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

Is Sinn Fein right? (The Stack Issue)

1…5681011…28

Comments

  • #212
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,516 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    kbannon wrote: »
    You mean he won't assist the Gardai in an ongoing murder investigation.
    Don't forget that this murder had nothing to do with your "war" and was not sanctioned by IRA HQ.

    No, it seems he won't be doing that. What bit of 'I will not assist in handing over information until it is part of a truth process' are you and others having trouble with?
    What bit of his assuring that it was included as a responsibility of the two governments to set up such a process in the multi party agreement that ended the conflict/war did you miss?

    I support Adams and SF's goal here and I understand why it would be suicidal to do it any other way. That is not great for the Stack family at the moment but neither is it for thousands of others.

    Stack would not have come into contact with IRA soldiers/combatants if it hadn't been for the conflict/war. Of course it was a part of the conflict/war.


  • #213
    osmiumartist
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 916 ✭✭✭osmiumartist


    kbannon wrote: »
    My "quarter-baked argument". I'm simply against the defence or a person who is actively covering up a murder and who has prior experience in this and the cover up of rape and paedophilia. How is my argument "quarter-baked"?
    You assume he's guilty of everything and based on that assume he is guilty of this too. Fine, that's up to you to do so.
    He'll go to his grave a free man all the same which shows you exactly how much evidence the Irish and UK states have amassed against him in 40 years of trying.
    (PS: I'm sure he'll take a lot of dodgy dealing to the grave with him too. Like it or not there was a war on.)


  • #214
    ...And Justice
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,283 ✭✭✭...And Justice


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    No, it seems he won't be doing that. What bit of 'I will not assist in handing over information until it is part of a truth process' are you and others having trouble with?
    What bit of his assuring that it was included as a responsibility of the two governments to set up such a process in the multi party agreement that ended the conflict/war did you miss?

    I support Adams and SF's goal here and I understand why it would be suicidal to do it any other way. That is not great for the Stack family at the moment but neither is it for thousands of others.

    Stack would not have come into contact with IRA soldiers/combatants if it hadn't been for the conflict/war. Of course it was a part of the conflict/war.



    I agree with you here, imagine a truth commission being set up on both sides (it will never happen) Assassinations left right and centre of people that took part in it, be it the IRA, UDA etc...I can see Theresa May "yeah Gerry will you fcuk off with your truth commission"


    It was a war, unfortunately it's no help to the stack family, but FF/FG are lapping it up, Michael Martin knows more and has decided to stay quiet for political point scoring.


  • #215
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 42,835 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    No, it seems he won't be doing that. What bit of 'I will not assist in handing over information until it is part of a truth process' are you and others having trouble with?
    So a TD is actively protecting a murderer and you're OK with that?
    If it was a drug dealer that shot an unarmed woman in the street, would you be equally as tolerant of a TD protecting the murderer?
    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    What bit of his assuring that it was included as a responsibility of the two governments to set up such a process in the multi party agreement that ended the conflict/war did you miss?
    What would the purpose of such a process be?
    Would amnesty be provided to all witnesses?
    Which organisation would be first to "testify"?
    Would all murderers provide full and complete information?
    Would that information be in relation to sectarian crimes or all crimes including those not ordered by their superiors?
    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    I support Adams and SF's goal here and I understand why it would be suicidal to do it any other way. That is not great for the Stack family at the moment but neither is it for thousands of others.
    Adams goal here is to protect his friend(s) who murdered someone outside of his pretend army's command.
    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Stack would not have come into contact with IRA soldiers/combatants if it hadn't been for the conflict/war. Of course it was a part of the conflict/war.
    So rherefore if the IRA didn't exist, Stacks father would still be alive?
    But the IRA didn't sanction the murder so what us your point?
    Or are you simply trying to change the facts that are out there?


  • #216
    Killergreene
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 431 ✭✭Killergreene


    Good show on rte 1 now. Adams is scum. Don't know how his party is still active. Pure dregs of society. Martin Kenny making excuses for gerry. Gtfo.


  • Advertisement
  • #217
    Phoebas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,371 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    ...And Justice wrote: »
    Because he knows that the British government and security forces will never take part in a truth commission, they don't want their ugly past or missions and collusion with the UDA revealed to the public. And by the way the UDA was a recognized legal organization during the troubles in collaboration MI5.

    A truth commission where one party can withhold truths when they decide that another party isn't fully engaging probably isn't going to be successful.

    In the meantime, normal rules should apply, for example, if you have important information pertaining to an active murder investigation, you should provide it to the Gardaí.


  • #218
    ...And Justice
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,283 ✭✭✭...And Justice


    kbannon wrote: »
    So a TD is actively protecting a murderer and you're OK with that?

    Gerry Adams would be a dead man walking if he opened his mouth, the Belfast arm of SF would kill him, look what happened to Donaldson, look at the documentary about it on YT, Gerry in an interview that he knew he was a gonner and there was nothing he could do about it, touts are killed end of story. So trying to compare an unarmed woman being shot by a drug dealer and Gerry ratting up IRA men are two totally different things.


  • #219
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 42,835 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    osmiumartist wrote: »
    You assume he's guilty of everything and based on that assume he is guilty of this too. Fine, that's up to you to do so.
    Are you stating that I assume he is guilty of covering up a murder? But he is!

    He delayed by about three yeaea giving the Gardai some of the information he has on people involved.
    He has already said that he won't be giving any more info.
    He was involved in arranging the meeting with the murderers and would have seen them.
    Can you not see the cover up?

    It's no different to him helping his brother evade justice after his paedophile rapes. He allowed his brother to continue working in close contact with children both in Louth and Belfast.


  • #220
    osmiumartist
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 916 ✭✭✭osmiumartist


    Phoebas wrote: »
    A truth commission where one party can withhold truths when they decide that another party isn't fully engaging probably isn't going to be successful.
    And which side is this? The UK government? The Irish government? You know, the guys who were supposed to set up this commission but won't for some oh-so-unguessable reason?


  • #221
    ...And Justice
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,283 ✭✭✭...And Justice


    Phoebas wrote: »
    A truth commission where one party can withhold truths when they decide that another party isn't fully engaging probably isn't going to be successful.

    In the meantime, normal rules should apply, for example, if you have important information pertaining to an active murder investigation, you should provide it to the Gardaí.


    Yeah but, this is the IRA were talking about, not some random murder, you will be killed if you gave up names to the Gardaí. He should just retire now and let the clean folk of SF take over, Pearse, Mary etc..


  • Advertisement
  • #222
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 42,835 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    ...And Justice wrote: »
    Gerry Adams would be a dead man walking if he opened his mouth, the Belfast arm of SF would kill him, look what happened to Donaldson, look at the documentary about it on YT, Gerry in an interview that he knew he was a gonner and there was nothing he could do about it, touts are killed end of story. So trying to compare an unarmed woman being shot by a drug dealer and Gerry ratting up IRA men are two totally different things.
    So Gerry, a former head of the IRA around the time of the murder, is withholding evidence because he is scared of the IRA because IRA members murdered someone without orders?
    Really? Is this nonsense the best that you can come up with?


  • #223
    Phoebas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,371 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    osmiumartist wrote: »
    And which side is this? The UK government? The Irish government? You know, the guys who were supposed to set up this commission but won't for some oh-so-unguessable reason?

    All sides I'd say.
    I wouldn't have confidence of a truth commission working for anyone.


  • #224
    Phoebas
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,371 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    ...And Justice wrote: »
    Gerry Adams would be a dead man walking if he opened his mouth, the Belfast arm of SF would kill him, look what happened to Donaldson, look at the documentary about it on YT, Gerry in an interview that he knew he was a gonner and there was nothing he could do about it, touts are killed end of story. So trying to compare an unarmed woman being shot by a drug dealer and Gerry ratting up IRA men are two totally different things.
    ...And Justice wrote: »
    Yeah but, this is the IRA were talking about, not some random murder, you will be killed if you gave up names to the Gardaí. He should just retire now and let the clean folk of SF take over, Pearse, Mary etc..

    The idea that Gerry Adam's motivation for withholding information is a fear for his life just isn't serious.


  • #225
    ...And Justice
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,283 ✭✭✭...And Justice


    kbannon wrote: »
    So Gerry, a former head of the IRA around the time of the murder, is withholding evidence because he is scared of the IRA because IRA members murdered someone without orders?
    Really? Is this nonsense the best that you can come up with?

    Ok Gerry goes to the Gardaí, tells them a few things, 3 weeks later he's gone missing presumably dead. It doesn't matter what your rank is, you tout , you die.

    For God sake.


  • #226
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 42,835 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    ...And Justice wrote: »
    Ok Gerry goes to the Gardaí, tells them a few things, 3 weeks later he's gone missing presumably dead. It doesn't matter what your rank is, you tout , you die.

    For God sake.
    Stop. Please, stop.
    You're really scraping the bottom of the excuse barrel now and it's embarrassing!


  • #227
    ...And Justice
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,283 ✭✭✭...And Justice


    Phoebas wrote: »
    The idea that Gerry Adam's motivation for withholding information is a fear for his life just isn't serious.

    Really, then why did he ask for a truth commission? because he knew nobody would be willing to take part, especially the loyalists. Their hands are dirtier with MI5 and the British security forces, that's why Tony Blare didn't wan't to go into that "detail" during the peace process, it would have exposed "national security" information on missions and collusion. We can just go round and round in circles here if you want?


  • #228
    ...And Justice
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,283 ✭✭✭...And Justice


    kbannon wrote: »
    Stop. Please, stop.
    You're really scraping the bottom of the excuse barrel now and it's embarrassing!

    You're embarrassing yourself.


  • #229
    osmiumartist
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 916 ✭✭✭osmiumartist


    I doubt Adams has much to fear myself no matter what he says.
    The truth of it is there is nothing to be gained for him or SF by ratting on the IRA with any information he has. It won't get SF more votes.
    Ironically standing down while continuing to refuse to answer may actually get SF more support.


  • #230
    ...And Justice
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,283 ✭✭✭...And Justice


    osmiumartist wrote: »
    I doubt Adams has much to fear myself no matter what he says.
    The truth of it is there is nothing to be gained for him or SF by ratting on the IRA with any information he has. It won't get SF more votes.
    Ironically standing down while continuing to refuse to answer may actually get SF more support.

    Ironically SF have gained hugh support with people joining in 2016, not sure of the numbers.


  • #231
    osmiumartist
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 916 ✭✭✭osmiumartist


    ...And Justice wrote: »
    Really, then why did he ask for a truth commission? because he knew nobody would be willing to take part, especially the loyalists. Their hands are dirtier with MI5 and the British security forces, that's why Tony Blare didn't wan't to go into that "detail" during the peace process, it would have exposed "national security" information on missions and collusion. We can just go round and round in circles here if you want?
    Precisely. I don't hear anybody asking for MPs visiting Ireland to be arrested and questioned about UK collusion with terrorists or involvement in bombing campaigns in the republic.


  • Advertisement
  • #232
    osmiumartist
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 916 ✭✭✭osmiumartist


    ...And Justice wrote: »
    Ironically SF have gained hugh support with people joining in 2016, not sure of the numbers.
    Maybe so, I'm not in SF so have no idea. That doesn't mean they wouldn't do even better without Adams at the helm.


  • #233
    ...And Justice
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,283 ✭✭✭...And Justice


    osmiumartist wrote: »
    Maybe so, I'm not in SF so have no idea. That doesn't mean they wouldn't do even better without Adams at the helm.

    I think they could be in the next government if he steps down, whatever your politics are, you can't ignore the elephant in the room called SF and it's a big elephant.

    FF are doing themselves no favors either, Michael Martin knows the same as Gerry, but he's quietly whistling in the corner looking the other way.


  • #234
    osmiumartist
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 916 ✭✭✭osmiumartist


    It's also quite telling that everybody who seems so concerned about getting "the truth" out of Adams are the same people 100% against a Peace and Reconciliation forum where this could come out.


  • #235
    ...And Justice
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,283 ✭✭✭...And Justice


    osmiumartist wrote: »
    It's also quite telling that everybody who seems so concerned about getting "the truth" out of Adams are the same people 100% against a Peace and Reconciliation forum where this could come out.

    Yeah, I'm just looking at this logically, others are political supporters of FG/FF I have no agenda here just to point out the obvious.

    HE SHOULD TELL THE GARDAÍ!!!!!!!!!!-- Yeah and get killed in the process, I don't think so.


  • #236
    Itssoeasy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,967 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    Listening to Gerry Adams talking on morning Ireland and he's asked very directly would he give the name of the IRA person he and Austin stack meet and Gerry is dancing around it better than a dancer on strictly come dancing.

    It was a yes or no answer gerry.

    Jesus the presenter Audrey carville isn't giving Gerry an easy time of it.


  • #237
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,516 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    kbannon wrote: »
    So a TD is actively protecting a murderer and you're OK with that?
    If it was a drug dealer that shot an unarmed woman in the street, would you be equally as tolerant of a TD protecting the murderer?

    More of the faux outrage and failure to understand the bigger picture.
    No, I am not ok with it, but in sensibly weighing up the position he is in, and in ACTUALLY listening to what he has to say, the better course of action for us all, including the Stack family is to hold to the line he has always said he is holding to.

    What would the purpose of such a process be?
    Would amnesty be provided to all witnesses?
    Which organisation would be first to "testify"?
    Would all murderers provide full and complete information?
    Would that information be in relation to sectarian crimes or all crimes including those not ordered by their superiors?

    That would be for all parties to work out,(and would be based, no doubt on other similar processes that have taken place elsewhere in the world, there is nothing unique in such a process) and it seems to me that there is only one party to the conflict that has a problem with it and another party to it that is actively engaged in ignoring it. (The two governments)

    Adams goal here is to protect his friend(s) who murdered someone outside of his pretend army's command.
    It was a killing that wouldn't have happened had there been no conflict. In that sense it is part of the conflict.

    So rherefore if the IRA didn't exist, Stacks father would still be alive?
    But the IRA didn't sanction the murder so what us your point?
    Or are you simply trying to change the facts that are out there?

    Yes, his father would probably be still alive. Do you think the IRA would have existed if the island had not been partitioned and the sectarian statlet that emerged had not been allowed (by the same two governments) to fester and explode into violent conflict?


  • #238
    Itssoeasy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,967 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    Jesus Christ I know politicians as a whole have a reputation of not answering questions put to them but Gerry Adams is stonewalling Richard Crowley.


  • #239
    FrancieBrady
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 73,516 ✭✭✭✭FrancieBrady


    Itssoeasy wrote: »
    Jesus Christ I know politicians as a whole have a reputation of not answering questions put to them but Gerry Adams is stonewalling Richard Crowley.

    Far as I can hear, Richard like others on here, only wants the answers he wants to hear. He is not listening.


  • #240
    Itssoeasy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,967 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    FrancieBrady wrote: »
    Far as I can hear, Richard like others on here, only wants the answers he wants to hear. He is not listening.

    Well no Richard asked him would he ask the man he spoke to in 2013 if he was now willing to speak to the gardai. It was a yes or no answer. It's not as if he was asking Gerry Adams to name the guy. He could ask the guy if he is willing to talk to gardai. If he says no then Gerry could convey that to the public and I'd personally feel like Gerry Adams has tried to make progress to get the answers the stack family want.


  • Advertisement
  • #241
    ...And Justice
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,283 ✭✭✭...And Justice


    Itssoeasy wrote: »
    Well no Richard asked him would he ask the man he spoke to in 2013 if he was no willing to speak to the gardai. It was a yes or no answer.

    What do you think that answer is gonna be? "No way I'll be killed"


Advertisement