Arthur Morgan Watch: Irish News has interview with Arthur Morgan in tomorrow’s paper…

By day three of our Arthur Morgan Watch, it seems the Irish News has finally struck lucky… We await with interest to see the details…

  • RepublicanStones

    By day three of our Arthur Morgan Watch..

    You make it sound like a wildlife programme with Bill Oddie in cargo halfcuts with binos !

    Does the online edition go live after midnight or later in the morning?

  • Im possibly jumping the gun here without seeing the piece but this is another PR fail by the shinners if Morgan has opted to break his silence by speaking to a newspaper that probably has less than 100 readers in his constituency of Louth. If his re-engagement with the media was planned he would have broken his silence through one of his local media outlets like LMFM, The Argus or Dundalk Democrat all of which would have been much softer in their approach to him. If the local interview was positioned correctly then fed out through the channels he would still have received the much sought-after national/online coverage.

    [Ball, not man please – mods]

  • Mr Crowley

    Morgan has no option but to answer the Irish News as they are the main paper of the constituency that most matters to the shinners. Don’t be expecting anything that hasn’t been sanitised and spun by the shinner department of popular enlightenment. I would expect a statement as opposed to any legitimate question and answer session. It will be more of the usual dishonest, shinner shite as previously excreted by Dear Leader.

  • Echos

    Respect to those who cry out for justice for child abuse victim Aine Tyrell on Slugger. Such a shame they probably ensure Liam Adams’ argument that he cannot receive a fair trial in the North will prevail, due to their yet-to-be-proven-in-court allegations. This is NI’s most widely read blog after all.

    Or maybe it’s just certain poster’s personal distaste for GA that’s the catalyst this admirable concern for justice for Aine?

    Maybe one could take these people more seriously if they were crying out for justice for the Kincora victims who were served on a tray for so many of the ‘establishment’ many years ago.

    In the posters are sincere, maybe a contribution to this site may be in order:

  • Can ‘mods’ enlighten me as to why my comment above was edited to remove a line about the Irish News which was totally relevant to the post. Afterall the post is as much about the Irish News scoop as it is about the fact that Morgan has spoken to them.

    Mr Crowley of course Morgan has another option, that is tha he doesnt have to speak to them or answer their questions. The Irish News is hardly central to SF strategy nor has it been for the last 30 years given that they vehemently oppossed the Provos throughout their campaign.

  • Mick Fealty

    Simples. It was speculative and a slur. The problem with slurs is they don’t qualify as arguments and are therefore not useful to the ongoing discussion.


    I suppose our wall to wall coverage of the Robinson story from before it actually broke (Eamonn was on to it before Christmas) was personal too? And even if it was, the important thing is that things that were hidden before are now in the public domain. Mr R only has the opportunity to exonerate himself because the detail is out there, and no longer hidden. Same applies to Deputy Morgan.

    I’ll post later on what I think the public (as opposed to any private) interest is in the Dundalk end of this story. But for now, I’d prefer to hear what Deputy Morgan has had to say first.

  • chewnic

    I thought ‘Rusty Nail’ Hugh Jordan would have got the scoop for the Sunday World

  • At the risk of repeating myself: Mr Morgan has questions to answer because they relate to other. equally serious accusations made on this site and others.

    I understand the Irish News got the ‘scoop’ but that there are still questions to answer.

    I like everyone will wait and see and for my own part, hope the accusations eventually prove groundless. No quarter can or should be given to child abusers, whenever they rear their heads.

  • Echos


    I agree precisely. But it’s not an issue of a story being ‘personal’ or otherwise. The robinson story was widely discussed here before it broke, conventionally. However, it seems that the culpability of Mr. Robinson was not prejudiced in that early comment. And if it was, did that comment prejudice or jeopardise any future investigation. Time will tell.

    Robinson’s alleged wrong-doing was discussed, but not his assumed culpability? I suppose my question is: Where is the proof of alleged criminal equivalence (not acting in the public interest), that is being implied in this thread.

    And, in the event that proof is established, did comments on Slugger jeopardise the establishment of that proof in a court of law?

    All I’m raising here is the sincerity of motive. If one’s implied primary motive on this blog is to be of assistance in the search for justice for Aine Tyrell, then it would be wise not to add armour to Liam Adams’ attempt to avoid the scales of justice.

    Again, I re-iterate, my point regards sincerity. Let not one’s abhorrence of Adams jepardise the quest for justice for his niece.

  • Mr Crowley

    All I’m raising here is the sincerity of motive. If one’s implied primary motive on this blog is to be of assistance in the search for justice for Aine Tyrell, then it would be wise not to add armour to Liam Adams’ attempt to avoid the scales of justice.
    Posted by Echos on Jan 14, 2010 @ 11:18 AM

    You mean don’t do what his brother Gerry has done, even as recently as his blog of last weekend? There were newspaper reports that court injunctions were being sought to stop him from commenting on the issue of his brother’s guilt. You won’t need such drastic measures to stop Gerry commenting on his own guilt in fialing to protect the public.
    You mention Kincora above, Echos. I for one would love to see that case reopened and believe that there are many parallels; you have accused or known paedophiles, state agents and the advancement of the goals of the British establishment in each case.

  • Mr Crowley

    Agreed, Kincora should be reopened and any collusion between Brit establishment and child abusers dragged into the light.

    It is long past time child abuse and its repercussions were dealt with. It has damaged too many lives with apparent impunity.

  • Surely the argument that ‘Kincora should be reopened’ qualifies it as a classic example of whataboutery?

    Claim: Someone has shielded a alleged paedophile, and then lied about how they responded to believing that the crime in question took place. That person was an Irish Republican

    Response: Brits colluded with paedophiles as well! Re-open Kincora.

    Kincora and this issue are not related. If you want to campaign for that, do so, but there is no precedent that is relevant to the claims that are being made.

    Most political movements would compel people in their leadership to put their probity on issues like this beyond all reasonably doubt. For some reason, SF don’t feel the need to do that and can get away with not doing so.

    The actual details of the case are not really appropriate for open discussion and more has gone into the public domain than really should have done – that’s the sad reality for the families of people who are in politics.

    But the *politically* interesting question is this: SF’s relationship with its voters is one in which they can get away with fudging a question like this. No other party would be able to do this.

    If I’m right in saying that, the consequences for SF and it’s rivals are quite profound.

  • Mr Crowley

    Kincora and this issue are not related. If you want to campaign for that, do so, but there is no precedent that is relevant to the claims that are being made.
    Posted by Paul Evans on Jan 14, 2010 @ 02:21 PM

    I would disagree with you there Paul in that the RUC and thus state intelligence were aware of alleged paedophile activity yet chose not to initiate criminal proceedings. We are reliably informed that this was for the purpose of political blackmail, agent recruitment and asset protection in the case of Kincora and there is every reason to suspect that similar factors played into their handling of the Adams family.

    Gerry knew about Liam and did nothing but so did the RUC and the state. Yes Adams needs to go and so too does British rule.

  • Paul Evans

    The actual details of the case are not really appropriate for open discussion and more has gone into the public domain than really should have.

    Agreed, and its why I do have some sympathy for Gerry Adams in this case.

    I believe there should be investigations into all the churches and institutions responsible for children, throughout the island of Ireland.

    I dont believe, once the truth is known, people will support a party that has shielded child abusers, and here I am not referring to Liam Adams but to any other child abusers republicans may have assisted to escape justice.

    I also believe it was wrong of Gerry Adams to have told people not to report child abuse to the police, surely its the one crime that should be above everything else.

  • No. Adams needs to address these questons, AND whoever was responsible for doing what you say happened at Kincora probably has questions to address if what you say is true (I’ve forgotten the details no I can’t really comment).

    But the two questions are not in any way related. There is no connection. No causation. No relevance. To raise it here is misdirection. The culpability of those involved in Kincora is no more relevant to this than the culpability for a certain massacre in Drogheda or a bomb in a chip-shop.

    That’s what ‘whataboutery’ is. Instead of focusing on the issue in hand, you’re saying ‘you can’t talk about (alleged) republican nonces without talking about Brit-sanctioned nonces.

    On that argument, no individual issue will ever need to be addressed or responded to until all issues are addressed and responded to.

  • Mr Crowley

    you’re saying ‘you can’t talk about (alleged) republican nonces without talking about Brit-sanctioned nonces.
    Posted by Paul Evans on Jan 14, 2010 @ 02:43 PM

    Are you deliberately missing the point that Liam Adams, whom we are told was a member of IRA internal security as well as PSF in addition to his ‘youth work’, could very well also have been a ‘Brit-sanctioned nonce’?

  • KateMcC

    The primary motive in the search for justice is holding people to account for their actions or indeed inactions. This case is about more than one individual, it is not a witchhunt after GA.
    The only way to ascertain who was responsible for the failure to protect children and bring an alleged paedophile to account is by some sort of enquiry to take place, and this involves GA answering very pertinent and revelant questions. If others failed to act on GA’s information regarding the potential risk to children then they must also be held to account.
    Arthur Morgan’s explanation in the Irish News is far from satisfactory and again raises more questions than it answers.
    Donating to the NSPCC is commendable, however preventing the abuse taking place or indeed limiting the abusers capacity to continue the abuse, is as equally important. That involves ensuring there is proper accountability and structures in place. Once any adult becomes aware of child abuse they have a responsibility to act, such a burden is not one to be wished on anyone, but unfortunately once in receipt of it you have a duty to ensure children are protected.
    There is no reason why an enquiry into GAs role in this should jeopardise any trial.

  • Pippakin.

    Sympathy for Adams is well placed. No-one deserves that in their family. There’s a view that child abuse is a learned activity and that Liam Adams – if it turns out that he *is* guilty of it – should have his own experiences taking into consideration.

    But that’s not any of our business and it only gets talked about if you are a politician. I have enormous sympathy for all politicians – I think that the public make demands upon them that aren’t always reasonable and they are generally more honest and hardworking than we give them credit for being.

    But – in this case – Gerry Adams *appears* to have lied about a serious issue. If he did, it’s a massive issue and one that would finish most people. In fact, not going the extra mile to clear his name would finish most politicians. My point is that SF and it’s politicians have a different reality.

    It makes them a more questionable political force, but it also suggests that they are not vulnerable in the way that other parties are. A worrying fact for their opponents.

  • Mr C.

    Ah. I see what you’re getting at, up to a point. That line of culpability should be investigated, it it could be.

    But as an entirely separate question to the one of his brother’s involvement – unless you are saying that Gerry knew about *that* as well – and his apparent lack of candour reveals some collusion with the British state?

    That is something he would have trickier questions to answer on, to a trickier audience perhaps?

  • Paul Evans

    True, but to mention one in the same case as another is not to trivialise, confuse or change the subject.

    If the Brits sanctioned any form of child abuse then it needs the same investigation, and possible charges, as any other investigation into child abuse. This is not about republican v loyalist. It is about children. We need to remember that and stick to this and every investigation until we are sure that they are at last as safe as adults can make them