Socialist paid 600 euros/hr to write for community paper.

[merle haggard]

Ah , yes, website declarations and passing motions at an ard fheis , do not a socialist ( or even a democrat )make.

Their activities at street level tell the real story.

ok , we have a situation here in the north at present where the unemployed are being forced to work a 40 hour week for £15 or lose their paltry dole of £50 . Imagine being forced to work an entire week for £65 . The exploiter that takes you on not only gets your labour for free he also gets £70 per week just for taking you on and having you work for almost free - the £15 covers your bus fares to and from work providing you dont live anywhere more than 2 mile from the place your forced to work for £15 per week This includes large well known chainstores that even make TV adverts showing their happy staff beaming like idiots . Many of these happy staff are little more than slaves.
Ive been talking to young lads that work in sainsburys , the shiny big capitalist shrine many thousands of our countrymen and women are currently worshipping at like a Hajj to Mecca . Workers are being locked in to the building at night , even if you smoke you arent allowed out to the carpark for your entire shift and cant smoke inside . The night shifts consist of stocking shelves . You arent allowed to have even ten pence in your pocket , your searched at random . You arent allowed to speak during your shift . Workers have to move silently up and down aisles not permitted to speak to the person just accross the isle from them . Managers lurk behind shelves trying to catch people talking to one another. Then serach them in the middle of , at the start of and the end of these humiliating shifts .
These are the issues working class people are coming to us on the ground with .These are the issues we as republicans wish to formulate a response to on the ground , to fight against . The unions are useless and dont want to know . Sinn Fein dont want to know . The southern parties dont want to know , they simply reckon its unpatriotic to shop in that part of Ireland .

So as a socialist im asking you what should our response be ? what are you personally prepared to do to help us fight this ? feel free even to pm me with some suggestions and the offer of your personal assitance which ill await eagerly.

alternatively you could shut your hole

[topcat4]

Where are the Shinners, even the usual faces don't seem to be prepared to defend their glorious leader on this issue.

[merle haggard]

its laughable that not only is this rag paying him a fortune , its the only newspaper ive ever heard of which forced its editor to write a full page , front page groveling apology for the crime of criticising the areas local MP a couple of years back . While its multi millionaire owner was on a jaunt to the united states Robin Livingstone lost the run of himself after a decade of gerry adams sycophancy and took the bizarre notion into his head that west belfasts political leadership was actually responsible for the political leadership being given to the people of west belfast . And , astounding as it might seem , wrote an opinion piece that the lack of morale and complete political hopelessness evident on the ground in west belfast was somehow related to the political leadership being afforded to the west belfast , and attempted to claim there was a dorect correlation between the two . Pointing out that gerry adams was the areas MP - had been for over 20 years , and was therefore somehow responsible for the state west belfast was in .

It wasn’t as if Adams didn’t have the clout and the contacts. A former aide of Tony Blair has been making frankly embarrassing revelations in a new book about how close Adams and Blair were. Adams was the Oprah Winfrey of Irish-America. And what did we get? InBev gone and Visteon going. A huge investment conference that holds its nose as it swishes past West Belfast ferrying ministers and Invest NI suits to Hillsborough and Cultra. Adams might have got away with pointing to the lack of investment in his constituency in 1983 and saying: “Nothing to do with me, mate.” 20 years on and you’d buy a house in Ross Street quicker than you’d buy that.

20 years. Two decades. Four parliamentary terms. Four US Presidents. Two Popes. 11 Secretaries of State. Five UN Secretary-Generals. Five Taoisigh. Five Prime Ministers. In Ross Street the wind of change blows in empty Budweiser boxes and despair; it blows out good people and hope.
As a friend bitterly told Squinter over a St Paddy’s Day pint, Ourselves Alone are not the proud and risen republican people surging shoulder-to-shoulder towards a new Ireland, but the abandoned pensioners of the lower Falls who now fear the night a million times more than they ever feared the Brits or the loyalists. And don’t tell Squinter they’re not right to be afraid. When the bad guys can kill a well-known and popular ex-prisoner who was a fit and strong body-builder, then quite frankly Squinter’s more than a little concerned himself.
And so, next election day, Squinter thinks he’ll stay in the house in solidarity with those who are staying in their homes simply because they’re afraid to leave.

of course this was a ridiciculous notion and Mr Livingstone was forced to retract his bizarre analysis on the front page the very next week . Im sure the £600 per hour has also soothed gerrys pain somewhat as well .

A chara,
The ‘Squinter’ article of March 20, following the murder of Bap McGreevey, was both offensive and hurtful.
I am well used to and welcome criticism but I am disappointed at the tenor and tone of his tirade.
It was more reminiscent of a Sunday Independent columnist than the Andytown News.
Squinter’s advice that we should stay at home is also bad advice.
The duty of citizens is to join in the efforts to achieve more change, more jobs, better housing, and safer communities.
That’s the way forward for this constituency.
Gerry Adams, MP MLA

The Andersonstown News accepts that the tone and the timing of the Squinter article last week, during a period of community mourning, was inappropriate and unnecessary and apologises to Gerry Adams and our readers for any hurt caused.

[Skin]

I don't base whether a person is socialist or not on what they earn (although how you distribute it is important.)

Their actions are far more important.

But this topic is based on the notion that if you earn 600e an hour, you cannot call yourself a socialist - and that basically is what critics of GA's payment (if this is true, I would like a source to confirm it as some of the sh!te thrown around on this site in the past just serves to make a mockery of politics.ie) are arguing.

If you earn 600e an hour you cannot call yourself a socialist.

However, as you stated, how you distribute it is important (is it?). How did GA's distribute this money then?
Did he squirrel it all away into his own bank account? Did donate a some of it to the local GAA club? Did he contribute to the 'Tar Isteach' - the ex-prisoners welfare program? If he did, how much did he give? 1euro, 10euro? Would that enable him to be a socialist, or would he have to give a lot more? How much? What are the rules to being a 'socialist'?

[merle haggard]

But this topic is based on the notion that if you earn 600e an hour, you cannot call yourself a socialist - and that basically is what critics of GA's payment (if this is true, I would like a source to confirm it as some of the sh!te thrown around on this site in the past just serves to make a mockery of politics.ie) are arguing.

If you earn 600e an hour you cannot call yourself a socialist.

However, as you stated, how you distribute it is important (is it?). How did GA's distribute this money then?
Did he squirrel it all away into his own bank account? Did donate a some of it to the local GAA club? Did he contribute to the 'Tar Isteach' - the ex-prisoners welfare program? If he did, how much did he give? 1euro, 10euro? Would that enable him to be a socialist, or would he have to give a lot more? How much? What are the rules to being a 'socialist'?

i thought people were arguing that if you accept £600 an hour from the british governemnt , via their massive funding to their andytown news which permits them to pay you £600 an hour for promulgating policies and activities which the British governemnt would like to see advanced in Ireland ( a small country which it partially occupies ) , then you couldnt call yourself a socialist . Because the British future for Ireland which you are then promoting , for £600 an hour , is an imperialist future and not a socialist one .
Thats pretty much why the andytown news certainly didnt pay Brendan Hughes £600 an hour to promote politics which the British governemnt didnt want promoted in Ieland . I think the point is theres a distinct correlation between the andytown news ability to secure massive British funding , that British funding enabling them to pay politicians £600 an hour and what that politician actually says . That all these issues are inextricably linked .
socialism would therefore be quite absent fom that equation .

[Skin]

i thought people were arguing that if you accept £600 an hour from the british governemnt , via their massive funding to their andytown news which permits them to pay you £600 an hour for promulgating policies and activities which the British governemnt would like to see advanced in Ireland ( a small country which it partially occupies ) , then you couldnt call yourself a socialist . Because the British future for Ireland which you are then promoting , for £600 an hour , is an imperialist future and not a socialist one .
Thats pretty much why the andytown news certainly didnt pay Brendan Hughes £600 an hour to promote politics which the British governemnt didnt want promoted in Ieland . I think the point is theres a distinct correlation between the andytown news ability to secure massive British funding , that British funding enabling them to pay politicians £600 an hour and what that politician actually says . That all these issues are inextricably linked .
socialism would therefore be quite absent fom that equation .

Hmmm....but I do believe it is possible to British and a socialist at the same time.

By the way, it appears that then the British government obviously want socialist views put forth. The proof is in the pudding of this thread.
Gerry Adams claims to be a socialist - by publishing articles of a socialist nature. On the face of it therefore he is a socialist.
However, his detractors in this thread point not to the content of his published articles, but rather to the payment of 600e per hour.
Therefore if GA is not a socialist it would be straightforward enough to identify this in his published articles. But his published articles must have a socialist doctrine to them (otherwise how would anyone know that he was claiming to be a socialist?). So therefore if they have a socialist doctirne, then by your perspective he is "promulgating policies and activites that the British governemnt would like to see advanced..."

And back to the origins of this thread, the OP mentioned nothing of British policies but rather payment of 600e per hour.
I have asked, and am still asking, how much can you earn before you dont become a socialist? What are the rules?

[merle haggard]

[quote=Skin;2307549]

Hmmm....but I do believe it is possible to British and a socialist at the same time.

of course it is . The problem is gerry adams is Irish , and the money paid to him for promoting his policies comes from Britian . Which is a force of occupation . Gerry adams policies are also dictated to him from Britian . Tony Blair and Johnathon powell even personally wrote some of them . Word for word .

By the way, it appears that then the British government obviously want socialist views put forth. The proof is in the pudding of this thread.
Gerry Adams claims to be a socialist - by publishing articles of a socialist nature. On the face of it therefore he is a socialist.

erm..no . Bertie Ahern also claims to be a socialist . Therefore on the face of it just because someone calls themselves a socialist it does not actually follow that they actually are one .

However, his detractors in this thread point not to the content of his published articles, but rather to the payment of 600e per hour.
Therefore if GA is not a socialist it would be straightforward enough to identify this in his published articles. But his published articles must have a socialist doctrine to them (otherwise how would anyone know that he was claiming to be a socialist?).

As gerry adams was feverishly assuring voters in the south that sinn fein had no intetnion of intefering with the success of the celtic tiger , while his party was busy privatising everything in the north and trying to figure out how to bring in water charges and the British police its safe to assume his articles didnt have any socialist doctrine in them . As logic dictates its unlikely they were criticisng his own party for its actions . Its straight forward enough to identify whether someone is a socialist from the actions and policies of the party he leads . You dont need to read his newspaper articles . Much the same as you dont need to read newspaper articles by bertie ahern to determine whether or not hes a socialist despite himself terming himself as a socialist .

So therefore if they have a socialist doctirne, then by your perspective he is "promulgating policies and activites that the British governemnt would like to see advanced..."

no , hes promukgating his political leadership and that of sinn fein . Id be higjly surprised indeed to hear of gerry adams promulgating an actual socilaist doctrine . Calling for the overthrow of the state , the take over of factories , armed uprising against colonialism and imperialism would get him into a lot of trouble . Hed be thrown out of stormont , hed lose a lot of money .

And back to the origins of this thread, the OP mentioned nothing of British policies but rather payment of 600e per hour.
I have asked, and am still asking, how much can you earn before you dont become a socialist? What are the rules?

i think the issue is who you earn it from and why they pay you . You can earn a basic industrial wage , or even minimum wage , for throwing widows and orphans onto the streets , Still doesnt make you a socialist though .

[Skin]

[quote=merle haggard;2307646]

of course it is . The problem is gerry adams is Irish , and the money paid to him for promoting his policies comes from Britian . Which is a force of occupation . Gerry adams policies are also dictated to him from Britian . Tony Blair and Johnathon powell even personally wrote some of them . Word for word .


erm..no . Bertie Ahern also claims to be a socialist . Therefore on the face of it just because someone calls themselves a socialist it does not actually follow that they actually are one .
As gerry adams was feverishly assuring voters in the south that sinn fein had no intetnion of intefering with the success of the celtic tiger , while his party was busy privatising everything in the north and trying to figure out how to bring in water charges and the British police its safe to assume his articles didnt have any socialist doctrine in them . As logic dictates its unlikely they were criticisng his own party for its actions . Its straight forward enough to identify whether someone is a socialist from the actions and policies of the party he leads . You dont need to read his newspaper articles . Much the same as you dont need to read newspaper articles by bertie ahern to determine whether or not hes a socialist despite himself terming himself as a socialist .

no , hes promukgating his political leadership and that of sinn fein . Id be higjly surprised indeed to hear of gerry adams promulgating an actual socilaist doctrine . Calling for the overthrow of the state , the take over of factories , armed uprising against colonialism and imperialism would get him into a lot of trouble . Hed be thrown out of stormont , hed lose a lot of money .
i think the issue is who you earn it from and why they pay you . You can earn a basic industrial wage , or even minimum wage , for throwing widows and orphans onto the streets , Still doesnt make you a socialist though .

But despite the fact that the money is coming from British, then you have to ask where did the Birtish get the money from? Well, in part they get some of it from the Irish, and further to that they get it from Irish Socialists. If I was a working mechanic in the North paying taxes into the British exchequer and I held a socialist view point then it would please me greatly if any socialist was extracting the highest price from the British exchequer to promote socialist views. It would not be an ideal position but better than nothing at all.
As for GA being a socialist or not, the point was that he proclaims to be one. His articles would have a socialist agenda, if not, then it would be easy to point out that he was not a socialist. Instead this thread has focused on the amount of money he earned (i.e. if you earn 600e per hour you are not a socialist). The OP did not make any reference to the source of the money, it quite clearly focuses on the amount of money. To turn this topic into anything else would be to hijack the thread.

So the question still remains, how much do you have to earn to be considered a socialist. The question is really directed at anyone here who believes that anyone earning 600e per hour cannot be a socialist.

[Truth.ie]

This is not just about the money issue. (even though Adams earns more in one hour than one of his unemployed constituents makes in 10 weeks).
It also about the issue of conflict of interest. The paper for which he writes, and indeed the contents of his writings are pro State, Pro GFA, Pro Stormont, anti militant, and are approved by the British who fund it.
Imagine if Joe Higgins was getting paid 600 euros an hour to write pro NAMA, or pro Lisbon articles in the Metro, and we later learnt it was funded by Fianna Fail.
Sleaze is not only to be found in the 26 counties, it can be found here also.

I wrote the O.P Skin. Maybe you missed this post above.
Imagine if you had heard during the 80s, that John Hume was writing anti Provo or anti armed struggle articles every week in the Derry Journal, and getting paid 120'000 a year via British or NIO funding?
You wouldn't find that suspicious or suspect. You'd at least raise an eyebrow. No?
Try looking with the blinkers on.

[merle haggard]

[quote=Skin;2307760][quote=merle haggard;2307646]

But despite the fact that the money is coming from British, then you have to ask where did the Birtish get the money from? Well, in part they get some of it from the Irish, and further to that they get it from Irish Socialists. If I was a working mechanic in the North paying taxes into the British exchequer and I held a socialist view point then it would please me greatly if any socialist was extracting the highest price from the British exchequer to promote socialist views. It would not be an ideal position but better than nothing at all.

im a factory worker in the north who pays taxes , theres no union allowed in my workplace . Sinn fein have abslutely no interest in changing that state of affairs . It does not please me one bit that the british governemnt is paying people in this country to do what gerry adams does .

As for GA being a socialist or not, the point was that he proclaims to be one.

so does bertie ahern

His articles would have a socialist agenda, if not, then it would be easy to point out that he was not a socialist.

im pointing this out , mr adams actions speak for themselves

Instead this thread has focused on the amount of money he earned (i.e. if you earn 600e per hour you are not a socialist). The OP did not make any reference to the source of the money, it quite clearly focuses on the amount of money. To turn this topic into anything else would be to hijack the thread.

no , to discuss actual sinn fein actions and policies and the input of the british government into them as well as british government assistance in promotuing them is simply unhelpful from your point of view . youd rather not see them discussed or examined as its blatantly obvious this would make your insistence gerry adams is a socialist quite ridiculous
you are actually insisting here that its a derailment of the thread to look at sinn feins actual policies and record in office when discussing the issue of gerry adams socialist credentials

thats a plainly ridiculous suggestion to make to anyone , utterly preposterous . id suggest you think before making suggestions as you plainly havent thought that one through . its an atrocious point .

So the question still remains, how much do you have to earn to be considered a socialist. The question is really directed at anyone here who believes that anyone earning 600e per hour cannot be a socialist.

mairtin o muilloir would not be paying gerry adams £600 an hour to discuss the necessity of taking martin omuilleoirs millions and company off him and redistributing this wealth to the poor of west belfast . Neither would the british government be giving mairtin o muilleoir the money to pay gerry adams to say any such thing . Which mr adams is certainly not suggesting in any of his articles . Which means plainly Gerry adams is not promoting socilism in this newspaper and isnt a socialist .