Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

What evidence of Gerry Adams' IRA membership do people need?

Options
1…3738394042

Comments

  • Options
    #1232
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,795 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    The court where if enough people say something then it is so?

    Just we're clear: you're taking the view that Jimmy Saville was wronged?


  • Options
    #1233
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Just we're clear: you're taking the view that Jimmy Saville was wronged?
    Why would he need to make that "clear"? He never said anything even close to that. In fact I think you should answer your own question since you're the only person who seems to be interested.


  • Options
    #1234
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,795 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    Why would he need to make that "clear"? He never said anything even close to that. In fact I think you should answer your own question since you're the only person who seems to be interested.

    I don't think Jimmy Saville was wronged.

    Do you?


  • Options
    #1235
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Just we're clear: you're taking the view that Jimmy Saville was wronged?

    I am taking the view that the man accused here is still alive, equating him to what happened after somebody died is nonsense. The usual nonsense that Godge comes out with he doesn't want to deal with something. I.E. the fact that Gerry Adams has not been convicted of IRA membership and denies the claim.
    Just like he is proving over on other threads, it seems 'evidence' and the right to a defense is not required when it comes to allegations made against republicans.


  • Options
    #1236
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,795 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    I am taking the view that the man accused here is still alive, equating him to what happened after somebody died is nonsense. The usual nonsense that Godge comes out with he doesn't want to deal with something. I.E. the fact that Gerry Adams has not been convicted of IRA membership and denies the claim.
    Just like he is proving over on other threads, it seems 'evidence' and the right to a defense is not required when it comes to allegations made against republicans.

    That was a pretty verbose way of not answering the question.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1237
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    That was a pretty verbose way of not answering the question.

    Whatever.
    You can allege anything you want about Jimmy Saville, he can't answer or defend himself.
    I didn't pay much attention to the story or allegations and didn't read one line of print about it, but on what I heard on radio and telly, yes, I think he was probably guilty.
    That doesn't for one second diminish his right to defend himself if he where alive.


  • Options
    #1238
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,664 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    Godge wrote: »
    The same court that Jimmy Saville was convicted in.

    So basically your proof that gerry adams was in the IRA is that Saville was a pedo. Excellent logic once again there Godge.


  • Options
    #1239
    Fuzzy Clam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,293 ✭✭✭Fuzzy Clam


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    Whatever.
    You can allege anything you want about Jimmy Saville, he can't answer or defend himself.
    I didn't pay much attention to the story or allegations and didn't read one line of print about it, but on what I heard on radio and telly, yes, I think he was probably guilty.
    That doesn't for one second diminish his right to defend himself if he where alive.
    "probably guilty"
    Are you for real?

    Reading between the lines, you seem to think that a person is innocent as long as they are alive to deny any allegations against them but are probably guilty when they can no longer defend themselves.

    Strange.


  • Options
    #1240
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Fuzzy Clam wrote: »
    "probably guilty"
    Are you for real?

    Reading between the lines, you seem to think that a person is innocent as long as they are alive to deny any allegations against them but are probably guilty when they can no longer defend themselves.

    Strange.

    Just ask yourself what would have happened had Saville been alive and you'll figure it out.


  • Options
    #1241
    Fuzzy Clam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,293 ✭✭✭Fuzzy Clam


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    Just ask yourself what would have happened had Saville been alive and you'll figure it out.

    He would have been found guilty

    Whats your point?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1242
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Fuzzy Clam wrote: »
    He would have been found guilty

    Whats your point?

    He may or may not have, but he would have had the right to defend himself and to his good name until somebody produced evidence capable of proving he was guilty. eg. nobody would have the right to call him a pedophile/rapist/abuser(or what was alleged about him) until such time that the above took place.
    Adams is entitled to the same if you call yourself a democrat.


  • Options
    #1243
    MakeEmLaugh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,356 ✭✭✭MakeEmLaugh


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    I am taking the view that the man accused here is still alive, equating him to what happened after somebody died is nonsense.

    Ok then. Take Bill Cosby, who is still alive.

    There is no evidence that Bill Cosby is a rapist other than testimonial.

    Do you regard Bill Cosby as innocent until proven guilty?


  • Options
    #1244
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    MakeEmLaugh wrote: »
    Ok then. Take Bill Cosby, who is still alive.

    There is no evidence that Bill Cosby is a rapist other than testimonial.

    Do you regard Bill Cosby as innocent until proven guilty?

    I have no idea, I know nothing about him other than he was in a TV when I was younger.
    This is getting really ridiculous now.

    And yes...he is innocent until proven guilty...that is how democracies work. I know it is inconvenient to some.


  • Options
    #1245
    MakeEmLaugh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,356 ✭✭✭MakeEmLaugh


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    I have no idea, I know nothing about him other than he was in a TV when I was younger.
    This is getting really ridiculous now.

    And yes...he is innocent until proven guilty...that is how democracies work. I know it is inconvenient to some.

    Instead of evading questions, why don't you answer the title question of this thread?

    You keep saying "I'd like to see evidence" but won't elaborate on what you mean.

    We have testimonial evidence, photographic evidence, written evidence (from Adams himself, before he assumed the role of leader of Sinn Fein and would have to deny such claims to woo US politicians).

    What do you want? A video of Adams being sworn into the IRA?


  • Options
    #1246
    Godge
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,727 ✭✭✭✭Godge


    maccored wrote: »
    So basically your proof that gerry adams was in the IRA is that Saville was a pedo. Excellent logic once again there Godge.


    I will pretend that I am a Savillebot for a minute.

    Where is your evidence that Saville was a pedo????

    The man was never convicted in a court of anything. Shame on you for suggesting that Jimmy Saville was anything other than a high upstanding citizen of the Queen's England. Have you no shame, making baseless accusations against a man who crusaded for years to help little children and who single-handedly rescued the country from terrible music. You should look at yourself in the mirror and be ashamed of yourself that you accused a great man of such things.


    Oh, I feel sick after posting that, is that how SF acolytes feel after posting defence after defence of Gerry, the child abuse protector?


  • Options
    #1247
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    MakeEmLaugh wrote: »
    Instead of evading questions, why don't you answer the title question of this thread?

    You keep saying "I'd like to see evidence" but won't elaborate on what you mean.

    We have testimonial evidence, photographic evidence, written evidence (from Adams himself, before he assumed the role of leader of Sinn Fein and would have to deny such claims to woo US politicians).

    What do you want? A video of Adams being sworn into the IRA?

    Firstly; the man himself denies the allegations.
    Secondly: he has been tried and 'evidence' presented and there was NO conviction.
    Thirdly: I cannot trust the allegations made against him by certain people because politically they are his enemies. That would unsound imo to assume they are telling the truth without them being cross examined in a court of law.
    Lastly: there are people more expert than you or me, the police and intelligence services of both jurisdictions who as yet, have not been able to gather evidence capable of proving him guilty.


  • Options
    #1248
    Godge
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,727 ✭✭✭✭Godge


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    I have no idea, I know nothing about him other than he was in a TV when I was younger.
    This is getting really ridiculous now.

    And yes...he is innocent until proven guilty...that is how democracies work. I know it is inconvenient to some.


    O.J. Simpson is alive, he is also innocent before a court of law of murdering his wife. You support him too as well as Saville?

    Just checking whose company you are keeping.


  • Options
    #1249
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    Godge wrote: »
    You support him too as well as Saville?

    .

    If you think trying to get a rise out of somebody strengthens your 'arguments' rock on.
    The entire forum has watched you devalue them by making stuff up to suit yourself.


  • Options
    #1250
    MakeEmLaugh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,356 ✭✭✭MakeEmLaugh


    MakeEmLaugh wrote: »
    Instead of evading questions, why don't you answer the title question of this thread?

    What do you want?
    Happyman42 wrote: »
    Firstly; the man himself denies the allegations.
    Secondly: he has been tried and 'evidence' presented and there was NO conviction.
    Thirdly: I cannot trust the allegations made against him by certain people because politically they are his enemies. That would unsound imo to assume they are telling the truth without them being cross examined in a court of law.
    Lastly: there are people more expert than you or me, the police and intelligence services of both jurisdictions who as yet, have not been able to gather evidence capable of proving him guilty.

    Your inability to answer a simple question is startling.


  • Options
    #1251
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    I don't think Jimmy Saville was wronged.

    Do you?
    Why do you keep asking people about Saville?
    Are you against pedophilia and rape yourself, just so we can be 100% clear on your position?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1252
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    MakeEmLaugh wrote: »
    Your inability to answer a simple question is startling.

    You want me to pass judgement on a man when I haven't seen or am not even familiar with the case against him? Brilliant, a boards kangaroo court!
    There is a reason I avoid sensational and prurient media coverage of abuse and sex allegations against people. Because as a rule reportage on them are prurient and sensational and are about as trust worthy as Godge when it comes to interpreting what is been said in a court. (see his interpretation of what I said about Saville, was turned into 'support for Saville' :rolleyes:)

    In particular I avoid reportage of abuse within families and the actions of those caught up in it. Because what people do for (to them) the best of motives can look different to an un-involved outsider and when manipulated by a sensationalist reporter of those facts (see Godge above, again)
    I leave decisions on those matters to a court of law, trusting that they will forensically and indeed, sympathetically, review the evidence.
    Comparing the case in the thread title is stupid, it is entirely different in nature to the ones you want me to pronounce judgement on. (without the evidence in both cases btw, and I am painfully aware that 'evidence' doesn't seem to be important in these parts)


  • Options
    #1253
    MakeEmLaugh
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,356 ✭✭✭MakeEmLaugh


    Happyman42 wrote: »
    You want me to pass judgement on a man when I haven't seen or am not even familiar with the case against him? Brilliant, a boards kangaroo court!
    There is a reason I avoid sensational and prurient media coverage of abuse and sex allegations against people. Because as a rule reportage on them are prurient and sensational and are about as trust worthy as Godge when it comes to interpreting what is been said in a court. (see his interpretation of what I said about Saville, was turned into 'support for Saville' :rolleyes:)

    In particular I avoid reportage of abuse within families and the actions of those caught up in it. Because what people do for (to them) the best of motives can look different to an un-involved outsider and when manipulated by a sensationalist reporter of those facts (see Godge above, again)
    I leave decisions on those matters to a court of law, trusting that they will forensically and indeed, sympathetically, review the evidence.
    Comparing the case in the thread title is stupid, it is entirely different in nature to the ones you want me to pronounce judgement on. (without the evidence in both cases btw, and I am painfully aware that 'evidence' doesn't seem to be important in these parts)

    Nice rant there, pal, but I wasn't talking about your inability to answer questions about Savile.

    I was talking about your inability to explain what would constitute evidence of Adams' membership, besides the mountain of existing evidence.

    I shouldn't have engaged with you. As I said originally, people like you are either obstinate or genuinely unintelligent.

    I won't be responding to any further comments from you in this thread, so you needn't bother responding to this.


  • Options
    #1254
    Happyman42
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,066 ✭✭✭✭Happyman42


    MakeEmLaugh wrote: »
    Nice rant there, pal, but I wasn't talking about your inability to answer questions about Savile.

    I was talking about your inability to explain what would constitute evidence of Adams' membership, besides the mountain of existing evidence.

    I shouldn't have engaged with you. As I said originally, people like you are either obstinate or genuinely unintelligent.

    I won't be responding to any further comments from you in this thread, so you needn't bother responding to this.

    My answers to your questions are in the thread if you had read it.

    A lot of the 'mountains of evidence' (the beret, and other photographs) have been presented in a court and Adams was not convicted of membership.
    But you and others know better than a court, a court run by a government who would (on the basis of a proven bias against republicans) have been only too glad to see this man thrown in a jail and stood over the internment of hundreds of other republicans without a trial at all.


  • Options
    #1255
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,795 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    Why do you keep asking people about Saville?
    Mostly to watch them squirm as they try to avoid answering them.

    So, once again: do you believe Jimmy Saville was wronged? (Not that I was asking you originally, but seeing as you have decided to wedge yourself into the discussion with one of your ultra-defensive specials, why not?)
    Are you against pedophilia and rape yourself, just so we can be 100% clear on your position?
    Yes, I am.

    ^ See that? It's called an answer. Not a knee-jerk, reflexive, defensive, smart-arsed posturing sneer - an answer.

    So, do you believe that Jimmy Saville was wronged?


  • Options
    #1256
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Just we're clear: you're taking the view that Jimmy Saville was wronged?

    This post perfectly sums of the depths of stupidity and desperation this thread has reached. Utter, utter drivel


  • Options
    #1257
    Crooked Jack
    Registered Users Posts: 5,678 ✭✭✭Crooked Jack


    MakeEmLaugh wrote: »
    Nice rant there, pal, but I wasn't talking about your inability to answer questions about Savile.

    I was talking about your inability to explain what would constitute evidence of Adams' membership, besides the mountain of existing evidence.

    I shouldn't have engaged with you. As I said originally, people like you are either obstinate or genuinely unintelligent.

    I won't be responding to any further comments from you in this thread, so you needn't bother responding to this.

    The mountain of existing evidence is only evidence of the fact that Adams was a senior republican, that he negotiated on behalf of republicans and that he supported and had contact with the IRA.
    None of this he denies.


  • Options
    #1258
    Godge
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,727 ✭✭✭✭Godge


    Crooked Jack wrote: »
    This post perfectly sums of the depths of stupidity and desperation this thread has reached. Utter, utter drivel


    You didn't answer the question.

    There is a basic premise here. Can you conclude that somebody (Saville, O.J. Simpson, Lee Harvey Oswald, Strongbow, Gerry Adams, whoever) is guilty of a crime without that being proved beyond reasonable doubt in a court?

    The answer to that is YES. It is not easily done, it shouldn't be done recklessly but the court of public opinion can make that conclusion. Now the court of public opinion shouldn't be carrying out punishments like knee-capping, shooting and expelling but it can reach a reasonable conclusion based on the evidence available.

    Once we all agree on this basic premise, we can move on to discuss the particulars of whether Gerry Adams is/was a member of the IRA without the diversionary tactics of it was never proved in court.


  • Options
    #1259
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    MakeEmLaugh wrote: »
    I won't be responding to any further comments from you in this thread, so you needn't bother responding to this.
    Waaah waaah waaah and I'm taking my ball with me under my jumper so I can put my fingers in my ears.


  • Options
    #1260
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    So, do you believe that Jimmy Saville was wronged?
    Is this a theological question?
    Is Genghis Khan "wronged" if I call him a creep?
    It's a meaningless pile of ****e question. You were a big fan of Saville or something and are worried about his legacy?
    Also, are you against garrotting babies in their sleep? Just so we can all be sure of your position on this I think you should come forward and tell us.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1261
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,795 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    Waaah waaah waaah and I'm taking my ball with me under my jumper so I can put my fingers in my ears.
    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    Is this a theological question?
    Is Genghis Khan "wronged" if I call him a creep?
    It's a meaningless pile of ****e question. You were a big fan of Saville or something and are worried about his legacy?

    As I was saying...
    oscarBravo wrote: »
    ...a knee-jerk, reflexive, defensive, smart-arsed posturing sneer...


Advertisement