Does anyone actually believe that Gerry Adams wasn't in the IRA?

FrancieBrady

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

and you have ignored the question. a good politicians answer.

How is this IGNORING the question? Jesus christ!

A strategic lie about his membership of the 'RA wouldn't tarnish that achievement in my books anyhow.

James Brown

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Well if it could be proven he was a member then he has been lying to you for decades. that wouldn't affect your opinion of him?

I would see it as a man trying to obtain political goals without going to prison for his political beliefs, if they included being in the IRA. So I wouldn't be surprised and it wouldn't change a thing. He was right to lie, if he did indeed lie.

For a bunch of lads supposedly interested in Adams, you sure spend a lot of time trying to needle or score points on other posters rather than discussing Adams.

Feisar

Whether he was or wasn't a member is semantics. He was a senior figure during the troubles whom I'm sure had a strong influence in the Provisional IRA.

maccored

SafeSurfer wrote: »

I’ll try and spell it out again. I don’t know if he was in the IRA or if he was a British agent but both are things I would be interested in finding out.
So to say, as you do, that it doesn’t matter, is I believe disingenuous.

so you want to find out if he was and instead start asking if people's opinion would change if it ended up he was a british agent. thats taken whataboutery to a whole new level there

blanch152

maccored wrote: »

so you want to find out if he was and instead start asking if people's opinion would change if it ended up he was a british agent. thats taken whataboutery to a whole new level there

I think SafeSurfer raised a clever point.

If people truly don't care whether Gerry Adams was a member of an organisation or not because his achievements stand for themselves, then it truly doesn't matter to them whether that organisation was the IRA or MI5.

Like me, he finds that hard to believe.

On the question of Gerry Adams as liar, we already know that he is a liar, because he has told two different stories, one on Spotlight and another in court, about his knowledge of his brother's sexual abuse of his niece. We know that at least one account is a lie, unfortunately, because we don't know the truth, we don't know which one (or both) is the lie.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

I think SafeSurfer raised a clever point.

If people truly don't care whether Gerry Adams was a member of an organisation or not because his achievements stand for themselves, then it truly doesn't matter to them whether that organisation was the IRA or MI5.

Like me, he finds that hard to believe.

On the question of Gerry Adams as liar, we already know that he is a liar, because he has told two different stories, one on Spotlight and another in court, about his knowledge of his brother's sexual abuse of his niece. We know that at least one account is a lie, unfortunately, because we don't know the truth, we don't know which one (or both) is the lie.

I would suggest, like safesurfer you are simply trying to get digs in on those you believe supporters of Adams suggesting he was an MI5 informer and that's your only interest. Otherwise, like safesurfer, you'd be discussing Gerry Adams being in MI5 and not the premise as it pertains to other posters?
If he turns out to have been an MI5 informer you'll need re evaluate your whole stance on Irish/British politics, no?

FrancieBrady

Matt Barrett wrote: »

I would suggest, like safesurfer you are simply trying to get digs in on those you believe supporters of Adams suggesting he was an MI5 informer and that's your only interest. Otherwise, like safesurfer, you'd be discussing Gerry Adams being in MI5 and not the premise as it pertains to other posters?
If he turns out to have been an MI5 informer you'll need re evaluate your whole stance on Irish/British politics, no?

There would therefore be a lot of much bigger liars if it turns out he was a British agent.

You can be sure the moral high grounders angle would then be...'they had to do what they had to do'.

James Brown

FrancieBrady wrote: »

There would therefore be a lot of much bigger liars if it turns out he was a British agent.

You can be sure the moral high grounders angle would then be...'they had to do what they had to do'.

I'd actually get great laugh if it were true. McGuinness would be getting the blame for everything if Adams were no longer on the other team

FrancieBrady

Matt Barrett wrote: »

I'd actually get great laugh if it were true. McGuinness would be getting the blame for everything now Adams is no longer on the other team

McGuinness the 'good republican'...never!

ohnonotgmail

FrancieBrady wrote: »

How is this IGNORING the question? Jesus christ!

so if it came out that he was a member it would not affect your opinion of him?

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

If he turns out to have been an MI5 informer you'll need re evaluate your whole stance on Irish/British politics, no?

Why?

FrancieBrady

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

so if it came out that he was a member it would not affect your opinion of him?

No, it wouldn't.

I live in a border town, there are people here I know were in the IRA. There are people I know were in Loyalist organisations too.

Life goes on.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

There would therefore be a lot of much bigger liars if it turns out he was a British agent.

You can be sure the moral high grounders angle would then be...'they had to do what they had to do'.

Adams did wrong.

See the full stop at the end of that last sentence.

If he turned out to have been a British agent, that only makes his actions worse again.

ohnonotgmail

FrancieBrady wrote: »

No, it wouldn't.

I live in a border town, there are people here I know were in the IRA. There are people I know were in Loyalist organisations too.

Life goes on.

So him lying to you for decades would make no difference?

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Adams did wrong.

See the full stop at the end of that last sentence.

If he turned out to have been a British agent, that only makes his actions worse again.

Reviewing Adams career now it has ended. I would dispute that the wrong he did outweighs the good that he achieved. I live with what was achieved everyday. In sharp focus now as the British conspire to take it away again.

FrancieBrady

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

So him lying to you for decades would make no difference?

It must be nearly a decade ago on here that I said that I understood why he might have lied about it, or why it might have been an astute move NOT to be a member if he wanted to lead a political party.

Many many people involved in the conflict/war had to lie. Part and parcel of the history of any conflict/war.

blanch152

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Reviewing Adams career now it has ended. I would dispute that the wrong he did outweighs the good that he achieved. I live with what was achieved everyday. In sharp focus now as the British conspire to take it away again.

None of the good that he achieved would have been necessary without the huge wrongs that he did previously and neither does it outweigh the really bad things that he did.

There is no redemption possible for someone like Adams.

ohnonotgmail

FrancieBrady wrote: »

It must be nearly a decade ago on here that I said that I understood why he might have lied about it, or why it might have been an astute move NOT to be a member if he wanted to lead a political party.

Many many people involved in the conflict/war had to lie. Part and parcel of the history of any conflict/war.

but he is still lying about. and being a member didnt seem to affect McGuinness.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

None of the good that he achieved would have been necessary without the huge wrongs that he did previously and neither does it outweigh the really bad things that he did.

There is no redemption possible for someone like Adams.

So whether he was in or out is of no importance to you then. But here you are...:rolleyes:

FrancieBrady

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

but he is still lying about.

So you keep saying and he keeps saying he isn't.

What is it you want to happen here? We probably will never know conclusively...will the world quit spinning? No, it won't.

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

Why?

Because he would have been forced to lie for his cause, where serving the British would be selling out on his politics for an often criminal organisation, (BA/British Government) for no moral purpose.

maccored

blanch152 wrote: »

I think SafeSurfer raised a clever point.

If people truly don't care whether Gerry Adams was a member of an organisation or not because his achievements stand for themselves, then it truly doesn't matter to them whether that organisation was the IRA or MI5.

Like me, he finds that hard to believe.

On the question of Gerry Adams as liar, we already know that he is a liar, because he has told two different stories, one on Spotlight and another in court, about his knowledge of his brother's sexual abuse of his niece. We know that at least one account is a lie, unfortunately, because we don't know the truth, we don't know which one (or both) is the lie.

I dont care - if he was a brit agent then the brits are even worse as they were in complete control.

What do you think? Do you think he was a british agent? Shouldnt they have stopped years ago if he was?

IM not expecting an answer - just more waffle about how you dont think blah blah blah. Can be making apoint of anything now can we? Best just to say you think they were all terribly bad (though Ive noticed you dont really give out too much about the british and loyalists though Im sure you will say you do).

One thing I'll say about the republican-sided on this thread - at least they state their point and nail their flag to the pole. Yourself I find, tends to sit on the fence about everything bar your hatred of SF

blanch152

maccored wrote: »

I dont care - if he was a brit agent then the brits are even worse as they were in complete control.

What do you think? Do you think he was a british agent? Shouldnt they have stopped years ago if he was?

IM not expecting an answer - just more waffle about how you dont think blah blah blah. Can be making apoint of anything now can we? Best just to say you think they were all terribly bad (though Ive noticed you dont really give out too much about the british and loyalists though Im sure you will say you do).

One thing I'll say about the republican-sided on this thread - at least they state their point and nail their flag to the pole. Yourself I find, tends to sit on the fence about everything bar your hatred of SF

Who cares if Gerry Adams was a British agent? That only adds another level of evil to the man.

As for the Brits, I have already condemned them many times, but they were never acting for me or claiming to act for me.

I don't condemn them as a people, neither do I condemn them as a regime. Individuals have responsibility for what they do, be they Soldier F or Gerry Adams. I don't give either of them a free pass for what they did later in life. If Soldier F spent the next 40 years working for a disabled charity, does that excuse him the way that Francie excuses Gerry for what he did in politics?

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Who cares if Gerry Adams was a British agent? That only adds another level of evil to the man.

As for the Brits, I have already condemned them many times, but they were never acting for me or claiming to act for me.

I don't condemn them as a people, neither do I condemn them as a regime. Individuals have responsibility for what they do, be they Soldier F or Gerry Adams. I don't give either of them a free pass for what they did later in life. If Soldier F spent the next 40 years working for a disabled charity, does that excuse him the way that Francie excuses Gerry for what he did in politics?

As you are somebody who believes that the Irish should have waited around until the British got around to being democrats, I wouldn't be worrying that SF were doing anything in 'your name', blanch.

blanch152

Matt Barrett wrote: »

Because he would have been forced to lie for his cause, where serving the British would be selling out on his politics for an often criminal organisation, (BA/British Government) for no moral purpose.

But he spent the whole of his public life lying, what would be different?

The British government did wrong, but they weren't a criminal organisation, certainly not on the scale of the 1970s SF/IRA machine.

And how would that mean I will "need re evaluate your whole stance on Irish/British politics"?

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

But he spent the whole of his public life lying, what would be different?

The British government did wrong, but they weren't a criminal organisation, certainly not on the scale of the 1970s SF/IRA machine.

And how would that mean I will "need re evaluate your whole stance on Irish/British politics"?

The very existence of the GFA signifies that the British were 'wrong' since partition Blanch.
That they denied the rights enshrined in that GFA for over 40 years was 'criminal' in the eyes of those looking for those rights.

You selecting who you think were the only criminal side is pointless and selective and typical.

maccored

blanch152 wrote: »

Who cares if Gerry Adams was a British agent? That only adds another level of evil to the man.

As for the Brits, I have already condemned them many times, but they were never acting for me or claiming to act for me.

I don't condemn them as a people, neither do I condemn them as a regime. Individuals have responsibility for what they do, be they Soldier F or Gerry Adams. I don't give either of them a free pass for what they did later in life. If Soldier F spent the next 40 years working for a disabled charity, does that excuse him the way that Francie excuses Gerry for what he did in politics?

You didnt answer my question - or if you did and your answer is ‘who cares’, then you may ask yourself why you are asking others about your made up theory - that apparently you dont care about.

blanch152

maccored wrote: »

You didnt answer my question - or if you did and your answer is ‘who cares’, then you may ask yourself why you are asking others about your made up theory - that apparently you dont care about.

I didn't bring the British agent thing into this thread.

maccored

blanch152 wrote: »

I didn't bring the British agent thing into this thread.

you said it was 'clever' and asked the question yourself as well .....

James Brown

blanch152 wrote: »

But he spent the whole of his public life lying, what would be different?

The British government did wrong, but they weren't a criminal organisation, certainly not on the scale of the 1970s SF/IRA machine.

And how would that mean I will "need re evaluate your whole stance on Irish/British politics"?

Says who? The British? The IRA would have to go a very long way to compete with the British.

The archbishop of Canterbury has apologised “in the name of Christ” for the 1919 massacre at Amritsar in India, when hundreds of people were shot dead by British. forces.https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/sep/10/justin-welby-apologises-in-name-of-christ-british-massacre-amritsar

You are critical of Adams and SF and the IRA. If Adam's turned out to be part of the legal, democratic BA machine, where would that leave your view of them not being criminal for example?