On Adams, we are still being asked to believe not what we see but what we are told we should see…
Given the amount of stick Peter Robinson is getting from the MSM, I’d hate think what would have happened to him if it had been found he was shielding a brother he suspected of child abuse, and promoted him through the party ranks, and then persuaded a senior party front bencher to lie about it afterwards. If you read nothing else today, read Suzanne Breen’s excellent account of how Gerry Adams lied about his brother Liam’s role in the party in Dundalk. And consider just how you might feel about an MP who allowed his constituents send their kids to youth projects he’d kept in the dark about his own suspicions? If it was Robinson and not Adams, and the clubs were in Tullycarnet and the lower Newtownards Road and not Clonard and Beechmount, the likelihood is he would be fried for his sins. And not simply by the media, but by his party. Adams on the other hand…
Gerry Adams said he believed his brother was a paedophile from the moment Aine made her allegations in 1987. Yet 10 years later, he went canvassing with Liam through the streets of Dundalk in the southern general election. Photos show them laughing and smiling.This was at a time when Sinn Fein had previously led us to believe Liam had been expelled from the party and was estranged from Gerry. Would Peter Robinson, Jim Allister or Mark Durkan get away with taking someone they believed to be a paedophile on a canvass? I think not.
It has to be safe to assume that if Adams (and his party) were lying over his brother’s role in Louth, then they are also lying over his role in various youth projects in West Belfast. Yet today’s piece by Breen is the first serious piece of journalism from the BelTel on the subject since before Christmas. Sometimes you have to take the view that what’s important is not just the top down piece process (which always favours in the interest of the various elites), but the interests of the ordinary citizen who still buy newspapers.
There is feverish speculation about a future Panorama programme and what it might or might not reveal about Robinson. If it is a genuinely new and serious revelation, he may have to walk. But if as is perfectly possible, it turns out a damp squib then people like Breen are entitled to ask just why “we are still being asked to believe not what we see but what we are told we should see“.
Éirigí, a lucht ocrais, ó bhur gcodhladh ….. ? Maybe it was your principled resignation that cleft a once great party in twain. Another of 846 (the AntiChrist’s) Damascene conversions?
By the way, he has already fallen in my eyes
John,
I’m sorely tempted to call you a liar. From your previous posts you condemned the antichrist as being essentially lower than a snake’s belly. You can’t get any lower than that.
#
Mr Crowley, I think it would be safe to assume that you are not a member of Mr Adams’ party. If this is, indeed, the case then nobody gives a flying f**k whether you think he should or shouldn’t go. Confine your petty remarks vis-a-vis the party offices to the leader of whatever party would have you as a member.
Posted by socaire on Jan 05, 2010 @ 07:59 PM
Isn’t that the problem in west belfast today socaire, when other republicans who have a different viewpoint are labled dissident or anti republican, are the people of west belfast not entitled to know the truth of why Laim Adams was allowed to work where he worked for so long with these allegations hanging over him.
“I’m concerned that the allegations against Liam Adams will not be tested in court because of adverse publicity, and hence any due justice will be prevented.”
Well, you shouldn’t be in regard to comment on message boards. A comment must create a “substantial risk” that the defendant cannot get a fair trial. Since there is no reliable means of making the required measurement in message board comments, they are not used for the purpose of quantifying whether there is a substantial risk present. That will be made via analysis of comment in print and broadcast media, and analysis of comment by public figures.
In addition, the Contempt of Court Act has a strict liability rule to comply with Article 10 of the ECHR covering the right to freedom of expression. Under Section 5 “a discussion in good faith of public affairs or other matters of general public interest is not to be treated as a contempt of court under the strict liability rule if the risk of impediment or prejudice to particular legal proceedings is merely incidental to the discussion.”
So it perfectly acceptable (and a human right) that freedom of expression should not be censored but should, however, be qualified to protect other human rights where appropriate (i.e. to protect a person’s right to a fair trial). The Act only applies where proceedings are active. Contrary to myth, the Attorney General’s guidelines to the media are not enforceable. Another myth is that all comment is censored.
If the prosecution service or the judicial authority in the relevant jurisdiction decides that the defendant’s right to a fair trial has been impaired it will almost certainly be as result of comments from a senior politician and leader of a party of government within that jurisdiction declaring him guilty of the offence, with other comment being surplus to requirements.
What is occurring here is that folks are proffering the Contempt of Court Act as the basis for demanding that any criticism of a senior politician be expediently censored. That nicely dovetails with the self-censorship (or/and otherwise) that is occurred in the media about the role of that senior politician in this affair, with that media supporting the state at the direct expense of the public interest.
And another thing, 846. If the Peace Process falls because of this manufactured maelstrom of cretinous hypocrisy, the people will know that you – 846- was partly responsible – nay – wholly responsible for our return to violence and bloodshed. How can you sleep in your bed at night?
‘The leadership of Sinn Fein is an irrelevancy to me personally’
lol, John. That’s why you have been posting ad nauseum about ’666′ Gerry since the year dot!
As a man of God, where is your forgiveness towards Adams, a man you view as a sinner?
#
Only when goats trip trap over MY bridge!
Posted by socaire on Jan 05, 2010 @ 07:27 PM
oh gawd another troll lol
Alias,
Interesting analysis. I can’t comment on it since I am not particularly conversant with the law. Are you a lawyer? If not I would be interested in hearing from one of our lawyer contributors on the points you make.
I am not in favour of censorship, just a prudent self restraint.
#
Paul, as you seem to be a fairly recent addition to the posters on this site, could I ask that you do not discriminate against those of us who are not completely fluent in Ulster Scots. I just feel that your posts would be very interesting but if we can’t read nor comprehend them ………. ?
Posted by socaire on Jan 05, 2010 @ 07:04 PM
Stop trolling.
Also Alias,
Mr. Crowley made the point earlier that these two stories are intrinsically intertwined. I don’t agree. Adams certainly has questions to answer. One despicable thing that he said, IMO, was accusing his dead father of abuse. His father cannot defend himself, since he is dead, so I think that remark, especially since it was hearsay, should have been left unsaid.
I think the result of the next British Election will tell a tale. Will West Belfast refuse to vote for a man condemned by the gutter press as a ….. what was it? Or will they chew the thing over and dismiss the micro groupings and come out in their thousands to vote Adams in again? If they do, where will that leave the sanctimonious running dogs nipping ineffectually at his heels? Will that silence them forever? NO! They will manufacture a new ‘scandal’ and here we go again. The pathetic hyenas circling always sniffing for a weakness.
Your petulance and trolling merely highlight the state of desperation within your party; which has been exposed for the spineless, dishonest personality cult that it is.
Posted by Mr Crowley on Jan 05, 2010 @ 08:05 PM
yep spot on well said Mr crowley
I think that Mr Crowley and Paul are one and the same.
I’m convinced that there has been a fair amount of sock puppetry recently without singling out anyone in particular..
I Lionel Hutz, attorney-at-law, can back up Alias. Or alternatively pack my briefcase and jump out the window
Thanks, Lionel. That removes a lot of my concerns.
#
I think that Mr Crowley and Paul are one and the same.
Posted by socaire on Jan 05, 2010 @ 08:35 PM
Well you are wrong Mr TROLL
Did Aine Tyrell manufacture the allegations which Gerry believes? Did the press manufacture the lies that Gerry has told or the photographs and contemporary news reports which expose the lies? Does the fact that Bertie Ahern was elected during a tribunal negate the fact that he was dishonest? Whether Adams is elected or not he is still dishonest and disreputable; as are you for your slavish and salivatory defense of him.
Fact socaire is trolling to try to knock this thread off topic and deflect attention away from the mounting pressure on gerry adams
The desperate Gerrylove is strong in this one. An IP check by the moderators will demolish that particular troll stratagem. You have neither argument, integrity nor principles; that much becomes increasingly apparent with every attention-seeking post.
Joe
I’m sorely tempted to call you a liar. From your previous posts you condemned the antichrist as being essentially lower than a snake’s belly. You can’t get any lower than that.
Gerry Adams has actually crawled under a snake in recent weeks.
socaire
Thanks for the compliment. But no thanks. I have not contributed to Aine Tyrell’s astonishing accusation against the Antichrist or to his downfall in any rational sense. It is not man that tells you this but your own last remnants of faith in God that reveals to you that all is not well with Adams. I sleep okay by the way and I am not fearful of a return to violence, nor do I believe that Gerry Adams contributed in any way to the peace.
chewnic
You’ve noticed me, have you. I wonder why, but see above. God may forgive him in eternity. I never actually saw him as anything other than the devil’s operative, a soldier strategist but a soldier nonetheless.
#
Fact socaire is trolling to try to knock this thread off topic and deflect attention away from the mounting pressure on gerry adams
Posted by Paul on Jan 05, 2010 @ 08:44 PM
Anyone who disagrees with you paul is a troll or sinn feiner. you do not contribute to the debate nor give any meaningful insight other than call people trolls well so what if they troll, you obviously do it.
Regardless of Paul’s contribution he is still absolutely correct in regard to Socaire who is a shameless troll.
Socaire’s primary intention is to deflect attention from the failings of Gerry Adams and to dishonestly attempt to discredit the building evidence against Dear Leader and those who would draw attention to it. He is little more than a trolling party hack with minus integrity.
The desperation being shown by the GA fan club is laughable.
Regardless of Paul’s contribution he is still absolutely correct in regard to Socaire who is a shameless troll.
Socaire’s primary intention is to deflect attention from the failings of Gerry Adams and to dishonestly attempt to discredit the building evidence against Dear Leader and those who would draw attention to it. He is little more than a trolling party hack with minus integrity.
If he wants to be Deaf, Dumb and Blind then so be it, indulging in personal insults because the person has a different viewpoint to act as the Sinn Fein leadership is doing now.
Good post mr crowly
Anyone who disagrees with you paul is a troll or sinn feiner. you do not contribute to the debate nor give any meaningful insight other than call people trolls well so what if they troll, you obviously do it.
Posted by tacapall on Jan 05, 2010 @ 08:50 PM
I am apalled by this scandal and I have made my feelings known.Those that try to deflect attention way from GA and co deserve to be exposed for there shamless defence of him.
SF have been experts, in the past, in managing (massaging?) the message. They now appear to have lost it, somewhat, perhaps starting with the failure to tie down a date for devolution of P&J at St. Andrews.
If G.Adams were not around the same age as myself, I might accuse him of having clouded judgement due to senility. (Yes, I expect that may come back to haunt me.)
#
SF have been experts, in the past, in managing (massaging?) the message.
Posted by joeCanuck on Jan 05, 2010 @ 09:07 PM
SF are still at it on here but they have failed miserbly
Out of curiosity, Paul. Do you want to wipe PSF out as a party or will you be happy just to lose Gerry? Who do you think should replace him? All that Adams said was that his niece was a good girl and that her accusations should be taken seriously. Surely neither you nor your running mate can find fault with that?
Also out of curiosity and as an aside, Paul’s message shows the time of my last post at 9:07 yet on my computer it shows 03:07 although my clock time shows 04:07. Sunwise, there is a 5 hour difference. Does the UK no longer put back the clock in the Autumn?
socaire
Sinn Fein is a one man band. When Gerry goes, the mysterium ends.
There will be a power struggle between sinn féin in ROI and NI. It’ll be interesting to see who wins
Gerry Adams has one thing at least going in his favour and that is that he does not suffer from the terribly embarrassing handicap he might otherwise have if the little mob of semi-literate tricoteuses who stay up all day and all night posting the same dreary BEBO-level drivel on this site over and over again were in fact his supporters instead of his detractors.
With enemies like these who has need of friends?