Martin McGuinness to be named as Sinn Féins candidate for the Presidential Election?

Mezcita · 19-09-2011 11:55pm

JupiterKid wrote: »

I'll join you on that asylum waiting list Wilson10. The prospect of a former senior IRA terrorist of being the Head of State of my country is appalling.

Yes, I know the Unionists have had to swallow a very bitter pill with repect to Sinn Fein being in the Assembly up North, but the prospect of an SF President is a bridge to far for me and many in the Republic.

That's pretty much the key point for me. From an international point of view we are already a basket case and McGuinness being elected would certainly raise a few eyebrows.

I think that his decision to run as a candidate will encourage more people to go out and vote. But I don't think it will be to vote for him.

Wolfe Tone · 20-09-2011 12:29am

http://www.politics.ie/forum/sinn-fein/170590-michael-mc-dowell-just-lied-frontline.html

RTE are going all out on the anti MMG front

Liam Byrne · 20-09-2011 12:37am

WT - how do you know if that poster on politics.ie is genuine ?

jimmycrackcorm · 20-09-2011 12:39am

I despise Sinn Fein because of their idiotic economics policies and the fact that they do one thing in the north regarding cuts but object to them in the "free state".

However I'll give my vote to McGuinness. His history is no different to that of the people who brought this state into being. I think that most people who object to him based on his history are people who rarely if ever at all have been in the north and have little or no appreciation of the difference in life now there.

Wolfe Tone · 20-09-2011 12:42am

Liam Byrne wrote: »

WT - how do you know if that poster on politics.ie is genuine ?

The lad has been posting there for a long time, he is the mans son. You can check back over his previous posts if you want.

anymore · 20-09-2011 1:05am

Mezcita wrote: »

That's pretty much the key point for me. From an international point of view we are already a basket case and McGuinness being elected would certainly raise a few eyebrows.

I think that his decision to run as a candidate will encourage more people to go out and vote. But I don't think it will be to vote for him.

Well logically people educated in irish national schools in the 40'a , 50's and early 60's ought to vote for him because he went and did the things that our national education was telling us was the did to do , i.e free our country from protestant England - ' in spite of dungeon fire and swords, A nation Once Again, And father Murphy form Old Kilcormac, etc, etc, etc.
Remember The old articles 2 and 3 of the Constitution ? I dont vote SF, but i do remember the good old days.
Whats all the B/s about going to the Garden of Remembrance ?

Fred Cohen · 20-09-2011 1:07am

Mezcita wrote: »

That's pretty much the key point for me. From an international point of view we are already a basket case and

I don't think we are seen as a basket case, I think we are seen as sheep who will take whatever is imposed on us and we will because the only way out of this is through work and getting people back to work.

I also think that we as a nation need to get up off our knees, raise our heads and say No, it is not acceptable to raise the salary of the CEO of AIB from €500,000 to €690,000 when we are dismissing resource teachers.

On Martin McGuiness, I think he's better than the lot before us.

A Primal Nut · 20-09-2011 1:55am

I wonder will McGuinness sign into law, any legislation which is opposed vehemently by Sinn Fein. Indeed, most legislation put forward by this government would be opposed by Sinn Fein. I wonder would he resign if something particularly strongly against their policies went through. I can see McGuinness being put under a lot of pressure by his supporters not to sign certain legislation.

Pompey Magnus · 20-09-2011 2:45am

A Primal Nut wrote: »

I wonder will McGuinness sign into law, any legislation which is opposed vehemently by Sinn Fein. Indeed, most legislation put forward by this government would be opposed by Sinn Fein. I wonder would he resign if something particularly strongly against their policies went through. I can see McGuinness being put under a lot of pressure by his supporters not to sign certain legislation.

If he was presented with an issue he regarded as of great national importance then why shouldn't he refuse to sign it? That power is in the constitution for a reason.

He would have been more likely to refuse to sign the dubious "Banker's Bailout" bill than Mary McAleese ever was. I would have expected that McGuinness, in that position, would have used his powers to refer it to the Supreme Court, an opportunity that McAleese declined to take.

CptMackey · 20-09-2011 8:43am

Does he accept the legitimacy of the Irish army or does he still believe (wrongly) that the ira are the legit force? Also has he ever answered what he did to mr hegarty who he lured to Derry from Donegal and was later found murdered?

We can't forget his brutal past and then on the other hand hang Norris with his.

Tazz T · 20-09-2011 8:46am

The general public aren't hanging Norris with his past. The media is and by standing down he didn't do himself any favours.

Kev_ps3 · 20-09-2011 9:38am

That anti-Mcguinness propaganda on the FrontLine last night was scandalous, makes me want him to win even more. What were these liberal idiots doing when our brothers in the north where being killed?

walrusgumble · 20-09-2011 10:14am

A Primal Nut wrote: »

I wonder will McGuinness sign into law, any legislation which is opposed vehemently by Sinn Fein. Indeed, most legislation put forward by this government would be opposed by Sinn Fein. I wonder would he resign if something particularly strongly against their policies went through. I can see McGuinness being put under a lot of pressure by his supporters not to sign certain legislation.

Do you actually understand how the Constitution provisions on legislation work?

I wonder will Michael D Higgins sign into law, any legislation supported and drafted by a Labour Minister, that he vehemently opposes? Same can be said about Gay. Or what about Religious Conservative Dana? (all three are conservatives except Higgins)

What type of crap is this. Go and read the Constitution will you. The President has no say. He can only send the case to the Supreme Court in certain circumstances. (By the way, although caught of the ball on fRONT LINE, not so long ago, Michael Twee seemed to think that he could send a bill before the Supreme court even when it effected a money bill , which is not applicable). And if he don't want to be impeached, he will keep his gob shut or resign

O'Dáiligh, a Fianna Fáil supporter/Candidate was President during Cosgrave's Fine Gael Government. No issue assenting legislation. Oh but of course, government seemed to take issue withe the President's choice of invoking Article 26.

Oh by the way, the mere fact that a referral to the Supreme Court (article 26) is in no way an indication , as far as the court's concerned, that a bill is unconstitutional. it has to be looked in full

KeithAFC · 20-09-2011 10:22am

Kev_ps3 wrote: »

That anti-Mcguinness propaganda on the FrontLine last night was scandalous, makes me want him to win even more. What were these liberal idiots doing when our brothers in the north where being killed?

How dare anyone be anti Mcguinness. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. It's amazing how some Republicans thought only Unionists had bad feelings towards him which is nonsense. A lot of people in the Republic hate him too.

walrusgumble · 20-09-2011 10:28am

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

Not really no. They picked probably their best known party member beside Gerry Adams, hardly cyncial or ill-conceived. More likely smart politics.

They (SF) are a generation removed from the days of the Troubles. Bare in mind, for a significant portion of the electorate, as well as many SF politicians, the Troubles are just that; pages from history.

Unlikely. It's public knowledge as to McGuinness' role as a PIRA commander and what the IRA got up to. That's all in the past now and of course, Irish political history, as well as the current government, is made of individuals who have made the transition from violence to peaceful, democratic politics.

You've badly misunderstood the comparisons made between Mandela, Collins & McGuinness. It's not about whether you consider his actions as a PIRA commander as legitimate, but about being part of of radical organisations which espoused violence, like the ANC/ SA Communist Party/IRB/ 'old; IRA, which then made the transition to peaceful politics.

You might not like McGuinness being compared to either Collins' or Mandela, but they share a similar political history so the comparison is very much valid whether you like it or not.

McGuinness has publicly admitted he was senior IRA member. You also realise we've alreadt elected presidents who've participated in violent, bloody coups:eek:.

David Norris is a political nobody, McGuinness is an experienced politician. I have no doubt there will be plenty of sabre rattling from the usual suspects in the run of the election but whatever skeletons are dug up or rehashed by the Sindo it's old news. We know his past, but we also know he's someone who has signed up to the GFA and being involved in democratic politics for nearly 2 decades.

Using your spurious reasoning then why aren't you holding the Labour Party to account and asking about their skeletons? A section of their membership and elected representative share a similar story to McGuinness and SF in terms of their transition from armed conflict to democratic politics.

Emotional reasoning, now you're getting desperate. I refer you again to Irish political history where there is numerous examples of individuals who were involved in armed comflicy making the transition to democratic politics.

Some people will never support McGuinness because of his past, which is fair enough, but it will be grossly hypocritical to focus solely on his PIRA activities when it's quite clear that (p)SF have made the transition from a party which was the mouthpiece for the PIRA to embracing democratic politics hook, line and sinker.

Tl; DR

It's Hypocritical to whinge about McGuinness' past when we have consistently elected people in this state to position of office who've also had murky backgrounds but made the transition along the line to embracing peace and democratic politics.

I am amazed that the old chestnut, "Det Gerry McCabe" has not been used yet.:rolleyes:

Some one ****ted on about the army. A President is no more than the figure head Commander in Chief. THe Minister for Justice & Defence has more power. Look you we have as Minister; someone who is prepared to put the interest of a foreign country over that of his own if it conflicts with International view. What happens, if Israel attacks Irish Soldiers currently in the Lebanon?

Point is, people are trying to give hypothetical examples without any consideration that a whataboutery would be valid and legitimate put to them to show they might be talking nonsense.

Funny how these same people will tell Republicans/Nationalists to let go of the past etc, yet when it suits them, they drag it up.

Our leaders had no problem hailing people like McGuinness and demagogues like Paisley are great Statesmen etc, yet they turn to wanting to represent their country bout north and south, this crap comes up

What possibly is going to come out against McGuinness that we already don't know or are suspicious about? The past won't hurt him then and won't now. Time for people to realise that and attack him on other more relevant issues like what he has done since GFA 1998.

Some people are odd (I don't include people who hold consistent and genuine views on matters)

20-09-2011 10:38am

FTA69 wrote: »

If you think there is a massive gulf between Collins and those who came after him then you're engaging in the worst of revisionism to be honest.

There IS a gulf, no question, between Collins and the provos. Collin's organisation fought a campaign of guerilla warfare against an occupying force which was without a popular mandate from the people they were opressing and subjugating. I don't believe the people of Ireland ever voted for a British occupation. The claim can legitimately be made that the old IRA, Under Collins, were freedom fighters. The same can't be said for the provisional IRA under mcGuinness and the rest, they were terrorists, plain and simple. They bombed and shot innocent men, women, and children going about their work for an authority which had been given a mandate that was ratified by the vast majority of people north and south of the border in a legitimate, inclusive democratic process. The provisional IRA simply chose to ignore that mandate for peace and embark on a campaign of terror in the name of a couse which they deemed justified, and that's to say nothing of their ancilliary criminal activities which ran in paralell with their "struggle".

And in case anyone should get the wrong idea, i'm not defending the British authorities record in the north which gave rise to the republican terrorist movement and the troubles, it was clearly apalling, but the fact remains that the provisional IRA were ignoring the will of the majority of people put forward in an inclusive democratic process, Collins was not.

JupiterKid wrote: »

I'll join you on that asylum waiting list Wilson10. The prospect of a former senior IRA terrorist of being the Head of State of my country is appalling.....the prospect of an SF President is a bridge to far for me and many in the Republic.

Well said. I'm not slighting Sinn Fein for their choice to run a candidate, we live in a democracy after all, but McGuinness is the wrong candidate to run. His past is completely unclear and very dubious. Do we really want to elect a man to the áras who may yet be indicted under international law for war crimes he may or may not have committed in the north during the troubles? Even the prospect of that skeleton in the closet should be enough to rule him out of the race.

Do we want a reflection of Ireland of 2011, with it's mass unemployment, emigration, and recession, as a country which is working to improve itself, and get back on it's feet, or one that is regressing to promoting a former republican Terrorist to it's highest office? A vote for a left wing ex-IRA president for Ireland would be a massive step back for the country's international profile, particularly now. What would it say to the likes of America, Japan, and Europe about our Stance on terrorism?

McGuinnesses' past is part and parcel of the man. We CANNOT overlook it (much as he would like us to) in the race for the áras. It would be an insult to the releatives of the victims of the IRA in the troubles, and as far as i am concerned it makes him deeply unpalatable as a presidential candidate, for many reasons.

Let him continue in the good work he appears to be doing in the Northern Executive, which many see as making amends for the sins of the past in a real and directly relevant way in the north, and let him leave the presidency to someone else.

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

You've badly misunderstood the comparisons made between Mandela, Collins & McGuinness. It's not about whether you consider his actions as a PIRA commander as legitimate, but about being part of of radical organisations which espoused violence, like the ANC/ SA Communist Party/IRB/ 'old; IRA, which then made the transition to peaceful politics.

You might not like McGuinness being compared to either Collins' or Mandela, but they share a similar political history so the comparison is very much valid whether you like it or not.

Sorry, but it's not. You can see above for my response on it, but your point of view is exactly the one that the people who were pulling triggers and setting detonators during the troubles would use to defend their actions, and to accept it would be to do their victims and their families a disservice.

It's a simplified view of the political and social climate of the time, and ignores the fact that the Provos were going against a clear democratic mandate for peace, which had been ratified by the vast majority of people north and south, in an inclusive poll, which the IRA chose to ignore or dismiss, for reasons rooted in their own misguided ideaology.

Do you think that Michael Collins, were he alive to see it, would have approved of the bombing of innocent civillians, men women and children, in Belfast or on the UK mainland in the 70's, as a legitimate tactic for securing a lasting peace in the 32 counties of Ireland?? The treaty he negotiated was supposed to be a stepping stone to peace, to be won later by democratic means. And that's to say little of the protection rackets, corruption, large scale robbery and all the other peripheral criminality that went on with the IRA when they were at their height.

Collins fought for freedom from opression and for a peace he never lived long enough to see. The Provisionals fought against that peace when it came about, in the name of hatred and greed, and did it unilaterally and without the support of the people. To me, to compare the two is to insult Collins' memory and all that he stood for.

maccored · 20-09-2011 11:10am

this whole idea that the 'old' IRA ('old'??) were saints and the provos were terrorists just makes me laugh. both IRAs killed people, as that tends to happen in war situations. It amazes me people still believe the fairytale that the 'old IRA' never harmed anyone. Fairytales told by and listened to by those who dont really have an idea of what happened in the later part of the 20th century in the north. The provos had a lot of support in the north btw, which is generally the region they operated in. the idea that you cant overlook martin mcguinness' past but you can overlook devs etc is just laughable. and terribly hypocritical.

Deleted User wrote: »

There IS a gulf, no question, between Collins and the provos. Collin's organisation fought a campaign of guerilla warfare against an occupying force which was without a popular mandate from the people they were opressing and subjugating. I don't believe the people of Ireland ever voted for a British occupation. The claim can legitimately be made that the old IRA, Under Collins, were freedom fighters. The same can't be said for the provisional IRA under mcGuinness and the rest, they were terrorists, plain and simple. They bombed and shot innocent men, women, and children going about their work for an authority which had been given a mandate that was ratified by the vast majority of people north and south of the border in a legitimate, inclusive democratic process. The provisional IRA simply chose to ignore that mandate for peace and embark on a campaign of terror in the name of a couse which they deemed justified, and that's to say nothing of their ancilliary criminal activities which ran in paralell with their "struggle".

And in case anyone should get the wrong idea, i'm not defending the British authorities record in the north which gave rise to the republican terrorist movement and the troubles, it was clearly apalling, but the fact remains that the provisional IRA were ignoring the will of the majority of people put forward in an inclusive democratic process, Collins was not.

Well said. I'm not slighting Sinn Fein for their choice to run a candidate, we live in a democracy after all, but McGuinness is the wrong candidate to run. His past is completely unclear and very dubious. Do we really want to elect a man to the áras who may yet be indicted under international law for war crimes he may or may not have committed in the north during the troubles? Even the prospect of that skeleton in the closet should be enough to rule him out of the race.

Do we want a reflection of Ireland of 2011, with it's mass unemployment, emigration, and recession, as a country which is working to improve itself, and get back on it's feet, or one that is regressing to promoting a former republican Terrorist to it's highest office? A vote for a left wing ex-IRA president for Ireland would be a massive step back for the country's international profile, particularly now. What would it say to the likes of America, Japan, and Europe about our Stance on terrorism?

McGuinnesses' past is part and parcel of the man. We CANNOT overlook it (much as he would like us to) in the race for the áras. It would be an insult to the releatives of the victims of the IRA in the troubles, and as far as i am concerned it makes him deeply unpalatable as a presidential candidate, for many reasons.

Let him continue in the good work he appears to be doing in the Northern Executive, which many see as making amends for the sins of the past in a real and directly relevant way in the north, and let him leave the presidency to someone else.

Sorry, but it's not. You can see above for my response on it, but your point of view is exactly the one that the people who were pulling triggers and setting detonators during the troubles would use to defend their actions, and to accept it would be to do their victims and their families a disservice.

It's a simplified view of the political and social climate of the time, and ignores the fact that the Provos were going against a clear democratic mandate for peace, which had been ratified by the vast majority of people north and south, in an inclusive poll, which the IRA chose to ignore or dismiss, for reasons rooted in their own misguided ideaology.

Do you think that Michael Collins, were he alive to see it, would have approved of the bombing of innocent civillians, men women and children, in Belfast or on the UK mainland in the 70's, as a legitimate tactic for securing a lasting peace in the 32 counties of Ireland?? The treaty he negotiated was supposed to be a stepping stone to peace, to be won later by democratic means. And that's to say little of the protection rackets, corruption, large scale robbery and all the other peripheral criminality that went on with the IRA when they were at their height.

Collins fought for freedom from opression and for a peace he never lived long enough to see. The Provisionals fought against that peace when it came about, in the name of hatred and greed, and did it unilaterally and without the support of the people. To me, to compare the two is to insult Collins' memory and all that he stood for.

HellsAngel · 20-09-2011 11:36am

walrusgumble wrote: »

I am amazed that the old chestnut, "Det Gerry McCabe" has not been used yet.:rolleyes:

Totally agree. In fact I think that the " What about Gerry mcCabe " brigade are at this point making a mockery of the fella's death :rolleyes:

Doirtybirdy · 20-09-2011 11:53am

President of Ireland is a mostly ceremonial position.
The only power they have I think is to refer legislation to the council of state and even that wouldn't mean madness ensues as they are mostly former Taoisaigh and judges etc aren't they?

I can't understand all this Sinn Féin bashing over a ceremonial head of state position.
Surely Sinn Féin as well as any other party should be entitled to run for it and fair play to them if they win.

You should leave the politics of it to elections where the elected have some chance of affecting your life and ladies and gentlemen,the presidency isn't it.

Martin McGuinness is probably the most personable of Sinn Féin's leaders.
Yes he has a history steeped in terrible things but so have a lot of other people internationally and they've moved on,often to great things.
**** happens folks when caught up in the moment.The important thing is to have learned from it.
Fact of the matter is,in my opinion,the troubles up North would have happened whether Martin McGuinness got involved in it or not.
That was the situation then.We're in a different situation now.
There are an awfull lot of diehards up there that would still be at it , were it not for the strong persuasion of people like McGuinness who changed tack and saw a better way.
In the fog of war [and you can argue whether it was a war or not,it was very like one anyway given the sectarianism and polarisation up there] it takes time to see the bigger picture.
Kudus for persuading the most,goes to McGuinness even when the fog had yet to lift fully.

That is all peace out

Argue the politics and economics lads over a government job not over a titular head of state.

mike65 · 20-09-2011 12:38pm

McGuinness makes his first miss-step today, having a go at "West-brits" in the southern media. He'll need to keep in tongue in check if he wants to actually win this election (and a bit of me thinks SF actually don't care that much if they don't, rather this is about keeping the SF profile high. Adams in the Dail is making little impact).

KeithAFC · 20-09-2011 12:45pm

mike65 wrote: »

McGuinness makes his first miss-step today, having a go at "West-brits" in the southern media. He'll need to keep in tongue in check if he wants to actually win this election (and a bit of me thinks SF actually don't care that much if they don't, rather this is about keeping the SF profile high. Adams in the Dail is making little impact).

Did he actually say West brits? Would not surprise me if he did. Anyone who dares criticise him or Sinn Fein are just West Brits. It is rather incredible.

dulpit · 20-09-2011 12:50pm

KeithAFC wrote: »

Did he actually say West brits? Would not surprise me if he did. Anyone who dares criticise him or Sinn Fein are just West Brits. It is rather incredible.

He did: http://jrnl.ie/231533

Wolfe Tone · 20-09-2011 1:01pm

He is right tbh, the west brits in the media are out to get him as they are horrified at the prospect of him being president.

KeithAFC · 20-09-2011 1:03pm

dulpit wrote: »

He did: http://jrnl.ie/231533

That is amazing. How is he going to get elected by saying stuff like that?

Zubeneschamali · 20-09-2011 1:05pm

KeithAFC wrote: »

That is amazing. How is he going to get elected by saying stuff like that?

He isn't, he knows he isn't, that's not the point. The point is that SF are running, and FF aren't, because if they did, SF would beat them.

SF are now the Opposition.

cardwizzard · 20-09-2011 1:08pm

KeithAFC wrote: »

That is amazing. How is he going to get elected by saying stuff like that?

By appealing to those who will vote for him. West Brits, or whatever you want to call them never will. Good to see you lashing MMG out of it on Boards, while your party sits and talks everyday day with him. Ironic.

seamus · 20-09-2011 1:18pm

cardwizzard wrote: »

By appealing to those who will vote for him. West Brits, or whatever you want to call them never will.

The point is not who or what he's upsetting, it's the obvious implication of what he's saying. It goes to show that he's lost none of the anti-British bigotry that led to decades of terrorism and murdered innocents up North.

Even if people liked the man for his accomplishments, public displays that he has failed to move on and still retains his bigotry will lose him any non-republican support that he would otherwise have from the admiring Irish middle class. He can't win it on the republican vote alone. He can't even make an impression with just the republican vote.

At the end of the day, using terms like "West Brit" makes it appear as though he's still just that same old revolutionary terrorist, but now paying lip service to politics because terrorism has failed and he's too old to keep fighting.

KeithAFC · 20-09-2011 1:19pm

cardwizzard wrote: »

By appealing to those who will vote for him. West Brits, or whatever you want to call them never will. Good to see you lashing MMG out of it on Boards, while your party sits and talks everyday day with him. Ironic.

I vote for the DUP? News to me.

Wolfe Tone · 20-09-2011 1:21pm

seamus wrote: »

The point is not who or what he's upsetting, it's the obvious implication of what he's saying. It goes to show that he's lost none of the anti-British bigotry that led to decades of terrorism and murdered innocents up North.

Even if people liked the man for his accomplishments, public displays that he has failed to move on and still retains his bigotry will lose him any non-republican support that he would otherwise have from the admiring Irish middle class. He can't win it on the republican vote alone. He can't even make an impression with just the republican vote.

At the end of the day, using terms like "West Brit" makes it appear as though he's still just that same old revolutionary terrorist, but now paying lip service to politics because terrorism has failed and he's too old to keep fighting.

Dont be daft, he is calling people like Myers west brits.

What are you on? Anti Brit bigotry led to the troubles?

EricPraline · 20-09-2011 1:27pm

dulpit wrote: »

He did: http://jrnl.ie/231533

And yet people claim that he is the only candidate who represents the entire island :rolleyes: These ill-considered comments clearly show a huge disconnect between Martin's understanding of Southern Irish culture and reality.

Martin McGuinness to be named as Sinn Féins candidate for the Presidential Election?

Comments