Gerry Adams’ White House ‘controversy’: “Quite apart from being bumptious, paranoid and absurdly self-pitying…”

In the Irish News Newton Emerson highlights the unintended consequences of Sinn Féin president Gerry Adams’ intemperate outburst following his recent misunderstanding with security at the White House.  From the Irish News

GERRY Adams could have been pragmatic and diplomatic about being locked out of President Obama’s St Patrick’s Day reception and simply laughed it off.

It is all too believable that the White House has the same hapless jobsworths in its security hut as everywhere else – and that has since been the US Secret Service’s official explanation.

But instead, Adams has alleged splits inside the US government, a Washington conspiracy against his party and an attempt by America’s first black president to send the TD for Louth to “the back of the bus”.

Quite apart from being bumptious, paranoid and absurdly self-pitying, this has caused people to ask if Adams and the White House really have fallen out – a scenario in which the White House will never appear to be the loser. [added emphasis]

Indeed they have asked.  [We’re not taking any more licks for Gerry! – Ed].  And it was nice to see in the RTÉ report that the Sinn Féin deputy president, Mary Lou McDonald, was able to make her way from her front seat on the bus to stand beside Gerry Adams as he complained to the media about his seating arrangements

Adding to the general sense of a lack of self-awareness on the part of the Sinn Féin president, as ‘evidence’ of this apparent anti-Sinn Féin bias by “some within the US administration” [an “unwelcome development”? – Ed], Gerry Adams, in a later statement, complained about the “constant additional security processes and delays” faced by Sinn Féin representatives visiting the US.

He chose, as a specific example, the delays experienced by Sinn Féin TD, Martin Ferris, on his trip to Boston.

“The constant additional security processes and delays which Sinn Féin representatives are regularly subject to has long been a cause of concern. We have raised it privately in the past.

“Yesterday my colleague Martin Ferris was delayed getting on his flight to Boston and when he eventually arrived on a later flight he was held for several hours.

Whodathunkit!  US Immigration, and possibly Homeland Security, the FBI et al, paid particular attention to the travel arrangements of a convicted arms-smuggler – and more recently associate of armed robbers and Garda killers – when he decided to visit the same US city in which the Provisional IRA procured the 7 tonnes of weaponry – that he was caught red-handed attempting to smuggle – from notorious Boston gangster James ‘Whitey’ Bulger.

[Perhaps one of those potential US “investors and key political players” should have a quiet word with Martin McGuinness while he’s sitting comfortably… – Ed]  Ah, that’s different.  [Why? – Ed]  He’s Sinn Féin (Northern Ireland).  [Partitionist! – Ed]  Indeed.

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

  • Brendan Heading

    Reminded of how quasi-monarchical republicans can be – Gerry’s comment “Sinn Féin will not sit at the back of the bus for anyone” suggesting that he embodies or personifies Sinn Féin reminds me of Queen Victoria using the majestic plural.

  • SDLP supporter

    The best comment on the whole affair was from a letter in the Irish Times that Gerry Adams and Rosa Parks had one thing in common: neither were in the IRA.

  • Surveyor

    Cut and paste Pete at it again.

  • Arthur Renfrew

    Pete in the driving seat and the Beard at the back of the bus again. The ironing is delicious.

  • Brendan Heading

    I saw that. Hilarious. 🙂

  • Hugh Davison

    There’s another thread on this, and Pete has made his mark there.
    Talk about ‘dragging the arse out of it’, to use a vulgar Dublin expression.

  • New Yorker

    Some in the US government consider them terrorists. I’m glad my government is careful about the movements of such people. The elevated self-importance of Adams ran into reality.

  • Dan

    I’m just surprised the reception was able to proceed without the most important Irishman in the world there. Didn’t Obama notice?

  • babyface finlayson

    Didn’t Gerry want to draw media attention to this awful discrimination?
    Otherwise why make such a bold comparison to Rosa Parks?

  • SeaanUiNeill

    “Mise Éire…………..”

    Roger Casement spoke eloquently and often of the need to assert the dignity of Ireland, but I do not believe that at any point he believed that this was in any way embodied in his own particular person.

  • chrisjones2

    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/gerry-adamss-us-snub-linked-to-ira-report-on-criminality-34555991.html

    Gerry says he has been told it was a mistake in relation to him … that this slight to his offer to give audience to the President was just a mix up and has been elevated to Obama’s Aide (perhaps the guy who brings in the coffee?) … that he wont be kept at the back of the bus. So there. Even the canapés Mary Lou smuggled out in her handbag wont console him. It was a BIG THING

    But perhaps for SF at last actions are starting to have consequences? And what will they do? Tweet bad things about Obama and hope Trump gets elected? Disappear the bus? Will their butterfly loving associates launch a pre-emptive strike on the West Coast?

    Nope.

    Gerry and his coterie will tuck their tails away and hope there is no disturbance to the $250 a plate dinner circuit for gullible Boston Irish Americans.

    The British and Irish Governments will hope that life gets back to normal as soon as possible – Gerry and Marty are far too useful to lose

    And meanwhile others in the party must be looking on and thinking that this was very badly handled by Gerry and he has to go sooner rather than later ….but then their views dont really count

  • Glenn

    It’s just as well Adams got in to see Prince Charles, when he demanded it. That particular bus would definitely have a semtex parcel under it.

  • chrisjones2

    Because, as we say in Belfast, he’s too far up his own a*se”?

  • Jag

    It is SF policy to confront these assaults on their freedoms head-on. That’s why Gezza complained about the food provided to him when in police custody in 2014 in Antrim. That’s why SF constantly complain to the press standards folks in Dublin about Independent News and Media. That’s why there was an apology in the Andytown News for slamming living standards in west Belfast. That’s why MMG tore strips off Miriam O’Callaghan in the dressing rooms after the Irish presidential debate in 2011. And that’s why SF elevated last week’s affront to the status of “controversy” and claimed there was an orchestrated campaign which also ensnared Martin Ferris.

    The policy is “hit them so hard that they don’t do it again [or at least think twice about the sh*tstorm that will ensue]”. Does it work? Hard to say. As SF grows bigger, it carries more weight, and going nuclear probably does deter recurrence. It just makes them look like sullen children, or using canons to hit flies as General Maxwell said of the British suppression of the Easter Rising. That’s not to take away from the legitimate grievances that SF undoubtedly have, it’s just “going nuclear” all the time is fatiguing.

    Will the latest tantrum impress the Yanks? No, of course not. Suggesting there be 90 minute delays to their landings at Shannon, or worse saying the airport is busy and waving them onto Brize Norton instead; now, that would get their attention…

  • chrisjones2

    …but unlike Gerry he was a terrorist involved in armed resistance ……

  • Thomas Barber

    Was William of Orange a terrorist then Chris ?

  • Thomas Barber

    Adams is right to be paranoid that dark forces are at work to undermine him thats part and parcel of being an Irish republican who challenges the status quo, Im sure Donald Trump is feeling the same way at the moment but im sure he would just love to have been in Gerry Adams position when he was cold shouldered by Obama an honour in these times. Im sure though Adams and Sinn Fein will remember the lack of camaraderie from other Sinn fein politicians who remained inside while their leader was refused entry.

  • SeaanUiNeill

    Chris might differ but I’d answer a resounding “yes” myself. We are sadly still living with the seismic tensions of the Prince of Orange’s usurpation, with its cynical aborting of his Uncle James’s policies for complete religious toleration and civil liberties for all in his three kingdoms:

    http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674073098

    It is of interest, too, that Sir Roger, in his 1916 defence in court, referred back to the recognised status of those Irish Gentlemen who had elected to serve their true and rightful king against the treacherous and utterly illegitimate British “government” of the Elector of Hanover during the eighteenth century. Didn’t work……….

  • Ben De Hellenbacque

    But is it real paranoia or “absurd self pitying” posturing to gain political capital? A representative from any other (more democratic?) political party would try to field off this apparent snub as a minor moment of embarassment/awkwardness/misunderstanding etc in the name of good diplomatic relations. Instead Grizzly turns it, yet again, into glorified victimhood. Bleating foul despite your past being far from savoury exposes a heavy reliance on the old dependable binary nature of some human beings. Ach sure Gerry’s still as Norn Irish as he always was no matter where he travels to.

  • Thomas Barber

    “We are sadly still living with the seismic tensions of his usurpation”

    Sadly an understatement Seaan

    History and facts speak for themselves the heavy price paid not only in Ireland but the rest of the world cannot be underestimated.

  • Ben De Hellenbacque

    Hmmm no. William of Orange was the first constitutional (non absolutist) monarch in Britain since 1066. He also reigned jointly with his missus who was a constitutional monarch in her own right. He could do very little without her consent or without the consent of parliament.

  • Thomas Barber

    William didn’t succeed anyone he was a foreigner financed by foreign Jews and the Vatican and supported by traitors in London who through force of arms without the support of the people usurped the then rightful King.

  • Thomas Barber

    Name me any politician who doesn’t play to the gallery but self pitying he isn’t, maybe a highterned sense of awareness but hardly delusional. He can read between the lines like everyone else and im sure he and Sinn fein will decode the whole episode as a subtle hint from those who pull the strings that that they feel its time for a new Sinn Fein leadership.

  • Ben De Hellenbacque

    Probably with the help of the Illuminati too I guess.
    Oh those invisible hands of Jewish financiers. Don’t ever approach your bank for a loan or mortgage: usury is not just a sin in itself, availing of it is unwitting collusion in your own oppression. I wonder was the first draft of ‘The Protocols of the Elders of Zion’ in circulation in the 1690s. We christians are such helpless creatures: incapable of figuring out when we’re being manipulated by greater powers.
    It’s not inconsistent with Gerry’s line on his White House snub.

  • Ben De Hellenbacque

    I’m more mindful of a Carry On Caesar; Infamy, infamy, they’ve all got it in for me! Aw bless.
    The ability to raise victim status to such a noble, worthy and elevated position requires ski…, long term suggestible adherents. That’s how party loyalty is measured.

  • Thomas Barber

    Dont shoot the messenger Ben the facts are out there for all to see perhaps sticking your head in the sand will blind you from the truth but it wont change reality. Wasn’t it Cromwell who allowed the Jews back into England after Edward turfed them out over 300 years earlier.

  • SeaanUiNeill

    Ben, its all propaganda. For a start neither he nor his wife were monarchs, how could they be, with James, uncle, father and father in law still very much alive, and patently willing to give the lie to the fact. Certainly I have not encountered James giving assent to any “law” of abdication that would have made way for the Prince and his wife. No, if William was not an unconstitutional rebel in every sense, no one can be so termed!

    No respecter me of that patently Oligarchic body of self seekers who turfed out both their lawful (and “Constitutional”) king and his advanced policies of toleration. If it’s a choice between genuine advanced liberal thinking from an “Absolute” monarch and a lot of pretence at the same from John Locke’s capitalist buddies, I’d choose the former. Look up John Locke and enclosures if you really want to get just how good the Whig Revolution really was for ordinary people underneath all that sickening hypocrisy as the Whigs “legally” shifted common land into private hands, something the king had protected the poor against before the Quislings called in William to “liberate” them all.

  • SeaanUiNeill

    Cautious up vote, Thomas, as someone with about 7% Jewish blood, I’m not so sure my (7%) people really should get the blame for the Dutch Usurper. They may have leant the unscrupulous fellow money, but it was strictly business. But yes, the “traitors in London” and elsewhere I’d fully concur with.

  • Croiteir

    Absolutey correct – and how many people were jumped over to get the Hanoverians into power, something like 70 wasn’t it?

  • SeaanUiNeill

    One thing I’d neither blame or credit Cromwell for Thomas. While I’m saddened to contradict someone leaping to my defence honesty compels me to quote from the magnum opus of my acquaintance the American Historian Marcia Keith Schuchard;

    ‘Though the appeal of a party of Dutch Jews to Parliament has received ample attention from historians , the adherence of a larger number of European Jews to the royalist cause has often been minimized or ignored.”

    She cites David Katz’s book “Philo-Semitism and the Readmission of Jews to England, 1603-1655”, Oxford , Clarendon Press 1982, and Norman Roths work on the same theme.

    The return of the Jews under Old Noll is simply another piece of selective history written by the winners to retrospectively compliment the old sociopath (in this case it was concocted by the propagandist Whig admirers of Oliver).

  • SeaanUiNeill

    Was about 70 or so. Our most recent descendant of Fergus (and James himself) is of course Francis II:

    http://www.jacobite.ca/kings/francis2.htm

    Even as a legitimist supporting the Catholic Stuart succession, I’d be secretly very happy if my kinsman Don Hugo Ricciardi O’Neill was offered the role and brought home from Portugal to Dublin Castle. He is a most personable figure form our meetings and a restoration of the ancient line of our high kings would honour Ireland in my opinion.

  • SeaanUiNeill

    Delighted to find something we can agree on again, Ben. Kenneth Williams in a beard and those awful square(in both senses) spectacles …….no wonder Obama wouldn’t “want one about the place….”

  • SeaanUiNeill

    Thomas “its time for a new Sinn Fein leadership”….

    At last something I can actually agree with “drone strike” Obama on…..

  • Hugh Davison

    You may have misunderstood my posting. I was referring to the fact that there’s another discussion on Slugger about GA’s experience at the White House.
    Pete, for reasons known only to him, has started a second discussion on the same topic.

  • Jollyraj

    Perhaps this blatant BS from Gerry about state conspiracy from the US will make our American friends reflect more deeply on the various mendacities he has been peddling for decades, and which perhaps they may previously have carelessly accepted at face value re: the dastardly Brits.

  • Jollyraj

    Are you saying Gerry was threatening the US?

  • Jollyraj

    I can’t really see the US being too worried about Gerry’s attempt to bully and intimidate. The Beard should perhaps reflect on the perspective he has, hopefully, gained from the event.

  • Jollyraj

    Indeed. Better be too careful than not careful enough, I say.

  • No, this is ‘too many links’ Pete.

  • Granni Trixie

    It’s hard to stop when you’re havin fun.

  • Am Ghobsmacht

    Crying ‘wolf! wolf!’ will someday backfire.

  • Thomas Barber

    No offence intended Seaan Im not religious so it matters little to me the religious beliefs of those who financied both Cromwell and the Dutch dwarf and yes it was strictly businness and the same bankers are still reaping the rewards in the City of London and around the world but that doesn’t change the fact that it was Jewish bankers who financed both people. At least you have the comfort of knowing that Ireland was one of only a few countries in the world that didn’t expel Jews.

  • Thomas Barber

    “re: the dastardly Brits”

    Dont worry Jollyraj the Americans already know how dastardly the Britis are –

    “Perfidious Albion”- the View of the U.S. National Security Archive?

    http://www.pravdareport.com/opinion/columnists/25-08-2013/125491-perfidious_albion-0/

    .

  • Thomas Barber

    Are these letters forgeries then Seaan ?

    Cromwell To Ebenezer Pratt of the Mulheim Synagogue in Amsterdam,

    16th June 1647:

    — “In return for financial support will advocate admission of Jews to England: This however impossible while Charles living. Charles cannot be executed without trial, adequate grounds for which do not at present exist. Therefore advise that Charles be assassinated, but will have nothing to do with arrangements for procuring an assassin, though
    willing to help in his escape.” —

    To Oliver Cromwell From Ebenezer Pratt, 12th July 1647:

    — “Will grant financial aid as soon as Charles removed and Jews admitted. Assassination too dangerous. Charles shall be given opportunity to escape: His recapture will make trial and execution possible. The support will be liberal, but useless to discuss terms until trial commences.” —

  • Cosmo

    http://www.vocativ.com/news/290321/inside-scalias-very-very-weird-secret-hunting-society/

    hmmm, oh dear, see ‘yer man’ Francis is Grand Master of Order of St Hubertus….another member being that grotty and little (Supreme Court ) judge Antonin Scalia, the circumstances of whose recent death at the fun ranch of Poindexter, another member who denies it, is somewhat shrouded in mystery. A bit vulgar, and tacky, don’t you think !

  • Am Ghobsmacht

    Gerry IS the status quo!

  • Jag

    Was Gerry threatening the US last week when he was prevented from entering the White House? God no, I’d expect he was his usual charming self.

    Just saying that throwing a wobbly at the US secret service won’t change behaviour. But, coming back to Ireland and raising issues of interest to the US, such as the use of Shannon, will elevate his status with the Yanks.

    Always “going nuclear” is ultimately counterproductive.

  • Surveyor

    Remind us again who the Americans fought during the American War of Independence?

  • Surveyor

    So it’s acceptable in your eyes to issue an invite to the leader of one of the biggest political parties in Ireland and then refuse him entry when he turns up?

  • Ben De Hellenbacque

    Yes cuddly Cromwell did allow my Jewish ancestors back. So what’s your point & you’re off topic?

  • Ben De Hellenbacque

    I don’t agree with your misspelling of Kenneth.
    The reason for Gerry’s perma-affixed milk bottle bottoms is cos it magnifies his squinty little mince pies – intentionally. Without them his peepers are like p1ssholes in the snow. Yes Gerry has an optician (along with orthodontists & teeth whitening experts) among his image management team. Whether he has impaired vision or not is irrelevant.

  • New Yorker

    The Americans fought the British in our war of independence and won. Adams et al fought the Brits in NI and NI remains in the UK.

  • SeaanUiNeill

    Thank you for the spelling correction Ben, sometimes my fingers acquire a mind of their own. Done now. I met Ken when he was doing the voices for Nick Spargo’s “Willo the Wisp”, and to the consternation of my more conservative friends he used to call out to me across crowded roads, rush over and accost me as I passed through Soho and Covent Garden! He once told me that he thought I was how his friend Charlie Hawtrey would have been like if he’d actually been born a man (I have never known how to take that). So I hope his shade will forgive me putting an “i” in his name, as almost every one of his sentences began with it.

    Regarding the general gist of the rest “selectivly impaired” I’d imagine!

  • SeaanUiNeill

    Well I certainly believe that the House of Commons should be suspended entirely because Jeremy Thorpe and Cyril Smith were once members…..

    Sir, King Francis is your legitimate master, and such slurs will be noted for a proper settlement on his approaching restoration to his three kingdoms, (soon may it come)…………

    I was once in a weekend party in New England with Charlie Poindexter, but I think it’s John you’re thinking of……..

  • Cosmo

    sincerely hoping there’s a mix-up between the st Hubert and St Hubertus orders…
    …and that elderly Francis was not at this vulgar secretive gathering.

  • SeaanUiNeill

    Tom, you’re certainly on the right track blaming the bankers (“Look to the money!!!) but I’d encountered these letters before in Captain A. M. Ramsay’s little book “The Nameless War” and they looked very fishy. When you do a lot of primary source research in archives of seventeenth century manuscripts you get a feel for authentic voices, and these simply sound wrong.

    I used to know the Ramsays years back, and they are less than enthusiastic about Archie’s book, themselves questioning his scholarship. The letters he quoted had been sent to Oscar Wilde’s old boyfriend “Bosie” in 1921 by a notorious Amsterdam anti-Semite, L. D. van Valckert. They were in German, and are probably nineteenth or very early twentieth century forgeries like the “Protocols”. They claim to be transcriptions of “original” seventeenth century letters transferred “during the eighteenth century” to the manuscript book they were “found in”. Should you check out the books I’ve mentioned above that have researched the return of the Jews to Britain, you will discover a much more organic pattern of discussion and negotiation between a number of Jewish communities in Europe and those in power at different times in England during the seventeenth century. The reliability of sources is a most important concern for any serious historian, and while there are some extremely interesting issues in our history, such as the manner in which the “Toleration” policies of King James II & VII have been ignored as “inconvenient” by those historians extolling the imaginary “birth” of Democracy in 1688, the “World Jewish Conspiracy” has consistently failed to support its claims with any credible historical documentation, ands these documents are just one example amongst many concocted to support such theories.

    If you are interested in some real “suppressed history” that can be fully supported by serious and credible documentation, check out Scott Sowerby’s excellent research:

    http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674073098

    “In the reign of James II, minority groups from across the religious spectrum, led by the Quaker William Penn, rallied together under the Catholic King James in an effort to bring religious toleration to England. Known as repealers, these reformers aimed to convince Parliament to repeal laws that penalized worshippers who failed to conform to the doctrines of the Church of England. Although the movement was destroyed by the Glorious Revolution, it profoundly influenced the post-revolutionary settlement, helping to develop the ideals of tolerance that would define the European Enlightenment.

    Based on a rich array of newly discovered archival sources, Scott Sowerby’s groundbreaking history rescues the repealers from undeserved obscurity, telling the forgotten story of men and women who stood up for their beliefs at a formative moment in British history. By restoring the repealer movement to its rightful prominence, “Making Toleration” also overturns traditional interpretations of King James II’s reign and the origins of the Glorious Revolution. Though often depicted as a despot who sought to impose his own Catholic faith on a Protestant people, James is revealed as a man ahead of his time, a king who pressed for religious toleration at the expense of his throne. The Glorious Revolution, Sowerby finds, was not primarily a crisis provoked by political repression. It was, in fact, a conservative counter-revolution against the movement for enlightened reform that James himself encouraged and sustained.”

    Now that has quite important implications for the meaning of some of those perfidious “foundation myths” we in Ireland are all still bedevilled by!!!

  • SeaanUiNeill

    Cosmo you are marked already, no point in backtracking. Our innocent king’s grandson is the first of the legitimate line to be born in London since James II and we are simply now awaiting the final collapse of the Elector’s line. Parliament itself seemingly requireds no effort on our part to discredit it, it is doing an excellent job of this all by itself.

  • Cosmo

    Yes, agree, that neither Parliament, nor the Vatican is blameless in its recent history.
    I’m sorry, despite weathering through some excruciating dinner parties with ‘people in waiting’ in the South of France helped only by fine wines, can’t buy the belief that they represent a (spiritually-based) replacement for capitalism. No, humanity has to move on and invent new ways – minus ‘big Daddy’, and a few entitled ‘loopers’.

  • SeaanUiNeill

    Oh, you’ve met them too! I’m far less interested in the gang of “Légitimistes” around Henri VII than our own boy Franz, although that may simply be because I’m angling for a Jacobite title…..

    There is still a serious issue under all of this. If you run to the second half of a posting elsewhere on this thread responding to Thomas Barber:

    https://disqus.com/home/discussion/sluggerotoole/gerry_adams_white_house_controversy_quite_apart_from_being_bumptious_paranoid_and_absurdly_self_pity/#comment-2580919902

    I link to Scott Sowerby’s work and mention the “advanced” thinking of the later Stuarts. The illumination of history (no matter how late on), the dispelling of sterile foundation myths (“The Glorious Revolution”, etc) and the recognition of just how utterly wrongheaded the worship of the Prince of Orange by one camp and Whiggery (in the guise of “Republicanism”) really is here, is to me a valuable project in itself. And I do salt my Legitimist inclinations with another prince, Kropotkin, after all……

  • SeaanUiNeill

    I’ve mentioned this before on Slugger, but if that leader has been constantly discredited by issues such as his treatment of Áine (amongst others) then it becomes less and less possible for those in the real world “out there” to take any party that insists on being fronted by such a person seriously.

    I’d see this as a heavy hint myself……but don’t worry Hilary will be along in a few months!

  • Cosmo

    Yes, have already taken note of the Sowerby work – interesting stuff to delve into.
    Yes, indeed uncritical ‘Worship’, but, of whatever stripe, is a betrayal of our humanity…..
    (….always rather ‘fond’ of Kropotkin myself!)

  • SeaanUiNeill

    Scott has saved me a lot of work in my own book, whole swathes of exposition can now just be referenced. I’m glad others are reading him. The automatic “big boy” attribution of “Toleration” to the great John Locke is one of my pet concerns, and Scott opens up a whole grass roots movement that has been long ignored in the “Whig” homogenisation of a more complex and contradictory history for propaganda purposes.

  • SeaanUiNeill

    The Continental Army also fought the Tory “Forgotten Loyalists” of the colonies whom Robert Graves describes in an essay in his 1969 book “The Crane Bag and Other Disputed Subjects”.

    Such people were roundly betrayed, Graves shows us, by their British friends, and utterly ruined by their participation in that war by their support of the loosing side. Oh, and I wonder what that may have to teach anyone here in the Wee Six today?

  • SeaanUiNeill

    You too, Ben, שָׁלוֹם? Now we’re really getting off topic……

  • Cosmo

    … and If Louis et high-handed church and monarchy hadn’t been quite so ruthless towards the Hugenots, perhaps their payback communications campaign wouldn’t have been so effective and forceful.
    The history of history is fascinating – but, attention in a French accent!, don’t do a Casaubon and delay too long before completion and publishing – forthcoming generations might not be able to find the footnotes on their smart-phones. I realise this correspondence is the distraction-coffee!

  • Jollyraj

    Generally, I would say no, it isn’t. That has to be balanced, though, against the quite understandable unease at admitting someone who has had a thirty year association with a proscribed terrorist organization. The American people have suffered serious terrorist attacks in the past by Islamic fanatics, while Adams is a man who is in many people’s minds inextricably linked with similar groupings. Al Qaeda put bombs in planes to target civilians, the IRA put them under cars in busy high streets all over the UK. He says he was never a full member, and perhaps he wasn’t, but he definitely did seem to act as their negotiator and mouthpiece. I don’t think Adams was up to anything untoward when he was denied access, but you can never be too careful.

  • SeaanUiNeill

    Thank you, Cosmo, the book is out with my agent as I write! It’s up to how much someone thinks they can con the public from by publishing it now………

  • Cosmo

    Oh, do pls edit this reply – as not being expressed in as elegant language, as you know how..
    And the title is ….. ? or are you superstitious ?
    And, self-publishing and distribution, is a viable approach nowadays, by the way.
    And, why is I just know you will pick a great book-cover !

  • Jarl Ulfreksfjordr

    American War of Independence? Surely you mean the First American Civil War?

    Despite Yankee propaganda not everyone was a ‘rebel’.

  • Chris

    In The Army Now

  • SeaanUiNeill

    Cosmo, its done……

  • Cosmo

    you can delete this now

  • babyface finlayson

    That’s Pete.
    He’s experiencing the links effect.

  • the rich get richer

    Sinn Fein will Probably have to do their Own Lockout to get Gerry to hand over the Reins to the Next Generation.

    Are their any more political Leaders as hard to Retire as Gerry ?

  • Surveyor

    Why issue an invite in the first place then?

  • Jollyraj

    Dunno. Collusion, maybe? Perhaps a £200 million inquiry is called for.

  • Jollyraj

    Correction: NI remains, according to the democratic will of the people of NI, in the UK.

  • Jollyraj

    Can’t see any reason why Hillary would look any more favourably on the covering up of sexual abuse than Obama would – if you think that (from a lengthy list of possibles) was the reason for keeping him outside.

  • SeaanUiNeill

    Oh, I’d imagine it was the media publicity that worried the Whitehouse rather than his actual actions…….

    No fan of Hillary myself….

  • Jollyraj

    What do you mean? Surely he is unanimously elected year after year. I would tend to believe Gerry that he IS Sinn Fein. There would quite possibly be no more SF if he were to drop dead in the morning.

  • Am Ghobsmacht

    I’ll think you’ll find Gerry denies ever being in an army very strongly…

  • Chris

    At least when he’s Rockin all Over the World he’s staying out of mischief at home

  • chrisjones2

    “dark forces are at work to undermine him thats part and parcel of being an Irish republican who challenges the status quo”

    that could be true if he wasn’t in effect the outworking of the most successful; British foreign policy success since the second world war

  • chrisjones2

    …no he was a King and invited to assume the monarchy of what later became the UK

  • Bill Slim

    It teaches them not to lose.

  • SeaanUiNeill

    Bill, the fat lady has not yet entered the stage……..

    Seriously, I care enough about a culture I’ve been brought up to some degree within, and that still marks many of my own families political loyalty, to not simply watch it ignore reality until it does unquestionably loose. As I believe others like AG wish, I’d want Unionism to change, to admit its many mistakes and to actually find arguments that do not simply rely on ignoring realities, but are intelligent and articulate responses to the challenges it faces.

    The alternative is to join these other “forgotten Loyalists” in ignominious defeat.