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

Does anyone actually believe that Gerry Adams wasn't in the IRA?

Options
1…6791112…21

Comments

  • Options
    #242
    markodaly
    Registered Users Posts: 14,019 ✭✭✭✭markodaly


    maccored wrote: »
    I think its best to blame the people who actually planted the bomb. not the people who didnt. I know - ruins your point, but on the other hand, it's called telling the truth. Cant educate bacon i suppose

    I see you didn't answer my question.

    Were the PIRA anyway responsible, even partly responsible for the Omagh bombing given that it was they who trained these men in bomb-making in the first place?


  • Options
    #243
    SafeSurfer
    Registered Users Posts: 6,421 ✭✭✭SafeSurfer


    markodaly wrote: »
    maccored wrote: »
    I think its best to blame the people who actually planted the bomb. not the people who didnt. I know - ruins your point, but on the other hand, it's called telling the truth. Cant educate bacon i suppose

    I see you didn't answer my question.

    Were the PIRA anyway responsible, even partly responsible for the Omagh bombing given that it was they who trained these men in bomb-making in the first place?

    Personally I don’t think they were. The PIRA tried to convince members to abandon the armed struggle. Not all did.

    Multo autem ad rem magis pertinet quallis tibi vide aris quam allis



  • Options
    #244
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,661 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    markodaly wrote: »
    I see you didn't answer my question.

    Were the PIRA anyway responsible, even partly responsible for the Omagh bombing given that it was they who trained these men in bomb-making in the first place?

    I know what you are saying but unless the PIRA had a time machine, i doubt they'd have known the people they trained would plant a bomb when there was a peace process starting. You point is incredibly illogical


  • Options
    #245
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,661 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    SafeSurfer wrote: »
    If you don’t understand or can’t explain that’s fine.

    I admit - I have no idea what you are trying to say other than you clearly don't understand what was happening in the north


  • Options
    #246
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,267 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    maccored wrote: »
    I think its best to blame the people who actually planted the bomb. not the people who didnt. I know - ruins your point, but on the other hand, it's called telling the truth. Cant educate bacon i suppose


    I agree with you. It is always best to blame the people who actually planted the bomb (together with any accessories). Hence I blame Martin McGuinness and Gerry Adams for the deaths of an awful lot of people.

    Glad to see you do too.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #247
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,267 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    FF, and FG conspired to bury what they all did when we fought for our independence and had a civil war. Who did what, who was in what admissions were locked away and accounts of participation were entirely voluntary.
    Not until they were all dead were the transcripts and accounts of what was done released.

    We had a conflict/war here for 40 years, and all sides have been less than transparent about what they did, it is par for the course in post conflict situations.
    If former members of the IRA are 'duplicitous' then they are in plenty of company on this island.

    The others you refer to are dead and buried in graves. Different eras, different understandings of human rights and conflict.

    No excuse for former members of the IRA, none at all.


  • Options
    #248
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,267 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    Matt Barrett wrote: »
    Your waffle on it. It wasn't enough most thought he was or thought it likely, we have to put up with the blarney too.
    He wasn't as far as the law is concerned or they would have arrested him for it. We can surmise and tell anecdotes all day long I suppose.


    What absolute rubbish. You are on here night and day, telling us that FG and FF are corrupt and criminal, without even a scintilla of evidence that would stand up in court, yet because Gerry wasn't convicted in a court, that means he wasn't in the IRA.

    You have two obvious standards. One for Gerry Adams, one for FG/FF. Hypocrisy of the highest level.


  • Options
    #249
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,661 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    blanch152 wrote: »
    I agree with you. It is always best to blame the people who actually planted the bomb (together with any accessories). Hence I blame Martin McGuinness and Gerry Adams for the deaths of an awful lot of people.

    Glad to see you do too.

    plenty of people to blame blanch152. no-one wanted a conflict.

    I hope you blame every person who has fought in a war worldwide. great to see you dont support the poppy as thats obviously supporting people who directly and in directly killed people in warfare. great to hear you condemn the british army, american army and everyone involved in the world wars etc etc.

    I'l remind you of this next time I see you supporting any of them on here


  • Options
    #250
    Fionn1952
    Registered Users Posts: 3,404 ✭✭✭Fionn1952


    blanch152 wrote: »
    maccored wrote: »
    I think its best to blame the people who actually planted the bomb. not the people who didnt. I know - ruins your point, but on the other hand, it's called telling the truth. Cant educate bacon i suppose


    I agree with you. It is always best to blame the people who actually planted the bomb (together with any accessories). Hence I blame Martin McGuinness and Gerry Adams for the deaths of an awful lot of people.

    Glad to see you do too.

    So where does your blame towards the British Government come into it, Blanch?

    If you're going to blame Martin McGuinness and Gerry Adam's for any deaths which MAY be vaguely attributable to their previous actions, then how many deaths do you blame on the British government, who one could arguably vaguely attribute almost every death during the troubles to, by your own logic?

    I mean, if you're going to attribute The Omagh Bombing, committed by a bunch of people who were no longer part of an organisation which Martin McGuinness claims he was formerly part of, and Gerry Adams (not so believably) claims he was never part of....at a time when said organisation was committed to a ceasefire, surely you can take it all the way back to the point of instigation with the whole conflict and just blame those actors for the whole thing?

    I'm sure you'll acknowledge that I'm pretty far from an apologist for murder and bombing, but trying to pin the Omagh bombing on Martin McGuinness and Gerry Adams is pretty tenuous.


  • Options
    #251
    weldoninhio
    Closed Accounts Posts: 14,311 ✭✭✭✭weldoninhio


    markodaly wrote: »
    Em, he could just have a chat to An Garda Aiochana or are they too West Brit for you?



    Because killing 21 innocent people is justified. I guess Omagh was also justified.

    No one can ever explain to me how killing and blowing up innocent children and women was a necessary precursor to signing the Good Friday Agreement. But I guess that are the lies they tell themselves and the myths they espouse.

    Would that the AGS that "lost" a huge amount of the documentation relating to the Dublin/Monaghan bombings?? And stopped the investigation fully after 2 months??


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #252
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 67,141 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    blanch152 wrote: »
    The others you refer to are dead and buried in graves. Different eras, different understandings of human rights and conflict.

    No excuse for former members of the IRA, none at all.

    Ah the cherrypicking partitionist view. 'It was ok for us to do but not for others'.


  • Options
    #253
    SafeSurfer
    Registered Users Posts: 6,421 ✭✭✭SafeSurfer


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Ah the cherrypicking partitionist view. 'It was ok for us to do but not for others'.

    Is that exactly the same situation with Sinn Fein condemning dissident republican violence?

    Multo autem ad rem magis pertinet quallis tibi vide aris quam allis



  • Options
    #254
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,661 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    SafeSurfer wrote: »
    Is that exactly the same situation with Sinn Fein condemning dissident republican violence?

    SF spent years, along with Hume and others (anyone remember how john hume was ridiculed in the late 80s for talking to adams?), bringing the british and the loyalists to the table for talks, which ended up in the peace process.

    They helped create a chance for peace - which didnt exist when the provos were around. it exists now, which is why SF condemn the dissidents> The dissidents have a choice. the provos didnt.

    Is that really that hard for you to comprehend?


  • Options
    #255
    SafeSurfer
    Registered Users Posts: 6,421 ✭✭✭SafeSurfer


    maccored wrote: »
    SafeSurfer wrote: »
    Is that exactly the same situation with Sinn Fein condemning dissident republican violence?

    SF spent years, along with Hume and others (anyone remember how john hume was ridiculed in the late 80s for talking to adams?), bringing the british and the loyalists to the table for talks, which ended up in the peace process.

    They helped create a chance for peace - which didnt exist when the provos were around. it exists now, which is why SF condemn the dissidents> The dissidents have a choice. the provos didnt.

    Is that really that hard for you to comprehend?

    If there was no choice how come the majority of people didn’t choose violence?

    Multo autem ad rem magis pertinet quallis tibi vide aris quam allis



  • Options
    #256
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,267 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Ah the cherrypicking partitionist view. 'It was ok for us to do but not for others'.


    I never it was ok for anyone, I just distinguished between eras and said different standards apply. I didn't say where that left us or them, or that it was ok what they did, just that you have to consider actions in the context of the time.

    Whither Al Jolson today? Was everyone who went to see him a racist?

    You just extrapolated what you thought you read. There is no link between the Provisional IRA and those who went before them, regardless of what you think of those who went before them.


  • Options
    #257
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 67,141 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    SafeSurfer wrote: »
    Is that exactly the same situation with Sinn Fein condemning dissident republican violence?

    No, the reason the dissidents are condemned is because there is an agreement in place and it is 'supposed' to be a process. First achieving equal rights for all and when consensus is achieved - a United Ireland.

    Of course we have the usual anti a UI crowd desperately trying to re-set the bar on that agreement. But that is par for the course for those happy with partition.


  • Options
    #258
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,267 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    maccored wrote: »
    The dissidents have a choice. the provos didnt.


    Neither John Hume nor Seamus Mallon were stuck without a choice in the way that so many provos claimed. A sad attempt at an excuse for inexcusable actions.


  • Options
    #259
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 67,141 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    blanch152 wrote: »
    Neither John Hume nor Seamus Mallon were stuck without a choice in the way that so many provos claimed. A sad attempt at an excuse for inexcusable actions.

    John and Seamus spectacularly failed to broker a deal. Hume, at least, and to his eternal credit, recognised who had to be at the table, and convinced many of it. That, after criticising Hume, and forcing him to operate solo, eventually (with wonderful hindsight on Mallon's part) became the light bulb moment for the SDLP.
    Mallon, emerges as the bitter chancer of the piece and you don't have to look much further to understand why the north's electorate seen through the SDLP.


  • Options
    #260
    SafeSurfer
    Registered Users Posts: 6,421 ✭✭✭SafeSurfer


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    SafeSurfer wrote: »
    Is that exactly the same situation with Sinn Fein condemning dissident republican violence?

    No, the reason the dissidents are condemned is because there is an agreement in place and it is 'supposed' to be a process. First achieving equal rights for all and when consensus is achieved - a United Ireland.

    Of course we have the usual anti a UI crowd desperately trying to re-set the bar on that agreement. But that is par for the course for those happy with partition.

    There was an agreement after the war of independence. Is it not true to say that those who continued to use violence in pursuit of a United Ireland after the signing of the Anglo Irish Treaty were the dissidents of their day? The bombing campaign in Britain in the 1930’s, the border campaign in the 50’s etc.

    Multo autem ad rem magis pertinet quallis tibi vide aris quam allis



  • Options
    #261
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 67,141 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    SafeSurfer wrote: »
    There was an agreement after the war of independence. Is it not true to say that those who continued to use violence in pursuit of a United Ireland after the signing of the Anglo Irish Treaty were the dissidents of their day? The bombing campaign in Britain in the 1930’s, the border campaign in the 50’s etc.

    How did those 'agreements' work out for the people of the north? Take your time reviewing the history here.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #262
    Screw Attack
    Registered Users Posts: 77 ✭✭Screw Attack


    Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness deserved the death penalty. Their party supporters are also morally diseased.


  • Options
    #263
    SafeSurfer
    Registered Users Posts: 6,421 ✭✭✭SafeSurfer


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    SafeSurfer wrote: »
    There was an agreement after the war of independence. Is it not true to say that those who continued to use violence in pursuit of a United Ireland after the signing of the Anglo Irish Treaty were the dissidents of their day? The bombing campaign in Britain in the 1930’s, the border campaign in the 50’s etc.

    How did those 'agreements' work out for the people of the north? Take your time reviewing the history here.

    You mean not everybody approved of the agreement and so believed violence to be legitimate? Similar to today’s dissidents who believe the Good Friday Agreement fails them. No?

    Multo autem ad rem magis pertinet quallis tibi vide aris quam allis



  • Options
    #264
    Wanderer2010
    Registered Users Posts: 6,687 ✭✭✭Wanderer2010


    Nah, everyone knows he was in it up to his neck. He doesn't really have the toughness or hard exterior Martin had so its hard to visualise this seemingly mind mannered barman being so influential or feared but he obviously had something about him that maybe we didn't see.

    I don't know who said it of him that there was "something of the night in Gerry Adams" meaning he was a dark and sinister figure. I agree with that, hes just off in every way. Psychopathic.


  • Options
    #265
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 67,141 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    SafeSurfer wrote: »
    You mean not everybody approved of the agreement and so believed violence to be legitimate? Similar to today’s dissidents who believe the Good Friday Agreement fails them. No?

    You can legitimise the dissidents if you wish, I don't.


  • Options
    #266
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,661 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    SafeSurfer wrote: »
    If there was no choice how come the majority of people didn’t choose violence?

    there was a conflict in the north because people didnt 'choose violence' (no-one chose it btw). or no, sure it was only a handful of crims that wanted the violence, yes?

    really - educate yourself a bit.


  • Options
    #267
    maccored
    Registered Users Posts: 10,661 ✭✭✭✭maccored


    blanch152 wrote: »
    Neither John Hume nor Seamus Mallon were stuck without a choice in the way that so many provos claimed. A sad attempt at an excuse for inexcusable actions.

    thats why the SDLP are such a force to be reckoned with these days is it? oh no - sure they're dead in the water because they didnt represent people as well as other nationalist parties did.


  • Options
    #268
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users Posts: 67,141 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Wanderer2010 wrote: »
    Nah, everyone knows he was in it up to his neck. He doesn't really have the toughness or hard exterior Martin had so its hard to visualise this seemingly mind mannered barman being so influential or feared but he obviously had something about him that maybe we didn't see.

    I don't know who said it of him that there was "something of the night in Gerry Adams" meaning he was a dark and sinister figure. I agree with that, hes just off in every way. Psychopathic.

    I personally think Adams political astuteness was what got him to where he was and stayed for so long.

    And I could see sense in the argument that in order to stay in control of the movement politically he needed to be completely divorced from the IRA, as that would possibly have led to long periods in jail.

    But, maybe I am wrong and he was in the IRA. It makes no difference whether he was or not imo.


  • Options
    #269
    SafeSurfer
    Registered Users Posts: 6,421 ✭✭✭SafeSurfer


    maccored wrote: »
    SafeSurfer wrote: »
    If there was no choice how come the majority of people didn’t choose violence?

    there was a conflict in the north because people didnt 'choose violence' (no-one chose it btw). or no, sure it was only a handful of crims that wanted the violence, yes?

    really - educate yourself a bit.

    People didn’t choose to use violence yet some people chose not to use violence?
    Was there a choice or not?

    Multo autem ad rem magis pertinet quallis tibi vide aris quam allis



  • Options
    #270
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,267 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    maccored wrote: »
    thats why the SDLP are such a force to be reckoned with these days is it? oh no - sure they're dead in the water because they didnt represent people as well as other nationalist parties did.


    It is why they were such a force to be reckoned with at the time.

    The Provisional IRA never had any popular support when they were going around killing people.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #271
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,267 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    Wanderer2010 wrote: »
    I don't know who said it of him that there was "something of the night in Gerry Adams" meaning he was a dark and sinister figure. I agree with that, hes just off in every way. Psychopathic.

    You just need to read his blog to get uneasy about him.


Advertisement