Martin McGuinness Individual Interview Late Late Show... your opinions?

wolfpawnat

Adrianno28 wrote: »

Individual Interview Late Late ... Some people say that his history should exempt him from the Presidential race, others say that this is a major reason as to why he should be included. ...how do you think he did?

Didn't stop DeValera from becoming President. Same sort of history.

fitflip wrote: »

I cant understand how with his past in the ira and the constant bull**** how he is even in this race. Im sure if he was not part of sein fein and the ira he would make an excellent pres. a very perssonable man.

I have a question for people with this mindset,

He decided to go into the IRA because of the hardship he and his community were going through in the 60-70's, then he came out and tried the political route. But this is just as wrong in some people's books, "how dare he with his past". So would ye rather he stayed within the IRA? It really is damned if you do, and damned if you don't. He was part of the Peace Process and is personal friends with one of the more hardline Unionists of the talks! Proving he can talk to literally anyone from any background. A necessity for a country's President!

I think his interview last night was good, considering the pressure he got from the ever so slightly bias Ryan "FF" Tubridy.

fitflip

resorting to joining an organisation in which its sole focus was unification at all costs including murder of innocent people just doing thier jobs. I dont go into a bank and blow them up to get what i want. You can think its sole focus was to re-unite the island, when a massive part of it was common crime, profitering and persecuiting innocent people. He never admits anything that has happened and said sorry for any actions when it is clearly documented he was a high ranking member, he turned to politics cause he knew after all the murder and killing it will never work. I repects aspects of martin but in terms of the aras we need a president that will be open and honest. martin is not honest as I said, he admits nothing.

LordSutch

wolfpawnat wrote: »

He decided to go into the IRA because of the hardship he and his community were going through in the 60-70's, then he came out and tried the political route.

Can you really not understand why there is such antipathy towards him ?

Clue, think pre 94' and the total refusal of McGuinness & Adams to condemn the most horrendous bombings & shootings by the PIRA, then add to that the fact that McGuinness was himself in the PIRA and you have the reason so many people shy away from him as a 'Presidential candidate'.

fitflip

LordSutch wrote: »

Can you really not understand why there is such antipathy towards him ?

Clue, think pre 94' and the total refusal of McGuinness & Adams to condemn the most horrendous bombings & shootings by the PIRA, then add to that the fact that McGuinness was himself in the PIRA and you have the reason so many people shy away from him as a 'Presidential candidate'.

Well said

lmaopml

wolfpawnat wrote: »

Didn't stop DeValera from becoming President. Same sort of history.



I have a question for people with this mindset,

He decided to go into the IRA because of the hardship he and his community were going through in the 60-70's, then he came out and tried the political route. But this is just as wrong in some people's books, "how dare he with his past". So would ye rather he stayed within the IRA? It really is damned if you do, and damned if you don't. He was part of the Peace Process and is personal friends with one of the more hardline Unionists of the talks! Proving he can talk to literally anyone from any background. A necessity for a country's President!

I think his interview last night was good, considering the pressure he got from the ever so slightly bias Ryan "FF" Tubridy.

Totally agree. I think hecklers aside that McGuinness is running and with some support, and it's an exercise to ascertain and remain in public opinion...There is a trend to be trendy at the moment to abhore all things that give a nod to those who took part in sitting across the table on the side of a republic - how times change, and so quick too - and a campaign to pigeon hole candidates that are easily 'tagged' and bagged - history both sides had to be forgot in order to bring about the status quo up North.

Martin, is a very clever guy - but imo not Presidential material - I would imagine though that they will be guaging the vote - not unlike others in our very recent history. Go figure!

Magill

fitflip wrote: »

resorting to joining an organisation in which its sole focus was unification at all costs including murder of innocent people just doing thier jobs. I dont go into a bank and blow them up to get what i want. You can think its sole focus was to re-unite the island, when a massive part of it was common crime, profitering and persecuiting innocent people. He never admits anything that has happened and said sorry for any actions when it is clearly documented he was a high ranking member, he turned to politics cause he knew after all the murder and killing it will never work. I repects aspects of martin but in terms of the aras we need a president that will be open and honest. martin is not honest as I said, he admits nothing.

And you think this is the only reason people joined the IRA during the troubles ? Never ceases to amaze me how a lot of people from the South (Almost as quickly as those from the rest of the UK..) so easily dismiss or fail to acknowledge the MAIN reason why people joined the IRA. Its the same reasoning as to why the current RIRA has very little support.. because the catholic community is no longer treated as second class citizens in Northern Ireland.

lmaopml

Magill wrote: »

And you think this is the only reason people joined the IRA during the troubles ? Never ceases to amaze me how a lot of people from the South (Almost as quickly as those from the rest of the UK..) so easily dismiss or fail to acknowledge the MAIN reason why people joined the IRA. Its the same reasoning as to why the current RIRA has very little support.. because the catholic community is no longer treated as second class citizens in Northern Ireland.

Just a small correction! We're not part of the 'rest of the 'UK''? No?

North and South - what? self determination was the best thing ever! ...and equally, the good thing is that people who identify as 'Irish' are not treated as second class citizens because of the work of so many - this was never a 'religious' divide lets face it....calling it 'religious' is crap really...a real cop out. The religious community both North and South and East across the water have more in common than not..

Magill

lmaopml wrote: »

Just a small correction! We're not part of the 'rest of the 'UK''? No?

North and South - what? self determination was the best thing ever! ...and equally, the good thing is that people who identify as 'Irish' are not treated as second class citizens because of the work of so many - this was never a 'religious' divide lets face it....calling it 'religious' is crap really...a real cop out. The religious community both North and South and East across the water have more in common than not..

Huh ?

Ofc it was never really about religion.. It quite clearly wasn't a "Holy" war, it was just an easy way to seperate those who considered themselves Irish and those who considered themselves British.. this made it a lot easier for soldiers/police/employers to oppress the "Nationalist" community.

foggy_lad

wolfpawnat wrote: »

Didn't stop DeValera from becoming President. Same sort of history.

Isn't it marvellous the way people and politics can move on from the past.

I have a question for people with this mindset,

He decided to go into the IRA because of the hardship he and his community were going through in the 60-70's, then he came out and tried the political route. But this is just as wrong in some people's books, "how dare he with his past". So would ye rather he stayed within the IRA? It really is damned if you do, and damned if you don't. He was part of the Peace Process and is personal friends with one of the more hardline Unionists of the talks! Proving he can talk to literally anyone from any background. A necessity for a country's President!

Thousands maybe even millions of people throughout several generations did not decide to join any illegal terrorist groups and become killers, thugs, money-launderers, deisel washers, gun runners etc etc

These Honest decent people got on with their lives and feared the likes of McGuinness just as much as anyone on the loyalist/unionist side. thousands were maimed by having their knees shot off by people wheo were supposed to be fighting for them because they were suspected informants. McGuiness was involved in killing Irish people!

The people who joined the IRA were those who wanted to gain from the extortion and criminality of the organisation as there were millions of pounds up for grabs! And those on the higher reaches of the IRA had a steady supply of barrow-boy types who went from the post office with their giro to the pub and bookies to act as cannon fodder and do the Donkey work!

lmaopml

Magill wrote: »

Huh ?

Ofc it was never really about religion.. It quite clearly wasn't a "Holy" war, it was just an easy way to seperate those who considered themselves Irish and those who considered themselves British.. this made it a lot easier for soldiers/police/employers to oppress the "Nationalist" community.

Maybe! Is this still happening now to the same extent?

KELTICKNIGHTT

wolfpawnat wrote: »

Didn't stop DeValera from becoming President. Same sort of history.



I have a question for people with this mindset,

He decided to go into the IRA because of the hardship he and his community were going through in the 60-70's, then he came out and tried the political route. But this is just as wrong in some people's books, "how dare he with his past". So would ye rather he stayed within the IRA? It really is damned if you do, and damned if you don't. He was part of the Peace Process and is personal friends with one of the more hardline Unionists of the talks! Proving he can talk to literally anyone from any background. A necessity for a country's President!

I think his interview last night was good, considering the pressure he got from the ever so slightly bias Ryan "FF" Tubridy.

what pressure id tubbs put him under,not alot,he only said crap anyways,dont believe anything he says
as far past goes, he was a terrorist in ira in derry,and he fixed what he caused,

Magill

lmaopml wrote: »

Maybe! Is this still happening now to the same extent?

No, theres still traces of it but in general employers and the police wouldn't get away with it these days. Theres still quite a bit of friction between both sets of communities in certain parts of Belfast and a few other places... but hopefully with time.. it'll lessen like the rest of the country.

lmaopml

foggy_lad wrote: »

Isn't it marvellous the way people and politics can move on from the past.

Thousands maybe even millions of people throughout several generations did not decide to join any illegal terrorist groups and become killers, thugs, money-launderers, deisel washers, gun runners etc etc

These Honest decent people got on with their lives and feared the likes of McGuinness just as much as anyone on the loyalist/unionist side. thousands were maimed by having their knees shot off by people wheo were supposed to be fighting for them because they were suspected informants. McGuiness was involved in killing Irish people!

The people who joined the IRA were those who wanted to gain from the extortion and criminality of the organisation as there were millions of pounds up for grabs! And those on the higher reaches of the IRA had a steady supply of barrow-boy types who went from the post office with their giro to the pub and bookies to act as cannon fodder and do the Donkey work!

Well it's really nice to know that our current Irish state was built on the back of a few donkeys, alcoholics and gamblers! Cheers! Nice to know that.

I don't think so..

McGuinness may be many things but he is only really doing any kind of decent work where he is not exactly speaking donkey language..across the table- apparently braying....

He is not President material, but my goodness he can speak donkey language among the biggest donkeys ever..:P That's where he belongs imo...

LordSutch

Magill wrote: »

And you think this is the only reason people joined the IRA during the troubles ? Never ceases to amaze me how a lot of people from the South (Almost as quickly as those from the rest of the UK..) so easily dismiss or fail to acknowledge the MAIN reason why people joined the IRA.

The main reason being that some Catholics (mostly in Derry) pre 69' felt descriminated against at the hands of their fellow Unionist Northeners? cue thirty years of bombs & bullets, with some of the most awful & destructive acts, perpetrated by the PIRA in the name of the Irish people (but without their consent), cue thirty years of McGuinness being involved with said PIRA, with being a member, and with refusing to condemn any of the atrocities committed by the PIRA.

Its very easy to say "Oh well the Catholic community were treated as 2nd class citizens" by their Northern Unionist counterparts, and indeed they probably were descriminated against in many instances! > but did that warrent all the death & destruction comitted by the PIRA?

NO.

Sunnyisland

Lord Sutch wrote: »

The main reason being that some Catholics (mostly in Derry) pre 69' felt discriminated against at the hands of their fellow Unionist Northerners? cue thirty years of bombs & bullets, with some of the most awful & destructive acts, perpetrated by the PIRA in the name of the Irish people (but without their consent), cue thirty years of McGuinness being involved with said PIRA, with being a member, and with refusing to condemn any of the atrocities committed by the PIRA.

Its very easy to say "Oh well the Catholic community were treated as 2nd class citizens" by their Northern Unionist counterparts, and indeed they probably were discriminated against in many instances! > but did that warrant all the death & destruction committed by the PIRA?

NO.

I find your remarks being very flippant to actually what was happening there at that time The conflict was the result of discrimination against the Catholic/nationalist minority by the Protestant/unionist majority and the question of Northern Ireland's status within the United Kingdom & death & destruction was not just caused by the IRA as without the violence and apartheid like situation by the majority there there wouldn't have been a reinvented IRA.

Sunnyisland

KELTICKNIGHTT wrote: »

what pressure id tubbs put him under,not alot,he only said crap anyways,dont believe anything he says
as far past goes, he was a terrorist in ira in derry,and he fixed what he caused,

Shows you what you know about Irish history.

KELTICKNIGHTT

realies wrote: »

Shows you what you know about Irish history.

what,the fact fact mcg is a liar and terrorist
truth hurts

Sunnyisland

KELTICKNIGHTT wrote: »

what,the fact fact mcg is a liar and terrorist
truth hurts

What is a terrorist ?

A person who uses terrorism in the pursuit of political aims

don't have a problem with that.

There having a weekend of Che Guevara over in the west of Ireland http://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=6&ved=0CEQQFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.examiner.ie%2Fireland%2Fche-guevara-festival-to-prove-a-revolution-166700.html&ei=6j2ITpSmNKaR0AWCgoEG&usg=AFQjCNG3LrGXtdqieWGPtWbY5ArvrR41aQ

Terrorist or guerrilla fighter ?

Sunnyisland

Love your Avatar :-)

Magill

LordSutch wrote: »

The main reason being that some Catholics (mostly in Derry) pre 69' felt descriminated against at the hands of their fellow Unionist Northeners? cue thirty years of bombs & bullets, with some of the most awful & destructive acts, perpetrated by the PIRA in the name of the Irish people (but without their consent), cue thirty years of McGuinness being involved with said PIRA, with being a member, and with refusing to condemn any of the atrocities committed by the PIRA.

Exactly my point with my orginal post... look at how dismissive you are of the descrimination / oppression that the nationalist community was under from not only Unionist "Northerners" but from the ruling government and authorities... the peaceful route was given a chance with the cival rights movement.. but look how that turned out and the political path was a dead end because of jerrymandering. Again... its a lot easier to judge and sit on your high horse when you weren't the one being subjected to this kind of treatment... especially when your opinion on the matter is so ignorant.

LordSutch

realies wrote: »

What is a terrorist ?

Anyone who was in the Provisional IRA, Mr McGuinness included.

Wolfe Tone

LordSutch wrote: »

Anyone who was in the Provisional IRA, Mr McGuinness included.

But you would also regard anyone who was in any IRA ever as a terrorist yes?

alastair

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

But you would also regard anyone who was in any IRA ever as a terrorist yes?

I note, as should you, that he said provisional IRA. That the provos used terrorism tactics isn't exactly controversial opinion.

TMH

alastair wrote: »

I note, as should you, that he said provisional IRA. That the provos used terrorism tactics isn't exactly controversial opinion.

I believe Wolfe Tone's point is that, by referring to McGuinness/the PIRA as terrorists, you also have to call the original IRA (and the IRB and the Fenians before them) terrorists, as they used similar guerrilla tactics during the war of independence.

LordSutch

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

But you would also regard anyone who was in any IRA ever as a terrorist yes?

Lets not muddy the waters, this thread is about Martin McGuinness, who admits that he was in the Provisional IRA (who wanted to usurp this state)! To most people thats reason enough to tick him off the candidate list. Yes, he has become a reformed figure in middle age, and there's no disputing that, but McGuinness makes no apologies for his actions in the IRA, and if he became President it would be rewarding him for the death & misery dished out to so many.

Nodin

LordSutch wrote: »

Lets not muddy the waters, this thread is about Martin McGuinness, who admits that he was in the Provisional IRA (who wanted to usurp this state)! To most people thats reason enough to tick him off the candidate list. ..........

...but as a self-declared unionist, you'd dissolve the state yourself, so trotting out that is a bit much, to be honest.

alastair

TMH wrote: »

I believe Wolfe Tone's point is that, by referring to McGuinness/the PIRA as terrorists, you also have to call the original IRA (and the IRB and the Fenians before them) terrorists, as they used similar guerrilla tactics during the war of independence.

Did Dev or Michael Collins employ the 'guerrilla' tactic of strapping bombs to people and forcing them to drive to border checkpoints before blowing them up? I think we're all able to determine the distinctions.

LordSutch

Nodin wrote: »

...but as a self-declared unionist, you'd dissolve the state yourself, so trotting out that is a bit much, to be honest.

The only thing I might need to dissolve is some Alka Seltzer if old Marty gets in

Gay Mitchell, Alan Shatter, Michael McDowell, Pat Byrne (former Garda commissioner) all Irish Nationalists, who have all "trotted out" (as you would say) similar accusations against Martin McGuinness & his past as a member of the Provisional IRA. Incedentially, I heard Danny Morrisson on the radio the other day, trying forcefully to warn off a journalist who was 'squeezed' by McGuinness & two heavies back in the 70s.

You guys really don't like the cage being rattled.

Nodin

LordSutch wrote: »

The only thing I might need to dissolve is some Alka Seltzer if old Marty gets in

Gay Mitchell, Alan Shatter, Michael McDowell, Pat Byrne (former Garda commissioner) all Irish Nationalists, who have all "trotted out" (as you would say) similar accusations against Martin McGuinness & his past as a member of the Provisional IRA. Incedentially, I heard Danny Morrisson on the radio the other day, trying forcefully to warn off a journalist who was 'squeezed' by McGuinness & two heavies back in the 70s.

You guys really don't like the cage being rattled.

Yes, I'm sure they have. That wasn't what I specifically addressing, nor does it make your double standard stance any less dubious.

LordSutch

Nodin wrote: »

Yes, I'm sure they have. That wasn't what I specifically addressing, nor does it make your double standard stance any less dubious.

Double stance? What, you mean like more dubious that Marty's denial of post 74' IRA membership :rolleyes:

Get over it Nodin, McGuinness has questions to answer.

Nodin

LordSutch wrote: »

What, you mean like more dubious that Marty's denial of post 74' IRA membership :rolleyes:

Get over it Nodin, McGuinness has questions to answer.

O you seem desperate to get away from your little remark....what was it again? O yes

Lets not muddy the waters, this thread is about Martin McGuinness, who admits that he was in the Provisional IRA (who wanted to usurp this state)! To most people thats reason enough to tick him off the candidate list

You're a self declared unionist. You've therefore not a leg to stand on when speaking of people in regard to their loyalty to the state.

alastair

Nodin wrote: »

You're a self declared unionist. You've therefore not a leg to stand on when speaking of people in regard to their loyalty to the state.

Mind you, he's not running for head of that state either, so maybe there's no contradiction at play?

LordSutch

Nodin wrote: »

You're a self declared unionist. You've therefore not a leg to stand on when speaking of people in regard to their loyalty to the state.

That's "almost" like Nazi tactics, like being a Jew in 1930s Germany, I live here but I can't have an opinion because I am not an Irish Nationalist, is that it? But then what about Gay Mitchell, Michael McDowell, & Alan Shatter? Are their Anti McGuinness opinions allowed? Gay actually mentioned McGuinness's "West Brit" comment during the show, McGuinness smiled.

Nodin

LordSutch wrote: »

That's "almost" like Nazi tactics, like being a Jew in 1930s Germany, I live here but I can't have an opinion because I am not an Irish Nationalist, is that it? But then what about Gay Mitchell, Michael McDowell, & Alan Shatter? Are their Anti McGuinness opinions allowed? No doubt you would have them silenced also.

Aha, the godwin.

You're entitled to your opinion and I haven't said otherwise. However I'm free to point out that - having expressed loyalty to another state and wishing this one dissolved - you complaining of anyone wishing to 'usurp the state' is more than a tad hypocritical. Unless you know something about Messrs Shatter, McDowell and Mitchell that I and the rest of us don't, that specific point can't be made at them.

LordSutch

Nodin wrote: »

Aha, the godwin.

You're entitled to your opinion and I haven't said otherwise. However I'm free to point out that - having expressed loyalty to another state and wishing this one dissolved - you complaining of anyone wishing to 'usurp the state' is more than a tad hypocritical. Unless you know something about Messrs Shatter, McDowell and Mitchell that I and the rest of us don't, that specific point can't be made at them.

I am entitled to my opinion as long as it doesn't rattle the cage, that's the impression I get. and as regards being a Unionist, so what? is that not allowed? and then there's the dissolving issue which is lost on me, I'm afraid. Martin McGuinness wants to be President of Ireland, he was in the Provisional IRA, and he has questions to answer to the people of Ireland, me included . . . . . . .

Nodin

LordSutch wrote: »

I am entitled to my opinion as long as it doesn't rattle the cage, that's the impression I get..

As a fairly unrepentant republican, you'd note that I'm not even remotely "rattled". Going on your last few responses, the same might not be said for thee.

LordSutch wrote: »

and as regards being a Unionist, so what? is that not allowed? and then there's the dissolving issue which is lost on me, I'm afraid. Martin McGuinness wants to be President of Ireland, he was in the Provisional IRA, and he has questions to answer to the people of Ireland, me included . . . . . . .

You seem to be trying to intimate that you're being persecuted. At no stage have I stated that you aren't entitled to hold whatever opinions you might have. However, I feel it rather ludicrous that somebody who wishes to end the existence of the Irish state as its now constituted is criticising a candidate for his alleged wish to 'usurp' same. Pots, kettles, etc.

LordSutch

Nodin wrote: »

I feel it rather ludicrous that somebody who wishes to end the existence of the Irish state as its now constituted is criticising a candidate for his alleged wish to 'usurp' same. Pots, kettles, etc.

End the existence of the State? And replace it with what?

Anyway, getting back to the Late Late, I think Tubridy was too soft on McGuinness, who skilfully ducked & dived the questions.

Nodin

LordSutch wrote: »

End the existence of the State? And replace it with what?.

Merge it into the UK, seats in Westminister? You're the unionist, you'd be the one to answer that.

LordSutch wrote: »

Anyway, getting back to the Late Late, I think Tubridy was too soft on McGuinness, who skilfully ducked & dived the questions.

I suspect that unless Tubridy skewered him though the heart with a stake and burnt the remains, you and a few others would hold that view regardless.

More generally though, Tubridy isn't really of sufficient calibre to host such a debate. Kenny, Bowman would have been more suitable.

puppetmaster

LordSutch wrote: »

End the existence of the State? And replace it with what?

Anyway, getting back to the Late Late, I think Tubridy was too soft on McGuinness, who skilfully ducked & dived the questions.

He showed obvious bias against McGuinness.Which he shouldnt have his job is to host in a fair and even manner. He should have been harder on all of them. And i think it nieve to believe that McGuinness wouldnt duck and dive any question no matter how direct. He is afterall (currently) a Politician.

KELTICKNIGHTT

realies wrote: »

What is a terrorist ?

A person who uses terrorism in the pursuit of political aims

don't have a problem with that.

There having a weekend of Che Guevara over in the west of Ireland http://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=6&ved=0CEQQFjAF&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.examiner.ie%2Fireland%2Fche-guevara-festival-to-prove-a-revolution-166700.html&ei=6j2ITpSmNKaR0AWCgoEG&usg=AFQjCNG3LrGXtdqieWGPtWbY5ArvrR41aQ

Terrorist or guerrilla fighter ?

Neither did the likes of ira and mcguinness,chicken s$$t terrorists
hence,only fools will trust them

Sunnyisland

KELTICKNIGHTT wrote: »

Neither did the likes of ira and mcguinness,chicken s$$t terrorists
hence,only fools will trust them

I am no fool .

KELTICKNIGHTT

realies wrote: »

I am no fool .

mcguinness and his sf club will get plenty of questions about his past and involvement ,few more debates but we all know mcguinnes wont tell the truth ,just change the subject

COYW

thebman wrote: »

I think he needs to cut out that crap alright and that wage nonsense. It doesn't impress me one bit TBH and he isn't the worst candidate though I wouldn't vote for him anyway given his past.

I was talking to people about him today and his constant waffle talk is starting to put people off him. For the record, I have no time for him but some of the others present were prepared to consider him. A few points about him that they were getting sick of :

1) Running as an independent candidate when it is obvious that he is running for SF.

2) This average industrial wage rubbish and the hiring of the people on the dole.

3) His terrorist past. Everyone knows he is lying.

4) The fact that he couldn't answer simple questions like how much he was going spend on his campaign, yet he could say that it was going to be less than everyone else.

KeithAFC

Magill wrote: »

And you think this is the only reason people joined the IRA during the troubles ? Never ceases to amaze me how a lot of people from the South (Almost as quickly as those from the rest of the UK..) so easily dismiss or fail to acknowledge the MAIN reason why people joined the IRA. Its the same reasoning as to why the current RIRA has very little support.. because the catholic community is no longer treated as second class citizens in Northern Ireland.

No. The RIRA has no support because the bombing campaign of 30 odd years didn't bring about a United Ireland. People want to use politics now. It isn't about civil rights and the PIRA knew that. They didn't care about blowing Catholics up either.

I should actually add more to this post. Sinn Fein is starting to lose some hardcore supporters who now see Martin Mcguinness running as president of the Republic Of Ireland. Many Republicans didn't and don't see it as a civil rights thing. It is simply about getting a United Ireland by force.

blahfckingblah

COYW he is running as an independant because his party does not have enough members in the oireachtas to nominate him on their own and so needed the help of independants, the majority of whom would have little in common with Sinn Fein and would not like to be seen as closet SFers by some narrow minded individuals.

COYW

blahfckingblah wrote: »

COYW he is running as an independant because his party does not have enough members in the oireachtas to nominate him on their own and so needed the help of independants, the majority of whom would have little in common with Sinn Fein and would not like to be seen as closet SFers by some narrow minded individuals.

No, he is running for president for SF with the support of some independents. His campaign was approved by the SF's officer board and ratified by the party's Ard Comhairle. I think he is using the title of independent as a protection mechanism for SF in the event that something unpleasant surfaces about his past.

PARKHEAD67

KELTICKNIGHTT wrote: »

Neither did the likes of ira and mcguinness,chicken s$$t terrorists
hence,only fools will trust them

Ha ha. Your obviously a Catholic who lived in Derry throughout the 60's and 70's.You clearly know what your talking about.:rolleyes:.I despair at people sometimes.I really do.

PARKHEAD67

KeithAFC wrote: »

No. The RIRA has no support because the bombing campaign of 30 odd years didn't bring about a United Ireland. People want to use politics now. It isn't about civil rights and the PIRA knew that. They didn't care about blowing Catholics up either.

I should actually add more to this post. Sinn Fein is starting to lose some hardcore supporters who now see Martin Mcguinness running as president of the Republic Of Ireland. Many Republicans didn't and don't see it as a civil rights thing. It is simply about getting a United Ireland by force.

Civil rights Keith?? Speaking of which, what happened in McGuinness's home town of Derry in 1972 when unarmed Catholics took to the street to protest against the apartheid against Catholics that was going on up there?Thats right..14 of them were murdered.By the British Army.We've finally got an apology off the British.How nice.Every Irish person knows that Catholics were brutalised for years up there.Internment without trial.Beating Catholics out of their homes.Burning Catholics out of their homes.McGuinness grew up in this era. Lets not forget that we were considering invading the north ourselves for a time(The Irish Army).I cant understand all these self-righteous morons down here who label McGuinness a "terrorist". If you walked the shoes that man walked ,you'd soon change your tune.I guarantee you that.

LuckyLloyd

Questions about his past and this debate miss the point. Whatever the truth of his level of involvement with the IRA, timelines of same, etc - the important thing for a potential President is the ability to keep their counsel under pressure, and act with grace when faced with personal or political attacks. In that respect, McGuinness has been nothing short of, well, Presidential since he entered the campaign.

What do we need from a potential President? We need someone who can essentially drink tea for Ireland, be a public figure without making overtly political points, and have the experience and discretion to deal with the worst case constitutional scenarios. This candidate:

- Is personable, speaks well and has forged strong personal relationships across divides during his political career in Northern Ireland;
- Is particularly adept at talking in broad terms about peace, community and tolerance; and is well versed in saying a lot without telling you anything;
- Has been a key member of teams involved in complex negotiating processes, as well as serving as Deputy Leader of a legislative assembly;

As such, he is definitely qualified and able to do the job. Aside from Michael D Higgins, I think the other candidates are essentially unelectable whether it be due to a lack of judgement and dependability, or a lack of personality.

People are entitled to not vote for him because they make the decision that he has too much baggage and they don't like / can't trust him because of it. So far though, his performance has been very strong and one can rest assured that he would execute the office competently were he to pull off an incredibly unlikely election victory.

COYW

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

What do we need from a potential President? We need someone who can essentially drink tea for Ireland, be a public figure without making overtly political points, and have the experience and discretion to deal with the worst case constitutional scenarios.

Given the hard left political views he has, that makes him unsuitable for the role then. He isn't going to be aligned to the current government, is he. Also, he has no experience of dealing with constitutional matters in this country.