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

Lawlesz

MakeEmLaugh wrote: »

.

EVIDENCE GERRY ADAMS WAS IN THE IRA

* The fact that there are photographs of Adams at an IRA funeral in Belfast in 1971, as part of the cortege, wearing an IRA uniform and standing beside Martin Meehan (a man who never denied he was a member of the IRA).

Have not read the whole thread, but am I the only one who finds the OPs assertion that Adams is dressed in IRA uniform a bit odd? Did you have to dress in a suit and tie to be in the IRA?

maccored

If they are going to arrest him in the middle of an election (after of course, ther person concerned presents themselves voluntarily) and then hold him for 96 hours, they'd want to have something to show for it. They've embarrassed themselves, full stop

jmayo wrote: »

He did say he was available for questioning did he not ?
Or did he say he was available for questioing, just not between x date and y date ?
Maybe he should have ruled out sundays as well seen as he likes to go to the odd GAA match. :rolleyes:

So using your argument police forces shouldn't bother questioning most suspects lest they be embarassed.

alastair

Happyman42 wrote: »

They made a spurious arrest in the middle of an election campaign?

No. They interviewed a man implicated in a murder.

Happyman42 wrote: »

Based on the same flimsy evidence you had?

Neither of us knows what evidence they have.

Happyman42 wrote: »

Even the former secretary of state could see and call it what it was...inadvisable.

Luckily the PSNI are not subject to political influence.

Happyman42 wrote: »

Yes we know you would like to think a youth branch of SF are not part of their 'community'. But they are.

LOL. The innocence! A SF mural, by SF, for SF propaganda purposes.

Happyman42 wrote: »

Ah yes, your justice for some campaign. Keep it up.

Given that you can't acknowledge she was murdered, I'm not too fussed about your feelings on it.

Happyman42 wrote: »

Drag his private life in now, any mud will do.

Just reflecting on the quality of his 'duty'.

alastair

Lawlesz wrote: »

Have not read the whole thread, but am I the only one who finds the OPs assertion that Adams is dressed in IRA uniform a bit odd? Did you have to dress in a suit and tie to be in the IRA?

If you're in an IRA colour party you do.

Psst - the fatigues are equally silly costumes - that they don't wear except for PR purposes as well.

alastair

maccored wrote: »

Once again you want me to take a thread full of 'he's in the IRA! I have no evidence to back that up though!' gossip as fact? So in your world gossip is fact, and a person can be not guilty but also not innocent. Wow.

Or don't read the thread - your choice, but don't pretend to know what you're talking about if you haven't.

oscarBravo

maccored wrote: »

For some reason you're in heated debate with people over something you seem to agree with them on -ie Adams didnt do anything wrong.

I didn't say he didn't do anything wrong. Do you never get tired of making stuff up that it suits you to believe I've said?

maccored

Also if you're at a funeral too. Many people wear white shirts, black ties to funerals.

alastair wrote: »

If you're in an IRA colour party you do.

Psst - the fatigues are equally silly costumes - that they don't wear except for PR purposes as well.

alastair

maccored wrote: »

Also if you're at a funeral too. Many people wear white shirts, black ties to funerals.

Berets too - especially if it matches the rest of the IRA man in your colour party.

maccored

err ... yeah you did. well, you said 'I'm not saying Adams did anything'. Now you are saying you didnt say he didnt do anything wrong. Which is it? Did he do something or did he not do something?

oscarBravo wrote: »

I didn't say he didn't do anything wrong. Do you never get tired of making stuff up that it suits you to believe I've said?

Lawlesz

alastair wrote: »

If you're in an IRA colour party you do.

Psst - the fatigues are equally silly costumes - that they don't wear except for PR purposes as well.

Ok. So what about Republican Flute Bands, you see marching at Easter and other commemorations. They dress exactly as Adams did in that picture. Damn them pesky 11 year old IRA volunteers.

maccored

Yes, Berets were of course invented only for the IRA. You are an amazing treasure trove of information alastair.

alastair wrote: »

Berets too - especially if it matches the rest of the IRA man in your colour party.

alastair

Lawlesz wrote: »

Ok. So what about Republican Flute Bands, you see marching at Easter and other commemorations. They dress exactly as Adams did in that picture. Damn them pesky 11 year old IRA volunteers.

I'm not seeing either flutes or 11 year olds in the photo - just a number of IRA men in an IRA colour party.,

alastair

maccored wrote: »

Yes, Berets were of course invented only for the IRA. You are an amazing treasure trove of information alastair.

Those IRA men are certainly wearing them. I don't recall claiming that they were invented for the IRA though.

oscarBravo

maccored wrote: »

err ... yeah you did.

Err... no, I didn't.

well, you said 'I'm not saying Adams did anything'. Now you are saying you didnt say he didnt do anything wrong. Which is it? Did he do something or did he not do something?

I'm sure he's done lots of things.

Lawlesz

alastair wrote: »

I'm not seeing either flutes or 11 year olds in the photo - just a number of IRA men in an IRA colour party.,

That's fine. You see a number of IRA men at a funeral. Same as myself. I also see Gerry Adams. Do you see him too? Or are you still certain that him standing so close to these boys means he was in the IRA?

alastair

Lawlesz wrote: »

That's fine. You see a number of IRA men at a funeral. Same as myself. I also see Gerry Adams. Do you see him too? Or are you still certain that him standing so close to these boys means he was in the IRA?

Given the rest of the evidence that he was a member of the IRA - yes.

Lawlesz

alastair wrote: »

Given the rest of the evidence that he was a member of the IRA - yes.

What evidence? The drivel from the first post?

That some journalists said he was. Ok...

That he was part of a 'Republican' delegation that met the British Government? Adams, even at that time was a very well thought of member of the Republican movement, known to be a good strategist and thinker. Would have been silly of the military men not to take him. If I'm not mistaken, they took a solicitor to some of these meetings too. Was he a fully signed up member of the IRA?

alastair

Lawlesz wrote: »

What evidence? The drivel from the first post?

That some journalists said he was. Ok...

That he was part of a 'Republican' delegation that met the British Government? Adams, even at that time was a very well thought of member of the Republican movement, known to be a good strategist and thinker. Would have been silly of the military men not to take him. If I'm not mistaken, they took a solicitor to some of these meetings too. Was he a fully signed up member of the IRA?

Read the thread.

Son Of A Vidic

alastair wrote: »

You believe a conviction would be 'irrefutable'?

Of course it should be. But why do you ask? Do you think circumstantial would suffice? Personally, I prefer to subscribe to the principle of beyond reasonable doubt. Thankfully silly, speculative and biased based evidence isn't usally sufficent to convict. Although many in the Nationalist community, could justifiable disagree with me on that latter point.

alastair wrote: »

You're honestly claiming you believe he wasn't an IRA member?

I think you need to read what I posted again. I never made any comment or expressed any opinion, on whether I thought if he was or wasn't an IRA member. My post solely mentioned that nobody has produced any irrefutable evidence to prove their claims and thus convict him accdordingly.

Lawlesz

alastair wrote: »

Read the thread.

I've read most of it thanks, but to be honest one of your posts is enough, as you have pretty much repeated the same mantra the whole way through.

"He worse a shirt and tie to a Republican funeral, and stood close to known IRA men, lock him up".

I would imagine most people attending a Republican funeral would come within touching distance of IRA volunteers, it doesn't make them volunteers.

If your evidence is so strong, maybe you should contact the Gardai or the PSNI to make them aware, seen as they have never found anything on him?

Happyman42

alastair wrote: »

Sure - neither of them dispute that - so you don't really need any evidence beyond their openness about it.


Membership of Ulster Resistance isn't and wasn't illegal. Possibly they weren't proscribed because they never killed anyone.

They may not have been proscribed but have been linked to illegal activity such as robbing the Northern Bank and gun running.
Has Robinson a a self acknowledged leader, ever been arrested and questioned about that, during an election campaign or otherwise?

Your double standards and hypocrisy are clear for all to see here.

alastair

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

Of course it should be. But why do you ask? Do you think circumstantial would suffice? Personally, I prefer to subscribe to the principle of beyond reasonable doubt. Thankfully silly, speculative and biased based evidence isn't usally sufficent to convict. Although many in the Nationalist community, could justifiable disagree with me on that latter point.

It wouldn't. At least not for those who are prepared to throw accusations of 'political policing' at the questioning of a man implicated in a murder. And any case would be based on circumstantial evidence and testimony - there's no physical evidence likely to arise.

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

I think you need to read what I posted again. I never made any comment or expressed any opinion, on whether I thought if he was or wasn't an IRA member. My post solely mentioned that nobody has produced any irrefutable evidence to prove their claims and thus convict him accdordingly.

I'm asking the question. Not claiming you've said anything.

Godge

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

Of course it should be. But why do you ask? Do you think circumstantial would suffice? Personally, I prefer to subscribe to the principle of beyond reasonable doubt. Thankfully silly, speculative and biased based evidence isn't usally sufficent to convict. Although many in the Nationalist community, could justifiable disagree with me on that latter point.

.

Do you also believe in the innocence of Sean Fitzpatrick and O.J. Simpson?

alastair

Happyman42 wrote: »

They may not have been proscribed but have been linked to illegal activity such as robbing the Northern Bank and gun running.
Has Robinson a a self acknowledged leader, ever been arrested and questioned about that, during an election campaign or otherwise?

Your double standards and hypocrisy are clear for all to see here.

Still not seeing any evidence tbh. You want to question Robinson about a robbery committed by the UVF?

Godge

Happyman42 wrote: »

They may not have been proscribed but have been linked to illegal activity such as robbing the Northern Bank and gun running.
Has Robinson a a self acknowledged leader, ever been arrested and questioned about that, during an election campaign or otherwise?

Your double standards and hypocrisy are clear for all to see here.

Linked by who? You?

There is ample circumstantial evidence available to the public that would certainly warrant the questioning of Gerry Adams in respect of IRA membership. Whether the police have more (or other evidence exonerating him) remains to be seen. The degree of co-operation given by Adams in answering the questions also remains to be seen (given his previous performances in court in relation to the incest case, I hold out little hope of truth from him). However, all of the posturing by McGuinness cannot hide the fact that this is something the police should have done years ago.

As for those nameless others you are accusing, let you present the pictures and evidence of their criminal involvement.

Dazzler88

Phoebas wrote: »

Of course participation in a colour party at a funeral is an indication of membership of an illegal organisation. Its not concrete proof for sure, but a pretty strong indication.

I know a man who works the door at Stanford Bridge but he cant get me a game

I am not a republican but common sense would suggest after years of MI5 and other organisations spying the Republican movement. if Gerry was in the IRA, they would have evidence to the same.

alastair

Dazzler88 wrote: »

I know a man who works the door at Stanford Bridge but he cant get me a game

I am not a republican but common sense would suggest after years of MI5 and other organisations spying the Republican movement. if Gerry was in the IRA, they would have evidence to the same.

They do have evidence of the same - as the wikileaks cables make clear. And just as they won't prosecute McGuinness for membership, they won't prosecute Adams.

maccored

in your eyes just what is this thread? To me its full of unfounded allegations and gossip, but to you it seems its the Thread of All Truths or something. "but don't pretend to know what you're talking about if you haven't" ... oh my my.

Come up with some provable proof of Adams IRA membership or admit you dont have any.

alastair wrote: »

Or don't read the thread - your choice, but don't pretend to know what you're talking about if you haven't.

Happyman42

alastair wrote: »

They do have evidence of the same - as the wikileaks cables make clear. And just as they won't prosecute McGuinness for membership, they won't prosecute Adams.

But they'll arrest and question him for four days in the middle of an election campaign?

You are making eminent sense alright.

maccored

Is this more insight into the world of alastair? Im sure if they had the proof they would have used it. Conspiracy forum is thataway ...

alastair wrote: »

They do have evidence of the same - as the wikileaks cables make clear. And just as they won't prosecute McGuinness for membership, they won't prosecute Adams.