Is Sinn Fein right? (The Stack Issue)

blackwhite

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Where did you get the notion that SF would begin touting? Is there anything in the record that shows they said they would do that?
Why are you disappointed that they haven't done something they never said they would do?

Why would they be lectured on this by two parties that came out of a bloody birth and subsquently behaved the exact same way.
The 'who shot Brian Stack' story is just a modern 'who shot Michael Collins' one.

Sums up SF and their supporters in a nutshell.

The behviour sounds identical to the approach of the catholic church and child abusers. "We've dealt with it internally, stop asking us questions."

If it was any other party they'd be screaming from the rafters about cover-ups. When it's SF, different rules apply.

FrancieBrady

blackwhite wrote: »

You were quite happy to cheer-lead Mary Lou doing the same thing about politicians from other parties - including her quite deliberate insinuations about Sean Barrett.

Funny how the tune changes when SF are the ones in the spotlight.

You were not happy with ML doing it once in a blue moon, but silent on it happening again and again in relation to SF.

That warrants a QED . Well done.

FrancieBrady

blackwhite wrote: »

Sums up SF and their supporters in a nutshell.

The behviour sounds identical to the approach of the catholic church and child abusers. "We've dealt with it internally, stop asking us questions."

If it was any other party they'd be screaming from the rafters about cover-ups. When it's SF, different rules apply.

Did you find a quote where they said they would tout?
You only lose credibility if you don't do something you said you would do.

Correct?

Jawgap

tomwaterford wrote: »

These meeting leaking like a sieve :pac: :pac: :pac:


I know if three national policies being discussed that nothing has been released to media/discussed upon

One of which is a massive step aside/snub of a billionaire businessman



Considering they are leaking buckets....perhaps you'll how they are ended

ah now, come on.......there's a world of difference (even though SF wouldn't think so) between boring, in development policy issues and someone saying something inflammatory and newsworthy.

Unlike SF, most parties have factions - alliances are forming and reforming constantly. You said the word 'scum' had been used and went on to suggest that even less parliamentary language might be used behind closed doors and I suggested the PP meetings leak.

You really think that if someone was using that kind of language a rival wouldn't leak it?

Leaking a policy potentially hurts the party (unless it is a policy very closely tied to a personality) and hurts the collective - leaking a quote damages the person who said it - not the worst idea if you are in a multi-seat constituency or jockeying for promotion

......and I'm sure other party whips look at SF and envy their tight, "uno duce una voce" approach to getting out their political message out and the code of omerta that backs it up - in fairness you never see much of anything leaked from them.

FreudianSlippers

Can I just ask a basic logic question with regard to Adams?

Is it true to say that one does not "have information on a crime" on one hand, yet admit knowing someone who either does or at the very least claims to have information on a crime?

As a mere logic question - if you don't know who committed a crime but you know someone who does or potentially does know, don't you therefore "have information on a crime"?

weldoninhio

FrancieBrady wrote: »

After yesterday's shennanigans, yet again, in the Dáil, has the time come when FF, FG, Labour and all other parties and independents, should be looking to ways to bring closure to what happened during the recent conflict/war that involved everybody(even those who ignored it) on this island and many beyond it, instead of single issues like the one currently in the news.

It seems to me that again and again and again there are those who only want to remember selective things that happened. Is Adams right when he says:

The British and Irish (FF/FG) govts want no part in a truth commission. They both know that if the stories of their collusion etc come out that they can no longer vilify SF (Irish govt) and that it would be a huge international scandal (British).

LordSutch

A few questions;

"Why is Gerry Adams still the leader of SinnFein" and when will he stand down?

How & why is he still allowed to lead a political party in the Dail?

...and finally, what do you SF/IRA supporters & followers want to happen regarding your leadership for the future?

johnnyskeleton

FrancieBrady wrote: »

you sure about that? See Post 7.

Ok, on reading it again you did draw a distinction between SF and the IRA there.

But tell me this, how is the IRA's participation relevant to SF, since you were the one who made the connection?

Surely a truth and reconciliation commission would require that senior members of SF who were in the IRA admit that they were?

FrancieBrady

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Ok, on reading it again you did draw a distinction between SF and the IRA there.

But tell me this, how is the IRA's participation relevant to SF, since you were the one who made the connection?

Surely a truth and reconciliation commission would require that senior members of SF who were in the IRA admit that they were?

In my world 'truth' means truth and I would expect everyone to tell it. There is one side in the conflict which refused to take part because ...well make your own mind up about that.

Something that intrigues me about this phenomenon that you might know the answer to.
In every other environment, family, social, down the pub, the court's etc if someone keeps alleging stuff, at some point they will be asked to produce something to back it up. Not so, with Adams or SF.
Stack was taken to meet somebody with info, he was given the info but classically (see similar behaviour on here) it wasn't the info he wanted. (That the IRA sanctioned the killing) so he just gets away with staying it is untrue. No journalist or poster in here thinks it important to ask: well, how do you know it isn't true?'

That would happen no where else.

A Little Pony

A just society would have seen Gerry Adams hanged long ago due to his crimes against humanity. I just hope his eventual death is painful.

FrancieBrady

A Little Pony wrote: »

A just society would have seen Gerry Adams hanged long ago due to his crimes against humanity. I just hope his eventual death is painful.

We got rid of hanging because it is unjust.

Needs Must

Gerry was and still is involved with a terrorist organisation, and continually tries to lie and deflect about this. This is just another classic example.

He has zero credibility left, a complete liar when it comes to these matters and a liability to the rest of his party.

A Little Pony

FrancieBrady wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

A just society would have seen Gerry Adams hanged long ago due to his crimes against humanity. I just hope his eventual death is painful.

We got rid of hanging because it is unjust.

Not when it comes to these kinds of people. I would say the same with the likes of Michael Stone, Lenny Murphy, Billy Wright,  Martin Mcguinness, Gerry Adams, Gerry Kelly, absolute pits of the world.

FrancieBrady

A Little Pony wrote: »

Not when it comes to these kinds of people. I would say the same with the likes of Michael Stone, Lenny Murphy, Billy Wright,  Martin Mcguinness, Gerry Adams, Gerry Kelly, absolute pits of the world.

If somebody hung them that would make them murders.
Hanging is illegal.

A Little Pony

FrancieBrady wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

Not when it comes to these kinds of people. I would say the same with the likes of Michael Stone, Lenny Murphy, Billy Wright,  Martin Mcguinness, Gerry Adams, Gerry Kelly, absolute pits of the world.

If somebody hung them that would make them murders.
Hanging is illegal.

Unfortunately you are right.

FrancieBrady

A Little Pony wrote: »

Unfortunately you are right.

I'm curious, why would somebody who wishes to respond violently to a group of men have a problem with the violence these men are supposed to have committed or condoned?

Can you see the paradox there?

Cazale

Berserker wrote:

I never realised that SF/IRA were at war with the Irish state. Can you give us some more detail about this war?

They wanted to overthrow the British in the six counties and the free state in the 26 counties. Of course they were at war. They just took different forms because their orders precluded offensive actions against forces in the 26 counties.

blackwhite

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Did you find a quote where they said they would tout?
You only lose credibility if you don't do something you said you would do.

Correct?

I'm sure you can point to where I ever made that claim?

Or is it back to the usual distraction tactics?

SF would never pass information on to the Gardai if they felt there wasn't some political or personal gain in it for them.
Yet they'd be the first with torches and pitchforks if there was a suggestion of any other party protecting murderers, rapists and paedophiles in the way SF do.

They, and anyone who defends such behaviour, are utter hypocrites.

FrancieBrady

Cazale wrote: »

They wanted to overthrow the British in the six counties and the free state in the 26 counties. Of course they were at war. They just took different forms because their orders precluded offensive actions against forces in the 26 counties.

I don't think anyone in the IRA would disagree that they were opposed the Irish government.
At war with them? No.

Jawgap

Cazale wrote: »

They wanted to overthrow the British in the six counties and the free state in the 26 counties. Of course they were at war. They just took different forms because their orders precluded offensive actions against forces in the 26 counties.

.....and did that, in actuality, mean they didn't kill Irish police, soldiers and, in the case of Brian Stack, prison officers?

FrancieBrady

blackwhite wrote: »

I'm sure you can point to where I ever made that claim?

Or is it back to the usual distraction tactics?

SF would never pass information on to the Gardai if they felt there wasn't some political or personal gain in it for them.
Yet they'd be the first with torches and pitchforks if there was a suggestion of any other party protecting murderers, rapists and paedophiles in the way SF do.

They, and anyone who defends such behaviour, are utter hypocrites.

How can you be hypocritical for not doing something you never said you would do in the first place?
Even Stack had to admit that Adams did what he said he would do.

The crimes/actions of the fathers and mother's and grandparents of members of FF and FG commited during the birth of the state were locked away under the Secrets act for decades.

Why do you think that was?

marienbad

FrancieBrady wrote: »

How can you be hypocritical for not doing something you never said you would do in the first place?
Even Stack had to admit that Adams did what he said he would do.

The crimes/actions of the fathers and mother's and grandparents of members of FF and FG commited during the birth of the state were locked away under the Secrets act for decades.

Why do you think that was?

Francie , I think you continually miss the point . The fact that GA was able to arrange for the Stack brothers to travel in a sealed vehicle to meet this unknown figure is enough to disqualify him and SF from serving in government - ever .

blackwhite

FrancieBrady wrote: »

How can you be hypocritical for not doing something you never said you would do in the first place?
Even Stack had to admit that Adams did what he said he would do.

The crimes/actions of the fathers and mother's and grandparents of members of FF and FG commited during the birth of the state were locked away under the Secrets act for decades.

Why do you think that was?

Are you trying to drag this down another of your "invent a definition" wormholes?

They, and their cheerleaders, are hypocrites for expecting to be above criticism when behaving in a way that they would criticise anyone else for doing.

One rule for SF and their IRA buddies, but a different set of rules for everyone else.


One can only imagine the hysterics from Pearse and Mary Lou if Enda Kenny was found to have had withheld information from a Garda investigation (let alone withheld info on rapist and a child-abusing paedophiles). But when Gerry does it then it's a-okay

FrancieBrady

marienbad wrote: »

Francie , I think you continually miss the point . The fact that GA was able to arrange for the Stack brothers to travel in a sealed vehicle to meet this unknown figure is enough to disqualify him and SF from serving in government - ever .

Why?
The conflict/war that only one side is to blame for, again? Drat!

Jawgap

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Why?
The conflict/war that only one side is to blame for, again? Drat!

No, because the people involved were likely complicit in the murder of public servants doing their job - loyalty to the party is one thing, loyalty to the party at the expense of loyalty to those who serve the public interest is wrong.

marienbad

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Why?
The conflict/war that only one side is to blame for, again? Drat!

Because most people don't see the country in the same terms you do . They don't see ( and lots don't care ) about your conflict/war terminology .

They see things in the most basic terms of what is good for them and their families . And they demand a certain level of credibility/trust in their politicians , a fairly low level it must be said .

In fact it is a fairly low bar as the likes of Lowry et al demonstrates , but whether you like it or not GA and SF fails that test every time with a huge number of people .

A Little Pony

I read that Gerry Adams has been President of Sinn Fein for over 32 years. That is just unbelievable, a party in a democracy having a leader for that long. It shows just what is wrong with Sinn Fein, a mafia type mentality still exists. They need to get rid of this fool.

FrancieBrady

Jawgap wrote: »

No, because the people involved were likely complicit in the murder of public servants doing their job - loyalty to the party is one thing, loyalty to the party at the expense of loyalty to those who serve the public interest is wrong.

There were many people 'complicit' in the conflict/war.
In post conflict situations you cannot seek retribution against one party to that conflict.
That is why there is a need for a structured process with everybody involved.

You can get down of that high horse when you can explain why it was ok to lock away the details of the deeds done to achieve independence and what happened after and it is not ok to seek to do the same thing here.

Jawgap

FrancieBrady wrote: »

There were many people 'complicit' in the conflict/war.
In post conflict situations you cannot seek retribution against one party to that conflict.
That is why there is a need for a structured process with everybody involved.

You can get down of that high horse when you can explain why it was ok to lock away the details of the deeds done to achieve independence and what happened after and it is not ok to seek to do the same thing here.

I'm sure there were and I'm sure you can't.......but you also can't change how people think and people outside Sf think very little of Adams. His recent behaviour and statements in respect of the murder of Brian Stack and his willingness to stand by others who've made similar statements does not sit well with people who prefer their public representatives not to be trailing around the country in blacked out vans to meet people of questionable character.

As for your second point, so what? It was done and it can't be undone - people can bleat on about unequal treatment and they probably have a point but what have SF done to deserve the trust of the people?

FrancieBrady

Jawgap wrote: »

I'm sure there were and I'm sure you can't.......but you also can't change how people think and people outside Sf think very little of Adams. His recent behaviour and statements in respect of the murder of Brian Stack and his willingness to stand by others who've made similar statements does not sit well with people who prefer their public representatives not to be trailing around the country in blacked out vans to meet people of questionable character.

As for your second point, so what? It was done and it can't be undone - people can bleat on about unequal treatment and they probably have a point but what have SF done to deserve the trust of the people?

Adams was thanked by Stack. He had no problem saying that last night without the caveat he added today when it emerged that the Gardai have the name and there is no story.
He now claims Adams insisted on him thanking him publicly
There is one story changing here all the time and it isn't SF's.

Again I ask, what have FG or FF done in the 20 yrs since the GFA to progress resolutions for all victims. If you find anything measure it against this political football and victim exploitation

marienbad

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Again I ask, what have FG or FF done in the 20 yrs since the GFA to progress resolutions for all victims. If you find anything measure it against this political football and victim exploitation

They have helped bring peace and prosperity to all communities , the first job of all political parties I would have thought .

Without that backdrop we cannot have resolution to anything

LordSutch

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Jawgap wrote: »

No, because the people involved were likely complicit in the murder of public servants doing their job - loyalty to the party is one thing, loyalty to the party at the expense of loyalty to those who serve the public interest is wrong.

There were many people 'complicit' in the conflict/war.
In post conflict situations you cannot seek retribution against one party to that conflict.
That is why there is a need for a structured process with everybody involved.

You can get down of that high horse when you can explain why it was ok to lock away the details of the deeds done to achieve independence and what happened after and it is not ok to seek to do the same thing here.

Ah yes the old smoke screen trick, blurr the picture and move the goal posts, typical Shinner trick. As it happens, in this case Mr Stack was not part of the IRA s dirty "war" or was he? Was the PIRA running their terrorist campaign on the ROI or not? and was Mr Stack one of their "legitimate" targets?
Adams, Ferris & Co are a nasty lot and they are poisoning politics with their twisted logic.

Jawgap

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Adams was thanked by Stack. He had no problem saying that last night without the caveat he added today when it emerged that the Gardai have the name and there is no story.
He now claims Adams insisted on him thanking him publicly
There is one story changing here all the time and it isn't SF's.

Again I ask, what have FG or FF done in the 20 yrs since the GFA to progress resolutions for all victims. If you find anything measure it against this political football and victim exploitation

Well it sounds like Mr stack may have a problem if he ever decides to run for election.

And seriously? The GFA? SF want credit for something they did 2 decades ago?

Their strategy of "don't hit me I'm holding the peace process" has zero resonance with people just trying to get on with getting on.

They really would do better to stop constantly harping on about the past. While the rest of us worry about the future.

FrancieBrady

LordSutch wrote: »

Ah yes the old smoke screen trick, blurr the picture and move the goal posts, typical Shinner trick. As it happens, in this case Mr Stack was not part of the IRA s dirty "war" or was he? Was the PIRA running their terrorist campaign on the ROI or not? and was Mr Stack one of their "legitimate" targets?
Adams, Ferris & Co are a nasty lot and they are poisoning politics with their twisted logic.

Would you have a count of the number of people killed on all sides who were not legitimate targets. How often have you heard FG or FF call for inquiries into the people who killed scores on the streets of Dublin and Monaghan and elsewhere?

That is what my point is, when does this constant and always pointless waste of time and victim exploitation stop?

A Little Pony

Jawgap wrote: »

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Adams was thanked by Stack. He had no problem saying that last night without the caveat he added today when it emerged that the Gardai have the name and there is no story.
He now claims Adams insisted on him thanking him publicly  :)
There is one story changing here all the time and it isn't SF's.

Again I ask, what have FG or FF done in the 20 yrs since the GFA to progress resolutions for all victims. If you find anything measure it against this political football and victim exploitation

Well it sounds like Mr stack may have a problem if he ever decides to run for election.

And seriously? The GFA? SF want credit for something they did 2 decades ago?

Their strategy of "don't hit me I'm  holding the peace process" has zero resonance with people just trying to get on with getting on.

They really would do better to stop constantly harping on about the past. While the rest of us worry about the future.

People should stop giving Sinn Fein credit for the GFA. They surrendered in 1998 and they know it, they had no choice but to enter the political arena. The PIRA was riddled with informers at the time and was becoming less of a threat compared to the 70s and 80s.

ForstalDave

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Would you have a count of the number of people killed on all sides who were not legitimate targets. How often have you heard FG or FF call for inquiries into the people who killed scores on the streets of Dublin and Monaghan and elsewhere?

That is what my point is, when does this constant and always pointless waste of time and victim exploitation stop?

How is the family of a murdered man seeking answers and justice victim exploration?

marienbad

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Would you have a count of the number of people killed on all sides who were not legitimate targets. How often have you heard FG or FF call for inquiries into the people who killed scores on the streets of Dublin and Monaghan and elsewhere?

That is what my point is, when does this constant and always pointless waste of time and victim exploitation stop?

I suppose when those involved or 'in the know' are no longer involved in politics . That is the reality of it .

When will SF forget that Bertie etc were members of FF or Lowry a member of FG or Wallace is a tax dodger ? The answer is never .

Its politics .

tomwaterford

ForstalDave wrote: »

How is the family of a murdered man seeking answers and justice victim exploration?

Because you know,I know it, and those exploiting him know it

The IRA are never going to give up its members like that.

Either he is extremely naive or being put up to it.....by those unknown for there own perverse pleasure??

ForstalDave

tomwaterford wrote: »

ForstalDave wrote: »

How is the family of a murdered man seeking answers and justice victim exploration?

Because you know,I know it, and those exploiting him know it

The IRA are never going to give up its members like that.

Either he is extremely naive or being put up to it.....by those unknown for there own perverse pleasure??

And that there is why SF and GA have issues, the attitude towards people who have suffered such a loss is sickening

Id not give up if it was my Dad and id not give a F if people thought id never get anywhere either id still ask and push for answers till my dying day because id want to know

tomwaterford

ForstalDave wrote: »

And that there is why SF and GA have issues, the attitude towards people who have suffered such a loss is sickening

Id not give up if it was my Dad and id not give a F if people thought id never get anywhere either id still ask and push for answers till my dying day because id want to know

Aye....but you've not sworn an oath of silence/service and have the tgreat of death hanging over if you break it


Not in 1921 would the IRA give up tom Barry....they are hardly going to change their rules now??



And you'll have plenty in the country Whatll encourage you in your somewhat fruitless mission nonetheless

ForstalDave

Doesn't matter if its tough to get answers and it doesnt matter if he has support what matters is asking the questions snd highlighting that those with answers are ignoring the issue, justice doesn't have to be easy bit it has to be pursued no matter how hard it is to get

FrancieBrady

ForstalDave wrote: »

And that there is why SF and GA have issues, the attitude towards people who have suffered such a loss is sickening

Id not give up if it was my Dad and id not give a F if people thought id never get anywhere either id still ask and push for answers till my dying day because id want to know

He got the info he wanted and because it wasn't what he wanted to hear he rejected it.

In 2013 he wanted information about his fathers death;, he was given that. Now he wants justice and he expects somebody who has been totally consistent, clear and concise on why he can't assist in that, to help him. It was spelt out to him what he would get in 2013 and he accepted that. What has changed?

ForstalDave

He still doesn't have justice abd it doesn't matter if he gets the answers, it does matter if the leader of a major political party has lied or withheld information

Now I don't know that he has and till it is proved one way or the other I will reserve my opinion buti cant fault Stack for wanting answers even if he knows he will likely never get them or for him pointing out GA if he believes he knows more the he is telling

FrancieBrady

ForstalDave wrote: »

He still doesn't have justice abd it doesn't matter if he gets the answers, it does matter if the leader of a major political party has lied or withheld information

Now I don't know that he has and till it is proved one way or the other I will reserve my opinion buti cant fault Stack for wanting answers even if he knows he will likely never get them or for him pointing out GA if he believes he knows more the he is telling

But Adams has always said why he cannot enter into a process of naming people.

What would happen if he did or if a loyalist leader did, do you think?

ForstalDave

If he has information but feels he can not share it then he should resign, not thats just my opinion people are free to form their own

FrancieBrady

ForstalDave wrote: »

If he has information but feels he can not share it then he should resign, not thats just my opinion people are free to form their own

The people who elected him and his party are off the opinion that he shouldn't and they support his parties sensible proposals (because this way is patently pointless and divisive) to bring resolution to everyone.

But it seems people are happy that FG FF exploit these people to deflect.

marienbad

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The people who elected him and his party are off the opinion that he shouldn't and they support his parties sensible proposals (because this way is patently pointless and divisive) to bring resolution to everyone.

But it seems people are happy that FG FF exploit these people to deflect.

But who do SF aspire to represent ? just those who vote for them or everyone ?

FrancieBrady

marienbad wrote: »

But who do SF aspire to represent ? just those who vote for them or everyone ?

Those who elected them and those who agree with some of the things they want, which would be people like me.

marienbad

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Those who elected them and those who agree with some of the things they want, which would be people like me.

And there you have it in a nutshell Francie , until they aspire to represent all of us , including those who don't vote for them they will always remain a niche party

A Little Pony

tomwaterford wrote: »

ForstalDave wrote: »

How is the family of a murdered man seeking answers and justice victim exploration?

Because you know,I know it, and those exploiting him know it

The IRA are never going to give up its members like that.

Either he is extremely naive or being put up to it.....by those unknown for there own perverse pleasure??

His dad was murdered by those cowardly dirt bags. I don't blame him confronting the evil that is Gerry Adams and Sinn Fein.