Gerry Adams to run for President ?

end a eknny · 17-05-2011 4:40pm

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Oh boy! Where to start!

Firstly (and on-thread) Gerry Adams has no credibility

Secondly, security forces ignoring warnings doesn't "maximise casualties" - putting a friggin' bomb in a street does

Thirdly, if people didn't put bombs in streets then the security forces wouldn't need to stop people and have guns on them when they do

Fourthly, if you have the above mindset re blaming the wrong people and excusing the thugs involved, it would also add to the chances of you being stopped

Finally, why is "people will get killed in a war" an OK defence of bombing, and yet you fail to see that "people will get stopped by armed soldiers in a war"

It was either a war (with war rules on both sides) or it wasn't! People who use the "war" card seem to forget that it works both ways and that security forces have to act differently in a "war".

there was a war but one side had goverment backing and no britsh soliders ever went to jail for assault, murder or intimitadion yet republicans where sent to jail without trial. killed while unarmed without trial. but most of all the british had no legitimate right to be in ireland.

end a eknny · 17-05-2011 4:46pm

tayto lover wrote: »

Like the boy in school when asked "what caused the fight"? He answered "the fight started when he hit me back".

and thats what the oppressed irish where trying to do just to fight back, its hard when you have spent so many years with the full weight of the british empire standing on your throat. but a time has to come when the people have to say enough is enough and fight back. this fight back was probably caused by the death of 13 unarmed civilians in derry. but maybe yous are right maybe the nationalists should have made orderly lines and queued up to be shot

tayto lover · 17-05-2011 4:51pm

end a eknny wrote: »

and thats what the oppressed irish where trying to do just to fight back, its hard when you have spent so many years with the full weight of the british empire standing on your throat. but a time has to come when the people have to say enough is enough and fight back. this fight back was probably caused by the death of 13 unarmed civilians in derry. but maybe yous are right maybe the nationalists should have made orderly lines and queued up to be shot

Pathetic.

Wolfe Tone · 17-05-2011 4:53pm

HavingCrack wrote: »

This always bothered me actually. Apparently it was perfectly ok for the PIRA to kill unarmed British soliders but when the SAS killed several PIRA members in an ambush rather than ask them to surrender there was uproar. It's either a war (with all its violence and dirty tricks) or it isn't, you can't have it both ways.

Its said they executed them after the volunteers surrendered.

end a eknny · 17-05-2011 5:13pm

tayto lover wrote: »

Pathetic.

some people dont like the facts you can belive want you want but i will stick to the truth

Happyman42 · 17-05-2011 5:19pm

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

Its said they executed them after the volunteers surrendered.

The Loughgall attackers where all shot in exactly the same place under the cheek with the bullet exiting at the back of the head as well as a multitude of other injuries. Some have suggested that it is a known SAS finishing technique.

tayto lover · 17-05-2011 5:22pm

end a eknny wrote: »

some people dont like the facts you can belive want you want but i will stick to the truth

You can't handle the truth.

HavingCrack · 17-05-2011 6:33pm

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

Its said they executed them after the volunteers surrendered.

Loughgall does seem to be very murky all around, I doubt we'll ever know what really happened. But anyway my point is that war is always dirty and violent. Executing people who surrender regularly occurs in warzones desptie the Geneva conventions. The PIRA had no problem killing off duty and unarmed British soliders either. I just find it odd that they found it unacceptable when the British army/SAS/RUC played dirty but had no problem with doing it themselves. As I said, you can't have it both ways.

end a eknny · 17-05-2011 9:17pm

HavingCrack wrote: »

Loughgall does seem to be very murky all around, I doubt we'll ever know what really happened. But anyway my point is that war is always dirty and violent. Executing people who surrender regularly occurs in warzones desptie the Geneva conventions. The PIRA had no problem killing off duty and unarmed British soliders either. I just find it odd that they found it unacceptable when the British army/SAS/RUC played dirty but had no problem with doing it themselves. As I said, you can't have it both ways.

tell us the names of the british soliders who went to jail for murdering innocent civilians i can list hundreds of ira volunteers who went to jail and also innocent men and women who wernt even in the ira thei

tayto lover · 17-05-2011 10:22pm

end a eknny wrote: »

tell us the names of the british soliders who went to jail for murdering innocent civilians i can list hundreds of ira volunteers who went to jail and also innocent men and women who wernt even in the ira thei

Ha ha of course you can.

HavingCrack · 18-05-2011 12:11am

end a eknny wrote: »

tell us the names of the british soliders who went to jail for murdering innocent civilians i can list hundreds of ira volunteers who went to jail and also innocent men and women who wernt even in the ira thei

What's that got to do with anything??? It's utterly irrelevant to my post.

jimmycrackcorm · 18-05-2011 1:46am

I'd vote for neither Adams nor Norris - they both need elocution lessons as goes for anyone from Caaark.

Deedsie · 01-10-2013 11:27pm

Hi sorry for reviving such an old thread, but i was thinking about this today. Michael D will be 77 at the next election. Will anyway stand against him or will he just continue into a second term unopposed?

Will a 70 year old Gerry Adams consider a run at the Áras? Time for Mary Lou or Doherty to take over the Sinn Féin presidency?

Podgerz · 02-10-2013 12:06am

Deedsie wrote: »

Hi sorry for reviving such an old thread, but i was thinking about this today. Michael D will be 77 at the next election. Will anyway stand against him or will he just continue into a second term unopposed?

Will a 70 year old Gerry Adams consider a run at the Áras? Time for Mary Lou or Doherty to take over the Sinn Féin presidency?

And if at the time in 2016 SF support is as strong as now, along with that the North being allowed a vote in presidential elections; any shinner would stand a great chance.

And it being 2016 anniversary would be glorifying the rising and armed rebellion wouldnt hurt Gerrys status. Good shout

Tramps Like Us · 02-10-2013 12:42am

Deedsie wrote: »

Hi sorry for reviving such an old thread, but i was thinking about this today. Michael D will be 77 at the next election. Will anyway stand against him or will he just continue into a second term unopposed?

Will a 70 year old Gerry Adams consider a run at the Áras? Time for Mary Lou or Doherty to take over the Sinn Féin presidency?

I think Higgins said he only wanted one term. I reckon MMG might run again, especially if people in the north east of the country can vote

Iwasfrozen · 02-10-2013 1:38am

Podgerz wrote: »

along with that the North being allowed a vote in presidential elections;

Scoff!

Annasopra · 02-10-2013 8:35am

Deedsie wrote: »

Hi sorry for reviving such an old thread, but i was thinking about this today. Michael D will be 77 at the next election. Will anyway stand against him or will he just continue into a second term unopposed?

Will a 70 year old Gerry Adams consider a run at the Áras? Time for Mary Lou or Doherty to take over the Sinn Féin presidency?

Higgins only said he would serve one term

Crooked Jack · 02-10-2013 12:43pm

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Scoff!

???????

Manassas61 · 02-10-2013 4:34pm

If Northern Ireland is allowed to vote, then the Unionist community need to have a candidate for them to vote for.

Crooked Jack · 02-10-2013 4:48pm

Manassas61 wrote: »

If Northern Ireland is allowed to vote, then the Unionist community need to have a candidate for them to vote for.

All the better.

Karl Stein · 02-10-2013 4:48pm

Manassas61 wrote: »

If Northern Ireland is allowed to vote, then the Unionist community need to have a candidate for them to vote for.

Why would a Unionist want to be president of a foreign and alien place such as the south anyway?

Manassas61 · 02-10-2013 4:53pm

Charlie Rock wrote: »

Why would a Unionist want to be president of a foreign and alien place such as the south anyway?

Well I don't see it happening anyway. I struggle to see how it would work legally as its two different states. But it is a job I suppose and I presume the President gets paid?

Crooked Jack · 02-10-2013 4:55pm

Manassas61 wrote: »

Well I don't see it happening anyway. I struggle to see how it would work legally as its two different states. But it is a job I suppose and I presume the President gets paid?

The constitutional convention has recommended it and it happens all over Europe. Why do you not see it happening? I'm delighted it's finally coming around. The next President could be the first really legitimate Irish President ever.

Karl Stein · 02-10-2013 5:00pm

Manassas61 wrote: »

I struggle to see how it would work legally as its two different states.

Anyone born on the island is entitled to Irish citizenship by law.

Iwasfrozen · 02-10-2013 5:02pm

Crooked Jack wrote: »

???????

Won't happen. The constitutional convention are a populist talking shop.

Crooked Jack · 02-10-2013 5:05pm

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Won't happen. The constitutional convention are a populist talking shop.

All the major parties are in favour of it as, I would imagine, are the vast majority of Irish passport holders in the north. I dont know how many of them there are in total but some 400,000 have been issued since 1998.
I'll be surprised if it's not in place for the next election.

Iwasfrozen · 02-10-2013 5:12pm

Crooked Jack wrote: »

All the major parties are in favour of it as, I would imagine, are the vast majority of Irish passport holders in the north. I dont know how many of them there are in total but some 400,000 have been issued since 1998.
I'll be surprised if it's not in place for the next election.

We'll see. I hope not but as long as it's only the presidential election I can live with it. It'll have to be passed by referendum though so that'll give us a chance to argue against it.

Manassas61 · 02-10-2013 5:31pm

Charlie Rock wrote: »

Anyone born on the island is entitled to Irish citizenship by law.

Doesn't mean this will happen. We will see. The Irish President is pointless anyway. The role has no power to do anything practically.

oscarBravo · 02-10-2013 6:04pm

Crooked Jack wrote: »

I'll be surprised if it's not in place for the next election.

Not without a referendum.

Crooked Jack · 02-10-2013 7:38pm

Manassas61 wrote: »

Doesn't mean this will happen. We will see. The Irish President is pointless anyway. The role has no power to do anything practically.

A lot like the english queen. Except elected. And much less expensive. And without the sense of entitlement. And minus all the ridiculous pomp.

Crooked Jack · 02-10-2013 7:39pm

oscarBravo wrote: »

Not without a referendum.

Are you suggesting there isn't time for a referendum within the next five years?

oscarBravo · 02-10-2013 9:18pm

Crooked Jack wrote: »

Are you suggesting there isn't time for a referendum within the next five years?

I'm suggesting it's unlikely one will be held.

Manach · 02-10-2013 9:28pm

Crooked Jack wrote: »

A lot like the english queen. Except elected. And much less expensive. And without the sense of entitlement. And minus all the ridiculous pomp.

Or without the link to the historical past, or a prine source of tourist revenue and a unifying symbol instead of a retirement home for political parties.

.jacksparrow. · 02-10-2013 9:45pm

Manach wrote: »

Or without the link to the historical past, or a prine source of tourist revenue and a unifying symbol instead of a retirement home for political parties.

And what a great past that was. A very proud and noble one with great intentions.

Crooked Jack · 02-10-2013 10:15pm

Manach wrote: »

Or without the link to the historical past, or a prine source of tourist revenue and a unifying symbol instead of a retirement home for political parties.

Jacksparrow already addressed the past issue. The tourist thing is questionable at best and as for a unifying symbol? Holy jesus how did you come to that conclusion? Anyway, this is way off topic

Manassas61 · 02-10-2013 11:29pm

Crooked Jack wrote: »

A lot like the english queen. Except elected. And much less expensive. And without the sense of entitlement. And minus all the ridiculous pomp.

We all know which one the world favours more. But that is besides the point. The position is just symbolic. You are basically voting for a person to go and cut the ribbon to open some Lidle stores.

Crooked Jack · 02-10-2013 11:32pm

Manassas61 wrote: »

We all know which one the world favours more. But that is besides the point. The position is just symbolic. You are basically voting for a person to go and cut the ribbon to open some Lidle stores.

Unionists are claiming to speak for the whole world now? Saints preserve us!

If its so inconsequential, why are you getting so worked up about all the Irish people finally having a say in who their president is?

Manassas61 · 03-10-2013 12:02am

Crooked Jack wrote: »

Unionists are claiming to speak for the whole world now? Saints preserve us!

If its so inconsequential, why are you getting so worked up about all the Irish people finally having a say in who their president is?

in reality the role is meaningless and holds no real weight. Is there any actual desire from the majority of people in Northern Ireland on this issue to be allowed to vote?

Crooked Jack · 03-10-2013 12:26am

Manassas61 wrote: »

in reality the role is meaningless and holds no real weight. Is there any actual desire from the majority of people in Northern Ireland on this issue to be allowed to vote?

Id assume the vast majority of nationalists would like to have a say in who their president is. id also say theres more than a few unionist passport holders out there who wouldnt pass up the opportunity to vote for anyone who may stop a member of Sinn Fein being elected to any post. anyway, thats beside the point. the president of Ireland should be elected by all the people of Ireland

Manassas61 · 03-10-2013 4:01am

Not unless the people of Northern Ireland want to. Which should go to a referendum if it must.

Sir Humphrey Appleby · 03-10-2013 7:32am

I wouldn't want anyone who covered up child sex abuse being President, and according to his Niece that is exactly what he did for 20 years.
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/adams-wanted-to-conceal-sex-abuse-allegation-29630587.html

Crooked Jack · 03-10-2013 8:31am

Manassas61 wrote: »

Not unless the people of Northern Ireland want to. Which should go to a referendum if it must.

Yeah, we should allow a small minority of people to make a decision affecting the whole country, because that worked out so well before

timthumbni · 03-10-2013 9:11am

Sir Humphrey Appleby wrote: »

I wouldn't want anyone who covered up child sex abuse being President, and according to his Niece that is exactly what he did for 20 years.
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/adams-wanted-to-conceal-sex-abuse-allegation-29630587.html

I don't think this is going to blow over quite so easy for adams. In fact I could see this being the push for him to go out to pasture. Surely even some blindly obedient shinner bot types are now questioning the actions of adams on dealing with this matter. It will be interesting to see how it develops.

And as for the priest trying to hush up the abuse story that's hardly surprising. What's one more child abuse/child rape cover up for that so called church.

Godge · 03-10-2013 12:31pm

Crooked Jack wrote: »

Id assume the vast majority of nationalists would like to have a say in who their president is. id also say theres more than a few unionist passport holders out there who wouldnt pass up the opportunity to vote for anyone who may stop a member of Sinn Fein being elected to any post. anyway, thats beside the point. the president of Ireland should be elected by all the people of Ireland

The President of Ireland is not the President of Northen Ireland since Articles 2 and 3 were amended.

As for Gerry Adams to run for President, let us just ask his niece what she thinks of that.

nordydan · 03-10-2013 12:59pm

Manassas61 wrote: »

Not unless the people of Northern Ireland want to. Which should go to a referendum if it must.

Interesting idea, however the vote should be limited to Irish passport holders only.

Manassas61 · 03-10-2013 3:42pm

Crooked Jack wrote: »

Yeah, we should allow a small minority of people to make a decision affecting the whole country, because that worked out so well before

There is two states on the Island. That is a reality. Time to face up to that. The people will choose if they must in Northern Ireland.

Happyman42 · 03-10-2013 5:05pm

Manassas61 wrote: »

There is two states on the Island. That is a reality. Time to face up to that. The people will choose if they must in Northern Ireland.

Read the GFA, it is more complex (and always has been) than 2 separate states and the GFA deals with that. Allowing Irish people to vote for the president is entirely in line with the agreement.

Manassas61 · 03-10-2013 5:06pm

Happyman42 wrote: »

Read the GFA, it is more complex (and always has been) than 2 separate states and the GFA deals with that. Allowing Irish people to vote for the president is entirely in line with the agreement.

No it isn't. If that was the case, it would already be happening.

Happyman42 · 03-10-2013 5:09pm

Manassas61 wrote: »

No it isn't. If that was the case, it would already be happening.

Yes it is. It will be introduced in due course. The GFA is an agreement and a process.

Manassas61 · 03-10-2013 5:12pm

Happyman42 wrote: »

Yes it is. It will be introduced in due course. The GFA is an agreement and a process.

It would need to be voted on. Go look up the facts. People in Northern Ireland can't vote for the Irish President.

Gerry Adams to run for President ?

Comments