“I moved immediately both to stop that and to get him dumped out of Sinn Féin..”
According to Gerry Adams’ previous version of events..
Mr Adams denied that Liam was nominated as a potential Sinn Féin candidate in the Dundalk area after the Sinn Féin leader broke ties with his brother. He said that as soon as he heard of the possibility his brother might be nominated, he moved to ensure that such a thing could not happen. “I moved immediately both to stop that and to get him dumped out of Sinn Féin without telling people why. But I moved very, very quickly. He wasn’t a contender, there was no nomination for Liam Adams in the Dundalk area. There was no convention in which his name was put forward, there was no contest in which he was part of.”
But today’s Sunday Tribune has pictures, from a Dundalk Argus article, of Gerry Adams canvassing in Dundalk in June 1997 with Liam Adams on behalf of the SF candidate Owen Hanratty. [Added link to Sunday Tribune front-page article]
Updated below the fold.And we’ve been sent another photograph of the Adams brothers canvassing together in Dundalk in 1997.
And there are still questions about what happened in west Belfast..
Adds From Suzanne Breen’s Sunday Tribune article [added link]
We have also statements from three republicans who were present at the selection convention in the Imperial Hotel, which Sinn Féin still denies took place. It was chaired by Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin and minutes were taken, the sources said. Liam Adams was supported by Belfast republicans living in Dundalk who were moderates and pro-leadership.
Local Dundalk republicans, and south Armagh men living in Co Louth, rallied behind Hanratty. After a debate, it was agreed that IRA activists and republican supporters who weren’t in Sinn Féin could vote at the meeting.
“The room was packed,” one source said. “Liam Adams came in with two envelopes. I’m told one was an acceptance speech and the other was one of him conceding. He immediately saw from the crowd gathered that he wouldn’t win, so he pulled out. A massive show-of-hands defeat would have damaged his brother.”
“Another source said: “Liam announced to the room that he was withdrawing from the race. He wished Owen Hanratty all the best, pledged to work for him on his campaign, and they shook hands.”
Sinn Féin claims Liam’s involvement in the party in Dundalk was brief, but republican sources insist it lasted at least seven years. One source said Gerry Adams regularly visited his brother in Muirhevnamor, staying overnight in his home many times.
Update According to the BBC report
A Sinn Fein spokesman said it saw no conflict with the Sunday Tribune’s claims and Mr Adams’ previous comments on meetings with his brother.
“Gerry Adams has made it clear that he did see his brother on occasions in the 1990s and made it clear when he discovered he was a member of the party in the Dundalk area he moved to have him expelled in the late 1990s,” a Sinn Fein spokesman added.
Which is a reference to the RTÉ interview with Tommie Gorman.
Except that, as noted above, Gerry Adams subsequently said that, as soon as he heard of the possibility his brother might be nominated as the Sinn Féin candidate for Co Louth in the 1997 general election he “moved immediately both to stop that and to get him dumped out of Sinn Féin”.
That’s before Sinn Féin selected Owen Hanratty as their candidate for Co Louth in 1997.
And before Gerry Adams joined Liam Adams on the streets of Dundalk canvassing for Hanratty.
J O’C
I don’t know why I tried to argue with you. Where was Gerry abused? You are still imagining he was, as if you want it to be true, that is what is disturbing to me.
Peter Fyfe,
So you have been caught out lying and now try a bit of spinning: pathetic really. Your post was simply an attempt to deflect attention away from the crimes of terrorists.
As to my contempt for republicans: I am proud of that. What you again lie about, however, is that a number of commentators have on a number of occasions mentioned that I hold loyalists in even higher contempt. Of course that would not fit your narrative so you lie about it: unsurprising.
I also hold collusion in extreme contempt. I do not believe it was vast. I do, however, believe it was there. I have never made any bones about the fact that I would like all the colluding agents of the state to be prosecuted with the full rigour of the law. Anyone who committed murder was a murderer whatever organisation they were in. You know full well that has always been my position. I do not find it remotely uncomfortable to say. You wish I did as that would suit your narrative and so you lied about what I have said. Then you feign understanding: more pathetic lying dishonesty.
Now you tell us do you think the murderers of Kathyrn Eakin, the murderers of those at Sean Graham’s shop, the Darkley, Kingsmills etc. murderers should be persued or are you just more worried about collusion?
Or in reality are you trying a bit of distraction.
Peter Fyffe
Where was Gerry abused?
His whole family faced physical, emotional as well as sexual abuse at the hands of his father, as admitted by way of deflecting attention away from his niece’s suffering.
What am I lying about? Did I misquote myself? It is not an attempt to deflect criticism. The acts you mention are a disgrace on this area of the world and I am thankful I am only 24 and do not have a clear memory of the events I was alive for. It tortures me to think how did people stand by and let this happen. I have thought many times of leaving this god forsaken place when I think of what people did to each other and the indifference that existed. I acknowledged your condemnation of Loyalists, I asked about your lesser condemnation of state forces. Where did I lie about this? When have you referred to elemants of the security forces as,’ child killers’? You do not appear to treat it with the same contempt, that is my point. I acknowledged you have tackled the issue. When was the last time you interrupted a thread about sex crimes and labelled members of the security forces as, ‘child killers?’ Why would I lie about my opinions of different murders? I do not try to separate them like some, they are all a disgrace.
You have some cheek talking about distraction, you used this thread about the abuse of a 4 year old child to label a fellow poster a supporter of child murderers because she won’t jump to your command. Must be great up there looking down on everybody.
You spelt my name incorrectly but I did abbreviate yours so I guess I deserved it. He says he did not know of the abuse to later years therefore I ask again where was Gerry abused?
Peter Fyfe,
Caught out in the lying you keep spinning. Still not able to comment on child killers other than in the most obtuse terms are you Peter? Makes one wonder about that condemnation of your doesn’t it?
However, you still cannot get it that I have repeatedly condemned collusion. I know that is inconvenient to your narrative and hence, I presume that is why you lie about it. However, the unfortunate fact is that you are lying. As I said it seems to be an attempt at distraction. As to me indulging in distraction I merely pointed out that Kathy C who condemned Gerry Adams for his inadequate response to a child abuser also supports child killers. That is called holding hypocrites to account.
The fact that you tried to do the same to me and were exposed as a liar is I am sure distressing as you thought it was a clever move. However, it was a lie and you have been caught out. You might have the decency to admit it but since you lied at the start, are continuing to lie and show no interest in the truth makes me doubt practically all that you say. I even begin to doubt your supposed opposition to violence. Since you lie repeatedly about me and what I say am I not entitled to doubt the veracity of your other comments? Maybe you are a closet cheerleader?
Now run along and dream up a few more untruths to tell about me.
Im sure deep down you are highly uncormfortable with these injustices but they don’t make the keyboard as much.
I was being sincere when I said this, you may not believe me. To me you do not appear to be as forthright in your condemnation of state violence as that of republican or loyalist violence. If i’m wrong, I am genuinely sorry for offending you. Do not accuse me of condoning the murder of innocent people, I am not doing this. I have constantly condemned this time and time again on this thread as well as others.
I should point out that first line was a quite from the first post I made on this thread.
John,
And so now the reason it will damage Sinn Fein is because Gerry Adams’ father was abusive? My head would hurt too much trying to put all these disjointed ideas forth regarding why Adams is now doomed.
All I’ve been able to gather from the reports is that Liam Adams is accused by his daughter of raping her as a child. She evidently went to her uncle with this accusation and he didn’t do right by her, although Gerry Adams has repeatedly said that he believed the accusations the first time she told him.
If the above is true, then he declined to act on his responsibilities as an uncle and a man. That is despicable.
I wish, however, that the girl involved didn’t have to watch people making political hay out of her very personal tragedy. I find that simply awful and unworthy of honorable people.
Now run along and dream up a few more untruths to tell about me.
How do you get out of the house in the morning with that head? Everybody is a liar except you, all supprt terrorism except you, you don’t have a collar round your neck in real life do you, because you sure sound like you do, and we know what clerics are like don’t we?
Peter Fyfe,
Your lying is now catching you out.
On this thread you have just said about “I have constantly condemned this time and time again on this thread as well as others. “
However, earlier on this thread you said this “I don’t believe the actions of the IRA were right and may not say it as much as I should.”
So you clearly admit that you are much less interested in condemning the terrorist organisation which caused most of the murders (though it is unclear whether or not you regard them as murders – but we will leave that for the meantime). That is you who have admitted to this double standard in your own words.
You then repeat your lie that I am inadequate in condemning any and all collusion. The problem here is that you are the one who by your own admission minimise the majority of the murders and raise in significance the ones you have a political interest in raising. That contrasts with many of us here – by no means only myself or other unionists – who denounce all the murders from whatever quarters. Indeed I am almost more appalled by any murders committed by people in the security forces as they were there to defend us from terrorists. You, however, minimise (by your own admission) the much, much larger number of murders committed by those whom you seem to semi approve of.
Now as I said before run along and dream up some more lies. You might do some undisguised cheerleading as well as you have fairly clearly exposed yourself as a cheerleader.
Turgon
Maybe you could start reading my whole posts and stop getting precious. You do not appear to hold the same contempt for state violence due to the much more regular occurance when you condemn republicans. I read this blog quite a bit and thats how it appears to me. That is my opinion, not a lie. I do not need to condemn when you ask me to, I’m happy with my own concience, I have never voted or been member of a party who has had members associate with paramilitaries. How is Trevor Collins getting along? I know your not a fan as I have saw previous posts, but you will still vote for his party I guess. Not all black ands white though, is it? I guess you know this and thats why you call me a terrorist cheerleader. Were you distracting the attention from yourself? I do not need to defend myself against supporting the actions of the IRA when you demand as I never have. Just out of interest how would that improve the life of anybody but yourself in hearing those words?
I want to get this right. You have accused me of hijacking this thread away from republican murders because I support them. You stirred this thread away from talk of the protection of qa child abuser, are you a supporter of protecting child abusers by your logic? Of course your not, I just wish to highlight the flaw in your thinking. Of course I did say I do not condemn violence as often as I should, the reason I don’t is becasue I do not see it contributing anything positive. You may be more interested in killing conversation, I am 24 and would like to know what others think.
Peter Fyfe,
Back you come again. We have already established that you do not condemn IRA violence as much as you might. Now I put it to you that that is beacuse you are actually in significamnt sympathy with the IRA’s campaign of violence. You certainly seem much more worried about all other sorts of violence than the IRA’s.
That is why I gave you the opportunity to condemn the IRA: you did not; that tells us something about you.
You again avoid admitting my ringing condemnation of any and all loyalist terrorism and that includes any which involved collusion.
A few comments ago you said that “If i’m wrong, I am genuinely sorry for offending you.” Now you are saying that “You do not appear to hold the same contempt for state violence due to the much more regular occurance when you condemn republicans.” Make your mind up: either stick to lying abut me or apologise for it.
In reality I have frequently condemned loyalist and republican murders. I also condemn any and all collusion and any murders committed by any of the security forces. I am entirely consistent on this. It is you who by your own admission “I don’t believe the actions of the IRA were right and may not say it as much as I should.”
You are all over the place on this.
Incidentally as a supposed non cheerleader why is it that you enthusiastically support the Maze shrine on the extremely dubious grounds that it is closer to the “primary sources.”
On Bobby Sands this is your view:
“Bobby sands was a person from Northern Ireland who joined the IRA, was jailed for his activities. While in the Maze Prison he took part in the blanket protests and eventually became the first person to refuse food as part of the hungerstrike of 1981. He died as a result.”
If you are not a cheerleader you are at very best a minimiser of the wrong and immorality of the IRA. Your refusal to condemn them in answer to requests from myself and others explains your position. That and your admission that you do not condemn them as much as maybe you should.
As to you being 24: I care little about your age. You seem to be a 24 year old minimiser of the crimes of the IRA and sometime cheerleader for hunger strikers. Why should I care what age people such as you are.
A person reading this thread could be forgiven for thinking the two of you don’t care for each other.
Isn’t it a pity that a thread on a current and rather important development descends into a pissing contest of who condemns in the strongest terms collusion and the hunger strikes?
I take it the moderator is off for the holidays.
Kevsterino,
Probably a fair criticism.
I think, however, this thread has become irrelevant re Gerry Adams as it has been passed by with several other threads about Gerry Adams and what he did or did not do and whether or not he will survive. Slugger threads often get side tracked for all manner of reasons; quite often because another thread takes up the original theme.
Fair enough, but I probably should have added my own opinion of the whole condemnation business, so as not to come off as some blog-nanny.
Condemnation for too many represents their final step in dealing with these horrible things, as if folks believe they have now done their bit to keep virtue alive. It is simply not enough to condemn.
In my opinion, if we are ever to improve our world, we need to take action root out the causes of the madness. If we merely condemn, we condemn our children and theirs to suffer similar atrocities.
Happy New Year and all the best