Martin Ferris in the Irish Times

squonk

Anyone catch the picture on the front of the Irish Times website today of Martin Ferris meeting the men convicted of killing Gerry McCabe on their way out of prison? Surely this is not the sort of situation most people would like to see a public representative in? It makes a mockery of the political process in this country I think. If the incident had been a sanctioned IRA activity in the first place there may have been cause for justifying his meeting them, but because it wasn't then it's no better than an elected representative from any party meeting with say gangland figures on their way out from prison. Not on!

Liam Byrne

Yup. Heard this despicable news on the radio this morning, and just had a look at the photo there now.

Sickening!

Goings-on like this, and yet GA, MF, TF & Co still manage to wonder why "we pick on them" :rolleyes:

Gerry Adams can comment on anything he bloody well likes; he's not even an elected representative, and while he's talking bollox, I don't care anymore - the guy doesn't know the meaning of facts or objectivity, but he has no impact on my life.

Ferris, on the other hand, should have more cop-on. I hope he doesn't have any reason to ring the Gardai for help in the next while; how ironic would that be ?

Of course you don't really need the Gardai if the buddies you pick up from jail have their own AK-47s.

spank_inferno

And somehow the Shinners on Boards.ie have claimed that there is an unfair perception that Sinn Fein are still the IRA.

FTA69

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Gerry Adams can comment on anything he bloody well likes; he's not even an elected representative,

As far as I'm aware he's a poll-topping MP representing West Belfast.

Liam Byrne

FTA69 wrote: »

As far as I'm aware he's a poll-topping MP representing West Belfast.

OK, so I left out "in this country". Sue me. :rolleyes:

mike65

Belfast in the UK?

FTA69

Part of Ireland is in the UK, yes, and Irish people in Belfast voted for Gerry Adams. He isn't an elected representative in this state, but he is a representative of Irish people in this particular country.

Min

Those people are cold blooded killers, it is sick that a public representative is more concerned about the killers than the victims.
I'm sure the families of the victims - both the McCabe and his Garda partner who was also shot are finding it hard today.

marco murphy

Min wrote: »

Those people are cold blooded killers, it is sick that a public representative is more concerned about the killers than the victims.
I'm sure the families of the victims - both the McCabe and his Garda partner who was also shot are finding it hard today.

You can't speak for Martin Ferris

Liam Byrne

FTA69 wrote: »

Part of Ireland is in the UK, yes, and Irish people in Belfast voted for Gerry Adams. He isn't an elected representative in this state, but he is a representative of Irish people in this particular country.

Fair point; similar to Irish people in the U.S. voting for Barack Obama, or Irish people living in Dubai voting for Abbai Dubbai.

They can vote for whoever they want. Their choice.

But he's (a) irrelevant to me and (b) represents opinions, biases and prejudices that I disagree with.

So because he's not in "this country", I can ignore him.

dlofnep

No, not similar to Irish people in the US.

An Irishman, being voted by Irish people on Irish soil. Don't be silly.

As for Jerry McCabe, they were convicted of manslaughter, not murder by a non-jury special criminal court. Let's stick to the facts.

I am of the opinion that the entire situation was a terrible chapter in history. A family was left without a parent, and a wife without a husband. I doubt anybody is or was reveling in his death.

WillieCocker

Perestroika wrote: »

You can't speak for Martin Ferris

No but his actions can.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/tds-pictured-with-provos-in-prison-494788.html

Dirty scummers.

DoireNod

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Fair point; similar to Irish people in the U.S. voting for Barack Obama, or Irish people living in Dubai voting for Abbai Dubbai.

Not quite the same though. It's not as if 'Northern Ireland' is an island separate and distinct from the 'Republic of Ireland'. Socially, economically and politically, the two are intertwined.

But he's (a) irrelevant to me and (b) represents opinions, biases and prejudices that I disagree with.

How's he irrelevant to you? He's the leader of Sinn Féin - a party which has seats in the Dáil. Maybe it would be more apt to say he's irrelevant to you because you make him irrelevant to you by ignoring him

oscarBravo

dlofnep wrote: »

As for Jerry McCabe, they were convicted of manslaughter, not murder by a non-jury special criminal court. Let's stick to the facts.

They were convicted of manslaughter, yes. But I think in the eyes of any right-thinking member of society, someone who rams a police car from behind before jumping out and riddling the occupants with several rounds from an automatic weapon is a murderer.

LordSutch

Does it really matter what Ferris, Adams & Co do anymore? the killing has stopped, and they are an irrelavency to most people here in the South, SF only accounts for less than 10% of the vote, so if they want to celibrate the release of their IRA 'heroes' then let them get on with it > sad bunch that they are.

Liam Byrne

DoireNod wrote: »

Not quite the same though. It's not as if 'Northern Ireland' is an island separate and distinct from the 'Republic of Ireland'. Socially, economically and politically, the two are intertwined.

France and Spain are on the same landmass, too. American & Mexico. Yes, there are intertwinings, and maybe more than those because of the size of the island, and the emotive aspect too.

But the fact is that Adams is not elected in this country, so I have no reason to listen to him or his opinion.

DoireNod wrote: »

How's he irrelevant to you? He's the leader of Sinn Féin - a party which has seats in the Dáil. Maybe it would be more apt to say he's irrelevant to you because you make him irrelevant to you by ignoring him

No. His party might have a few seats, but and he might be leader, but he - thankfully - has no real impact on my life. As I said, he's not elected in this country.

Plus HE makes HIMSELF further irrelevant to me by spouting bull**** and making me want to puke by "apologising while claiming they should have been released earlier" - weasel words.

I'll listen to anyone, up to a point; but if their words and actions are objectionable and I have to listen to repeated bull****, I'll stop listening. It's understandable, and it applies to Brian Lenihan & Co at this stage, too.

dlofnep

oscarBravo wrote: »

They were convicted of manslaughter, yes. But I think in the eyes of any right-thinking member of society, someone who rams a police car from behind before jumping out and riddling the occupants with several rounds from an automatic weapon is a murderer.

I was banned from politics about 2 years back for suggesting that the farmer who shot that traveller in the back as he escaped on foot was murder. I expect the same rules to be applied across the forum.

dlofnep

Liam Byrne wrote: »

"apologising while claiming they should have been released earlier" - weasel words.

He did not say that. He stated that they although they were entitled to early release under the GFA, that they served their time. Find me an article where he states that in his opinion - they should have been released earlier.

WillieCocker

dlofnep wrote: »

I was banned from politics about 2 years back for suggesting that the farmer who shot that traveller in the back as he escaped on foot was murder. I expect the same rules to be applied across the forum.

Tenner bets you did it whilst the case was pending?

dlofnep

WillieCocker wrote: »

Tenner bets you did it whilst the case was pending?

No, it was after it. Here is my post:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=52508833&postcount=139

It seems the rules only apply in certain threads and for certain posters.

Liam Byrne

dlofnep wrote: »

He stated that [in his opinion] they were entitled to early release under the GFA [but] they served their [full] time.

Accurate clarification or misrepresentation?

Because if "they were entitled to early release" [again, HIS opinion, for the record I completely disagree and reckon they should have been hung for capital murder of a Garda] but "they served their full time", then it's OBVIOUSLY his opinion that "they should have been released earlier".

tfitzgerald

Camelot wrote: »

Does it really matter what Ferris, Adams & Co do anymore? the killing has stopped, and they are an irrelavency to most people here in the South, SF only accounts for less than 10% of the vote, so if they want to celibrate the release of their IRA 'heroes' then let them get on with it > sad bunch that they are.

camelot is on the ball and any more discussion is only inflating their egos ie sf/ira

WillieCocker

dlofnep wrote: »

No, it was after it. Here is my post:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=52508833&postcount=139

It seems the rules only apply in certain threads and for certain posters.

Mods will be mods.:pac:

dlofnep

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Accurate clarification or misrepresentation?

Because if "they were entitled to early release" [again, HIS opinion, for the record I completely disagree and reckon they should have been hung for capital murder of a Garda] but "they served their full time", then it's OBVIOUSLY his opinion that "they should have been released earlier".

Sorry, you're distorting the facts and misrepresenting what he said. No, it was not of his OPINION that they should be released - it was FACT that they were ENTITLED to be released under the GFA. He does not give any representation of his opinion in that statement.

oscarBravo

dlofnep wrote: »

I was banned from politics about 2 years back for suggesting that the farmer who shot that traveller in the back as he escaped on foot was murder. I expect the same rules to be applied across the forum.

So report my post. If you expect the rules to be applied, start by following them.

nuac

Gda McCabe was murdered. The evidence was that 15 rounds were fired into their vehicle, three of which hit Gda McCabe. Witnesses were intimidated, therefore the prosecution had to go for the manslaughter verdict.

Disturbing to see an elected member of the Oireachtas welcoming these killers out of prison.

Will he or they now assist in getting two other suspects back from SOuth America?

dlofnep

oscarBravo wrote: »

So report my post. If you expect the rules to be applied, start by following them.

Sorry OB - I wasn't referring to your post. You stated that it was opinion. I've no problems with yours. I was referring to the this and the previous post.

Liam Byrne

dlofnep wrote: »

Sorry, you're distorting the facts and misrepresenting what he said. No, it was not of his OPINION that they should be released - it was FACT that they were ENTITLED to be released under the GFA. He does not give any representation of his opinion in that statement.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2000/0801/mccabe.html

Also, from http://historical-debates.oireachtas.ie/D/0594/D.0594.200412070034.html

J. O'Keeffe
The Minister must make it clear that the early release of the killers never came within the terms of the Good Friday Agreement. That was stated by the Taoiseach and others before and after the conclusion of the Agreement. It was stated within and without the Dáil, both verbally and in writing, including in a letter sent on behalf of the Government to Mrs. McCabe. The position was also made absolutely clear by the High Court and the Supreme Court, where it was stated that the Government’s power to release is “a quintessentially executive function” and that the decision “that the applicants would not be entitled to consideration for release under the Good Friday Agreement was a policy choice which was entirely within the discretion of the executive to make”.

One must ask why members of Sinn Féin are still claiming, despite the Supreme Court decision, that release of the killers comes within the terms of the Good Friday Agreement.

Mr Mc. Dowell
The actions of the offenders in Adare in June 1996 were cold, callous and cowardly. Detective Garda Jerry McCabe was shot twice and Detective Garda Ben O’Sullivan was hit by no less than nine bullets. Let me be absolutely clear that the Government would prefer to see the prisoners serve their full sentences. The Government has never chosen to deal with these issues as a matter of choice in the current political talks. It was an issue raised by Sinn Féin. The Government has consistently maintained that the prisoners do not qualify for release under the Good Friday Agreement, and that remains our position. I have checked that with officials in my Department, and at the talks in Castle buildings it was made abundantly clear that the prisoners would not avail of the provisions set out in the Agreement.

The courts ruled that they were NOT entitled to early release, so how can it be a "fact" ?

Adams' opinion is that they were entitled to it.
My opinion is that they weren't.
The Justice Minister and the courts agree with me.

Then again, that doesn't bother me what Adams' opinion is; his opinion is that shooting is "regrettable", while mine is that it is unacceptable; he's OK with the PR that his party gets for going into cushy jail surroundings with murderers for photo-ops; I'd expel someone for doing that.

So I won't blow a fuse over Adams' opinion; like I said I've given up trying to reason with Shinners as to what's acceptable in this country versus in the North.

But do not accuse me of distorting facts and misrepresentation. Next time will be reported.

irishgrover

dlofnep wrote: »

I was banned from politics about 2 years back for suggesting that the farmer who shot that traveller in the back as he escaped on foot was murder. I expect the same rules to be applied across the forum.

maybe if the farmer in question was charged with murder, but then all the witnesses refused to testify after friendly visits from members of the IFA, which coincidentally happened at a time when the guilty party agreed to manslaughter, then you might have more of a point...

as it stands this 'murderers' are released today because they were only charged with manslaughter because their fellow freedom fighters/terrorists/bank robbers silenced the witnesses prior to the trial.
I understand and accept that post GFA a healthy dose of revisionism and air brushing of history has become the accespted norm, but the fact remains that G. MCabe was murdered in cold blood and his murders got away with it because of witness intimidation.
IMHO the people who refute this, are disingenuous muppets, with the same mental capacity who believe that the IRA had nothing to do with the Northern Bank robbery. They are either happily lying or mentally retarded (or possibly both)

dlofnep

that the applicants would not be entitled to consideration for release under the Good Friday Agreement was a policy choice which was entirely within the discretion of the executive to make

In any case, the point he was trying to illustrate was that they had served their time that was given to them by the court.

LordSutch

I presume that Ferris & Co wont be championing the release of the 'Massereene Barracks' murderers, or the murderers of PC Stephen Carroll in ten years time? > seeing that those particular murders were sanctioned by the 'real IRA' as opposed to the 'Provisional IRA'. :rolleyes:

dlofnep

irishgrover wrote: »

maybe if the farmer in question was charged with murder, but then all the witnesses refused to testify after friendly visits from members of the IFA, which coincidentally happened at a time when the guilty party agreed to manslaughter, then you might have more of a point...

Neither were convicted of murder. Many people have claimed that both incidents were murder. There should be a clear cut line for what we can classify as murder and what we can't.

If it's OK to classify anything as murder, by virtue of it automatically being accepted as opinion without stating so, (and saving boards.ie libel court cases) - then by all means, I would love to see the rule passed. But it was not, and that is my problem. You cannot pick and choose when to ban and when not to ban for 2 people breaking the exact same rule. That is categorical evidence of biased moderating.

In any case, I've said all I needed to say in this thread. I'm not here to defend the killers of Jerry McCabe. Quite frankly, I think the whole fiasco has tarnished the Republican name and I don't think there is an onus on us to defend all Republicans, just because they are Republican.

oscarBravo

dlofnep, stop discussing moderator actions (or lack thereof) in this thread. You know the rules.

dlofnep

No probs.

Liam Byrne

Hold on a sec, dlofnep!

That's VERY selective quoting and interpretation!

1) the High Court and the Supreme Court decide that the GFA states that Good Friday Agreement allows for a policy choice which was entirely within the discretion of the executive to make.

And the excutive [the Government] has consistently maintained that the prisoners do not qualify for release under the Good Friday Agreement, and that remains our position.

Basically, the GFA allows for the discretionary application, and the Govt says no - no discretion.

Ergo, they DID NOT QUALIFY even under the GFA's "discretionary" application.

2) Why did you not quote this part :

It quickly became clear that although Sinn Féin and the IRA were in a position to choose to move on decommissioning and end paramilitary activity, they refused to do so while some of their members remained behind bars.

i.e. they were trying to hold the country to ransom;

Or this

The Government has contested the contrary view in the courts, including the Supreme Court, and has won in the latter court, as Deputy Jim O’Keeffe acknowledged. If the prisoners had qualified under the terms of the Agreement, they would not still be in jail. The basis of the Supreme Court decision has been the subject of gross and deliberately dishonest misrepresentation by senior Sinn Féin figures in recent days.

Why didn't you quote those parts ? Maybe because they spell out the facts ?

dlofnep wrote:

In any case, the point he was trying to illustrate was that they had served their time that was given to them by the court.

And he should have done so without the weasel words. "They've served their time - let them move on" is fairly OK (despite the fact that we unfortunately didn't have the new legislation to handle intimidation, and so even THAT time was already massively reduced) but squeezing in his biased and blatantly incorrect view just emphasises that he doesn't want to live in the same world as the rest of us want, where Gardai are on the streets and murderers in jail.

Fratton Fred

dlofnep wrote: »

Neither were convicted of murder. Many people have claimed that both incidents were murder. There should be a clear cut line for what we can classify as murder and what we can't.

If it's OK to classify anything as murder, by virtue of it automatically being accepted as opinion without stating so, (and saving boards.ie libel court cases) - then by all means, I would love to see the rule passed. But it was not, and that is my problem. You cannot pick and choose when to ban and when not to ban for 2 people breaking the exact same rule. That is categorical evidence of biased moderating.

In any case, I've said all I needed to say in this thread. I'm not here to defend the killers of Jerry McCabe. Quite frankly, I think the whole fiasco has tarnished the Republican name and I don't think there is an onus on us to defend all Republicans, just because they are Republican.

did you not make the exact opposite arguement on the Aidan McAnespie thread?

Liam Byrne

Fratton Fred wrote: »

did you not make the exact opposite arguement on the Aidan McAnespie thread?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=61355763&postcount=19

dlofnep

Fratton Fred wrote: »

did you not make the exact opposite arguement on the Aidan McAnespie thread?

No I did not. I felt that Aidan was murdered, but it is entirely my opinion. Like I said - I would be more than happy to see a rule passed where we can automatically have everything automatically classified as opinion, to avoid these issues.

Secondly, I pointed out why the British system of Law was severely flawed when it came to convicting British soldiers, and evidenced where it occurred on numerous occasions

My initial gripe was due to an original decision, that seemingly is applied at random. OB doesn't wish us to discuss moderating any further in this thread, so I can't. I'd be more than happy to discuss it with you in a message.

dlofnep

Liam Byrne wrote: »

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=61355763&postcount=19

Thank you, you've saved me searching for me. My opening line was:

This thread is about a possible cold-blooded murder

I do not clarify it as fact, it is my opinion. The views shared in these threads however have stated something to be fact. That's the difference and my entire argument.

I feel Aidan was murdered, along with many other issues. You no doubt feel that Jerry was murdered, and you should express those views - but only as "opinion".

dlofnep

I really don't want to take this thread off-topic any further. Could both of you please message me or leave and comment and I will discuss it with you.

Liam Byrne

dlofnep wrote: »

I feel Aidan was murdered, along with many other issues. You no doubt feel that Jerry was murdered, and you should express those views - but only as "opinion".

The thugs that shot McCabe are murderers, that's my opinion. Happy now ?

However, for someone who's so adamant on clarifications between "fact" and "opinion", this is a serious own goal:

dlofnep wrote: »

No, it was not of his OPINION that they should be released - it was FACT that they were ENTITLED to be released under the GFA.

I'll repeat that (as posted, no edits from me) :

dlofnep wrote: »

it was FACT that they were ENTITLED to be released under the GFA.

Capital letters and all, despite being a direct contradiction to the Supreme Court and the Minister for Justice, who specifically referred to the "deliberately dishonest misrepresentation by senior Sinn Féin figures" in trying to suggest that they DID qualify.

After that, dlofnep, I'm DEFINITELY calling these scum murderers; hell, I'll even start putting it in capitals and saying that it's a FACT, rather than just referring to them that way in posts that are "my opinion".

If you're going to back-pedal on the way out, please do so gracefully before you hang yourself with further inconsistencies.

dlofnep

I am not backpeddling from anything. The GFA categorically stated: "Conditional early release within two years of paramilitary prisoners belonging to organisations observing a ceasefire."

Secondly, you can calm your tone fairly lively with me. I don't care who you call scumbags or murderers. You're well entitled to your opinion. I'm not here to defend the killers of Jerry McCabe, so relax the whole personal gripe.

djpbarry

dlofnep wrote: »

You no doubt feel that Jerry was murdered, and you should express those views - but only as "opinion".

What we can say with absolute certainty is that Jerry McCabe’s car was pumped full of bullets while he was sitting inside it. The fact that a representative of a certain political party felt it necessary to “welcome” the perpetrators of this crime back into our society is just another in a long list of reasons why said political party will never command the respect of the vast majority of people in this country.

dlofnep

djpbarry wrote: »

What we can say with absolute certainty is that Jerry McCabe’s car was pumped full of bullets while he was sitting inside it. The fact that a representative of a certain political party felt it necessary to “welcome” the perpetrators of this crime back into our society is just another in a long list of reasons why said political party will never command the respect of the vast majority of people in this country.

I'm not disputing that it's a serious issue affecting the voting demographic, nor am I disputing the events of the day. I take onboard everything you have to say.

I am on a personal level, not attending any welcoming home parties. That is my prerogative. Other activists are entitled to theirs.

dave-higgz

I think this has finally finished any chance of Fine Gael going into co-alition with Sinn Féin

spank_inferno

dave-higgz wrote: »

I think this has finally finished any chance of Fine Gael going into co-alition with Sinn Féin

I think the same can be said for any political party now.

Liam Byrne

dlofnep wrote: »

I am not backpeddling from anything. The GFA categorically stated: "Conditional early release within two years of paramilitary prisoners belonging to organisations observing a ceasefire."

What the GFA stated - "categorically" or otherwise - and how OUR courts and OUR Minister for Justice interpreted and applied it are two separate issues. The clue may even be in the word "Conditional", which might well equate back to "a policy choice which was entirely within the discretion of the executive to make".

They made the decision : they did NOT qualify.

So the FACT is that they did not qualify. That's NOT an "opinion".

And I wasn't getting personal, per se; just asking you to stop complaining if someone else states opinion as fact (or simply doesn't clarify which it is) while you seem perfectly happy to EXPLICITLY claim that YOUR opinion is FACT, to the point of using the word "FACT" and putting it in capitals.

I'll re-issue the direct quote from the Minister for Justice:

If the prisoners had qualified under the terms of the Agreement, they would not still be in jail.

nuac

Dlofnep mentioned welcoming home parties.

Any person or political party holding a welcoming home party for these murderers has no regard for this state or it's institutions, nor for the McCabe family.

A Dub in Glasgo

oscarBravo wrote: »

They were convicted of manslaughter, yes. But I think in the eyes of any right-thinking member of society

Are you stating that the three judges are wrong-thinking members of society

Spiritoftheseventies

spank_inferno wrote: »

I think the same can be said for any political party now.

Well they have said they would not go into power with them long before this.

Liam Byrne

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Are you stating that the three judges are wrong-thinking members of society

Remind me again why the new legislation was brought in last week, so that proper convictions could be made against those who not only commit crimes, but also intimidate witnesses....

Why was this required ?
Were the judges who let off the gang members and scum prior to this legislation "wrong-thinking" too, or did they just have their hands tied by the differential between what they could "prove" and what was known ?