More Crap on Adams, Mod Warning in OP.

Donnielighto

Creative Juices wrote: »

I voted SF in the recent local elections. Not #1 but it was still the first time I ever put them down as a preference. I was glad I did. I really like Mary Lou and Pearse as people as politicians.
However I will not vote for a SF candidate in the next GE if Adams is still in charge. Why? I just don't trust him and I never will. Wrong or right, that wont change. I doubt I am alone. I expect SF to do very well but I do think they have the potential to be great.

Doherty is good, cant stand Mary Lou, though, seems really conceited, feeling she is very much out for herself.

Creative Juices

Donnielighto wrote: »

Doherty is good, cant stand Mary Lou, though, seems really conceited, feeling she is very much out for herself.

Out for herself? She spends half her time defending her glorious leader...

Donnielighto

Happyman42 wrote: »

Your imagination is sound, they have resisted all the way.

But then I wouldnt level criticism at dublin over the process going ahead since another of the four parties (uk) is the one holding it up. The derry inquest and response was welcome though, did seem genuine as well.

It is harder to legitimise things that governments do anyway compared to the IRA or Unionists. Governments and parties are generally held to a higher standard, this is part of the issue facing SF now as they transition.

Donnielighto

Creative Juices wrote: »

Out for herself? She spends half her time defending her glorious leader...

She wants to be annointed imo. Adams wont be leader in 10 years.

Happyman42

Donnielighto wrote: »

But then I wouldnt level criticism at dublin over the process going ahead .

Well I would, as representatives of Irish people they should be applying as much pressure on the British as is humanly possible. But not a dickie bird out of them.

Timberrrrrrrr

Donnielighto wrote: »

She wants to be annointed imo. Adams wont be leader in 10 years.

I'd be surprised if he is leader in 2 years.

Creative Juices

Donnielighto wrote: »

She wants to be annointed imo. Adams wont be leader in 10 years.

If they have any sense, they should drop him now before the ramp up for GE 2016

Donnielighto

Happyman42 wrote: »

Well I would, as representatives of Irish people they should be applying as much pressure on the British as is humanly possible. But not a dickie bird out of them.

We're outsiders looking in though, the pressure should be from the north.

Happyman42

Donnielighto wrote: »

We're outsiders looking in though, the pressure should be from the north.

No we are not. Read the GFA, we are very much involved.

Donnielighto

Happyman42 wrote: »

No we are not. Read the GFA, we are very much involved.

Didn't the republic give up the claim on the north in that though, of course events affecting Irish citizens would be cause to take issue.

Happyman42

Donnielighto wrote: »

Didn't the republic give up the claim on the north in that though, of course events affecting Irish citizens would be cause to take issue.

Read the GFA, we have a very definite and defined role, on behalf of those who identify as Irish.

Donnielighto

Happyman42 wrote: »

Read the GFA, we have a very definite and defined role, on behalf of those who identify as Irish.

Which is pretty much what I asked. It was a genuine question btw.

Happyman42

Donnielighto wrote: »

Which is pretty much what I asked. It was a genuine question btw.

The GFA agreement is an international agreement which gives the Irish Government a role in NI's affairs.

Sierra Oscar

Speaking of the Good Friday Agreement, how long now until Adams starts claiming that this scandal threatens the peace process? Usually happens when Sinn Féin/IRA's dirty and murky past is brought under the spotlight.

padraig47

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Speaking of the Good Friday Agreement, how long now until Adams starts claiming that this scandal threatens the peace process? Usually happens when Sinn Féin/IRA's dirty and murky past is brought under the spotlight.

That is why court case was dragged out so that Ms Cahill got fed up waiting. SF are thugs North and South.

Dan_Solo

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

Speaking of the Good Friday Agreement, how long now until Adams starts claiming that this scandal threatens the peace process? Usually happens when Sinn Féin/IRA's dirty and murky past is brought under the spotlight.

Patently obvious trial by media smear campaigns by the golden circle parties and their cronies could derail the peace process alright, but it's unlikely.

Dan_Solo

padraig47 wrote: »

That is why court case was dragged out so that Ms Cahill got fed up waiting. SF are thugs North and South.

Makes you wonder why every court case isn't dragged out if it's a sure fire way of avoiding a guilty verdict.
Nice random non-sequitur thug comment at the end BTW. Does that apply to all unproven criminal suspects or just the ones you select not to like?

Timberrrrrrrr

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Patently obvious trial by media smear campaigns by the golden circle parties and their cronies could derail the peace process alright, but it's unlikely.

I honestly think if GA was found in a bog burying a body you would claim it was a smear campaign to blight the meteoric rise of SF. Face facts man, Gerry Adams has blood on his hands and is not the innocent little doe eyed puppy he (or you) try to portray.

Winty

I have been posting and reading post on Mr Adams on Boards for a number of years and this thread is a great example of SF supports keeping a low profile.
In the early days of this story they were fast to stand up for their leader but now that we all know the truth that Mr Adams is a lier they have gone to ground.

Come on you shinners where are you?

Dan_Solo

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

I honestly think if GA was found in a bog burying a body you would claim it was a smear campaign to blight the meteoric rise of SF. Face facts man, Gerry Adams has blood on his hands and is not the innocent little doe eyed puppy he (or you) try to portray.

Face facts... as soon as you bring one to the party mate!
Somebody said something sometime about something. The Independent said so. Conviction right there!

Donnielighto

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Patently obvious trial by media smear campaigns by the golden circle parties and their cronies could derail the peace process alright, but it's unlikely.

Do you have any proof there is a smear campaign?

Dan_Solo

Donnielighto wrote: »

Do you have any proof there is a smear campaign?

Lots of unproven and more or less unprovable accusations.
No facts.
Pretty much the definition of a smear campaign actually.

tipptom

Winty wrote: »

I have been posting and reading post on Mr Adams on Boards for a number of years and this thread is a great example of SF supports keeping a low profile.
In the early days of this story they were fast to stand up for their leader but now that we all know the truth that Mr Adams is a lier they have gone to ground.

Come on you shinners where are you?

Ya,We saw your earlier posts and they were all as silly as this one and you were still misspelling liar and you haven't appeared to got as many thanks as you thought you might have got,maybe its because SF is garnering so much more support in the polls despite the FF/FG/Irish media collusion to subvert the state.


Now you can spell out where GA has been proven to be a liar in this case so far?

Donnielighto

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Lots of unproven and more or less unprovable accusations.
No facts.
Pretty much the definition of a smear campaign actually.

Are they intentional misrepresentations by the "golden cirlce," do you have evidence?

Donnielighto

Will the same lads who are belowing for unequivocal evidence have the same attitude when it isn't SF in the crosshairs?

Timberrrrrrrr

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Face facts... as soon as you bring one to the party mate!
Somebody said something sometime about something. The Independent said so. Conviction right there!

Simple question

Do you believe that Maíria Cahill hasa lied about being raped and then "interviewed" by Gerry Adams and other members of the IRA?

If so, why did she lie and what has she to gain?

Dan_Solo

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Simple question

Do you believe that Maíria Cahill hasa lied about being raped and then "interviewed" by Gerry Adams and other members of the IRA?

Invalid question.

Dan_Solo

Donnielighto wrote: »

Will the same lads who are belowing for unequivocal evidence have the same attitude when it isn't SF in the crosshairs?

Example?

Godge

Donnielighto wrote: »

Doherty is good, cant stand Mary Lou, though, seems really conceited, feeling she is very much out for herself.

Doherty is the only one to be a proven liar on this one (or else ignorant of the facts).

Asked several times whether the IRA had kangaroo courts for sexual abuse he categorically said they hadn't. Gerry Adams has now said they did.

Creative Juices

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Invalid question.

Jesus will you answer the question.

donfers

Barely There wrote: »

Poor Gerry's had his arse handed to him in the Dail this afternoon - he's in for many more grillings on this issue I reckon. His lick-spittle buddies beside him looked like they wanted the ground to open up and swallow them.

An opinion poll is currently being carried out with results to be presented in this weekend's newspapers. Will be interesting to see what damage the Shinners will have suffered.

Hopefully not enough to make them consider ditching the 'dear leader' - it's very important for civilised society that he be allowed to continue his fantastic work in ensuring SF remain forever unelectable.

very little damage I'd assume - indeed it could entrench their vote as the perception of a hypocritical media-led witch hunt gathers more and more steam with the impression taking hold among many on the left that Miss Cahill is merely being used by establishment parties as a stick to beat Sinn Fein with - a cheap opportunistic party political stunt rather than a genuine concern for the victim and the issue of how child abuse was dealt with in a foreign jurisdiction 20 years ago.

I predict Sinn Fein to hold steady at around 25%, the mud keeps getting thrown at them but it's not sticking - the disappeared, ink cartridges, the Adams arrest, no matter what the issue, no matter how trivial or profound the Sinn Fein vote has proved immune to criticism from certain quarters for the simple reason that the people who are outraged by Sinn Fein would never have voted for them anyway. The only consequence of this kind of stuff is the outraged group will become more outraged and the Sinn Fein vote more emboldened as a kind of siege mentality envelops the party. They could very well be strengthened by this, the lack of foresight shown by the same old sources seeking to discredit them astounds me; they constantly merely preach to the converted.

One final point; the comparisons between the Catholic Church and the IRA in terms of how they dealt with child abuse fall down on one key issue; the republicans in the North had zero faith in the RUC to police any matter within that community (and oftentimes with good reason) - the Church had no such excuse. Thus the kangaroo courts came into being notwithstanding the fact that it's as far from an appropriate and adequate a way of dealing with the issue as you can imagine, which Adams himself has admitted - however the larger socio-political context should be acknowledged instead of lazily and perhaps disingenuously equating the two groups.

Phoebas

donfers wrote: »

One final point; the comparisons between the Catholic Church and the IRA in terms of how they dealt with child abuse fall down on one key issue; the republicans in the North had zero faith in the RUC to police any matter within that community (and oftentimes with good reason) - the Church had no such excuse.

Let's not start pretending that the IRA held kangaroo courts for their own members (and them let them out on the streets to offend again) out of some yearning for justice.

porsche959

Donnielighto wrote: »

Are they intentional misrepresentations by the "golden cirlce," do you have evidence?

The Sindo is owned by an offshore media magnate with known FG connections that was previously criticised in a tribunal report in relation to those connections. Whether it is a media smear campaign will never be proven to the satisfaction of the likes of you, but, join the dots.

Timberrrrrrrr

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Invalid question.

Awwwwww

Dodging the tough questions today aren't we?

Let me rephrase it for you so as not to upset your sensibilities

Simple question

Do you believe that Maíria Cahill has lied about being raped by a member of the IRA and then "interviewed" by Gerry Adams and members of the IRA?

If so, why did she lie and what has she to gain?

yipeeeee

Has enda even met Louise o Keefe yet after weeks of talk??

Yet he meets maria Cahill a few days after it comes out.

Not political at all.

Happyman42

yipeeeee wrote: »

Has enda even met Louise o Keefe yet after weeks of talk??

Yet he meets maria Cahill a few days after it comes out.

Not political at all.

Yep. It's a right slap in the face for all survivors of abuse still waiting for some closure. Counterpointed with how she was treated by both FF and FG governments it's rank hypocrisy, grandstanding and jumping political bandwagons at it's finest.

marienbad

Happyman42 wrote: »

Yep. It's a right slap in the face for all survivors of abuse still waiting for some closure. Counterpointed with how she was treated by both FF and FG governments it's rank hypocrisy, grandstanding and jumping political bandwagons at it's finest.

Making it a political football is irrelevant , though it may be unedifying .

The only issue is was there abuse and if so was it covered up . Everything else is just an irrelevant circus .

Happyman42

marienbad wrote: »

Making it a political football is irrelevant , though it may be unedifying .

The only issue is was there abuse and if so was it covered up . Everything else is just an irrelevant circus .

Well, SF say they believe she was raped but categorically deny that there was a cover-up. Where do we go now?

Timberrrrrrrr

Happyman42 wrote: »

Well, SF say they believe she was raped but categorically deny that there was a cover-up. Where do we go now?

It depends on who you believe

What does Maíria Cahill gain from making these accusations?

What does SF gain from denying these accusations?

One of them is lying and it's gonna be the one with the most to gain.

marienbad

Happyman42 wrote: »

Well, SF say they believe she was raped but categorically deny that there was a cover-up. Where do we go now?

Well if there was abuse and there was a 'Kangaroo court'' of any kind that is enough.

Remember it was the questioning of that poor boy by adults and in secret that bought the scandal in the Catholic church to light.

I can't for the life of me understand how posters on here don't get that. Everything else is irrelevant

Tosca1

Am I missing something? Ms Cahill withdrew her complaints and the defendants were acquitted. Is it fair that she refreshes her complaints through the media? The defendants are entitled to have the accusations put to them in Court to either be acquitted or convicted. Ms Cahill should either have put up or shut up. One other puzzle - why is she more concerned with prosecuting/persecuting Mr Adams rather than her alleged abuser? Do I smell interference from other sources - will she stand close scrutiny, because otherwise how soon until her support vanishes?

Happyman42

marienbad wrote: »

Well if there was abuse and there was a 'Kangaroo court'' of any kind that is enough.

Remember it was the questioning of that poor boy by adults and in secret that bought the scandal in the Catholic church to light.

I can't for the life of me understand how posters on here don't get that. Everything else is irrelevant

that there was abuse is beyond doubt imo.
I fail to see how she is going to get any evidence that there was a kangaroo court from the IRA, they won't give any info about their activity until there is a T&R process with all involved.
I also cannot see SF or Adams admitting there was a cover up, as that, rightly, would permanently damage the whole party.
She is on a very sticky wicket here once the glare goes off this, and it will, it always does.
The McNulty affair is water long gone under the bridge at the moment.

marienbad

Happyman42 wrote: »

that there was abuse is beyond doubt imo.
I fail to see how she is going to get any evidence that there was a kangaroo court from the IRA, they won't give any info about their activity until there is a T&R process with all involved.
I also cannot see SF or Adams admitting there was a cover up, as that, rightly, would permanently damage the whole party.
She is on a very sticky wicket here once the glare goes off this, and it will, it always does.
The McNulty affair is water long gone under the bridge at the moment.

No I don't think you are correct here . I agree with you that there was abuse is beyond doubt . And if anyone within the organisation knew about it , then that is enough.

After that is just a question of how bad it is going to be .

BlutendeRabe

Tosca1 wrote: »

Am I missing something? Ms Cahill withdrew her complaints and the defendants were acquitted. Is it fair that she refreshes her complaints through the media? The defendants are entitled to have the accusations put to them in Court to either be acquitted or convicted. Ms Cahill should either have put up or shut up. One other puzzle - why is she more concerned with prosecuting/persecuting Mr Adams rather than her alleged abuser? Do I smell interference from other sources - will she stand close scrutiny, because otherwise how soon until her support vanishes?

Thats the one thing that perturbs me. I don't doubt that what she says is true but as other posters have said there is zero chance of a trial at this stage.

Happyman42

marienbad wrote: »

No I don't think you are correct here . I agree with you that there was abuse is beyond doubt . And if anyone within the organisation knew about it , then that is enough.

After that is just a question of how bad it is going to be .

What more could they have done only advise her to go to the police, get counselling or to tell her family?
Gerry Adams and the other 4 people whom he said where willing to come forward, all say they told her to do that. But as she said herself in the Spotlight programme..'she didn't recognise the RUC for political reasons'.
Last night an MLA said on the BBC that 'she came to her in 2005 and the advice was still the same, go to the police and seek counselling' not her exact words but that was the gist.

hmmm

sallymomo wrote: »

When a person becomes a member/sympathiser of Sinn Fein, do they automatically get a "deflection pack"?

Most people who vote for SF know exactly what they're getting, they just don't care. But it's good to remind some younger people that the modern, liberal, social justice facade is just that - a facade masking something much darker underneath.

Tosca1

BlutendeRabe wrote: »

Thats the one thing that perturbs me. I don't doubt that what she says is true but as other posters have said there is zero chance of a trial at this stage.

There was a trial - the complainant withdrew her complaints - if she felt she could not withstand scrutiny then - how come she has her version of events accepted by the media without further scrutiny. It is all too opportune as Sinn Fein could hold a balance of power. Who is behind Ms Cahill and pulling her strings?

Esel

padraig47 wrote: »

That is why court case was dragged out so that Ms Cahill got fed up waiting. SF are thugs North and South.

Tosca1 wrote: »

Am I missing something? Ms Cahill withdrew her complaints and the defendants were acquitted. Is it fair that she refreshes her complaints through the media? The defendants are entitled to have the accusations put to them in Court to either be acquitted or convicted. Ms Cahill should either have put up or shut up. One other puzzle - why is she more concerned with prosecuting/persecuting Mr Adams rather than her alleged abuser? Do I smell interference from other sources - will she stand close scrutiny, because otherwise how soon until her support vanishes?

Tosca1 wrote: »

There was a trial - the complainant withdrew her complaints - if she felt she could not withstand scrutiny then - how come she has her version of events accepted by the media without further scrutiny. It is all too opportune as Sinn Fein could hold a balance of power. Who is behind Ms Cahill and pulling her strings?

Wan't it apparently the case that she withdrew when she learned that a certain individual was going to testify for the defence?

Happyman42

Esel wrote: »

Wan't it apparently the case that she withdrew when she learned that a certain individual was going to testify for the defence?

Statement issued from the 4 defendants in her case,

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/four-accused-reject-mairia-cahill-allegation-647317.html

Dan_Solo

hmmm wrote: »

Most people who vote for SF know exactly what they're getting, they just don't care. But it's good to remind some younger people that the modern, liberal, social justice facade is just that - a facade masking something much darker underneath.

You "remind" them and then their popularity goes up. Almost as if they can see (not too hard really) right through a tissue thin smear campaign by the golden circle and cronies.