More Crap on Adams, Mod Warning in OP.

Happyman42

But being willing to ask tough questions of your own leader, demonstrating that you are not just dupes of xxxxx xxx machine, /QUOTE]

Oh yeh, we see party members doing that all the time in FF, FG, Lab, DUP, UUP etc etc. :rolleyes:
Jaysus H! Talk about cheap journalistic tripe!

Godge

Happyman42 wrote: »

Oh yeh, we see party members doing that all the time in FF, FG, Lab, DUP, UUP etc etc. :rolleyes:
Jaysus H! Talk about cheap journalistic tripe!

I can tell you this much, not one other party leader would have lasted five minutes if they had taken 20 years to go to the police about their child-abusing brother.

porsche959

Godge wrote: »

I can tell you this much, not one other party leader would have lasted five minutes if they had taken 20 years to go to the police about their child-abusing brother.

You're parrotting almost verbatim what the opportunist Enda Kenny said in the Dail earlier, a guy that sat in the Dail for forty years and never heard a word about abuses in residential care homes until 2009. A guy that leaks personal communications relating to his own TD's.

The three wise monkeys springs to mind, maybe Enda is the forth monkey who heard of evil only when he thought he could exploit it for political reasons.

michael999999

porsche959 wrote: »

You're parrotting almost verbatim what the opportunist Enda Kenny said in the Dail earlier, a guy that sat in the Dail for forty years and never heard a word about abuses in residential care homes until 2009.

The three wise monkeys springs to mind, maybe Enda is the forth monkey who heard of evil only when he thought he could exploit it for political reasons.

And Michael Martin staring across the Dail for decades, also seemingly oblivious to what was going on!

porsche959

michael999999 wrote: »

And Michael Martin staring across the Dail for decades, also seemingly oblivious to what was going on!

No party leader could last five seconds if he was part of a Cabinet that drove the economy into the rocks, necessitating IMF bailout! Except, miraculously, Michael did.

michael999999

porsche959 wrote: »

No party leader could last five seconds if he was part of a Cabinet that drove the economy into the rocks, necessitating IMF bailout! Except, miraculously, Michael did.

He can afford to retire early. All that developers money that went into he's wife's account must be racking up interest!

yipeeeee

How many of those in the dail knew what the church was doing for years and said nothing??

walshb

I have to agree with Enda. If this was any other party the leader would be gone. The whole innocent until proven guilty notwithstanding.

Happyman42

walshb wrote: »

I have to agree with Enda. If this was any other party the leader would be gone. The whole innocent until proven guilty notwithstanding.

Generally when a politician resigns, it turns out that they are in fact guilty of the allegations. I don't see why Gerry should resign his position on foot of allegations that have turned out to be false or unproven. 'membership, Jean McConville etc etc'. Why should somebody succumb to allegations, that makes a nonsense of democracy.
In my world the onus is on the accuser to prove the allegation.

K-9

Happyman42 wrote: »

Generally when a politician resigns, it turns out that they are in fact guilty of the allegations. I don't see why Gerry should resign his position on foot of allegations that have turned out to be false or unproven. 'membership, Jean McConville etc etc'. Why should somebody succumb to allegations, that makes a nonsense of democracy.
In my world the onus is on the accuser to prove the allegation.

Second sex abuse case is a bit careless all right.

Happyman42

K-9 wrote: »

Second sex abuse case is a bit careless all right.

Cyclical allegations are suspicious and must be treated with care by all democrats.
You only have to look casually around these boards to see that there are those who have wet dreams about catching this particular man on something.
Maybe they will go after him on his taxes like Al Capone.

_Kaiser_

Whatever about the real story here, I fail to see why it isn't being dealt with through normal channels like any other case/accusation of this type.

Given what we know of FF and FG it won't surprise me if it turns out to be a smear campaign as a reaction to SF's rise in the polls.

Enda himself has been involved in more than a few scandals in the last 24 months alone - to have him pontificating about leaders going is more than a tad ironic

K-9

Happyman42 wrote: »

Cyclical allegations are suspicious and must be treated with care by all democrats.
You only have to look casually around these boards to see that there are those who have wet dreams about catching this particular man on something.
Maybe they will go after him on his taxes like Al Capone.

Well, Mr Adams had some problems with his mature recollection then, so maybe his memory has improved in the interim, no notes or records and all!

Godge

yipeeeee wrote: »

How many of those in the dail knew what the church was doing for years and said nothing??

porsche959 wrote: »

No party leader could last five seconds if he was part of a Cabinet that drove the economy into the rocks, necessitating IMF bailout! Except, miraculously, Michael did.

The whataboutery brigade are out in force tonight, Gerry must be in real trouble.

oscarBravo

Happyman42 wrote: »

Maybe they will go after him on his taxes like Al Capone.

I'm not sure what's funnier - the implication that poor old Al was unjustly hounded, or the implication that Gerry is a tax evader.

_Kaiser_

Godge wrote: »

The whataboutery brigade are out in force tonight, Gerry must be in real trouble.

I think you'll find it's more the old saying about people in glass houses...

Godge

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Whatever about the real story here, I fail to see why it isn't being dealt with through normal channels like any other case/accusation of this type.

Given what we know of FF and FG it won't surprise me if it turns out to be a smear campaign as a reaction to SF's rise in the polls.

Enda himself has been involved in more than a few scandals in the last 24 months alone - to have him pontificating about leaders going is more than a tad ironic

Alan Shatter didn't wait for a case against him to be proved. Neither did Charlie Haughey, or Ray Burke, or Brian Cowen or Albert Reynolds.

Some of them were honourable men, some dishonourable, but they all resigned before there was a guilty verdict in a criminal case. Can we expect the same from Gerry or will the Dear Leader' apologists still cling to the thinnest of lifelines that he has never been convicted of anything?

Godge

oscarBravo wrote: »

I'm not sure what's funnier - the implication that poor old Al was unjustly hounded, or the implication that Gerry is a tax evader.

Think he owes some fuel taxes, diesel or something.

RandomName2

Godge wrote: »

The whataboutery brigade are out in force tonight, Gerry must be in real trouble.

He won't be among regular SF supporters. Like Adams himself in relation to his denial of being in the IRA, they've invested too much to go back. If he resigns it will be of his own doing, for the "good of the party". Will that happen here? Unlikely. Sex abuse and its cover up is rather low level in terms of what we've seen to date. It would have to be a recent scandal, as in something that happened after the Good Friday Agreement (and I don't mean something overly murky like the torture and assassination of Denis Donaldson). It would have to be something like taxes. Which would be hilarious, all things considered.

Happyman42

How many TD's would be left in the Dail if they resigned anytime somebody made an allegation?

oscarBravo

Happyman42 wrote: »

How many TD's would be left in the Dail if they resigned anytime somebody made an allegation?

I guess it would depend how the credibility of the allegation compared to the credibility of the denial.

Dan_Solo

oscarBravo wrote: »

I'm not sure what's funnier - the implication that poor old Al was unjustly hounded, or the implication that Gerry is a tax evader.

Pity his post didn't actually make either implication isn't it.
Ah well, back to "paraphrasing" from you I guess.

Happyman42

oscarBravo wrote: »

I guess it would depend how the credibility of the allegation compared to the credibility of the denial.

Well, it would seem credibility isn't Adams problem, after all the allegations, the most popular party leader and surging ahead as a party.

Dan_Solo

Godge wrote: »

Alan Shatter didn't wait for a case against him to be proved. Neither did Charlie Haughey, or Ray Burke, or Brian Cowen or Albert Reynolds.

Some of them were honourable men, some dishonourable, but they all resigned before there was a guilty verdict in a criminal case. Can we expect the same from Gerry or will the Dear Leader' apologists still cling to the thinnest of lifelines that he has never been convicted of anything?

Can we expect somebody to resign because some nobodies on the internet ****ting themselves over the latest opinion polls have entirely unproven and evidence free allegations to sling at them?
Well shucks, probably not you know, but good luck with that lads.

oscarBravo

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Pity his post didn't actually make either implication isn't it.

I would spell out for you how it does, in fact, make both implications, but frankly life's too short. You seem to believe something can only be implied if it has been baldly stated.

Ah well, back to "paraphrasing" from you I guess.

It wasn't paraphrasing, it was a tongue-in-cheek jibe at the fact that, if you're going to claim someone is completely innocent, comparing them to Al Capone is probably something of a faux pas.

Apologies if it sailed over your head. Maybe read both his post and mine a few more times, it might sink in.

Dan_Solo

oscarBravo wrote: »

I would spell out for you how it does, in fact, make both implications, but frankly life's too short.

Internet slang for "not able to".

oscarBravo wrote: »

It wasn't paraphrasing, it was a tongue-in-cheek jibe at the fact that, if you're going to claim someone is completely innocent, comparing them to Al Capone is probably something of a faux pas.

Apologies if it sailed over your head. Maybe read both his post and mine a few more times, it might sink in.

Since it's utter tripe and not even tangentially related to the post you claim to be commenting on (yet again) I really hope whatever garbled "meaning" you imagine it has never does sink in thanks all the same.

K-9

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

I think you'll find it's more the old saying about people in glass houses...

Indeed, SF were big critics of Govt. and church responses to abuse cases, high horses and glass houses do indeed spring to mind.

Godge

RandomName2 wrote: »

He won't be among regular SF supporters. Like Adams himself in relation to his denial of being in the IRA, they've invested too much to go back. If he resigns it will be of his own doing, for the "good of the party". Will that happen here? Unlikely. Sex abuse and its cover up is rather low level in terms of what we've seen to date. It would have to be a recent scandal, as in something that happened after the Good Friday Agreement (and I don't mean something overly murky like the torture and assassination of Denis Donaldson). It would have to be something like taxes. Which would be hilarious, all things considered.

Well the Mairia Cahill child sexual abuse scandal and cover-up happened after the GFA if you were checking the dates and similar scandals cost a few bishops their jobs........but they weren't the Dear Leader.

Dan_Solo

K-9 wrote: »

Indeed, SF were big critics of Govt. and church responses to abuse cases, high horses and glass houses do indeed spring to mind.

It's a right pity for you campaigning that not one jot of you mudslinging has stuck isn't it? Which sex abuse allegations against the IRA have been proven? I'll give you a while to compile your list and get back to us.

Dan_Solo

Godge wrote: »

Well the Mairia Cahill child sexual abuse scandal

Oooh, "scandal". That's the word you use when you really really want to make some allegations against somebody but haven't the first notion how to go about proving it, isn't it?

K-9

Dan_Solo wrote: »

It's a right pity for you campaigning that not one jot of you mudslinging has stuck isn't it? Which sex abuse allegations against the IRA have been proven? I'll give you a while to compile your list and get back to us.

Considering I've voted SF in the past I'm pretty crap at this alleged campaigning.

Gerry had a few inconsistencies in his accounts of dealings with his brother. Those types of things don't seem to bother some though, bit like answering simple questions.

Dan_Solo

K-9 wrote: »

Considering I've voted SF in the past I'm pretty crap at this alleged campaigning.

Gerry had a few inconsistencies in his accounts of dealings with his brother. Those types of things don't seem to bother some though, bit like answering simple questions.

O.M.G. A few inconsistencies!
That there's a hangin' offence in these parts pardner!
Just because you've voted for a party in the past it's a physical impossibility to campaign against them for the rest of your life? Didn't know that myself. Ta.

Godge

Dan_Solo wrote: »

It's a right pity for you campaigning that not one jot of you mudslinging has stuck isn't it? Which sex abuse allegations against the IRA have been proven? I'll give you a while to compile your list and get back to us.

Liam Adams and Briege "Meehan", convicted child sex abusers, were members of the SF/IRA collective.

Everyone (including Gerry Adams) bar a few nutters on here say they believe Mairia Cahill's story about being abused by a senior IRA person.

So we are up to three and counting.

porsche959

walshb wrote: »

I have to agree with Enda. If this was any other party the leader would be gone. The whole innocent until proven guilty notwithstanding.

Partially agree. The problem Adams has is that he is, potentially, "Taoiseach-in-waiting" or at least a potential Tanaiste, not just a TD. I stand by my points that FG and FF are being opportunistic, but, certainly, people are entitled to ask questions about how Adams dealt with these issues, and if the responses deemed not up-to-scratch, vote accordingly.

Dan_Solo

Godge wrote: »

Liam Adams and Briege "Meehan", convicted child sex abusers, were members of the SF/IRA collective.

Everyone (including Gerry Adams) bar a few nutters on here say they believe Mairia Cahill's story about being abused by a senior IRA person.

So we are up to three and counting.

Ah, so your contention is that any organisation that had sex abusers is inherently an organisation that is all about sex abuse. Good luck with that one.
Only nutters don't agree with me BTW.

feargale

gunny558 wrote: »

Im not rubbishing her particular case or any other particular allegations from other people. But I sometimes wonder, Gerry Adams seems to be plagued by so much crap(even his own brother was accused of rape :rolleyes:

and convicted ( since you mentioned it! )

feargale

Could we all come down off the high horse regarding who votes for who? Most people here defending Adams and his pals vote SF or similarly. Most who are not defending him vote otherwise. So what? Does the view of one count for more than the other here?

porsche959

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Ah, so your contention is that any organisation that had sex abusers is inherently an organisation that is all about sex abuse. Good luck with that one.
Only nutters don't agree with me BTW.

If it's only three sex abusers have ever been connected to Sinn Fein I don't think they've much to worry about. It is of course, statistically likely to be higher, but I'm not too sure if the numbers game is even a wise strategy to play from the FG/FF/Labour point of view.

porsche959

I have been told by a retired senior civil servant (who is no fan of Sinn Fein, and that's putting it mildly) that the Ferns diocese scandal implicated people who were never prosecuted, including a well-connected barrister.

I was also told that a bishop was under active investigation by AGS, also never prosecuted.

And then there's the Dalkey House of Horrors case, allegedly implicating AGS members who I strongly doubt were SF members or even sympathisers.

***cough, splutter, whistles past graveyard***

Crooked Jack

Winty wrote: »

Martin McGuinness has told the world the truth and he has the top job in N. Ireland so why can Mr Adams the man who put the nail in Jean's coffin

Winty wrote: »

Worked for Martin why not Gerry

Martin McGuinness has served a sentence for IRA membership and maintains that he left the IRA when he got out of prison, he therefore cannot be arrested for it again.
Gerry Adams on the other hand has not been convicted of IRA membership. Saying he was in the IRA would open him up to arrest and a two year sentence. It's idiotic when people waffle on about how Adams refuses to admit any role in the IRA. Why would he? Risk jail just to appease people who hate him and arent going to change their opinion of him after. It's a daft argument.

ardle1

I find it bewildering in this day and age that so many people are still pretending not to understand the complexity and secrecy of the IRA.
And that in 2014 some people expect,that the greatest most intelligent non Government funded army! should just open its archives to every Tom Dick and Harry!!
Is a full cessation(since 1997)of military exercises plus decommissioning in 2005 not good enough for some of you?

porsche959

ardle1 wrote: »

I find it bewildering in this day and age that so many people are still pretending not to understand the complexity and secrecy of the IRA.
And that in 2014 some people expect,that the greatest most intelligent non Government funded army! should just open its archives to every Tom Dick and Harry!!
Is a full cessation(since 1997)of military exercises plus decommissioning in 2005 not good enough for some of you?

Well, maybe if M15 and similar were to open their archives then IRA could respond.

But if the former is not likely to happen, one can see reasons why the Provos might not wish to do so also.

One wonders why the forthcoming UK inquiry into institutional child abuse specifically excludes both Northern Ireland and Scotland.

Maybe it is not just the IRA that don't want the books being opened!

Esel

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Only nutters don't agree with me BTW.

You lost a few floaters there. Can you still give us a lift home?

Unless you were trying to be sarcas.. sacrilig.. sarcophag.. sanctimo.. ?

In which case, carry on.

AngryHippie

bubblypop wrote: »

No, I agree with you, I lived from the 80's till the late 90's on the border, I have relations, friends and aquantinces in the north. My home is only a few miles from the border.

However, I do think if the ruc had a complaint against a member of the IRA they would've jumped at the chance.
If the injured party didn't go to them though, it is probably understandable.

I still think the IRA, are like the catholic church, think themselves to be the law and above reproach.

I think this might be part of the problem for this lady though.

She would have been prevented from going to the RUC by her own family, who would not have welcomed the attention nor the stigma. The only way it could have been dealt with in their social circle was the way it was handled. Unfortunately, some people are using this as some sort of slur on her credibility, which is a disaster for her.

Whether or not GA played the role she describes probably can't be ascertained without further investigation, but there is no reason to discount her story, as Adams is the one with serious question marks over his idea of what is the truth, what is conveniently true, and what can not be proven either way. It paints him in a very bad light, and to be honest, I would think this is also part of a momentum shift within SF trying to move away from their militant roots and gain some mainstream credibility as FG and FF have proven themselves to be incompetent gombeens on a semi-permanent basis.

I expect a witch-hunt to begin, and SF factions to slowly assemble opposing GA for the final turfing out. This however may run all the way up to the next general election before playing out.

Dan_Solo

Esel wrote: »

You lost a few floaters there. Can you still give us a lift home?

Unless you were trying to be sarcas.. sacrilig.. sarcophag.. sanctimo.. ?

In which case, carry on.

I thought it was a petty obvious response to the "except for a few nutters everybody agrees that" in the previous post?

Phoebas

Crooked Jack wrote: »

It's idiotic when people waffle on about how Adams refuses to admit any role in the IRA. Why would he? Risk jail just to appease people who hate him and arent going to change their opinion of him after. It's a daft argument.

Can you imagine if there was another party leader seeking high office in the country who was generally accepted as having spent maybe decades as a gangland boss? Can you imagine if his supporters argued that he should lie about his criminal past to avoid jail?

As EK says on another matter - he wouldn't last 5 minutes.

Dan_Solo

Phoebas wrote: »

Can you imagine if there was another party leader seeking high office in the country who was generally accepted as having spent maybe decades as a gangland boss? Can you imagine if his supporters argued that he should lie about his criminal past to avoid jail?

As EK says on another matter - he wouldn't last 5 minutes.

Unless they didn't think IRA membership was much of a crime I guess. A lot of people don't.

Phoebas

It was bound to happen and there are now reports of another case of child sexual abuse by an IRA member and 'dealt with' by an IRA kangaroo court.

The perpetrator was given some choices about his punishment and opted to move to a different parish country.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/second-victim-breaks-silence-on-kangaroo-ira-courts-30683754.html

Phoebas

Dan_Solo wrote: »

Unless they didn't think IRA membership was much of a crime I guess. A lot of people don't.

People often try to downplay their own or others criminal behaviour - nothing new there.

Dan_Solo

Phoebas wrote: »

People often try to downplay their own or others criminal behaviour - nothing new there.

And others try to exaggerate them for political reasons when opinion polls indicate those "criminals" are more popular than their own golden circle favourites.