Gerry Adams: hearts and minds…

Gerry Adams is the centre piece of last night’s Hearts and Minds (pushed earlier in schedules last night by the snooker). Adams’ performance is calm and measured. There’s a bit of a ruffling when Noel asks about the Repubican Movement’s response to David Trimble’s we have jumped Mr Adams, now it’s your turn statement when he took his party into the institutions in anticipation of decommissioning. The section on the McCartney killing is very interesting. Interesting listening/watching. We look forward to hearing your own views!!

  • Gonzo

    I hate the rather blatant way that Adams suddenly turns into the interviewer any time he’s on H&M any time Noel asks him a question that requires any speculation or specifics.

    It’s just so annoying (an interviewer just can’t express a view, especially during an election when legal restrictions are in force), but it wastes time and will no doubt please a section of the audience, so I guess we have to put up with it.

  • iluvni

    Dreadful fare served up by Adams last night, and again on Talkback.

    I cringed for him with his intro about druids and tree-hugging today.

    As for the new tactic of SF turning on the interviewer, as employed by both McGuinness and Adams recently on H&M…how boring and pointless.

  • DerryTerry

    Gonzo, you’re spot on, Adams response to Thompson definitely pleased this member of the audience and Thompson’s inability to respond was very telling.

    On the issue of the role of the interviewer, however, I’m not sure if you’re suggesting Noel has restrictions and had answers he couldn’t give, or whether it is unreasonable to ask an interviewer his opinion.

    IMO the attempt by interviewers a la Paxman to demonstrate they are the smartest person in the studio, rather than get to the bottom of issue, does neither the interviewer or the political process any good.

  • Éamo

    Gerry was very confident and articulate, Kent Brockman bores me nowadays.

  • DerryTerry

    Iluvni, did you watch the same programme? Just because you want Adams to be bad doesn’t mean he was, just as i accept that just because i want him to be good, doesn’t mean he was either.

  • iluvni

    I don’t want him to be bad…I just want him to answer the questions!

    Today on Talkback he was asked a question about the similarities between 9/11 and Canary Wharf. Can’t remember the exact phrase but he shrugged it off because he wanted to focus on the future or something. Well ok then Gerry, we’ll only ask you nice easy wee questions then….

  • Alan McDonald

    Mick Fealty,

    This thread throws me back into the same state of confusion I’ve expressed elsewhere. Since it is about Gerry Adams, how do you post without talking about “the man?” The word “Adams” and/or “Gerry” appears in every post so far. Where’s “the ball?” In fact, what’s “the ball” in this thread?

  • Gerry Lvs Castro

    I liked the bloke on ‘Talkback’ who informed Gerry that he was ‘more red than green’ and wanted to know why Gerry wasn’t pushing the ‘Socialist’ part of the ’32 County Socialist Republic’ any more. Because his electorate mightn’t all want to vote for a Castro-loving Marxist whose party are too ‘secular’ to even lower the tricolour at SF HQ when the pope died perhaps?

  • Levitas

    So many of your posters have such closed minds eg “iluvni” and “gerry lvs castro”, they can not even be bothered to be discreet evn in their choice of moniker, thus rendering all that they say entirely predictable. The result is that I increasingly find that reading this blog is a bore…and frankly compared to many other blogs its over-rated by its own readership, its just a sectarian playground for the most part and its tiresomely repetitive. I am honestly pro-republican and even I find its interest level is beginning to wane, if I was genuinely disinterested I wouldnt have returned after the first visit, and as for the pompous “ball not man” pronouncements, well this thread,as so eloquently stated earlier proves that not to be the case.The only function this blog serves that I can see is to give lazy journalists a quick route to picking up cheap copy…but then again maybe that IS what its for?

  • Davros

    Levitas- Mick is looking for republican bloggers. Why don’t you offer your services ?

  • Alan McDonald


    If my post is the one you refer to as “eloquently stated,” I thank you. I consider myself to be “genuinely disinterested,” as you put it, and I find most posts on this (or any blog) unreadable.

    Unfortunately, I have the same problem with my local daily newspaper. So, I check out the blogs and skim through the dross seeking the gold. My current analysis tells me there is more gold here than in other spots.

  • IJP

    Levitas and Alan

    You both raise some very interesting observations re Slugger.

    The ‘ball not man’ rule could be replaced with one I use at political meetings I chair, i.e. ‘no labels’.

    In short, I think the aim is that people should not resort to ‘Well you would say that, you’re a…’, and instead focus exclusively on the content of what is posted (while it is not unreasonable to ask someone what ‘group’ or ‘community’ they consider themselves to belong to, nor to observe that their views as posted seem precisely the same as some other person’s or some other group’s).

    So, in this case, the ‘man’ is Gerry Adams but the ‘ball’ is what he said on H+M.

    I can’t speak for Mick, but I remember him setting up the blog with a purpose merely to inform people on what was being said about NI politics. The number of responses is astonishing, but also tribute to the outstanding source of information this blog has been and continues to be. That just proves what a good job Mick is doing and I commend him for it.

  • Alan McDonald


    I agree with your observations. As an Amereican, I come here to be directed to Internet-available news that I might have missed elsewhere. I only scan the responses to see if anyone has first hand info to add.