Gerry McGeough confronts Gerry Adams

The Irish News reports that Gerry McGeough took the opportunity to have a quiet word with his former comrade-in-arms associate, Sinn Féin president Gerry Adams, when the latter was canvassing at the gates of St Patrick’s Church in Eglish, County Tyrone.  Gerry McGeough is currently being tried on charges of attempted murder, possession of two revolvers and being in the IRA between 1975 and 1981.  From the Irish News report

It is understood that after the exchange, Mr Adams leaned against the church wall and was comforted by outgoing Fermanagh and South Tyrone MP Michelle Gildernew.

Sinn Fein last night played down the verbal spat which was witnessed by parishioners emerging from Mass.

“There was a phalanx of them [Sinn Fein] at the chapel gate as I was coming out of Mass with my children,” Mr McGeough said.

“I immediately saw an opportunity to raise a few issues with Gerry Adams.

“I simply asked him why he was not speaking out about nationalists in Diplock courts.

“We were handshaking distance apart with Michelle Gildernew alongside about 10 to 20 others.

“We had our exchange and [Mr Adams] told me to go away.

“I said how dare he tell me to go away as I was coming out of my parish church and suggested that he should go away.”

Mr McGeough said he made points about alleged phone tappings and ongoing harrassment of republicans and accused Mr Adams of incorrectly claiming “the nightmare for nationalists was over”.

, , , , ,

  • tom soft

    Still waiting

  • T.S

    The Easter Rising Meets The Life of Brian
    (Republican Sinn Féin denounces the Real IRA as “traitors”)

    In the understandable publicity surrounding the bombing of the British Security Service’s (MI5) building in Belfast, a revealing spat between the exploders of this bomb – the so called Real IRA – and the main Irish Republican anti peace process group of dissidents – Republican Sinn Féin – went unnoticed and largely unremarked.

    First of all, with regards to the bombing itself. Given MI5’s nefarious exploits in Ireland, the harsh reality is that very few Irish nationalists would be concerned or surprised at attacks on the MI5 building, assuming that no person is injured in such attacks. Thus, many people might then raise half a cheer at news of the bomb and the Real IRA will congratulate itself on having perpetrated a devastating attack on the “Brits” and also at having dealt a blow to supporters of the peace process. Then, reality steps in.

    We learn that damage to the building itself was negligible and that an absolutely petrified taxi driver was forced to carry a deadly bomb in his car right across Belfast to the MI5 building, whilst the “soldiers” of the Real IRA held his family hostage. By all accounts, he ran from his car once he had done what he had been told to do and shouted an alert to police. His life, and that of his family, will never be the same again. The taxi driver could have no idea that the bomb would not explode on the way to its target.

    Before I explain my opposition to the Holier Than Thou stance of the dissidents (and why more importantly it is anti historical), it should be stated that the decision to site MI5’s new offices in Belfast was a disaster for those arguing for a new peaceful dispensation. It was a clear undermining of the Irish position and an encouragement to those who argued that we still had a British administration in the North.

    The move was obviously a bargaining chip in the negotiations for the doing away with the border between north and south, the standing down of the broadly despised RUC police force and the withdrawal of large numbers of combat troops. As British army barracks were being dismantled all over the Six Counties, hard line unionists could point to the establishment of MI5’s offices in Holywood (no not that Hollywood – Belfast’s Holywood) as a major signal of England’s intent to look after its own. The intention is perhaps understandable, in terms of reassuring pro British hardliners to sign up to the peace process. However, the decision to allow MI5 a continued role in the post peace agreement security strategy was far more than a slap in the face for Irish people, it was a straight kick in the genitals.

    A very good and concise pro British security analysis of the setting up of the MI5 offices in Belfast can be read here at

    For all that, the realpolitik of dissident car bombs and sporadic attacks is that they will not derail the peace process. What is far more likely is that the dissident groups themselves will continue to splinter because of the huge pressure that is now upon them to mount attacks so as to simply survive as military organisations (and thereby also maintain their self perceived prestige). In other words, the dissident paramilitary tail will wag the political dog instead of the other way about.

    Any group engaged in military actions is forced to be clandestine and therefore paranoid. Sensing spies and informers around every corner is not a good basis for furthering political ideas.This is the experience of each generation of Irish republicans but still there are those who refuse to digest it, or learn from the past.

    To speak quite bluntly, if as a political group you have not built up a groundswell of public support for your activities (a process which takes years, if it succeeds at all), actions like stopping people from the North travelling by train to rugby matches in Dublin (and everyone is aware that these passengers are mostly Protestant by the way); causing long traffic tailbacks for Sunday shoppers; holding families hostage, or making threats to “deal with” groups that oppose your views are the actions of a bully not of a freedom fighter. In truth, you really are a terrorist in Leon Trotsky’s classic definition of that term because you have no social context (or support) for your actions.

    (Leon Trotsky (with glasses) featured in Diego Rivera’s famous mural – Man, Controller of the Universe

    It may surprise many readers of “Cic Saor” that Leon Trotsky, who founded revolutionary Russia’s Red Army, and was its first brilliant commander, was a fierce opponent of individual acts of terror to further a political cause. Trotsky called it adventurism and, crucially, said that these acts “belittle the role of the masses in their own consciousness”. Nothing, not one act of self gratifying terror, can replace the only real agent for social change and that is mass consciousness of the urgent need for change.

    Much closer to home, there is an Irish military general whose career puts even the likes of Leon Trotsky into the halfpenny stakes and truly shows up the political piousness of republican dissidents for what it is. This general is Aodh Mór O’Neill (Hugh the Great O’Neill – Earl of Tyrone 1550 – 20th July 1616). Hugh O’Neill bankrupted the English treasury, as whatever army Queen Elizabeth the 1st sent against him was destroyed by O’Neill in a series of devastating campaigns of guerilla warfare. O’Neill was described by military leaders in Europe as one of the greatest generals of the 16th and early 17th century.

    This same O’Neill, one of the greatest of Irish heroes, was quite happy to take the English shilling when it suited him, accept his earldom, attend court in England, treat and negotiate with the English administration at Dublin castle, visit Queen Bess and kneel humbly before her, and generally accept that some form of English presence in Ireland was probably irrevocable.

    Aodh Mór Ó Neill – One of the greatest military generals of his age

    The point for O’Neill was what would work best to maintain a Gaelic order in Ireland, not make some false show of principle about never dealing with the English. He very nearly succeeded in his utterly pragmatic approach. If the Spanish forces who landed at Kinsale in 1601 to lend support to O’Neill had landed at Killybegs (Donegal) instead, we would probably all still be speaking Irish and walking round in Celtic togas instead of Levi Jeans but there would still be those in our country who look to England as their cultural home. This is a fact of our historical legacy and O’Neill recognised it and used it to his advantage.

    Thus, with the shades of Trotsky and Hugh O’Neill at our shoulder, we descend into the dissident Irish republican world of virtuous posturing, finger pointing and Not An Inch rhetoric.

    At this year’s Derry ceremony to commemorate the Easter Rising, a senior member of Republican Sinn Féin denounced the Real IRA and its tiny support base as “traitors”. The commemoration of the 1916 Easter Rising is a revered event for all Irish people and it must have been painful for Real IRA supporters in attendance to hear their own group being denounced from the speaker’s platform at the Derry event. In fact, a group people from the 32 County Sovereignty movement (the Real IRA’s political wing) left the commemoration in protest at what had been said.


    Liberty Hall, Dublin 1917 – commemorating the Easter Rising the year before.

    It is perhaps worth reminding ourselves that the leaders of the Easter Rising in Ireland publically declared that their sacrifice was made in the hope of creating an Irish Republic where all citizens, of all creeds and beliefs, could live in harmony.

    As far as I am aware only the local newspaper, the Derry Journal, reported the events in Derry and my congratulations go to the unnamed reporter. The Journal’s report can be read here.

    According to the Journal, the main speaker, a Mr. Emmet White from Offaly, told the assembled crowd:

    “We have many groups who call themselves republicans. We have the so-called Real IRA who are fighting for a 32 county republic or so they say. What did they do between 1986 and 1997? They were willing to accept the Provo agenda. They are traitors. They should put down their arms and go home. There can be no dilution of principle.”

    A masked man then spoke from the platform on behalf of Continuity IRA members, denouncing the peace process and describing peace supporters (that would be most Irish people) as treasonous and threatening to take action if we continued to “protect Ireland’s foe”. Of course, the threats were aimed primarily at Gerry Adams and the provisional Sinn Fein leadership but the logic of dissident thinking is that we are all legitimate targets, whereas only they hold the true flame of the Irish struggle alive. Hugh O’Neill would shake his head at the whole farce of it.

    Can dissident republicans (some of whom are entirely genuine in their beliefs and aspirations) not see what they look like to the outside world? The whole scene could have been lifted from the Monty Python film The Life of Brian.

    Take this dialogue, for example, where People’s Front of Judea member Reg (John Cleese) is sat in the amphitheatre with his comrades as they discuss who they hate most – tying themselves in knots over names in the process:

    Reg: The only people we hate more than the Romans are the fucking Judean People’s Front.
    Stan: Yeah the Judean People’s Front.
    Reg: Yeah.
    Stan: And the Popular Front of Judea.
    Reg: Yeah.
    Stan: And the People’s Front of Judea.
    Reg: Yea…what?
    Stan: The People’s Front of Judea.
    Reg: We’re the People’s Front of Judea!
    Stan: I thought we were the Popular Front.
    Reg: People’s Front!
    Francis: What ever happened to the Popular Front?
    Reg: He’s over there. (points to a lone man)
    Reg, Stan, Francis, and Judith: SPLITTER!

    Tá ár dteanga ag fáil báis agus níl aon treoir ag an t’aos óig – our language (Gaeilge) is dying. Our young people have no direction in life and certainly no political aspirations, whether they be about our language or Ireland, Gaelic and free. The Irish economy is in ruins and the fat cats have simply lined their pockets and skedaddled with the aid of government. The fishing industry has collapsed and we have no small scale infrastructure in place to generate local economies. Yet all the dissidents can offer is a slanging match about who is the most genuine Irish republican and issue threats to those they disagree with. For there can be no “dilution of principle”.

    It seems to me that journalists and commentators have not done enough to properly investigate and expose the political and tactical weaknesses in the dissident position. I am not talking about meaningless condemnations but proper journalistic analysis.

    In fact, what has happened instead is that, as the peace process has taken hold, a number of journalists have chosen the likes of Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness as the primary focus of their investigations. Well known journalists like Ed Moloney have gone further and have embarked upon what can only be described as a crusade against the pro peace process Sinn Fein leadership accusing it of a lethal duplicity and mendaciousness. Moloney’s new book (Voices From The Grave) apparently directly accuses Gerry Adams of having ordered the death of “disappeared” Belfast woman Jean McConville. This follows on from Moloney’s book on the IRA (A Secret History of the IRA), in which he accuses the Adams faction of having sacrificed the lives of IRA men for the sake of a covert political agenda. Wikipedia has a good account of Moloney’s career thus far here:

    See –

    I have always been a great admirer of Moloney’s work on collusion between loyalists and the British state. His work on the activities of UDA quartermaster William Stobie, for example, was outstanding. I should also point that he was one of the few journalists to expose the continued activities of the Official IRA and its links to the Workers Party and to receive a number of threats for his commendable research. However, all that said, I think there is a major flaw in his analysis of the Sinn Féin leadership as Moloney’s sources of information regarding the Adams leadership group in Sinn Fein very often come from that very same anti peace process constituency referred to above, which clearly detests Gerry Adams more than the Brits.

    The arguments put forward by Moloney and others with regards to the leadership of Sinn Féin may, or may not, be true. The Sinn Féin leadership was involved, along with the IRA, in guerilla warfare with the British and presumably would have had to throw smokescreens and be mendacious on occasions just as the British were. However, the net effect of the assault on Sinn Féin is very often to present dissident republicans as honest brokers in the argument, when in fact (as we can see from the events in Derry described above) they might be said to have the biggest axes to grind. To illustrate this, the question must be asked as to why those IRA dissidents who have now raised the issue of Jean McConville’s awful fate were not shouting about this issue from the 1970s onwards once it became clear that she had been abducted and executed as an informer?

    There is an excellent critique of Ed Moloney’s position at writer and broadcaster Jude Collin’s blogsite:

  • mcclafferty32

    Gerry McGeough left SF because of their pro abortion stand and their increasing acceptance of the British status-quo in the six counties!

  • Michaelhenry

    he was not selected to stand in the dublin council elections, so he left SINN FEIN, keep to the facts.

  • mcclafferty32


    “Keep to the facts?” I”m quoteing Gerry McGeough. Who are you quoting?

  • mcclafferty32


    “Keep to the facts”.

    I’m quoting Gerry McGeough. Who are you quoting?

  • Michaelhenry

    im quoting gerry mcgeough himself, he left SINN FEIN because he was not picked to run in the local dublin elections, talk abot being petty.

  • Michaelhenry


  • mcclafferty32

    I’m not trying to be “petty” I’m just quoting what Gerry, himself, told me.

  • Michaelhenry

    told you, he told the people of the 32 counties that he supported SINN FEIN, but then he lost the vote to stand for SINN FEIN in dublin, i thought gerry was the person for the job myself, but what he said later on makes me think that the dublin people were right.

  • mcclafferty32


    1) My understanding, as told to me by McGeough, was his main reason for leaving Sinn Fein was due to their pro-abortion stand for one and the path they were headed down toward Stormont. Not due to any “election failure in Dublin?”

    2) What did McGeough supposedly say “later on that made you think the Dublin people were right?”

  • Michaelhenry

    SINN FEIN were in the crown free stormont from 1998, McGEOUGH did not leave the party untill several years later, thats fact, SINN FEIN never had a pro abortion stance, in McGEOUGHs day the decision was left up to the pregnet woman and what ever her circumstances were, now a days SINN FEIN is an anti abortion party, i do not like this but i still support SINN FEIN and not huff about it. i did not say that the dublin people were right, just that they made the decision of not selecting GERRY McGEOUGH for the dublin local elections, then he left, this is the reason that he left the party, lets not forget that when GERRY McGEOUGH stood has an independent in the last assembly elections he said that he would take his seat at stormont if elected, well the people said no to him and so all we hear now is anti stormont guff.

  • mcclafferty


    As regards your “Dublin elections – GM”. Another SF lie/smear. Gerry McGeough never at any time put his name forward for elections in Dublin. He was not even on the voting register during his time in SF there. As a matter of fact, he was never particularly interested in getting involved in Dublin politics as his intention as a family was always to return to his home in Tyrone.

    If SF would spend less time trying to assassinate McGeough’s character and do something
    about his case it would be more appropriate.

  • Munsterview

    I do not know Gerry Mc or know of his thinking other than through his publication which I got on a few occasions. I have no particular ax to grind here regarding his membership of and his relationship with Sinn Fein.

    What I do know and I have seen is the appalling record of his arrest/release and the cat and mouse tactics of the Current Police Service towards him, it was as bad and indeed worse than much of the harassment of Republican or Nationalist activist during the old R.U.C. days. It is inexcusable that Gerry Adams, Martin McGuiness of Gerry Kelly et al should allow it to continue, given what we have all experienced North and South from these same Police tactics.

    Just to remind everyone yet again of just how bad this record of Police harassment is, could somebody please post the chronology of dates and times of arrests of Gerry that I see referenced some times back?.

    As I have also said before the measure of freedom of expression available in society is gauged in what is available to a dissident voice and given what I can recall of Gerry’s continual arrest list, for somebody like him it is pretty dismal.

    A clear word of warning to Gerry Adams and Co. if you think that you are going to repeat Dev in the The Thirties with ‘awkward Republicans’ and leave the machinery of State operate against Gerry Mc and people like him unchecked, then think again.If you do then a principle card of the Peace Process deck is not there or being played and you may quickly find that some of us ‘ have not gone away you know’ and we still know how the run a campaign or two!

    I for one did not support the Peace Process so this oppression of critical voices common under the R.U.C. and Fianna Failure for the past four decaded,( that I personally was also subjected to for standing with the Republicans in the Six Counties), could continue unchecked under a new dispensation irrespective of how much Gerry Mc is a thorn in the side of Sinn Fein.


  • mcclafferty


    I have been in contact with Gerry McGeough over this issue
    of running in the Dublin election and Gerry said that “you should be ashamed of yourself for spewing out such blatant lies about Dublin”.

    Due to Gerry’s position on the Ard Comhairle in
    2001, he was privy to certain developments. One of these was that the “rank and file” were to be kept in the dark about a new pro-abortion agenda that was under
    development. Shortly after that Gerry left the party for that reason.

    The Southern-based individual pushing this agenda later fell out with the shinners over her career prospects and took them to court where she won a settlement. No true Republican would have taken this measure, but SF is now
    infested by careerists.

    During the 2007 Assembly elections (which saw Gerry arrested) he pushed a hard anti-abortion agenda and forced SF to row back on their pro-abortion stance; even causing them to make the usual wishy-washy statements on the issue.

    I hope this finally puts an end to this smear-campaign against Gerry McGeough and this “Dublin issue”.

  • mcclafferty


    Dead on!

  • Munsterview


    ‘……..Just to remind everyone yet again of just how bad this record of Police harassment is, could somebody please post the chronology of dates and times of arrests of Gerry that I see referenced some times back?…….”

    Can you find and post this ?

    As to the abortion issue, this was always dynamite (no pun intended) for Sinn Fein. The party was always pushed by vocal mini-groups outside the organization and my a minority inside to adopt a pro-abortion stance. Aside from any moral issues involved, the problem was that the majority of the Party and definitely that of it’s support base did not accept this stance, hence the ambiguity.

    How much this changed in recent years I do not know for certain but I do know that most young people in the 18/ 30 age group seem to be as adamant on one side of the argument or the other as they were during the seventies and eighties. This issue is still a troublesome one and I can well understand the S.F. leadership trying to give it a wide berth!

  • Michaelhenry

    you are agreeing with me mcclafferty, i told you that GERRY McGEOGH left because he was not picked to be a candidate, your excuse back to me is that he never put his name forward for elections, he could not because he was not selected to run for SINN FEIN in the dublin local elections so he could not put his name up for the party, the truth hurts.

  • Munsterview


    What sort of convoluted nonsense is this?

    To the best of my knowledge Gerry Mc was a member of Sinn Fein while in Dublin and a member of a Cumann there.

    If so, for election, the first part of the process was that either he a) either put his own name forward to be considered to be a candidate for the Local Election selections or b) he would have been invited by comrades or Sinn Fein officers to put his name forward for selection.

    According to GerryMc he did not put his name forward, that takes care of the first part of the selection process.

    As to the second as GerryMc was well known to be an awkward customer not likely to toe the party line and of views in matters like abortion that would involve Sinn Fein in controversy, then I would be very surprised indeed it the party leadership ( in the way of these things) had not made sure that Gerry would not be selected.

    I left a lot of good comrades behind in the Sticks in ’69 but remained in civil terms with them up to the present day. The way that Old Comrades like Gerry are being spun against do not impress me one little bit especially as some of the young ‘Boy (and Girl) Wonders doing the spinning were still in nappies when Gerry was being bashed around the place by British Army/U.D.R. / R.U.C. for his Republicanism.

    If the worst these Johnny-come-latelys in the new dispensation have to face is a sarcastic remark and a bit of surveillance from a branchman, it is because people like Gerry, by their actions, brought about this situation and he should be respected for it!

  • Michaelhenry

    this is the sams person who went crying to the newspapers because JERRY ADAMS said boo to him at a chapel gate.

  • Michaelhenry


  • Munsterview


  • Michaelhenry


  • mcclafferty


    I will get that information posted shortly about Gerry.

    You seem to have a much clearer view of what Gerry McGeough is truly about and how SF is failing him and other Irish Republicans who have been critical of the Stormont agreement.

  • mcclafferty


    Let me ask you why you have no comment on the use of diplock courts in 2010? Do you think Gerry Mc should be on trial? Do you think SF is doing enough to highlight the issues of Gerry’s case? Why don’t you comment on these issues which have more relevance now then carrying on about McGeough and some 2001 Dublin elections?

    McGeough is being persecuted by the Crown and its servants. He has been hung out to dry by his comrades in SF and the charges brought against him by the RUC are purely politically motivated. McGeough’s Irish Republican credentials are impeccable and all you can do is whine about some damn election in the south that had nothing to do with McGeough to begin with? GROW UP!

    A man’s life and future is at stake here not to mention the future of his family. McGeough has been railroaded by the RUC/PSNI and SF stands by silently and allows the status-quo to remain for Irish republicans outside their “inner-circle.” Shame on them and shame on you.

  • mcclafferty

    Gerry McGeough Time Line

    This was originally compiled from the website by Mark McGregor a few months ago and I added onto it.

    South Tyrone’s Gerry McGeough was arrested as he left the election count in Omagh after the March 2007 Assembly election in which he had stood as an Independent Republican and was very vocal in his opposition to the RUC/PSNI. He was later charged with the attempted murder of former UDR member and current Dungannon DUP councillor Sammy Brush during the 1981 Hunger Strikes. At the time a solicitor of Gerry’s co-accused, Vincent McAnespie, said the prosecution relied on two recently compiled witness statements.
    Gerry eventually got a bail surety set after some stalling when the PSNI and Crown Prosecution falsely alleged that he had jumped bail in the US and Germany. The PSNI objected to the first two people to post bail on the grounds that they were ex-political prisoners and substitutes had to be found. In applying for bail Gerry’s solicitor had informed the court that he had been living in Tyrone for some time and that his children attended a local school. The PSNI wanted to visit the children at school presumably because they didn’t believe the documentation, submitted by the head-master, that they were enrolled there. McAnespie’s bail was granted unconditionally but Gerry’s was vigorously opposed on the grounds he was falsely alleged to be aligned with the CIRA, despite the fact that RSF, which is aligned with them, ran a candidate against Gerry in the election, totally undermining his campaign in the process. Gerry’s Defense team utterly demolished the PSNI’s false allegations (solely aimed at denying him bail), exposed it for the lie it was/is and secured Gerry’s release. He eventually got bail in April 2007 but under strict conditions after a number of PSNI attempts to mislead the court were disproved. He had to surrender his passport, is not allowed to leave the six counties and has to sign-on with the PSNI three times a week. This meant that he could not travel to work at his magazine “The Hibernian”, which was based in Drogheda. He managed to keep it going for a year longer after his arrest but it eventually folded in September 2008.
    Here is the timeline below:
    • His first hearing due on May 2007 was postponed until June 13th and then postponed again as the PSNI said they were waiting on evidence from the Gardaí.
    • In July 2007 the PSNI did not turn up in court so the hearing was postponed to August 2007.
    • In court on August 15, 2007, it turned out the PSNI had not forwarded a required file to the Prosecution Service and so the hearing was put back until September.
    • In September his case was postponed until October 2007.
    • In October the prosecution said they needed more time to prepare their case and were granted another two week postponement.
    • After a number of postponements, Gerry didn’t get to court again until the end of February 2008 when the case was put back for another three months.
    • A date for the preliminary enquiry was eventually fixed for May 16, 2008. The PSNI did not show up and so the case was postponed again until May 28, 2008.
    • On May 28h his case was postponed until June 27, 2008 when the Crown said they would fix a trial date.
    • In June 2008 the prosecution was granted a postponement until July when they were granted another three week postponement in order to prepare their case.
    • On July 31st the date for the Preliminary Enquiry was set for September 1st.
    • The Preliminary Enquiry began in September 2008 but was again riddled by setbacks and postponements as the Crown sought further delays to prepare their case.
    • In September 2008 Gerry’s magazine folded due to the restrictions of his bail conditions and ongoing PSNI harassment and surveillance. This had very detrimental financial ramifications for Gerry and his young family.
    • In November 2008 the main charges against Vincent McAnespie were dropped.
    • Gerry was giving a date of February 2nd for the start of his (Diplock) trial.
    • In February 2009, the trial was postponed indefinitely.
    • In March 2009 a trail was set for June 7, 2009.
    • In May the Crown sought and was granted a further postponement.
    • At the end of July 2009 Gerry suffered a massive heart attack.
    • In October 2009 a new trail date was set for March 2010.
    • In January 2010, Gerry received a trial date for March 8th. The Crown also informed Gerry’s solicitors that the prosecution will focus on Peter Taylor’s 1997 documentary series ‘Provos’?

    I think it’s quite obvious from this timeline that the PSNI don’t and never had a case against Gerry McGeough and this is a vindictive prosecution because of his outspoken criticism of the RUC and PSNI. The process has taken its toll on him both physically and financially and he’s received little support from the media.

    Back in June 2009 the British government “unexpectedly” extended the legislation allowing for Diplock Courts for another two years. The Diplock system was supposed to have ended for good by July 2009. Some observers saw this as a blatant move to ensure that Gerry McGeough is “tried” under this notorious emergency legislation.
    A judge has now been selected to preside at Gerry’s trial. He is an Englishman who is renowned as a pro-crown judge. Once again, the cards have been heavily stacked against Gerry. Not only is he being denied a Jury Trial but he also has to contend with a single judge within the notorious Diplock system who is known to be extremely partial towards the prosecution.

    Gerry’s lawyers, meanwhile, have conceded that the entire case is being driven with a vindictiveness that is “beyond persecution”. Gerry has been waiting to stand trail for 3 years while under severe bail restrictions which has caused him poor health and his wife and 4 children severe financial hardship.

    This is just further proof that the RUC/PSNI/Crown has not changed its stripes and that the Good Friday Agreement’s true purpose was to rescind Articles 2 and 3 of Ireland’s Constitution (which was done) and thus give Britain the sole control of Occupied Ireland – permanently!

  • mcclafferty


    “Convoluted nonsense”

    Thank you. Well said!.

  • Michaelhenry

    im glad you said other republicans who have been critical of stormont, because GERRY McGEOGH supports stormont and if he had have been elected he would have taken his seat at stormont, thats why R.S.F stood against him, lets not try to change history, I do not think that GERRY McGEOGH should be on trail for his part in the struggle, he will always have a good republican past, no one can say different, a not so good present, but i do hope he can have a good future, i know this man is well thougt of, but the truth has to be told.

  • Munsterview

    Gerry McGough case and issues arising, part one

    ( To regular readers please excuse the lengthy posting but Gerry’s case raises very important issues for the Peace Process as a whole that needs to be addressed and debated. That ‘cat and mouse’ record of abuse of due process is as appalling an inditement of the failure of the Peace Process to address institutional injustice as anything I have seen and it should not be tolerated !)


    Sad !. 12 May 2010 at 1:34 am. I was referring to your attitude in this posting.

    Michael, are you so ‘on message and on cue’ that you have abandoned all critical faculties. Republicans are supposed to be in the Movement because they started thinking for themselves: currently it must seem to outsiders from responses of people like you, that there is only a place in Sinn Fein for those who have stopped thinking!

    Tg4 T.V. is currently running a series on Republican escapes from prison over the years, recently it carried Richard Behal’s escape from Limerick Jail. I had the privilege of knowing most who were involved in that and their families; these are still true Republicans, they stood by the North from 69 on and paid a price for it in their domestic, social and business lives. Some did prison time for standing with you.

    Some continued on after the 86 split yet all and their families are now gone taking generations of resistance experience with them, have you and others like you asked why? Are you even aware of this?

    After the Sean O’Callahan spy scandal broke, something that was far more devastating to the then Republican Movement than the Donalson affair, Billy Leen went into Tralee Town Council and Kerry Co. Council. It was Billy and others like him who had to rebuild the Movement in Kerry and undo the damage Sean caused, not the Northern geniuses who promoted ‘yes man’ Callahan out of his depth and then failed to properly check or monitor this ego maniac’s actions when he was in a situation to devastate the Movement like he did .

    Billy has not changed his ideas one iota, he is still a Republican and a community activist constantly helping people with their problems. He could easily have said ” I tried to tell you but no body would listen, now go f….. yourselves”, he did not, he put his Republican beliefs first and took all the mockery and ridicule in the local hostile press and politics until credibility was restored for Sinn Fein. Billy was another that there was no place for in the new scheme of things, not because he did not know enough but because he knew too much and was not afraid to be critical and questioning!

    Then we have people like Christie Burke in Dublin; only those who knew Christie and were part of the Southern Movement can know how dedicated, effective and consistent he was.

    Dublin is not Cork, Belfast of Derry, it has it’s own ethos and it’s own Republican Traditions, as all these other places have. Christie was a critical voice behind closed doors, especially of the policy of not confronting Fianna Failure head on and exposing them for what they were in social policy and other areas. He knew power structures and could build alliances with other parties to get things done.

    Sinn Fein have since paid a political price for not following his advice! Belfast do not always know best! This ‘we must keep Fianna Fail sweet for the North’ attitude must have F.F. back room folk in constant laughter convulsions!

    Christie was put in a position where his integrity and principles left him with no other choice other than to walk. When he did hundreds of Republican families said …..’Ah now if there is no place for someone like Christie what are we doing’….. and they walked too. They took thousands of votes with them, votes against the system that have been lost because if they cannot vote for a Republican they can trust, most will not bother voting.

    Waterford, Galway etc. the story is the same and then some still wonder as to why Sinn Fein is not progressing in the South!

  • Munsterview

    Gerry McGough case and issues arising part two

    Now to Gerry McGeogh and other so called dissidents.

    The Movement went through a series of protracted meetings to decide on the Peace Process. Most Republicans accepted that it had to be a political process only and that the Armed Struggle had run it’s course. A significant number of active republicans disagreed and voted with their feet.

    The common dominator running through most of the various Anti-Peace Process Republicans is that while any part of Ireland is occupied by, to quote the proclamation, ‘an alien people and government’ by force of arms, then there is a right to resist that force with equal force… or more if it can be mustered! That was the U.I. position, the Young Ireland one, the Fenian one, the 1916 one, the 1918 one the 1922 one, the 56 one, the ’69 one, and it will always be the theoretically correct Republican position.

    Two major issues immediately arise from this; first, war is but a continuation of politics by other means, when the means exist to peruse politics by peaceful political means then the justification for war cease to exist on moral grounds. The second is practical, do the means exist to effectively organize, maintain and use armed force.

    As to the first I personally believe that limited and imperfect as they are, the means to peruse a political course of action to secure the desired political objectives of historical and current republicanism exists. Naturally Unionism are trying to limit and close down these avenues, that is the reactionary nature of the beast. It is up to our side to expand and consolidate these avenues as we have done and can successfully continue to do.

    As to the second, it was obvious even before 9/11 and the sea change in International opinion that here in Ireland for a multiplicity of reasons, Armed Force was no longer a viable option. If the I.R.A. with all it’s operating and historical experience, had it’s own Internal Security Arm compromised and run by M.I5, then it follows that the Republican Military system of underground organization operative since Fenian times was no longer fit for purpose at the end of the 20th, cent. never mind carrying on activity in the 21st.

    To briefly digress; I am not saying such armed resistance is impossible, recently in Iraq an armed resistance cell was found to have ‘off the shelf’ modified electronic technology costing a few hundred dollars that allowed them to down load images in real time from spy planes costing billions of dollars that were monitoring their activities. As to asymmetrical warfare generally: nothing changed there; in the words of Stanley Baldwin in 1932,……… “ The bomber will always get through”

    Yes but for what purpose or to what end?

    There is a Peace Process in existence and the Republican Assembly Ministers and de facto, part of the Six County political leadership who know the road we have travelled to reach this point. What Gerry and people like him are now subjected to, most of us once were ( and some in the South still are, even though they support the peace process ). The extraordinary, petty and vindictive means used against Gerry McGough is proof positive that there is not a new dispensation in the North and far from having a New Police Service, we have the R.U.C. mark 2.

    As they say down here, new faces but the same old capers !.

    The Sinn Fein Leadership should also be mindful of Albert Reynolds rueful remark when he lost power in what was a gentle breeze compare to the political storms that he had weathered to then, …… “ It’s the little things that trip you up”

    If the quality of freedoms and justice available to Gerry McGeough is the measure of what is really available to those who oppose the ‘status quo’ then the peace Process has abjectly failed in addressing the old problems and is well on it’s way to institutionalizing new ones.

    In closing Michael, I know some of Gerry’s service to Republicanism; so do Gerry Adams and if he and the other Sinn Fein leaders are concerned about the Peace Process and how it is perceived , then they should concern themselves with Gerry’s case and resolve it with immediate effect.

    As to mocking and denigrating Gerry Mc, if you cannot given the respect and assistance that he is due for his past services to your Movement, then please give him the charity of your silence, he has earned that right and deserves no less from the likes of you!

  • Michaelhenry

    its not me who goes crying to the media, i listen to those opposed to SINN FEIN but i do not trust those who are to scared to say who they support, remember all those who fought the system or were volunteers did so for the IRISH nation, some may have lost all love or pity because this is all that matters, maybe its wrong to put the nation before any individual, but SINN FEIN are right not the complainers. the leadership can not afford to wait for every one, even ones they respect.

  • Mr Crowley

    That’s quite the spin on what actually happened given that the newspapers contacted Gerry McGeough after being alerted to the incident by a parishoner who had witnessed Gerry Adams cower from McGeough’s questioning behind armed heavies, guldering party loyalists and maternal comforting.

    It’s ironic that you called Adams ‘Jerry’ as it invokes images of a cartoon mouse.

  • mcclafferty

    Who went “crying to the newspaper?” Any statements made by McGeough with regard to his run in with Adams was solicited from the media. You crack me up Michaelhenry with your childish remarks about McGeough. NOT ONCE have you ever mentioned the injustice being metered out to McGeough by the RUC/PSNI and the fact that SF remains silent and totally indifferent to his case/trial.

    I will not discuss McGeough with you anymore because you show no respect toward the man and you are not a patch on his arse. The day you can say you walked in the shoes of McGeough or any Irish republican who selfishly served the cause of Irish freedom, especially as long as Gerry did, and spent as much time in prison over the years as he did and is STILL being persecuted for his political views…then we can have a chat again. Until then, go home and play with your toys!

  • mcclafferty


    You keep going on about “elections” – exactly which
    elections are you on about? There were no elections in the South in 2001. The last local elections were in 1999. In these Gerry helped out on Dáthi Doolan’s campaign in Central Dublin, which he lost by a slight margin.

    The next local council elections took place in 2004, by which time Gerry had left the shinners three years. Which constituency/ward is being referred to and who were the personnel ? Who actually was selected to run and how did they fare?

    In 2001, the year referred to, Gerry McGeough was SF National Director of the “NO to Nice I” campaign. The successful campaign, which was won! Clearly, Gerry was good enough to be selected to lead this important endeavour at a National level, so what grounds were there for anyone to object to his running in anything else if he
    desired to do so?

    Your illogical whingeing merely reflects that the shinners are still smarting from the lashing McGeough gave Adams at Eglish. Would it not be more sensible for the
    party to reach out to the thousands of republicans who refused to vote for them last week in F/ST, leaving them dependent on a combined SDLP/Unionist vote in
    order to scrape in by 4 votes, instead of constantly attacking and smearing old comrades who put them where they are to begin with?

  • mcclafferty


    I enjoyed reading your last two posts. I found them very informative and felt your constructive criticism of SF’s “status-quo” regarding McGeough’s case/trial appropriate.

    Thank you for your honest and sincere outspokenness with regard to Gerry McGeough. It’s good to see that there are other people not afraid to “think and speak outside the box.”

  • Mr Crowley

    Are you drunk or 14, perhaps both. You’ve been caught lying on this thread and you have nothing to offer but the fact that you “don not trust” people who choose to think for themselves.

    A snake in sheep’s cloathing.

  • mcclafferty

    Mr. Crowley,

    I tend to agree with you. He is either drunk, very young, or both! However, I also think someone else put him up to smearing McGeough.

  • Munsterview

    As someone who did more than my share of ‘spinning’ in my day for S.F., I find it absolutely hilarious that given the slick, practiced and professional ( credit where credit is due) P.R machine of current Sinn Fein, that any supporter should take umbrage about an outsider making better use of the media than S.F. did. Perhaps Gerry McG stole a march on the spinners, if so fair play to him, they should not have let it happen, it will keep them alert. And who is to say that Lerts will not be needed in the future!

    As to ‘the Leadership cannot afford to wait etc’.

    In the two foregoing posts I outlined the history and political timeline to provide a frame of reference and I made several relevant points that, be it inadvertently or deliberately, you seem to have missed.

    Up to the Cease fire we had a United Republican Movement, it was a broad church of diverse opinion embracing left, center and right beliefs that, while clashing from time to time, could co-exist because we were principled defined and united by our opposition to British Rule spearheaded by the Armed Struggle.

    In a Post Ceasefire situation the Movement was always going to divide into pro and anti-armed struggle, we all argued out our viewpoints, a clear majority went with the Peace Process option. Granted if all the Unionist messing that followed could have been foreseen, that majority would not have been as large as it then was but it would still have been a clear majority.

    Once the Movement went down a purely political road and politics began to coalesce around a defined centre to have as broad as possible electoral appeal, it was again inevitable that some members with strong views would become marginalized and leave believing that their viewpoints were not represented by Sinn Fein. No fault on them or on the party; this is politics in action and it followed a well worn path of armed revolutionary movements world wide, transiting to conventional politics.

    There was never any question of ‘ the leadership waiting for every one’ they could not have been expected to, so why raise this red herring ? In fact it is another gratuitous insult to Gerry McG., that man is not exactly slow on the uptake or in the need to have too much explained to him by anyone. Like more of us greyheads he got his politics the hard earned way.

    Now we come to the nub of the problem, the Peace Process is supposed to have created certain basic conditions of freedom for everyone in The Six Counties, including the right to protest. I have not seen any allegations anywhere that Gerry McG. was involved in anything, post ceasefire, more violent than from time to time, being a colossal pain in the arse for the R.U.C. mark 2……. that is just all they are and will remain for most Republicans and Nationalists, while acting as they did in his case.

    This particular Leopard it seem has not changed it’s spots as much as it would have us believe! Either these basic freedoms, including the right to politically organize and protest exist or they do not.

    Unless there other aspects to Gerry McG,s case that have not been in the public forum to date, it seems that the worst he has done is to put his right to protest against the R.U.C. mark 2 to the test and as he has found to his cost it apparently do not exist. If this is correct then Gerry Adams as head of Sinn Fein, as a member elected to the assembly and as an elected M.P. has explanations to give and questions to answer.

    What are the true facts of the case ?, I personally do not know but somebody sure as hell do and it is time that they were all in the public arena as far bigger and more serious issues than the personalities of both Gerry’s are involved !.

  • Michaelhenry

    good to see all of you agree that GERRY McGEOUGH supported stormont and that he would have taken his seat has an independent if elected despite R.S.F saying that only traitors took there seats at the assembly, no right minded person pays any attention to R.S.F, but this is what they said, mcclafferty wrote at 1.28 am that he would not discuss McGEOUGH with me anymore, then at 1.55 am he is again talking about McGEOUGH to me, i just keep reeling you in.

  • Mr Crowley

    1. Why even bring RSF up, it’s not like they are relevant to the topic or in general.

    2. McClafferty addressed myself and Munsterview, not you. No doubt this played havoc with your attention deficit.

    As for ‘reeling’ whether ‘in’ or about the place, I think you’re more maggot than fisherman.

  • Munsterview


    I would like to know how just long you have been around? I would like to think that I am a right thinking person and I pay a lot of attention to what R.S.F has to say.

    If you knew your history as well as you should, would also would also know that Sinn Fein and all mainstream Republicans walked the same political and philosophical road that R.S.F. are on from 1969 up to 1986. Dismiss them as being of no consequences and you are but dismissing the first seventeen years of the Provisionals and proving your own political illiteracy.

    Sinn Fein are the ones that made major changes to politics, strategy and tactics post 1986, R.S.F. did not.

    I do not agree with the many of policies and strategies of R.S.F., neither would they agree with many of mine, but I do respect their political stand. As to what they said about taking seats; there is not one of our current Sinn Fein Leadership of my vintage that has not used the very same language and terms about the S.D.L.P. in those first seventeen years after the reorganization of the Republican Movement.

    Historians have to deal with facts, not fancy and ‘whatever your having yourself’. If you knew, or more important appreciated your history, then perhaps you would not be so dismissive and apparently disrespectful as you are.

    However back to the main problem and it can be simply stated: do Gerry McGeough, R.S.F., The S.W.P., The Militant League of Atheists or whatever have the right to peacefully protest on the streets of The Six Counties. ?

    Let me put this another way; can any minority group not alone publicly protest against the R.U.C. mark 2, but have the Police Service guard them against counter demonstrators ? Yes I will probably be able to hear the roars of laughter all the ways down here in the Munster hills after I post this!.

    However this is exactly what happens in London, New York, Montreal, Melbourne or any other open representative democracy. Thanks to the activities of Gerry McGeough we know what the base line of Protest Freedoms are under the G.F.A are., they are not what Gerry Adams say they are apparently but what the Police Service say they are depending on their attitude to the protesters!

    So do R.U.C. mark 2 decide who is going to protest, where they are going to do it and how that protest is going to be carried out just like R.U.C. mark 1 attempted to do up the time they were reformed ( in as much as they ever were or could be) or do we have real freedoms?.

    Comments please from those of you up there effected by this!

  • mcclafferty


    I’m starting to think that we are wasting our time on Michaelhenry. He appears to be much too immature to understand or even appreciate what you, Mr. Crowley and I are trying to explain to him. He can’t even answer any of the questions I put forth to him regarding what specific election(s) he insists McGeough was a candidate in Dublin and the people involved at that time. Nor does he have the courage to speak out about the injustice being metered out to Gerry McGeough and his family.

    It appears to me that MH could care less about Irish history, culture or even politics for that matter. He is just here to stir the pot and really has absolutely NOTHING substantial or factual to contribute to this issue. He is typical of the new generation of SF that I’ve had the misfortune to come across since the signing of the Stormont Agreement.
    The “Johnny come lately” who are now jumping on the SF bandwagon because it’s safe to do so now.

    AND…if our MH has in fact been around awhile, then his purpose here is to strictly try to smear McGeough in any way he can regardless of his total absence of facts. What I would say to MH is that it would take more then his nonsense here to take the caliber of Gerry McGeough down. As I mentioned in a previous post – MH isn’t a patch on McGeough’s arse or any other IR who walked the walk when it counted!

  • Michaelhenry

    i have stated that i have nothing against GERRY McGEOUGHs army past, but im against his anti SINN FEIN present, some do not like to seperate the two, but when those opposed start praising R.S.F it is very hard for us republicans to support the brit lovers in the continunity, who in there 24 years have never killed a british soldier, see the truth then see our future.

  • Munsterview


    “…….. but when those opposed start praising R.S.F it is very hard for us republicans to support the brit lovers in the continunity,…….”

    As they say up your neck of the woods…. ‘Away man and boil yer heid’…. that is if you have a head to boil !

  • keano276

    McClafferty is a she,not a he.

  • Michaelhenry

    munsterview i hope you still do not support the brit lovers in R.S.F, you do not know your countrys history if you do.

  • mcclafferty

    McGeough Trial Update 5/14/10

    Gerry was due to appear in court in Belfast today. However, just moments before he left home for the 50 mile drive, he received a phonecall to say that the court officers had made a “mistake” and overbooked the day’s schedule.

    Although, Gerry’s appearance was arranged a month ago, this “mistake” means that there is yet another delay in the proceedings of this more than three year long
    saga on charges going back 35 years.

    Observers believe that one of the goals of the British-Unionist-Sinn Féin axis in this case is to keep Gerry McGeough tied down in this “legal” quagmire for as
    long as possible in order to keep him politically inactive.

  • Michaelhenry

    he would make no difference to the election results, GERRY McGEOUGH has said that he will take his seat in the assembly if elected, the dissidents think of him has a traitor, and no one else would vote for him.

  • mcclafferty


    Take your prozac now and go take a nap. You are starting to sound like you are not wrapped too tight!

  • Munsterview


    “……. munsterview i hope you still do not support the brit lovers in R.S.F, you do not know your countrys history if you do……… ”

    Michael, you seem to have problems with large blocks of text. Go back again and read what I have written slowly and carefully and you will see that I have clearly set out my attitude to my former R.S.F comrades and political associates.

    My attitude to R.S.F are there for all to see; you it seems are the only one with a problem in discerning what it is!

  • jim

    y do u want to see british soilders killed.surely their somebodys sons

  • Dixie

    What many people seem to ignore is that there are many Republicans out there of my generation, who although opposed to and sickened by PSF’s transformation into Britain’s pet Paddys, no longer support armed struggle.

    Anti-GFA Republicans are fragmented and can’t even unite for commemorations so how can they ever hope to remove the Brits?

    In fact the stubborn adherence to armed struggle plays into Adams’ hands electorally and recent results are proof of this.

    If Republicans want to realistically challenge what is effectively Indirect Rule then Unity is needed and above all the support of the people who never have nor ever will support armed struggle.

  • Munsterview


    Know all about the abuse of due process, same shite down here !

    I once had a Circuit Court case listed for hearing on a R.T.A appeal, the night before at 9 PM the Police called to say that the case would not go on, it did, my name called, the Judge was not informed of the Police call to me the night before, I was convicted and it took me several trips to the High Court to undo this conviction.

    This is but one of not dozens, but hundreds of of such incidents against me over the last four decades.

    Martin Ferris, prior to his election as a T.D. had enough of R.T.A. summons to wallpaper a fair sized room, he got elected and surprise, surprise, they all went away just like that!.

    It is not as if our Elected Representatives do not know what abuse of due process is; the majority of the Old Guard have been subjected to the same process for a significant period of their lives.

    Gerry McGeough’s treatment is contrary to the spirit of the Good Friday agreement and Peace Process if not some specific letter of it. I have said it here before, we in the South who supported and promoted the Peace Process had to accept quite a lot in good faith from Gerry Adams, Gerry Kelly and Pat Doherty et al.

    We also had to put up with quite a bit since that was not in the script, at least none that we were told about at the time. However there are certain lines that cannot be crossed. Gerry McGeough’s case looks like it is well and truly over that line. Certain people better wake up and act or they may get a very loud and embarrassing public awakening.

  • Munsterview


    A few things to agree with in your posting : irrespective of the horse trading that was done regarding the Armed Struggle in the course of the Good Friday agreement and the Peace Process, elsewhere in other postings I set out why I personally believed that armed force as implemented had run it’s course and was no longer fit for purpose.

    This is not to say, all interested parties please note; that a course of asymmetrical warfare cannot be successfully pursued in the future if necessary. Elsewhere I have described how a Iraq resistance unit, recently discovered, had modified off the shelf electronic equipment to intercept video and other information from spy planes and were using this to hunt the hunters!

    The Peace Process will only be a progressive process for Republicans while a) it creates a local level playing field for all people of the Six Counties and b) it continues to advance the political program including the United Ireland agenda. Gerry McG case and that of the Derry prisoners brutalized in custody do not point to a level playing pitch, far from it in fact.

    As to your other point about commemorations, it is a valid one, thousands of Volunteers came through the Movement over the period of the Troubles, the majority still consider themselves as Provos, they would like to honor their dead comrades but for various reasons, they are alienated from the mainstream Republican commemorations, they do not attend or if they do, they are on the fringes of the attending crowds.

    No one Republican grouping should have a monopoly or total control of the main commemoration ceremonies. I agree that it is time to honor the services of all Volunteers, living and dead by having a ceremony under a neutral body where all can feel welcome and included with no one group making political capital from it. This is a much bigger issue for the Six Counties than the Twenty Six and the first moves will have to come from there.

  • Michaelhenry

    they are not my sons.

  • Michaelhenry

    but those fallen volunteers would have wanted the winning side to commemorate them.

  • Munsterview


    Jesus wept!

    If most of those commemorated volunteers that I knew, had any way of knowing of some of airheads they would be passing things on to, and who would later claim to speak in their name, they would not have fallen, they would have given up and gone home to their beds!

  • wee buns

    Catching up on this thread, and thanks to Mc Clafferty for the full timeline of events.
    The state can never wash away it’s record of ‘bad practice’ in this place. And it’s on-going repressive legislations which are completely & utterly Over The Top for the current alledged ‘Terrorist Threat’ which incidently seems to have spread worldwide.
    Of course it is about controlling dissident voices.
    Of course we shall always say fuck you in response.

  • Munsterview

    Wee buns

    While I was not quite shocked by the last line of your response at least one eyebrow definitely raised!

    Well, well! Old Provos mellowing and, Alliance Ladies of ahem, a certain age taking a radical turn. Interesting possibilities indeed. Maybe we could pool ideas on the banner for the protest march that seems to be on the cards?.

  • mcclafferty


    Just catching up this week.

    1) MH talks about RSF opposing McGeough on the grounds that he would take his seat if elected to the Stormont Assembly. Why then did they not stand a candidate against the Independent Republican candidate Hyland who stood in the Newry/Armagh constituency? He also planned to take his seat if elected. Strange that they should just focus on undermining Gerry’s campaign if the abstentions issue was so important to them. Explain that.

    In addition, Gerry’s election literature stated that he would take the seat in order to keep an eye on SF and prevent them from selling out further in order to appease their political enemies.

    2) “Fallen comrades would want the winning side to commomrate them.” What winning side are you referring to? Every fallen comrade is turning in their graves now because of the way SF, although in the driver’s seat for now, have actually become the chauffeurs for British government policies. McGeough used the right phrase when he said “they do nothing but appease their political enemies.” That is NOT what these young men and women died for. I also believe NO political groups has the right to claim domain over any commemoration for the “fallen.” They died for the Irish people’s right to self-determination free of British rule. Therefore they belong to the people NOT any one political group who likes to use these commemorations as tool for their own political gain.