Numbers up Gerry

johnr1

I wonder how many of the angry posters here actually have a clue of the very complicated and tortured time in the North which was thd "troubles"...... or how many have even read the Ed Moloney book in which Brendan Hughes own words -thousands of lines of them, are chronicled.
There might be less bullsh1t posted if people actually educated themselves before they shat their infantile and uninformed "opinions" all over the thread.

On both sides,- I might add.

yizorselves

K-9 wrote: »

I could imagine a Loyalist thug having the same reasoning about Bloody Sunday and British soldiers.

Good for you I suppose

I'd be more concerned about how he's explained away all the stuff with his brother. But I have a feeling that that would step on too many toes.

D1stant

No

Carlos Roca wrote: »

Adams is the product of a conflict zone. He witnessed his family and peers subjected to misery, imprisonment without trial, and murder by the BA and others. What would you have done? Gone out and thrown flowers at your tormentors?



I'll watch it with an open mind.

Good. I understand the environment that made Adams. And I do think he contributed to the peace process. But he denies being a senior figure in the IRA, he denies knowledge of any murders and so in my eyes he is a liar and a coward, and I don't want him sitting in the Dail in a seat that we pay for.

rockatansky

No

johnr1 wrote: »

I wonder how many of the angry posters here actually have a clue of the very complicated and tortured time in the North which was thd "troubles"...... or how many have even read the Ed Moloney book in which Brendan Hughes own words -thousands of lines of them, are chronicled.
There might be less bullsh1t posted if people actually educated themselves before they shat their infantile and uninformed "opinions" all over the thread.

On both sides,- I might add.

So what, are Brendan Hughes 'thousands of lines' now gospel that we should all kneel down before?

D1stant

D1stant wrote: »

Good. I understand the environment that made Adams. And I do think he contributed to the peace process. But he denies being a senior figure in the IRA, he denies knowledge of any murders and so in my eyes he is a liar and a coward, and I don't want him sitting in the Dail in a seat that we pay for.

He also talks about politics in the North maturing while criticising the corruption in the South. Funny stuff.

K-9

johnr1 wrote: »

I wonder how many of the angry posters here actually have a clue of the very complicated and tortured time in the North which was thd "troubles"...... or how many have even read the Ed Moloney book in which Brendan Hughes own words -thousands of lines of them, are chronicled.
There might be less bullsh1t posted if people actually educated themselves before they shat their infantile and uninformed "opinions" all over the thread.

On both sides,- I might add.

I'm just a teenager who knows nothing apparently!

It's a very complex history. I doubt many think about Unionist history when they think about reading about N.I. So, for all the so many experts on N.I. history you get on boards, it invariably means a Republican history.

Experts on one side of the equation, know it all types, but no understanding of Hume, Fitt, Unionists and the Government side. Unless you read on that side of it, it's inherently one sided and biased. It's impossible not to be.

Karl Stein

D1stant wrote: »

But he denies being a senior figure in the IRA, he denies knowledge of any murders and so in my eyes he is a liar and a coward, and I don't want him sitting in the Dail in a seat that we pay for.

I'm not saying he's innocent of these things, tbh I have no idea if he is or not, but you seem to have such conviction in your views that you take it as a self-evident fact that he was?

Why?

K-9

K-9 wrote: »

I'm just a teenager who knows nothing apparently!

It's a very complex history. I doubt many think about Unionist history when they think about reading about N.I. So, for all the so many experts on N.I. history you get on boards, it invariably means a Republican history.

Experts on one side of the equation, know it all types, but no understanding of Hume, Fitt, Unionists and the Government side. Unless you read on that side of it, it's inherently one sided and biased. It's impossible not to be.

There are a lot of situations that shouldn't be broken into "right" and "wrong" but the 60s and 70s in Northern Ireland sure as **** ain't one them.

Carlos Roca

Carlos Roca wrote: »

I'm not saying he innocent of these things, tbh I have no idea if he is or not, but you seem to have such conviction in your views that you take it as a self-evident fact that he was?

Why?

It really undermines everything else you say when you do this and I hate to see it.

K-9

Deleted User wrote: »

There are a lot of situations that shouldn't be broken into "right" and "wrong" but the 60s and 70s in Northern Ireland sure as **** ain't one them.

If you keeping looking into why the right were right and not gain an understanding of why the wrong did what they did, you'll learn nothing.

We have loads of students of Republican history on this site, I can't think of one N.I. historian.

wretcheddomain

No

Happyman42 wrote: »

If he denies what you seem to know then I'm afraid the onus is on you to prove what you know.

Is this what it comes down to? Really?

This rot appears to have sunk so far into your brain that you don't even know the evidence against your position.

I don't have to provide the evidence as many others have done that for me; it's just a pity you haven't familiarised yourself with this wealth of evidence.

You must be the only man in the land who believes Gerry Adams.

Karl Stein

Deleted User wrote: »

It really undermines everything else you say when you do this and I hate to see it.

Say what? That I have no idea if GA was in the IRA? I think you might be picking me up wrong. I'm not saying 'ha ha prove it' and neither am I denying that he actually was but how can anyone be so damned sure?

Fred Swanson

No

This post has been deleted.

D1stant

No

Oh long Jonson wrote: »

But how can your judgement on the case be objective when you freely admit that you have issues with Adams.

Everyone deserves a fair unbiased trial. To be judged on evidence presented.

What evidence are you presenting? Two people making accusations, is that all you've got ?

Congrats on your second post

Are you serious?

Happyman42

wretcheddomain wrote: »

Is this what it comes down to? Really?

This rot appears to have sunk so far into your brain that you don't even know the evidence against your position.

I don't have to provide the evidence as many others have done that for me; it's just a pity you haven't familiarised yourself with this wealth of evidence.

You must be the only man in the land who believes Gerry Adams.

I have read plenty of hearsay from people with an agenda of one kind or another. What I haven't seen and I'd love you to link to 'evidence' of what you allege. I am presuming that you know the difference between hearsay and evidence?

K-9

K-9 wrote: »

If you keeping looking into why the right were right and not gain an understanding of why the wrong did what they did, you'll learn nothing.

We have loads of students of Republican history on this site, I can't think of one N.I. historian.

Their reasons are no justification, they're a further example of why they were so wrong.

Carlos Roca wrote: »

Say what? That I have no idea if GA was in the IRA? I think you might be picking me up wrong. I'm not saying 'ha ha prove it' and neither am I denying that he actually was but how can anyone be so damned sure?

I would ask how someone couldn't tbh.

policarp

We were in Derry for the "Fleadh Ceoil" this year.
Derry "City of Culture."
Great place,lovely people.
We were told Belfast is the same.Nearly.
So why should one or two names
spoil things for everyone?

Karl Stein

Deleted User wrote: »

I would ask how someone couldn't tbh.

So I'll ask you then. What makes you so damned sure?

K-9

Deleted User wrote: »

Their reasons are no justification, they're a further example of why they were so wrong.

Never said they were, I've pointed out manys a time how Catholics were right.

This right vs. wrong thing is what the zero sum game is about. We were right, they were wrong and that's continued into power sharing 40 years later.

So yes unfortunately Adams has questions to answer, because it's us vs. them. Until it stops becoming us vs. them, then people can move on.

Carlos Roca

Carlos Roca wrote: »

So I'll ask you then. What makes you so damned sure?

His support in certain areas, local knowledge, family knowledge and connections, the source of his "political power" early on and just common sense.

K-9

K-9 wrote: »

Never said they were, I've pointed out manys a time how Catholics were right.

This right vs. wrong thing is what the zero sum game is about. We were right, they were wrong and that's continued into power sharing 40 years later.

So yes unfortunately Adams has questions to answer, because it's us vs. them. Until it stops becoming us vs. them, then people can move on.

I'm just saying that Northern Ireland is a rare example where there is a very clear right and wrong. The current "power-sharing" set-up and the need for it is, in my eyes, a damning indictment of the last 40 years, that they still have to specifically set it up so that the "ruling parties" have to be on opposite sides of an imaginary line and debate.

rockatansky

No

wretcheddomain wrote: »

Is this what it comes down to? Really?

This rot appears to have sunk so far into your brain that you don't even know the evidence against your position.

I don't have to provide the evidence as many others have done that for me; it's just a pity you haven't familiarised yourself with this wealth of evidence.

You must be the only man in the land who believes Gerry Adams.

Him and more than 15,000 first preference voters in Louth. And 23,000 in Belfast.

Karl Stein

Deleted User wrote: »

His support in certain areas, local knowledge, family knowledge and connections, the source of his "political power" early on and just common sense.

Fair enough. I don't know much about him personally so maybe I need to read up about it more.

Fred Swanson

No

This post has been deleted.

Happyman42

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Hard to get used to democracy, eh Fred?

Fred Swanson

No

This post has been deleted.

Carlos Roca

Carlos Roca wrote: »

Fair enough. I don't know much about him personally so maybe I need to read up about it more.

There's nothing I'm going to say online but there's not a whole lot I'd be more sure of :P I don't see the point in it constantly being brought up, I think there's a need for everyone to move on from such things, all around, but I cringe when it's treated like an outlandish accusation.

Fred Swanson

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Are you a writer for Family Guy?

Happyman42

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

He is involved in intimidating all those voters now too? Wow!