Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Toireasa Ferris again refuses to condemn Jerry McCabes killers

Options
2456789

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 8,203 ✭✭✭partyguinness


    Liam Byrne wrote: »
    This has got to be one of the most sickening posts I have read on boards.

    Jerry was carrying out his duties on OUR behalf. LEGALLY.

    The scumbag robbers were acting on their own behalf. ILLEGALLY.

    There is NO comparison. :mad:


    So its okay for Sein Fein to be in government in the North with Unionists...

    After all we spent years asking the Unionists to go into Government with Sein Fein..we even voted overwhelming for the Good Friday Agreement to allow power sharing with Sein Fein.....without any public condemnations may I add.

    But when Jerry McCabe is shot dead..we all of a sudden get all high and mighty about a refusal to condemn killing in Limerick.

    Talk about double standards...


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,929 ✭✭✭Raiser


    Shinners wrote:
    WE DIDN'T PERSONALLY PULL THE TRIGGER AND IT WAS A LONG TIME AGO - SURE TOIREASA WAS ONLY IN HER COT

    Flirting with Godwin's Law here......

    But the Holocaust happened a "long time ago" also - find me any individual who refuses to condemn that and then try to argue out your flawed rationale of "aw sure it happened ages ago" and "wasn't me Chief - we all busy singing RA songs in the pub that day"......

    Fact is that a Garda was murdered by two-bit thieves and you can't ever defend the indefensible to a morally sound audience......


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭jank


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    That's a fair point, on the face of it. But I'm not talking about dragging up ancient history - I'm talking about the current Sinn Féin party, whose current stance seems to be that it's not a big problem to execute members of the state's police force.

    Like I said - minimum standards.

    Unfortunately Oscar it is still the past so my point still stands. This happened about 13 years ago, not ancient history but not last year either. Everyone knows what happened. What is the purpose of bringing this up yet again yet to have another "those shinners" never learn rant? Everyone knows what they stand for...

    You know very well what way this thread is going. GuanYin wont be happy!:pac:


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,203 ✭✭✭partyguinness


    Liam Byrne wrote: »
    Less of the rolleyes, please; while you can choose to read it that way, I'd MUCH prefer if it went the other way.

    That people condemned what should be condemned and therefore showed themselves to be true politicians and democrats.

    That all candidates were above board morally and ethically - be that SF condemning and weeding out murderers and criminals, or FF condemning and weeding out corruption - and that we could concentrate on the policies and needs of the country without having to take into account the distracting sideshows.

    THEN we could move on - and maybe even vote for the new, improved Sinn Fein, breaking that 10-12% ceiling.

    But as you said yourself, they're stuck at that limit because most people - thankfully - don't agree with their self-inflicted stance.


    I am entitled to use the emoticons I wish as they can be better at expressing an emotion then any sentence. Your sensitivity is duly noted.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,762 ✭✭✭turgon


    The event happened years ago, but the standards still remain.

    These standards are what we are voting on.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    walshb wrote: »
    I do believe she and Sinn Fein regret the loss
    of innocent persons in the conflict

    To the neutral observer, there is no reason to believe this.

    You can believe all you want, but if Ferris wants votes she has to convince us.

    As I said earlier, people will want to know where she stands on abortion, divorce, health services, etc, and she'll have an opinion on those......even though she had nothing to do with them, either.

    She mightn't even use them, but is putting herself forward for election to provide services and govern for the good of the people, so the people need to know that she'll represent them.

    If Europe's anti-terrorism committee were voting on a policy of some sort, how would you trust her to vote for the common good if she's not prepared to stand up for law and order ?

    If Ireland was introducing witness protection, how would you know that her stance on it wouldn't be affected as her party's stance on releasing the scum involved in this from jail ?

    Or that she wouldn't view them as "informers", rather than people doing their civic duty ? After all, if she's OK with Gardai doing their duty being murdered, how could you trust her to support your interests if you did your duty ?

    So it IS relevant.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,203 ✭✭✭partyguinness


    Are people honestly suggesting that they would vote for Sein Fein if only they would condemn the murders of Jerry McCAbe or the deaths of innocent people during the Northern conflict?

    That is not credible IMO.


  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    jank wrote: »
    Unfortunately Oscar it is still the past so my point still stands.
    Only if you refuse to accept that there can never be any shades of grey; that if you hold a position then you must cleave resolutely to its most extreme edge.

    If your position is that we must either cling to every vestige of the past, or put it entirely behind us, then we should either break off diplomatic relations with Denmark because of the Vikings, or forget about the abuse of children in care because it was "in the past".

    In reality, you draw lines. For some people, perfidious Albion must never, ever be forgiven for 800 years of sins. I think that's a line too far.
    This happened about 13 years ago, not ancient history but not last year either. Everyone knows what happened. What is the purpose of bringing this up yet again yet to have another "those shinners" never learn rant? Everyone knows what they stand for...
    Yes, and it appears that they stand for murderers over and above law enforcement.

    Why does this keep getting brought up? Because it's their current position. When they decide that they will support the forces of law and order rather than those who would murder them - then it's in the past.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,203 ✭✭✭partyguinness


    I have always been curious about Sein Feins stance on this issue.

    The men who carried out the killing were not acting in any official capacity or sanction from the IRA.

    They were on a solo trip for personal gain (an ordinany decent criminal expediation to use an unfortunate phrase) so I am perplexed why Sein Fein would stand behind this. Obviously more to it behind the scenes.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    So its okay for Sein Fein to be in government in the North with Unionists...

    After all we spent years asking the Unionists to go into Government with Sein Fein..we even voted overwhelming for the Good Friday Agreement to allow power sharing with Sein Fein.....without any public condemnations may I add.
    There were two sides in the North. There were no sides in Adare.

    In fact, it was in a different country. Same island, different country. As walshb indicated above, stating the facts doesn't mean that it's necessarily my preference, but it's still the facts (if you want to add the "sad, but true", fire away).
    But when Jerry McCabe is shot dead..we all of a sudden get all high and mighty about a refusal to condemn killing in Limerick.

    Talk about double standards...

    How, exactly is this related ? One was a robbery by thugs in our country that even Sinn Fein and the IRA disowned for a while as "unauthorised", the other was what we are continuously told was a struggle for the purposes of freeing the country; one was loads of accidental deaths and injuries caused by the "authorities not responding to warnings" (if you choose to believe the guff), the other was a deliberate shooting of someone who still had his gun in his holster for the purposes of stealing money.

    These facts have been done to death - let's not re-hash them here again.


  • Advertisement
  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Are people honestly suggesting that they would vote for Sein Fein if only they would condemn the murders of Jerry McCAbe or the deaths of innocent people during the Northern conflict?

    That is not credible IMO.
    Speaking for myself: no, that's not what I'm saying.

    I'm saying there's not a snowball's chance in hell that I'd even consider a Sinn Féin candidate on his or her merits, as long as he or she belongs to a party that tacitly condones murder.

    When the party distances itself from that stance, I will begin to consider its candidates on their merits.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    I have always been curious about Sein Feins stance on this issue.

    The men who carried out the killing were not acting in any official capacity or sanction from the IRA.

    They were on a solo trip for personal gain (an ordinany decent criminal expediation to use an unfortunate phrase) so I am perplexed why Sein Fein would stand behind this. Obviously more to it behind the scenes.

    Not only did they stand behind it, they stood with them for photos in jail and campaigned for their release.

    NOT the type of behaviour you'd expect from law-abiding citizens.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,691 ✭✭✭RedPlanet


    They certainly were wrong to kill the garda.
    I don't know why they didn't get ejected from the PIRA, afterall there is fairly long-standing rule (order number 8 i believe) that says a volunteer should not use arms against forces of The Free State.
    Regardless, it's history now.
    Unfortunately the Irish government has refused to bring these PIRA prisoners under the terms of the GFA, of which the Irish government is a signatory. So they are in the wrong too.

    And a suggestion to moderators: Can you just create a handy thread called "Bash SF" and just lump all these types of threads there? It'd make moderation easier and it'd make it easier for everyone else to ignore it.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    RedPlanet wrote: »
    Unfortunately the Irish government has refused to bring these PIRA prisoners under the terms of the GFA, of which the Irish government is a signatory. So they are in the wrong too.

    No they're not, because it was claimed that this was an "unauthorised" operation. Using the word "unfortunately" shows your true colours there. The GFA was a "get out of jail free" for political prisoners, not a general pardon for everything you've ever done.

    Afterwards, when SF & Co realised they could maybe use a backdoor to get the scum out of prison, they re-claimed it, but the Government didn't fall for it.

    By your reckoning, a Christian Brother who happened to be a member of the IRA wouldn't be in jail for abusing kids :rolleyes:
    RedPlanet wrote: »
    And a suggestion to moderators: Can you just create a handy thread called "Bash SF" and just lump all these types of threads there? It'd make moderation easier and it'd make it easier for everyone else to ignore it.

    Stating facts and wanting answers isn't "bashing SF".


  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    RedPlanet wrote: »
    And a suggestion to moderators: Can you just create a handy thread called "Bash SF" and just lump all these types of threads there? It'd make moderation easier and it'd make it easier for everyone else to ignore it.
    You want me to make a special case for the criticism of one political party?

    Do you think Sinn Féin should be immune from criticism for their policies and positions?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,691 ✭✭✭RedPlanet


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    You want me to make a special case for the criticism of one political party?

    Do you think Sinn Féin should be immune from criticism for their policies and positions?
    On the first question: no.
    If there are numerous threads running like a broken record all bashing the FF party and it's positions, or the Green party and it's positions, then certainly case can be made that they deserve their own thread too.
    One the 2nd question: no.
    But that is obvious.


  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    RedPlanet wrote: »
    On the first question: no.
    If there are numerous threads running like a broken record all bashing the FF party and it's positions, or the Green party and it's positions, then certainly case can be made that they deserve their own thread too.
    One the 2nd question: no.
    But that is obvious.
    It seems you feel that criticism of a political party because of its refusal to condemn criminal behaviour is unwarranted criticism. We'll have to agree to disagree on that.


  • Registered Users Posts: 55,960 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    Why is Ferris being targeted to condemn the killings?

    This is not the first time. I'd be curious as to the motives
    of those who are seeking this condemnation.

    It's not like she condoned the act. She refused to condemn it. Big deal.
    She is simply following party practice on the issue. She is
    acting under orders from a rule that she herself did not make up!

    What is so special about HER having to condemn an action she
    had nothing to do with? It's old and sad to be
    harping on about this.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,203 ✭✭✭partyguinness


    Liam Byrne wrote: »
    There were two sides in the North. There were no sides in Adare.

    In fact, it was in a different country. Same island, different country. As walshb indicated above, stating the facts doesn't mean that it's necessarily my preference, but it's still the facts (if you want to add the "sad, but true", fire away).



    How, exactly is this related ? One was a robbery by thugs in our country that even Sinn Fein and the IRA disowned for a while as "unauthorised", the other was what we are continuously told was a struggle for the purposes of freeing the country; one was loads of accidental deaths and injuries caused by the "authorities not responding to warnings" (if you choose to believe the guff), the other was a deliberate shooting of someone who still had his gun in his holster for the purposes of stealing money.

    These facts have been done to death - let's not re-hash them here again.

    I will tell you exactly how they are related. Although I thought my point was very clear:

    1. We/our Government via ongoing and protracted peace talks and referenda voted and faciliated a peace process on this island of Ireland whish included Sein Fein. To paint a picture that it is somehow unconnected with down here is nonsense.

    2. There were 3 sides in the North.

    But the UUP or the DUP have no paramilitary affiiliations (officially at least). Indeed their parties contained members who lost family and friends to the IRA. A peace process was started we bent over backwards to move the situation forward to have all party inclusive dialogue and to sit down in Gov with Sein Feini..without the need for Sein Fein condemnations.

    We had no problem or even thought twice about the need for Sein Fein in Government in the North but when there is a killing on our back door it's very different isn't it?

    3. Sein Fein are an All Ireland party (and so are the GAA and think of the response you would get if you told GAA HQ that they sldnt fly the tricolour at GAA games in the North as its a "different country"..we are not talking about Somalia).

    So to say that it was a different country and by implication nothing to do with the south is not a serious proposition. Attempts to compartmentalise the situaion is not realistic and that legitimises double standards.

    So when Bertie Ahern said that he cld never go into Government with Sein Fein because of its paramilitary affiliations, can you imagine how laughable that was when he travelled to Belfast trying to convince Ian Paisley to enter Government with Sein Fein. Almost like we can cherry pick the bits we like.

    Its all or nothing. Good enough for you but not us.

    That my friend is the double standard.


  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    walshb wrote: »
    Why is Ferris being targeted to condemn the killings?
    I'm guessing geographical proximity. I'd be more inclined to ask why every SF candidate isn't constantly asked to condemn it, until they are pressured to change their stance.
    This is not the first time. I'd be curious as to the motives
    of those who are seeking this condemnation.
    Again guessing: to keep the fact that the party tacitly condones murder in the public eye. I don't see that as a bad thing.
    It's not like she condoned the act. She refused to condemn it. Big deal.
    She is simply following party practice on the issue. She is
    acting under orders from a rule that she herself did not make up!
    Refusal to condemn a criminal act is tacitly condoning it.

    Again: if a candidate refused to condemn the systemic abuse of children in institutions, would you say "big deal"?
    What is so special about HER having to condemn an action she
    had nothing to do with? It's old and sad to be
    harping on about this.
    Every member of her party should be asked to condemn it, until they do. That's how they'll make the issue go away.


  • Advertisement
  • Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,804 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    We had no problem or even thought twice about the need for Sein Fein in Government in the North but when there is a killing on our back door it's very different isn't it?
    Speak for yourself. I thought long and hard before voting "yes" to the GFA, because it involved the release of murderers on all sides.

    I wouldn't vote for SF in Northern Ireland either.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    We were all given a vote in relation to the North (in the GFA), and we voted; and we have to accept that there were downsides to that vote, and just hope that the pros outweigh the cons.

    But the fact that we had a democratic choice in the matter meant that we cannot complain about it.

    That was the sum total of our involvement.

    And while yes, there were non-violent / non-reactionary parties in the North, and a "normal" society would usually vote for them, the North made its own choice beyond that. I wouldn't have voted for SF, but they did, as they were entitled to.

    We also have a democratic choice down here, and part of that democratic choice is listening to candidates' stance on things, and choosing on that basis.

    Unlike the North, we don't have too many extremists backing uncompromising stances and threatening to murder people they disagree with, or people who view that as acceptable.

    So if someone offers that stance, they might get a vote in the North, but they won't get many here.

    So they are separate.

    And add in the fact that there was no logical link between murdering a Garda during a "we want money" like "ordinary decent criminals" (your own words) raid and any "struggle", and it becomes very apparent that treating the two differently is NOT double-standards.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,089 ✭✭✭✭P. Breathnach


    walshb wrote: »
    Why is Ferris being targeted to condemn the killings? ...

    Because she is a Sinn Féin candidate. That is a good reason for examining her position on this matter.


  • Registered Users Posts: 55,960 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    I know it seems that I have been defending her. I have to the extent that she is simply following party orders. It is not a personal thing with her I am sure. She has to refuse to condemn this. I strongly doubt that she condones it thru her lack of condemnation

    Personally, I think Sinn Fein should condemn all killings by the IRA; but the rules of the party say she/they cannot. I think this needs to be considered here. It's way too personal
    with Ferris. She is being singled out on this issue by non genuine folks who couldn't give
    a toss about her stance on the issue.


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,203 ✭✭✭partyguinness


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Speak for yourself. I thought long and hard before voting "yes" to the GFA, because it involved the release of murderers on all sides.

    I wouldn't vote for SF in Northern Ireland either.


    You missed my point..I am referring to the Gov and the 95% odd percent 'Yes' in the GFA who pushed for SF involvment.

    So I take it you are fundamentally opposed to SF in a power sharing exccutive in the North


  • Registered Users Posts: 8,203 ✭✭✭partyguinness


    Slightly off track but I would like to correct a misconception in the South.

    We only voted for changes to Art. 2 & 3 of Bunreacht na hEireann. Full stop.

    We did not vote for the GFA. A completely different document


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    I want to put a small caveat on my "thanks", which mainly referred to your first sentence.

    The other sentence :
    walshb wrote: »
    She is being singled out on this issue by non genuine folks who couldn't give a toss about her stance on the issue.

    There are lots of things that media commentators and interviewers and newsreaders don't give a toss about, but they cover because their audience is interested.

    So maybe they, personally "couldn't give a toss"......which is actually better than "they're out to hang her on it".

    If it's in the public interest, ask. If not, don't.

    e.g.

    Bertie's sleeping arrangements = irrelevant to any discussion (unless he was campaigning against separation and divorce) = Celia Ahern irrelevant.

    Bertie's girlfriend gets FF funds to buy a house = Celia Ahern VERY relevant.

    And like I said, there are LOTS of issues that she may not be objective on if her - or her party - take this stance on this case; which implies

    (a) murder is acceptable

    (b) murder of a Garda (which had a capital punishment on it long after the murder of a member of the public, so it's viewed as more serious) is acceptable

    (c) murderers and "ordinary decent criminals" should be released out the back door

    (d) it's ok to intimidate potential witnesses and subvert the course of justice



    All of which apply to the state's case in this regard.

    Whether they are her personal views or those of the party....well, if they're her's then that's reason enough.

    And if they are - as you're implying - "just" the party line, the fact is that by being - and staying - a member of the party she's agreeing with those views, and it's similar to the "bashing" that most FF members are currently getting; if you don't get out it means you're OK with the dodgy stuff.

    If a "party" or group that I was in said "we think murder is ok", then I'd leave; there is NO WAY I would go on TV or radio and regurgitate such a vile stance.

    Ironically (again, similar to an FF member) if she left the party BECAUSE of disagreement with these issues and the need to condone stuff like this, then she MIGHT actually get my vote.

    So which is worse - having a personal view which is despicable, or having a decent view but selling out and keeping that view to yourself and spouting a party line...?

    Either way, it doesn't make her look good and doesn't bode well for her ability to make decisions that reflect our views or to govern.

    So she doesn't get a vote as a result.

    Simple, really.


  • Registered Users Posts: 55,960 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    Like I said, party orders are preventing members from condemning. This is old news and has been going on for many many years. I don't think she should be the one pressured into condemning. She was only a child when this occurred. Maybe she should get out of the party or maybe the party should change the rules!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    walshb wrote: »
    Like I said, party orders are preventing members from condemning. This is old news and has been going on for many many years. I don't think she should be the one pressured into condemning. She was only a child when this occurred. Maybe she should get out of the party or maybe the party should change the rules!

    Then, like I said:

    a) find a party that doesn't have objectionable views, or go independent
    b) get the party to change the rules

    ....or else accept the fact that people will criticise you for a poor and objectionable stance, and that's not "bashing" or "unfair".....it's life and "cause and effect".

    As oscar said above, if SF's party stance was to refuse to condemn corruption, or refuse to condemn child abuse, it'd feel the exact same....

    And - very relevant fact Toireasa had nothing to do with either of those either, but still feels perfectly OK voicing her opinion and condemning THOSE ? :rolleyes:


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 8,203 ✭✭✭partyguinness


    LiamB..thats the point we are trying to make.

    We know what the SF position is and so do SF voters.

    Even hardline Unionists in the North dont bother looking fro condemnations so why we are some people obsessed with it?

    It doesnt change anything. It will be asked time and time again for years to come..and for what? IMO it just looks pathetic and smaks of point cheap scoring on a very easy and emotive target.

    Why focus on this killing? Why not the killing of Mountbatton in 1979 in Sligo? I tell you why..because it is easy and again cheap.

    At least SF are consistant...


Advertisement