Has anyone asked McGuinness if he ordered someone executed?

DeVore

The guy admitted himself he was a senior player in the IRA, part of the "elite" army council.

Has anyone asked him if he ordered a killing? I'm not trolling, I genuinely would like to hear the guys answer to that. Unfortunately, I doubt I'm going to be allowed to do the McGuinness interview for Boards.

DeV.

mikemac

Not that exact question but pretty much the same thing

He was on Cork local radio yesterday, RTÉ did a summary

Sinn Féin Presidential candidate Martin McGuinness has said he did not kill or shoot anybody while he was a member of the IRA between 1970 and 1974 - but he would not say if he had shot at anybody during that time.
Speaking on local radio in Cork, Mr McGuinness said he would not say what role he played in the IRA in Derry in the early 1970s because it would leave him open to charges that he was being boastful.

He said he was not prepared to get into what he had done in the IRA on a daily basis and was asking people to judge him "in the round".

When it was put to him that he was saying he did not use guns during his time in the IRA, Mr McGuinness said he was not saying that and he would not divest himself of his responsibility while he was in the IRA.

You can ask that question one hundred times and you will never get an answer.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2011/0922/president1.html

drunkmonkey

I'm sure if he thought it was a necessary evil he would have. Name any leader that hasn't, Cameron, Blair, Bush, Bush Jnr, Obama, Thatcher, Winston Churchill, Micheal Collins, Eammon de Valera, Bertie Ahern, Enda Kenny, in one shape way or forum they all have blood on their bibs.

Whatever he done it was in the name of freedom and Civil Rights. You can't say the same for everybody listed above bar one or 2.

Foghladh

I don't know that he's admitted to being on the Army council either. More a rank and file member I believe

sparks24

And what if he did, it was a war. We have already had a president who shot at people and ordered deaths.

Foghladh

There's a good timeline article in Saturdays Irish Times that's worth a read

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/weekend/2011/0924/1224304656550.html

Kind of mentions him in the IRA past 1974 though so I can't vouche how accurate it is :rolleyes:

Liam Byrne

because it would leave him open to charges that he was being boastful.

:rolleyes:

I've heard him spout some amount of vacuous rubbish over the years, but that one beats all!

Evasive idiot of the highest order!

RandomName2

sparks24 wrote: »

And what if he did, it was a war. We have already had a president who shot at people and ordered deaths.

Funny that. How do targets such as the Abercorn restaurant or Oxford St. fit into this war? Oh, it was the IRA's strategy that if they killed enough civilians that they would be able to achieve concessions. So what if they killed indiscriminately?

----

DeVore: I would actually say that the question is a little unfair to him. He is essentially pleading the fifth without actually saying it (i.e. being honest). Perhaps he feels that he has gone beyond the call of duty in admitting his role and position in the Troubles (he could always have said that the bombs and terrorist paraphernalia that he was arrested with were merely planted by the BA). Clearly he has no problem with killing pe se, as seen with his appointment of Mary McArdle.

Nodin

RandomName2 wrote: »

.......... Clearly he has no problem with killing pe se, ...........

He's hardly alone in that.

R P McMurphy

If that question was asked, it would be a bit of a mistake to answer that he did as would land him into a prison term.

The media coverage does interest me however. Funny that all of this focus on what McGuinness may or may not have done over 30 years ago during an armed campaign comes on a week when once again Ireland's links to the international arms industry were highlighted. This story appeared briefly and then slipped off the pages again. This is nothing new with companies such as Data Device Corporation and Analog Devices being the main companies in the "dual-use" field, and Irish-owned Timoney Technology Group selling items that are almost impossible to track. It has also been known for over a decade that major global arms brokers have operations and 'interests' in this fair isle. Impossible to say how much of this equipment has also been used in the murder of hundreds of thousands of civilians both by renegade states and factions and more significantly by the UK and US military machines. If the politicians that came out and spoke out against the suitability of McGuinness to be president might also address this issue in the same week then their moral high ground might be a little more stable

mike65

Nodin wrote: »

He's hardly alone in that.

He is among those standing for President.

KeithAFC

drunkmonkey wrote: »

I'm sure if he thought it was a necessary evil he would have. Name any leader that hasn't, Cameron, Blair, Bush, Bush Jnr, Obama, Thatcher, Winston Churchill, Micheal Collins, Eammon de Valera, Bertie Ahern, Enda Kenny, in one shape way or forum they all have blood on their bibs.

Whatever he done it was in the name of freedom and Civil Rights. You can't say the same for everybody listed above bar one or 2.

A UI, yes. The PIRA was no human rights organisation.

gandalf

He was doorstepped by a Newtalk reporter the other morning and was asked if he personally killed anyone to which he replied "No" and then asked if he had ordered anyone killed again to which he replied "No".

So we have two options here. He lied because as a senior member of the IRA (circa 1972 he was listed as being 2nd in command of the Derry IRA) he had to have knowledge of their murder campaign. So he is a liar not a trait that one would want in their head of state.

Or he is making up his IRA career history and is a total Walter Mitty. Would you like a dingbat like that representing you abroad? I wouldn't.

Sonnenblumen

sparks24 wrote: »

And what if he did, it was a war. We have already had a president who shot at people and ordered deaths.

No that's not true but IRA propaganda to try and justify/legitimise their ' NI armed struggle'. Also the rules of the Geneva Convention did not apply and the principal victims were typically civilian. What took place in NI was guerilla warfare but terrorism is probably a more accurate description and all sides share responsibility for the extent of attrocity.

The war of Independence was a quite different conflict.

DeVore

He's asking to be my President.

How does McGuinness get a free ride over potentially killing people when Norris was hounded out for writing a letter? Either we ask pertinent searching questions about candidates past or we dont.

DeV.

Dr Galen

DeVore wrote: »

He's asking to be my President.

How does McGuinness get a free ride over potentially killing people when Norris was hounded out for writing a letter? Either we ask pertinent searching questions about candidates past or we dont.

DeV.

Totally agree on this. If Norris, Mitchell and the others are going to be scrutinised on events from their past (circa 20 years or so ago) then same for McGuinness. He should see no issue with that, unless its the same for all candidates.

Out of interest, will we be seeing a Boards interview with himself?

Wolfe Tone

If he did, and Im not saying he has, afaik, or as far as you know Dev, he hasnt, do you expect him to say he did?

Besides, he has already said he didnt directly kill or indirectly kill anyone. Are you saying he has ordered somone executed? Looking forward to seeing some proof.

Why dont you ask Norris if he slept with someone underage seen as he has such questionable views?

Nodin

mike65 wrote: »

He is among those standing for President.

And the point still stands. If people believe that the use of violence in the North was unjustified, then let them spell that out. If they reject all violence everywhere, then let them state that. This vague ' He employed violence' craic gets on my tits. Its just an attempt by people to put themselves on a higher horse than the one they have.

drunkmonkey

gandalf wrote: »

Would you like a dingbat like that representing you abroad? I wouldn't.

Ahh he's already representing us (ireland) abroad. He's just back from a senior level trade mission in the states. He's a serious candidate already representing a lot of people in the country.

Liam Byrne

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Ahh he's already representing us (ireland) abroad. He's just back from a senior level trade mission in the states. He's a serious candidate already representing a lot of people in the country.

He's not representing this state.

Biggins

You know, for one man, he's sure made a boring election more lively - and this forum!

DeVore

Dr Galen wrote: »

Totally agree on this. If Norris, Mitchell and the others are going to be scrutinised on events from their past (circa 20 years or so ago) then same for McGuinness. He should see no issue with that, unless its the same for all candidates.

Out of interest, will we be seeing a Boards interview with himself?

Yes, we hope to but who knows. I won't be conducting it, I'm decidedly opposed to this person representing me in any way, or indeed being near me. It wouldnt be fair for me to conduct it.

DeV.
Ps anyone know how to contact his team?

Dev:

Contact

Our office is at:

100/102 Capel Street
Dublin 1

You can email us at:

admin[at]thepeoplespresident[dot]ie

Wolfe Tone

DeVore wrote: »

Dr Galen wrote: »

Totally agree on this. If Norris, Mitchell and the others are going to be scrutinised on events from their past (circa 20 years or so ago) then same for McGuinness. He should see no issue with that, unless its the same for all candidates.

Out of interest, will we be seeing a Boards interview with himself?

Yes, we hope to but who knows. I won't be conducting it, I'm decidedly opposed to this person representing me in any way, or indeed being near me. It wouldnt be fair for me to conduct it.

DeV.
Ps anyone know how to contact his team?

The website for his camaign? On the phone so I can't put it up.

Certainly would be interesting watching Dav ask him some of the inevitable hyperbole ridden questions.

Nodin

'Mr McGuinness - On the night the Hesperus went down, where were you?'

mike65

Interesting website addy for the McGuinness Campaign

http://www.thepeoplespresident.ie/news

Martin's Political Journey
Derry Republican
Martin’s political journey began on the streets of Derry in the late 1960s when he joined the marches for Civil Rights. From his early days he has been guided by the vision of re-uniting our country. He joined the IRA in the 1970s. He was present on Bloody Sunday when 14 of his fellow citizens of Derry were murdered by the British Army.

Peace Negotiator
In the late 1980s and early 1990s Martin worked alongside John Hume, Albert Reynolds, Gerry Adams and others in bringing about the IRA ceasefire and the development of the peace process. He was elected to the peace negotiations in 1996 and was appointed the Sinn Féin Chief Negotiator in the talks, which led to the Good Friday Agreement.

Hmmm something missing there.

sparks24

Sonnenblumen wrote: »

sparks24 wrote: »

And what if he did, it was a war. We have already had a president who shot at people and ordered deaths.

No that's not true but IRA propaganda to try and justify/legitimise their ' NI armed struggle'. Also the rules of the Geneva Convention did not apply and the principal victims were typically civilian. What took place in NI was guerilla warfare but terrorism is probably a more accurate description and all sides share responsibility for the extent of attrocity.

The war of Independence was a quite different conflict.

Oh ya tell that to the people of Derry they didn't qualify to legally defend their human rights.

You sound like someone from the social welfare doing a means test

Liam Byrne

Interesting web address - I was under the impression that .ie domains were strictly administered and that you had to prove that you were entitled to a name ?

Nothing about McGuinness suggests that he should have been awarded that domain name.

vellocet

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Interesting web address - I was under the impression that .ie domains were strictly administered and that you had to prove that you were entitled to a name ?

Nothing about McGuinness suggests that he should have been awarded that domain name.

This is getting pathetic Liam.

Alopex

Right so lets say we hypothetically believe his own words: he was second in command in Derry in the 70s

How could he not have been at least indirectly responsible for killing someone? Was he the worst guerrilla ever? And then somehow made it to the top of the political wing of the IRA?

You couldn't make this up.

Liam Byrne

vellocet wrote: »

This is getting pathetic Liam.

What is ? Having a different opinion to yourself and all the other McGuinness apologists ?

What's far more pathetic is the repeated double-standards and attempts to justify murder of innocents.

I have my opinion, and you have yours. But what SF & IRA have to realise is that in this country people can speak their mind without fear of getting kneecapped, and therefore we do.

If you want to have a discussion on how McGuinness deserves that domain name, then fair enough; but writing off an opposing view as "pathetic" is just lazy debating - it's along the lines of McGuinness himself using the ridiculous "West Brit" slander.

Someone who was a member of an organisation which murdered many Irish people, North and South, as well as a good many in Britain, is NOT a "people's president", by any stretch of the imagination.

Oh - and before the usual victimisation gene kicks in, I'd have the same view if the likes of Ahern had that web address (although in fairness I don't think FF murdered anyone).

drunkmonkey

Liam Byrne wrote: »

I have my opinion, and you have yours. But what SF & IRA have to realise is that in this country people can speak their mind without fear of getting kneecapped, and therefore we do.

Liam your opinion is just as good as the rest of ours, there's no right or wrong in this debate but rewind to 60's/70's Northern Ireland, people weren't able to speak their minds without fear. Heck they couldn't even have normal lives they were oppressed. I think your missing that point.
It was the likes of Mc Guinness that paved the way for the freedom they have now, you might not agree with his tactics but he paved the way all the same.

Liam Byrne

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Liam your opinion is just as good as the rest of ours, there's no right or wrong in this debate but rewind to 60's/70's Northern Ireland, people weren't able to speak their minds without fear. Heck they couldn't even have normal lives they were oppressed. I think your missing that point.
It was the likes of Mc Guinness that paved the way for the freedom they have now, you might not agree with his tactics but he paved the way all the same.

There's no "right and wrong" in the debate ? :eek:

Murdering innocent people is wrong. Period. No ifs, ands, buts or whataboutery. Wrong.

If they'd targetted their enemy I might not have agreed but I could have understood.

Targetting innocent third parties puts them below contempt.

Nodin

Alopex wrote: »

Right so lets say we hypothetically believe his own words: he was second in command in Derry in the 70s

How could he not have been at least indirectly responsible for killing someone? Was he the worst guerrilla ever? And then somehow made it to the top of the political wing of the IRA?

You couldn't make this up.

...he might have just been in admin....

Dyr

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Targetting innocent third parties puts them below contempt.

As would standing on the sidelines when war was being waged on your community...those who were safe to moralise from the republic would never understand that though.

Liam Byrne

Bambi wrote: »

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Targetting innocent third parties puts them below contempt.

As would standing on the sidelines when war was being waged on your community...those who were safe to moralise from the republic would never understand that though.

"safe to moralise" because the thugs who planted bombs wouldn't call round to kneecap us if we reported their crimes ?

As I said, such tactics - or even threats - wouldn't have been required if they had enjoyed any worthwhile level of support.

A Primal Nut

McGuinness' tactics, especially kneecapping, proxy bombing, etc; went well beyond what is morally acceptable of any freedom fighter.

drunkmonkey

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Murdering innocent people is wrong. Period. No ifs, ands, buts or whataboutery. Wrong.

100% Agree, Yet we facilitate US troops going through our airports. The Iraq civilian body count is at over 100,000 and counting.
This is happening right now and we tolerate it and even support it by our choices at the ballot box. (I didn't)

Martin Mc Guinness publicly called for the troops to be stopped while at political meeting in America, that's more than can be said for any southern leader.

If you voted ff/fg/pd/lbr, your have in around about way accepted that civilians dying are a fact of war and is ok on your watch. I for one took to the streets to protest and did not endorse any of the people in power since.

Eliot Rosewater

Claiming McGuinness, or any other former terrorist, ordered "executions" is to lend supporters of murder as a political means more credibility than they deserve. The IRA do not have, and never have had, any mandate to enact justice. The word "execution" subtly hints that they have, or at least suggests some kind of semi-legitimate judicial decision making process. Neither is the case: the killings carried out by the IRA were illegitimate and murder, plain and simple.

As regards McGuinness' involvement: as a member of the IRA he was obviously involved in political violence - the bread and butter of it and other terrorist organisations. The question should be whether such barbarity is reconcilable with one's democratic ideals. McGuinness' supposed conversion to peaceful politics is obviously important here, but if the statements of some of the Republican members of this forum are anything to go by, working within the democratic system now is no promise that violence is gone forever.

FurryFace

He won't get my vote anyway.

Liam Byrne

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Murdering innocent people is wrong. Period. No ifs, ands, buts or whataboutery. Wrong.

100% Agree, Yet we facilitate US troops going through our airports. The Iraq civilian body count is at over 100,000 and counting.
This is happening right now and we tolerate it and even support it by our choices at the ballot box. (I didn't)

Martin Mc Guinness publicly called for the troops to be stopped while at political meeting in America, that's more than can be said for any southern leader.

If you voted ff/fg/pd/lbr, your have in around about way accepted that civilians dying are a fact of war and is ok on your watch. I for one took to the streets to protest and did not endorse any of the people in power since.

OK - you can drop that angle for starters - I have been very vocal in relation to the abuse of Shannon and even in the threads regarding 9/11 where I specifically pointed out that the numbers murdered by America & Britain were far greater.

So at least I'm consistent, whereas you're making an issue out of protesting at one lot of murders while voting and condoning one of the main players in another ?

Eoin Cunniffe 94

I am totally against Martin McGuinness being elected as the president of our nation I have read his book and applaud his role in the peace process however he was involved with atrocious civilian killings whether it be directly or indirectly . All candidates have had extensive investigations into their pasts and McGuinness should too and due to past circumstances he is unsuitable for the presidency

gandalf

drunkmonkey wrote: »

100% Agree, Yet we facilitate US troops going through our airports. The Iraq civilian body count is at over 100,000 and counting.
This is happening right now and we tolerate it and even support it by our choices at the ballot box. (I didn't)

This is deflecting away from the topic at hand, a standard tactic by supporters of a certain ilk when the debate is getting too close to home for them.

Martin Mc Guinness publicly called for the troops to be stopped while at political meeting in America, that's more than can be said for any southern leader.

Well if he was President of Ireland and given the high amount of FDI in Ireland by US companies then that would probably at best be naive and at worst cause the loss of Irish jobs. Hardly the role of a apolitical head of state.

Also using the label "southern leader" doesn't bode well for a man who is supposed to be running a campaign based on the premise "I am a unifier". From my perspective and that of an awful lot of people he is exactly the opposite and his inclusion in this competition for the Head of this State cheapens the competition.

If you voted ff/fg/pd/lbr, your have in around about way accepted that civilians dying are a fact of war and is ok on your watch. I for one took to the streets to protest and did not endorse any of the people in power since.

What the hell kind of rubbish is this that is being spouted. We are talking about actions carried out in the name of all the people of Ireland when it was obvious that all did not support it, that a majority did not support it.

Liam Byrne

Liam Byrne wrote: »

drunkmonkey wrote: »

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Murdering innocent people is wrong. Period. No ifs, ands, buts or whataboutery. Wrong.

100% Agree, Yet we facilitate US troops going through our airports. The Iraq civilian body count is at over 100,000

You agreed with me, including the "no whataboutery" and yet the first thing you do after "100% agreeing" is engage in said whataboutery ?

Pompey Magnus

DeVore wrote: »

The guy admitted himself he was a senior player in the IRA, part of the "elite" army council.

Has anyone asked him if he ordered a killing? I'm not trolling, I genuinely would like to hear the guys answer to that. Unfortunately, I doubt I'm going to be allowed to do the McGuinness interview for Boards.

DeV.

Out of interest, if you got to ask him that question and he gave the straight answer "No", would you believe him?

drunkmonkey

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Liam Byrne wrote: »

You agreed with me, including the "no whataboutery" and yet the first thing you do after "100% agreeing" is engage in said whataboutery ?

I was trying to get the point across that you also have the blood of civilians on your bib, not intentional but letting it happen on your watch through the ballet box by supporting a party that thinks it's ok is not ok. Your not innocent.

There are necessary and accidental evils on the road to peace, there always will be and always have been. We can't hold the past against Mc Guinness he was walking a road not yet travelled, it lead him to peace, is it about time we accepted he arrived. I don't think he poses any threat to this state or any other one. If anything he could be the one to finally re unite the Island.

As I've said i'm not backing him as of yet I want to see how the whole election plays out. We need to see some good debates on TV and see how everyone holds up. I hope RTE play their part as impartial as possible.

Liam Byrne

drunkmonkey wrote: »

I was trying to get the point across that you also have the blood of civilians on your bib, not intentional but letting it happen on your watch through the ballet box by supporting a party that thinks it's ok is not ok. Your not innocent.

And as I said, you're wrong.

Secondly, it is whataboutery.

Thirdly it was FF that allowed the U.S. to use Shannon, and I never voted for them.

And finally there's a massive difference between voting for a party because they do something and voting for a party that later does something that you completely disagree with and that will - as a result - cost them your vote next time out. FG are heading that way given their policies.

So do not accuse me of having any "blood on my bib", because you're 100% wrong and - as I said - only trying to muddy the waters with deflection and whataboutery.

celticcrash

DeVore wrote: »

The guy admitted himself he was a senior player in the IRA, part of the "elite" army council.

Has anyone asked him if he ordered a killing? I'm not trolling, I genuinely would like to hear the guys answer to that. Unfortunately, I doubt I'm going to be allowed to do the McGuinness interview for Boards.

DeV.

This is not a question, Your agenda is clear, you dont like the man.
Trolling yes you are.
I would like my President to have experience and guts, put in old fashioned
way someone with a pair of balls who has a history of standing up to bullys.

Liam Byrne

celticcrash wrote: »

DeVore wrote: »

The guy admitted himself he was a senior player in the IRA, part of the "elite" army council.

Has anyone asked him if he ordered a killing? I'm not trolling, I genuinely would like to hear the guys answer to that. Unfortunately, I doubt I'm going to be allowed to do the McGuinness interview for Boards.

DeV.

This is not a question, Your agenda is clear, you dont like the man.
Trolling yes you are.
I would like my President to have experience and guts, put in old fashioned
way someone with a pair of balls who has a history of standing up to bullys.

It is a question - you see that curly yoke at the end of it ?

As for your president - would you not want him to be able to say the name of the state without choking?

Imagine Obama saying that he was "President of the 52 states" - what a joke!

celticcrash

the origional question is loaded one way, so its not a proper question.
More of an agenda.

drunkmonkey

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Thirdly it was FF that allowed the U.S. to use Shannon, and I never voted for them.

So you do see my point that on one side were lambasting McGuinness for what happened during the troubles and on the other were helping it happen to some other poor sods.
We've learned nothing from history.