Adams: Government has to go

Winty

Exile 1798 wrote: »

In other words you lied.

You made a completely false claim, which you probably made up on the spot.

What Lie?

Because the facts dont suit you twisted IRA support you get mad and called me a liar

Winty

dlofnep wrote: »

Gerry Adams was not in charge of a gang who killed an on duty Garda. Where is your evidence for this?

Yes OK your right, Mr Adams was never in the IRA

dlofnep

Winty wrote: »

What Lie?

Because the facts dont suit you twisted IRA support you get mad and called me a liar

You haven't stated fact. You posted an article about the Real IRA, which has nothing to do with Sinn Féin or Gerry Adams. You're clearly out of your depths here and don't have a clue about even the basics of republican groups, splits, and it's history. Don't come on here trying to preach history to us when you lack knowledge on even the most basic issues.

Winty

walrusgumble wrote: »

respectively, maybe if you put down the "simple history" book and look and how and why these organisations split from each other along with CIRA et all, maybe then you will get an answer and be able to spot the difference. Different groups of personnel altogether. It wasn't all black and white, but sure, what do you expect from Southerners (I am one btw)

I was born and raised in Derry, had a great view in the 80's

dlofnep

Winty wrote: »

Yes OK your right, Mr Adams was never in the IRA

He actually wasn't. He was a political figure from the very beginning, and was never actually engaged in armed conflict. But then - you being the expert and everything..

walrusgumble

dlofnep wrote: »

You haven't stated fact. You posted an article about the Real IRA, which has nothing to do with Sinn Féin or Gerry Adams. You're clearly out of your depths here and don't have a clue about even the basics of republican groups, splits, and it's history. Don't come on here trying to preach history to us when you lack knowledge on even the most basic issues.

Clearly he skipped the many chapter of several books written by his friend Ed Maloney oh well (not you dlofnep but the person you were directly replying to)

Still, I do believe Adams was a senior member of the Army at one time or another and possibly at least knew about things. Would it really have hurt him by coming out saying he was a member of the IRA? It has not affected McGuinness or even Gerry Kelly. Btw the latter two having made it crystal clear their positions about the Peace Process. Lets say Adams WAS head hancho, imagine the worse carnage would have occurred if his influence was completely ignored within the Republican circles, afterall, even Maloney accepted that Adams, a very long time ago truely believed that political and peaceful methods were the only way to go, alas going down a long and rocky road to convince other senior men like Hughes and co. But sure, lets not get those small facts interfere with the usual straw man argument coming from the likes of certain establishments in the South. Who suggested the UUP? Jesus talking about short memories there.

Exile 1798

Winty wrote: »

What Lie?

Because the facts dont suit you twisted IRA support you get mad and called me a liar

This lie, right here

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=65910840&postcount=44

When challenged you started mouthing off about Shinners and posted a link to a completely unrelated matter, perhaps naively hoping that no one would bother to actually read it.

I would suggest you just leave your original lie as is, and not continue to lie about your lie.

Winty

dlofnep wrote: »

You haven't stated fact. You posted an article about the Real IRA, which has nothing to do with Sinn Féin or Gerry Adams. You're clearly out of your depths here and don't have a clue about even the basics of republican groups, splits, and it's history. Don't come on here trying to preach history to us when you lack knowledge on even the most basic issues.

I am sorry if I upset you.

All the books you read in Waterford has giving you a paper based knowledge that others in your little private gang on boards like to debate.

Mr Adams and his group are not the saints you hold so high.

Has Mr Adams ever done anything wrong in your eyes

Winty

dlofnep wrote: »

you being the expert and everything..

I am no Expert far from It, Are you

dlofnep

Winty wrote: »

I am sorry if I upset you.

You haven't upset me. You've amused me if anything.

Winty wrote: »

All the books you read in Waterford has giving you a paper based knowledge that others in your little private gang on boards like to debate.

Considering you're unable to differentiate the PIRA from the RIRA, I'd sad you're in no position to make such a statement.

dlofnep

Winty wrote: »

I am no Expert far from It

You've demonstrated that very clearly.

walrusgumble

Winty wrote: »

I was born and raised in Derry, had a great view in the 80's

Well, respectively, you would think you'd know better in telling the difference between each of the groups and the type of personnell in the said groups then.

Winty

walrusgumble wrote: »

Well, respectively, you would think you'd know better in telling the difference between each of the groups and the type of personnell in the said groups then.

Its not easy, trust me the lines are not black and white. Some members jump from one to another and back again. Its not like membership of a golf club

Good Question BTW

Winty

dlofnep wrote: »

You've demonstrated that very clearly.

A man still has the right to speak and you have the right not to listen

dlofnep

Winty wrote: »

Its not easy, trust me the lines are not black and white.

The lines are pretty black and white. One supports the peace process and the Good Friday Agreement. The other does not. From someone who's involved in Republican politics - I can tell you, that there is a very clear line between the groups.

walrusgumble

Winty wrote: »

Its not easy, trust me the lines are not black and white. Some members jump from one to another and back again. Its not like membership of a golf club

Good Question BTW

completely fair enough. I am at least glad to see people do realise that these things were not and are not black and white.

Winty

dlofnep wrote: »

The lines are pretty black and white. One supports the peace process and the Good Friday Agreement. The other does not. From someone who's involved in Republican politics - I can tell you, that there is a very clear line between the groups.

Your talking policy, people jump ship and back again with speed and ease.

walrusgumble

dlofnep wrote: »

The lines are pretty black and white. One supports the peace process and the Good Friday Agreement. The other does not. From someone who's involved in Republican politics - I can tell you, that there is a very clear line between the groups.

hmmm, I would be of that view (ie one for the GF and other clearly not) but what about the low rankers who might get a bit impatient with the political parties, all I'd say is, I surely would not want to be in the senior circles of Sinn Fein at this time, wouldn't have the balls for it. look what happened to Mitchell McLoughlin not too long ago. hopefully my concern is unneccessary.

Anyway, back to the topic at hand, lets not fall into the usual pit falls when Mr Adams is mentioned. If I was a Sinn Fein activist, I would be calling on the senior heads to explain or tell me (I am sure they are doing it already) why Sinn Fein are the alternative, to even Labour. What is their solution to dealing with two clearly different minded Jurisdictions regarding the economy (look I know a nation is more than wealth, but you know full well, if it was up in the north, there wouldn't be too much to sing "the sash my father wore" or "wrap the green flag around me" if a person of the Republican background was sharing the same dole queue as an ardent unionist - the one time all are equal) Any one would much prefer to see a leader of the opposition spend more time on why they are the leaders we need and not the negative campaigning - remember Noonan's FIne Gael with their big publicity posters circa 2002 general elections concentrating on slagging off the government. Its not constructive to spend all that time doing it. Mary Lou shot herself in the foot during the last European Elections saying lets get them (ie government - which as we all know, FF don't do well in European Elections) Remember Green Party saying "time is now". TIme for what I asked.

dlofnep

Winty wrote: »

A man still has the right to speak and you have the right not to listen

You do have a right to speak - I never contended that. But when you preach complete and utter lies, then I have the right to challenge it. And when you can't even discern the difference between pro and anti-GFA republican groups - you should try avoid coming in with guns blazing, making accusations.

dlofnep

Winty wrote: »

Your talking policy, people jump ship and back again with speed and ease.

Actually, they don't. I know many people on a personal level who have left Sinn Féin, and have no intentions of ever coming back. It's a make or break moment for them - and they stick to it. There is no jumping forward and back.

Winty

dlofnep wrote: »

You do have a right to speak - I never contended that. But when you preach complete and utter lies,

I understand that you support the SF and well thats cool - but I did not lie, others like me see SF as a gang of thugs who in Derry and all over the north stole money from catholic business under the mask of protection. So to return to the OP Mr Adams has no business telling the Irish Gov how to run the shop.
SF have a right as they have a number of TD's but IMO Mr Adams needs to keep his ideas to himself.

Anyway its dinner time and I need food, I can see us chatting in Politics again very soon.

Good Night God Bless

walrusgumble

dlofnep wrote: »

Actually, they don't. I know many people on a personal level who have left Sinn Féin, and have no intentions of ever coming back. It's a make or break moment for them - and they stick to it. There is no jumping forward and back.

I think in this aspect Winty might have being referring to those who were/are associated/formerly associated/ sympathethic to the military wing of Republicanism as oppose to the Sinn Féin Party who have allowed/tolerated/supported Sinn Féin taking the front march.

aDeener

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Sorry, but I can't take the opinions of someone who refuses to acknowledge the legitimacy of the government seriously. I also can't accept the views of someone who won't condemn the killing of a Garda or the supporting of men that were "birdwatching" in Columbia.

It would be more in his line to go and represent his constituents in parliament, rather than coming out with statements about us. This is a Sinn Fein desperate attempt to become relevant in the republic. They can go jump. Terrorists.

well i knew sweeping generalisations has turned into an art form over on AH, didnt think it made its way to politics as well!!

would you afford the same label to FF, FG and labour considering their beginnings were steeped in violence but have since moved on? where the acts of their members would have deemed to have been terrorism?

or are you just out on a lovely sunday (s)troll?

dlofnep

Winty wrote: »

SF have a right as they have a number of TD's but IMO Mr Adams needs to keep his ideas to himself.

No he doesn't.

Nodin

Winty wrote: »

You being a Shinner nothing I write will do

Entirely wrong. You made a very specific claim. It's therefore quite easy for you to answer it.

They could not in the eyes of the yanks be seen dealing with terrorists so the Ulster Bank was allowed to be done over so the boys could go and live in Spain

Now all you have to do is to provide a source for your claim that PIRA members used money from the Ulster bank robbery to move to spain, with the tacit approval of the British and Irish Governments. You fairly specific about it being all part of some agreement.

Bottle_of_Smoke

He's the leader of a party which operate in the 26 counties, why is there even one poster saying he shouldn't be commenting about it?

Nodin

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

He's the leader of a party which operate in the 26 counties, why is there even one poster saying he shouldn't be commenting about it?

...because it's Sinn Fein.

the_syco

Winty wrote: »

I was born and raised in Derry, had a great view in the 80's

A great view... from which side?

=-=

Mr Adams has done a great job up north, but things are different down here. And thus many, including myself, don't think he'll do great down here. Heck, I think he'll f**k up the country even worse, should he get into power.

It's true that the government has to go, but the sad fact is, who will take FF's place? SF? I don't think so. Heck, they usually go get a small percent of votes. FG? They had their chance, and they blew it. As bad as they did, FF got voted in again, and until another political party starts making believable promises, I can't see that happening.

maynooth_rules

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

He's the leader of a party which operate in the 26 counties, why is there even one poster saying he shouldn't be commenting about it?

As leader should he not be putting himself forward for election to let the people have their say on him?? Having said that i think he is perfectly entitled to say what he has and it is what so many of us are thinking

lugha

Exile 1798 wrote: »

Gerry Adams is the Leader of this all-Ireland party, I would think it very strange if he didn't comment on issues affecting the Republic.

I don't doubt for a moment that there are plenty of petty or silly reasons why you think the leadership of Sinn Féin should make no comment on the Fianna Fáil government's record, but as I said I'm quite doubtful you could come up with any good ones.

Well let me spell out the particular problem I have with this. First, let’s be clear that this has nothing do with anybody’s rights. Of course Adams has the right to comment on any aspect of this state’s affairs, just as anybody else does. But virtually no politician with a mandate in one state would comment on the internal matters of another unless they were deliberately trying to cause a provocation. It’s a diplomatic no no.

I don’t think Adams was trying to be provocative. Like their 26 county speak, it is part of the whole Sinn Fein “well we say we recognise the legitimacy of the Southern state, but we don’t really”. Adams sees no diplomatic faux pas with commenting on the affairs of another state because he doesn’t really accept that it is another state. His Ireland is a 32 county Ireland. Which is perfectly fine and acceptable as a political aspiration. But it is not fine to assert it as your current political view. At least it is not if you claim to recognise the republic of Ireland and not, IMO, if you voted for the GFA.

Incidentally, I am not so sure I even agree with what Adams says. Certainly FF bear considerable responsibility for the depth, if not the fact, of the current crisis. But I do think that they are making a reasonable attempt to handle it. I don’t think an alternative government (e.g. a FG dominated one) would do things substantially differently. And there is a real possibility that a general election could give us a Dail where it would not be possible to form a stable government. I’m as sick of FF in power as most people. But alas, we could have a worse (if more popular) government.

A Dub in Glasgo

maynooth_rules wrote: »

As leader should he not be putting himself forward for election to let the people have their say on him?? Having said that i think he is perfectly entitled to say what he has and it is what so many of us are thinking

Plenty of Irish people have voted for him over the decades

Bottle_of_Smoke

maynooth_rules wrote: »

As leader should he not be putting himself forward for election to let the people have their say on him??

He puts himself forward in West Belfast, which he and many others see as more than just a geographical part of Ireland.

Having said that i think he is perfectly entitled to say what he has and it is what so many of us are thinking

Agree with that. Just can't understand those on this thread arguing otherwise

walrusgumble

maynooth_rules wrote: »

As leader should he not be putting himself forward for election to let the people have their say on him?? Having said that i think he is perfectly entitled to say what he has and it is what so many of us are thinking

Where in the South? ye good point who would take him though considering our apparent dislike for all things Northern? despite his popularity is he willing to do the parish pump politics and the nitty gritty overseeing that footpaths etc are in check (ye I know that local government work, but it never stops a TD smiley madly in front of the papers when something happens) Is he above that? (No doubt his work does not distract him from local work in his own constituency of West Belfast).

Whats the craic with MLA's and local councillors up there. Is it like down here when someone says they won't vote for so and so because they failed to eg get a medical card for little johnny, failed to put in a good word at the local council/post office/gardaí/ civil service job or failed to get something else for them vs the right man / women for national politics?

THat would be interesting, but then he might lose his control in the North were he is really needed.

Now to return to others who complain about his policy in Westminister. The people who vote for Sinn Féin at Westminster Elections are under no illusion as to what their position is regarding taking their seats. The substantial rise in votes clearly suggests that a good per centage in the northern ireland population agrees with them (we can't all assume its about up the ra etc). Anyway, what developments are a group (any group from Northern Ireland btw) going to make sitting in a 600+ House of Parliament in an atmosphere that really have not given a damn about Scotland or Wales, never mind Northern Ireland for the past while. Look where Conservatives got their votes, in England. Does Middle England really want a Scottish or Welsh Prime Minister? It never harmed Sinn Féins efforts in speaking to the PM before and with the Assembley, were the real bread and butter is, its not like they are the people are really losing out are they?

considering the attendance and voting records some or many of our glorious TD's in the Dáil (does Bertie even bother going in now a days?), its laughable with no real idea that the real work goes on outside the shouting Chambers of the House of Commons. It not like they are completely absent from London.

oppenheimer1

aDeener wrote: »

well i knew sweeping generalisations has turned into an art form over on AH, didnt think it made its way to politics as well!!

would you afford the same label to FF, FG and labour considering their beginnings were steeped in violence but have since moved on? where the acts of their members would have deemed to have been terrorism?

or are you just out on a lovely sunday (s)troll?

Yes the birth of the mainstream political parties in the republic is steeped in blood, but that was 90 years ago! The difference with SF is that there are a sizeable number of activists that were/are involved in activities which subvert the state.

As yet there is no SF supporter that can give a reason why the SF leadership won't condemn the Murder of Garda Gerry McCabe? Dlofnep maybe you can answer that directly instead of dodging the question.

Executive Steve

PARKHEAD67 wrote: »

levies on wages?On top of our already reduced wages while the cost of EVERYTHING goes up? The best 'occupation' in modern day Ireland is an unemployed drug dealer.Get the drug money, stroll down to the social office and claim whats 'rightfully yours' as a 'citizen'.I shake my head sometimes and wonder why I get up and do 12 hour shifts. Dont worry though. Supercowan and his chronies have it all under control.GANGSTERS. Wheres me brown envelope?

A little OT here, but selling drugs is an absolutely terrible job.

You have zero means of legitimately enforcing supply chain / purchasing contracts, zero protection from the law when you have a legitimate business grievance, the hours are dreadful, you get sentenced to more jail time than a rapist would be if you are caught with enough of whatever commodity it is you trade in to make a wage off, your customers by and large are quite happy to rip you off and your best customers expect you to give away your product for free. Even if you manage to somehow keep your head down and handle your business efficiently and with a minimum of hassle you still have to contend with your competition, who tend to be very unpleasant people with a bare minimum of professional scruples. Sourcing proper merchandise is extraordinarily hard as well.

The only reason people bother doing it is because the government have driven the price of the product through the roof by making it potentially injurious to stock and supply it, which makes it a temptingly lucrative short term option for those with no other options.

All for a salary that frankly isn't all that much more than you would expect from working in a middle management role in a call centre.

m@cc@

Winty wrote: »

Money my good man Money

20 Million stolen with permission from the Ulster Bank in Belfast paved the way from the arms to be put away

Not to be pedantic but it was 26million stolen from the Northern Bank. The majority of which became worthless within weeks of the robbery.

LordSutch

What ever happened to the idea of Adams becoming President of Ireland

Nodin

m@cc@ wrote: »

Not to be pedantic but it was 26million stolen from the Northern Bank. The majority of which became worthless within weeks of the robbery.

...stop pickin holes in the plot.....

Exile 1798

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Yes the birth of the mainstream political parties in the republic is steeped in blood, but that was 90 years ago! The difference with SF is that there are a sizeable number of activists that were/are involved in activities which subvert the state.

Eamon de Valera was involved in activities which subverted the State, yet he was President until 1973. Fianna Fáil had many such TD's and Councilors well into the 70s.

Fine Gael for their part choose to associate themselves with famous uber terrorist Michael Collins despite not having a direct connection.

While SF have no choice but to be associated with the IRA, FG on the other hand had and have the choice not to be yet they do everything in their power to connect themselves with past violence.

Can the anti-Shinner brigade in Irish politics please give us a rough estimation of how long everyone is going to have to put up with their conceited moralising? Just an rough estimate please, is it going to be 10, 20 or 30 years that we'll be hearing you drone on for?

paddyland

Exile 1798 wrote: »

Can the anti-Shinner brigade in Irish politics please give us a rough estimation of how long everyone is going to have to put up with their conceited moralising? Just an rough estimate please, is it going to be 10, 20 or 30 years that we'll be hearing you drone on for?

Well when the generation that gives tea and sympathy to Garda murderers is dead and gone, that might be a start...

Exile 1798

Off course we all know you'd be attack SF for cowardice and dishonesty if they had completely disowned the killers of McCabe.

Damn them if they do, damn them if they don't. Few people are fooled by this.

Winty

the_syco wrote: »

A great view... from which side?

From the side of right against wrong. Many Catholic business people were put to the wall around Derry City due to members of a political party putting them under pressure to support the cause.

By the By

Even people in SF do not see Mr Adams as a good financial rolemodel

"There was also family concern over an alleged attempt by Sinn Féin to insert a clause in the new Trust which would have made Gerry Adams a financial beneficiary. “It came in the draft version of the new trust documents drawn up in 1994 though Adams said that it should read the president of Sinn Féin of the day. We didn’t agree to either”.

http://sluggerotoole.com/2009/12/29/former-hunger-stiker-calls-on-adams-to-resign-from-sands-trust/

Nodin

Winty wrote: »

From the (.....)-trust/

I'm always suspicious of people who throw allegation after allegation whilst the questions raised by their first have yet to be answered.

Winty

Nodin wrote: »

I'm always suspicious of people who throw allegation after allegation whilst the questions raised by their first have yet to be answered.

You must work in Sinn Fein Public Relations.

Get a question you dont like so you divert attention, Classic Sinn Fein. Well Done.

So the Bobby Sands trust are incorrect in their mistrust of Mr. Adams?

SlabMurphy

Exile 1798 wrote: »

Eamon de Valera was involved in activities which subverted the State, yet he was President until 1973. Fianna Fáil had many such TD's and Councilors well into the 70s.

Fine Gael for their part choose to associate themselves with famous uber terrorist Michael Collins despite not having a direct connection.

While SF have no choice but to be associated with the IRA, FG on the other hand had and have the choice not to be yet they do everything in their power to connect themselves with past violence.

Can the anti-Shinner brigade in Irish politics please give us a rough estimation of how long everyone is going to have to put up with their conceited moralising? Just an rough estimate please, is it going to be 10, 20 or 30 years that we'll be hearing you drone on for?

Well it's not just FG or Ff who associate with former ' terrorists '. The Labour Party associates itself with James Connolly and the Irish Citizens army. De Rossa, Pat Rabbit, Eoghan Harris etc were invovled with SF the Workers Party/Offical IRA, Kathleen Lynch's husband was tried for murder of a Provisional SF member in Cork in the 70's.

And it's not just nationalist parties. The DUP were invovled in several loyalist movements such as Ulster Resistance, Ulster Protestant Volunteers etc. And the Ulster Unionists aren't squeaky clean either. They were one of the founders of the UVF in the earlier part of the last century. In the mid 70's David Trimble, Rev Martin Smyth and co. were also invovled in Ulster Vanguard paramilitary's and were quite happy to secret discussions notorious loyalists killers such as Billy Wright.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulster_Vanguard

What's that old saying about the pot calling the kettle black ?

guinnessdrinker

SlabMurphy wrote: »

And it's not just nationalist parties. The DUP were invovled in several loyalist movements such as Ulster Resistance, Ulster Protestant Volunteers etc. And the Ulster Unionists aren't squeaky clean either. They were one of the founders of the UVF in the earlier part of the last century. In the mid 70's David Trimble, Rev Martin Smyth and co. were also invovled in Ulster Vanguard paramilitary's and were quite happy to secret discussions notorious loyalists killers such as Billy Wright.

Shhhh, nobody likes bringing any of this up!

anymore

SlabMurphy wrote: »

Well it's not just FG or Ff who associate with former ' terrorists '. The Labour Party associates itself with James Connolly and the Irish Citizens army. De Rossa, Pat Rabbit, Eoghan Harris etc were invovled with SF the Workers Party/Offical IRA, Kathleen Lynch's husband was tried for murder of a Provisional SF member in Cork in the 70's.

And it's not just nationalist parties. The DUP were invovled in several loyalist movements such as Ulster Resistance, Ulster Protestant Volunteers etc. And the Ulster Unionists aren't squeaky clean either. They were one of the founders of the UVF in the earlier part of the last century. In the mid 70's David Trimble, Rev Martin Smyth and co. were also invovled in Ulster Vanguard paramilitary's and were quite happy to secret discussions notorious loyalists killers such as Billy Wright.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulster_Vanguard

What's that old saying about the pot calling the kettle black ?

Dont forget to mention Republicans cooperated with Loyalists when it suited them .

dlofnep

anymore wrote: »

Dont forget to mention Republicans cooperated with Loyalists when it suited them .

Examples of such co-operation?

SlabMurphy

anymore wrote: »

Dont forget to mention Republicans cooperated with Loyalists when it suited them .

AS far as I remember Eoghna Harris and De Roosa's old Stickie friends were accused of it by Vincent Brown in Magill magazine. As regards the Provos, if you look up the list of loyalist dead and the organisation accredited to killing them, the Provos can proudly lay claim to that honour of the most kills

Winty

dlofnep wrote: »

Examples of such co-operation?

Do you read the Derry Journal?

http://www.derryjournal.com/journal/-Report-that-drug-dealers.3686421.jp

"It was also claimed that the alleged links between the Real IRA and the loyalist gangs had been sanctioned by the leadership of the dissident republican organisation."