Is Sinn Fein right? (The Stack Issue)

Seth Brundle

Just checking, your post changes direction away from Gerry protecting his paedophile brother whilst ignoring his niece, the victim. Are we done with discussing that now that it's getting too embarrassing?

Itssoeasy

FrancieBrady wrote: »

There is really no point having an argument about what Brian Stack's murder was a part of. The important thing here is that the IRA and SF consider it part of and as a result of the conflict/war. There will be no more info outside of a truth recovery process.
It's now up to the 2 governments to consider if the 'victims' are important enough to find ways of dealing with these issues.

And of course there were politically motivated kneecappings as well as others.

Well isn't this what this thread is about ? Brian stack ? Just because the IRA and SF consider it apart of the conflict doesn't make it so Francie. so you're saying that Brian stacks murder was justified because of a conflict taking place in Northern Ireland ?

Why would a murder in the Republic of Ireland have anything to do with a truth recovery process for the north ?

FrancieBrady

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Oh stop it for Christ sake. Enda kenny or Michael Martin for that matter didn't bring Austin stack to meet a "trusted confidant" of Gerry Adams in 2013. Why can't ye stop trying to deflect from something that has nothing to do with either the Taoiseach or the FF leader.

Has Enda and his government been hypocritical about victims of abuse and rape?
Yes they have.

Has Adams addressed the mistakes he made? Yes he has.

I have already said that I think he should have gone over this issue. But he didn't and a sizeable number of his constituency have accepted what he has said and given him a mandate. And his party also.

Please don't say that they are all intimidated into this.

FrancieBrady

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Well isn't this what this thread is about ? Brian stack ? Just because the IRA and SF consider it apart of the conflict doesn't make it so Francie. so you're saying that Brian stacks murder was justified because of a conflict taking place in Northern Ireland ?

Why would a murder in the Republic of Ireland have anything to do with a truth recovery process for the north ?

Do any of you read the thread before wading in?

I never justified his killing.

I do think it was as a result of the conflict simply because neither the victim or the killer would have been there had there been no conflict/war.

Itssoeasy

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Has Enda and his government been hypocritical about victims of abuse and rape?
Yes they have.

Has Adams addressed the mistakes he made? Yes he has.

I have already said that I think he should have gone over this issue. But he didn't and a sizeable number of his constituency have accepted what he has said and given him a mandate. And his party also.

Please don't say that they are all intimidated into this.

I didn't say they hadn't.

No Adams hasn't adressed his mistakes because he refuses to acknowledge his past.

I didnt and won't say they were intimidated into this at all. Don't assume to know what I'm going to say.

atticu

oscarBravo wrote: »

Genuine question: what agreement is that?

Any answer to this question?

I would like to know.

Thank you.

Itssoeasy

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Do any of you read the thread before wading in?

I never justified his killing.

I do think it was as a result of the conflict simply because neither the victim or the killer would have been there had there been no conflict/war.

Oh yes I've read an awful lot of this thread. There wasn't a conflict/war in dublin in the 1980s so how was Brian stack a part of a conflict/war ? He was just doing his job as a prison officer Francie.

Full Marx

To return to the topic at hand I think it is relevant to mention Martin Ferris' comments about Stack in his book. He alleges that Stack was a particularly vindictive individual who delighted in directing violence and thought nothing of beating a prisoner with his baton when said prisoner was being restrained by other officers rendering him defenseless.

Prison officers themselves condemned the brutal conditions and how they were forced into visiting violence upon the prisoners:

In 1984 the Assistant General Secretary of the Prison Officers Association, Tom Hoare strongly criticized conditions within the prison stating that staff were forced by senior management in the prison to use excessive force against prisoners. He also criticized the then Governor of Portlaoise Prison, William Reilly, and the Minister of Justice Michael Noonan stating "I accuse the minister of negligence in this area. I accuse the management of Portlaoise Prison of being indifferent to complaints. I would hate to be a prisoner making a complaint".[6] At the Prison Officers Association 1984 conference a delegate from Portlaoise Prison, Larry O'Neill, told the conference: "If Hitler wanted generals today he would find plenty of them in Portlaoise. After the war the Nazis said many of them were doing their duty and that is what the management in Portlaoise are saying today".

There are umpteen books about Long Kesh but none about the republicans in Portlaoise, it would be a fascinating topic for any academic in the area to take up.

It is good that such times are by and large in the past.

FrancieBrady

marienbad wrote: »

This constant whataboutery is just demeaning to everyone at this stage .

Francie you need to get real here , GA protected a paedophile for nearly 10 years and was aware that he was in proximity to children . It really doesn't get much worse than that .

Let others answer for what they did and let GA answer for what he did or didn't do

Adams did address what he did and more importantly, didn't do in relation to his niece and brother. Two inquiries found that he did nothing unlawful. But he did handle it wrongly in my opinion.

Wheeliebin30

Full Marx wrote: »

To return to the topic at hand I think it is relevant to mention Martin Ferris' comments about Stack in his book. He alleges that Stack was a particularly vindictive individual who delighted in directing violence and thought nothing of beating a prisoner with his baton when said prisoner was being restrained by other officers rendering him defenseless.

Prison officers themselves condemned the brutal conditions and how they were forced into visiting violence upon the prisoners:


There are umpteen books about Long Kesh but none about the republicans in Portlaoise, it would be a fascinating topic for any academic in the area to take up.

It is good that such times are by and large in the past.

And there we have it.

The mask slips.

marienbad

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Adams did address what he did and more importantly, didn't do in relation to his niece and brother. Two inquiries found that he did nothing unlawful. But he did handle it wrongly in my opinion.

Neither did Daly Cumiskey et al , though they all have something else in common - a lawyer always close at hand .

Full Marx

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

And there we have it.

The mask slips.

Martin Ferris mask? It is what he says in his book which was published more than a decade ago.

FrancieBrady

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Oh yes I've read an awful lot of this thread. There wasn't a conflict/war in dublin in the 1980s so how was Brian stack a part of a conflict/war ? He was just doing his job as a prison officer Francie.

I just posted why I think it was a part of the conflict/war. The Irish state involved itself in the conflict/war, it was a target on a lot of occaisions with bombs, killings etc taking place in a lot of towns and cities.

But my opinion is not the important one. Research what SF and the IRA have to say.

FrancieBrady

atticu wrote: »

Any answer to this question?

I would like to know.

Thank you.

Is this addressed to me?
If so the agreement is the Stormont House Agreement. Which stems directly from intergovernmental dealings under the GFA

oscarBravo

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Is this addressed to me?
If so the agreement is the Stormont House Agreement. Which stems directly from intergovernmental dealings under the GFA

I don't see mention of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission in there.

FrancieBrady

oscarBravo wrote: »

I don't see mention of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission in there.

Truth recovery process.

I am not sure what issue we are debating here. I have obviously missed a post. Can you link me to the original post? On a phone here and moving between pages and posting links is difficult

Itssoeasy

Full Marx wrote: »

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

And there we have it.

The mask slips.

Martin Ferris mask? It is what he says in his book which was published more than a decade ago.

He has since stated he regretted saying what he said is his book.

oscarBravo

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Truth recovery process.

I don't see that either. I see an Information and Reconciliation Group, but it doesn't sound like what you've described as a Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

I am not sure what issue we are debating here. I have obviously missed a post. Can you link me to the original post? On a phone here and moving between pages and posting links is difficult

You said that the governments had signed up to a commitment to a truth process. I wasn't aware that they had, so I asked when they had done so.

The Stormont House Agreement doesn't have the word "truth" anywhere in it.

Full Marx

Itssoeasy wrote: »

He has since stated he regretted saying what he said is his book.

No doubt because it has proven awkward. He hasn't said it wasnt true though has he?

billy few mates

Your first post in this one thread was at 09:18 this morning Francie, fourteen hours later and your still posting in this thread. In that fourteen hours you've posted sixty responses challenging or addressing every single post that was made by every other contributor. The vast majority of those responses were made within five minutes of the comment, the longest response time between posts was twenty minutes, all this in just in one thread about Gerry Adams and the murder of Brian Stack.
Remind us again how you have no affiliation with SF even though the evidence from today's activities on this one thread alone suggests your role in defending them is more than a full time occupation?
Can you see how some people might have difficulties accepting your bone fides as a neutral observer...?

FrancieBrady

oscarBravo wrote: »

I don't see that either. I see an Information and Reconciliation Group, but it doesn't sound like what you've described as a Truth and Reconciliation Commission. You said that the governments had signed up to a commitment to a truth process. I wasn't aware that they had, so I asked when they had done so.

The Stormont House Agreement doesn't have the word "truth" anywhere in it.

I can't get the document open to find the name of the Commission but it isn't the one you named there. It was to be modelled on the disappeared commission and had the word Recovery in it.
Information on how loved ones where killed in both jurisdictions was to be made available.
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/agreement-reached-in-northern-ireland-talks-1.2047479

I accept that I didn't name them correctly, couldn't remember as it all became a dead duck very quickly when the British rowed back and said they wouldn't fully disclose after all.

FrancieBrady

Full Marx wrote: »

To return to the topic at hand I think it is relevant to mention Martin Ferris' comments about Stack in his book. He alleges that Stack was a particularly vindictive individual who delighted in directing violence and thought nothing of beating a prisoner with his baton when said prisoner was being restrained by other officers rendering him defenseless.

Prison officers themselves condemned the brutal conditions and how they were forced into visiting violence upon the prisoners:


There are umpteen books about Long Kesh but none about the republicans in Portlaoise, it would be a fascinating topic for any academic in the area to take up.

It is good that such times are by and large in the past.

I did some research (the google kind) on Tom Hoare's statement and couldn't find anything. Was there ever any follow up to this? What did Noonan say or do?

johnnyskeleton

billy few mates wrote: »

Your first post in this one thread was at 09:18 this morning Francie, fourteen hours later and your still posting in this thread. In that fourteen hours you've posted sixty responses challenging or addressing every single post that was made by every other contributor. The vast majority of those responses were made within five minutes of the comment, the longest response time between posts was twenty minutes, all this in just in one thread about Gerry Adams and the murder of Brian Stack.
Remind us again how you have no affiliation with SF even though the evidence from today's activities on this one thread alone suggests your role in defending them is more than a full time occupation?
Can you see how some people might have difficulties accepting your bone fides as a neutral observer...?

Mod note:

Please attack the post not the poster.

FrancieBrady

The Stormont House Agreement mentioned earlier for anyone who wants to read it.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/390672/Stormont_House_Agreement.pdf


In the 20 years since the GFA there has been plenty of work done on truth recovery and transitional justice, but yet again, the two governments have sat firmly on their hands in doing anything practical on this. The very thing that led to the conflict exploding in the first place.

http://opac.oireachtas.ie/AWData/Library3/FATRdoclaid210116_100026.pdf

For those who think that southern Ireland was not involved in the conflict/war, it is not us on this thread you need to convince or change opinion, it is your own government as they have clearly included southern Ireland in any remit/proposal on information recovery or transitional justice processes.

Article 4
Definitions
For the purposes of this Agreement:
1. A ‘death within the remit of the Commission’ means a death which was
wholly caused by physical injuries or physical illness that were the direct result of
an act of violence or force carried out in Ireland, the United Kingdom or the rest
of Europe between 1 January 1966 and 10 April 1998:
(a) for a reason related to the constitutional status of Northern Ireland
or to political or sectarian hostility between persons there; or
(b) in connection with preventing, investigating, or otherwise dealing
with the consequences of, an act intended to be done, or done, for a
reason related to the constitutional status of Northern Ireland or to
political or sectarian hostility between persons there.

blackwhite

Full Marx wrote: »

Martin Ferris mask? It is what he says in his book which was published more than a decade ago.

Shocking alright that someone who is implicated in the planning of the murder would make claims (a decade after the crime) to try and discredit his victim.


It's almost as shocking as the amount of posters on here who on one hand want to whinge about "exploitation" of victims, but at the same time are thrilled to engage in a bit of victim-bashing if it can be used to defend their favourite political party.

blackwhite

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I just posted why I think it was a part of the conflict/war. The Irish state involved itself in the conflict/war, it was a target on a lot of occaisions with bombs, killings etc taking place in a lot of towns and cities.

But my opinion is not the important one. Research what SF and the IRA have to say.

When did SF or the IRA become the binding authority on all facts? Is this another of the "Gerry's decree is binding" moments?


You still haven't answered how, other than enforcing the same laws that apply to everyone, the Irish state "involved" itself. It seems pretty clear you blame the Govt of Ireland for not giving SF or the IRA full exemption from the laws of the land (which of course is what SF and the IRA believed themselves to be entitled to - as their actions - both at time and in the present - have demonstrated time and again).

FrancieBrady

blackwhite wrote: »

When did SF or the IRA become the binding authority on all facts? Is this another of the "Gerry's decree is binding" moments?


You still haven't answered how, other than enforcing the same laws that apply to everyone, the Irish state "involved" itself. It seems pretty clear you blame the Govt of Ireland for not giving SF or the IRA full exemption from the laws of the land (which of course is what SF and the IRA believed themselves to be entitled to - as their actions - both at time and in the present - have demonstrated time and again).

I think if you read this and just accept the simple fact that if we are involved in the solution, then we must have accepted that we were involved in the problem, conflict/war.

It is just head in the sand, deflection to try and deny that anymore.

http://opac.oireachtas.ie/AWData/Lib...116_100026.pdf

FrancieBrady

blackwhite wrote: »

Shocking alright that someone who is implicated in the planning of the murder would make claims (a decade after the crime) to try and discredit his victim.


It's almost as shocking as the amount of posters on here who on one hand want to whinge about "exploitation" of victims, but at the same time are thrilled to engage in a bit of victim-bashing if it can be used to defend their favourite political party.

Wouldn't it be a worthwhile thing for our 'journalist' class to do to find out if Ferris's claims are true or false?
To find out what did the Head of the Prison Officers organisation mean when he lambast Prison management and the negligence of the Minister for Justice Michael Noonan, who is still a prominent member of the current government.

billy few mates

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The Stormont House Agreement mentioned earlier for anyone who wants to read it.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/390672/Stormont_House_Agreement.pdf


In the 20 years since the GFA there has been plenty of work done on truth recovery and transitional justice, but yet again, the two governments have sat firmly on their hands in doing anything practical on this. The very thing that led to the conflict exploding in the first place.

http://opac.oireachtas.ie/AWData/Library3/FATRdoclaid210116_100026.pdf

For those who think that southern Ireland was not involved in the conflict/war, it is not us on this thread you need to convince or change opinion, it is your own government as they have clearly included southern Ireland in any remit/proposal on information recovery or transitional justice processes.

FrancieBrady wrote: »

I think if you read this and just accept the simple fact that if we are involved in the solution, then we must have accepted that we were involved in the problem, conflict/war.

It is just head in the sand, deflection to try and deny that anymore.

http://opac.oireachtas.ie/AWData/Lib...116_100026.pdf

So now you're saying the IRA were actually involved in a war with the republic....?

FrancieBrady

billy few mates wrote: »

So now you're saying the IRA were actually involved in a war with the republic....?

I will challenge you to show where I came even close to saying that.

The republic was involved in the conflict/war. That is why they are involved in the solution and all the processes arising from the search for solutions and the much vaunted, but never properly addressed - closure.