Lemon Eddy
Disliked by dwyer
He's really not. The vast majority of mainland brits would be happy to see Ireland reunited.
Gerry Adams exposed , his lies demolished at brothers rape trial
- Thread starter Casually Red
- Start date
He's really not. The vast majority of mainland brits would be happy to see Ireland reunited.
N_igma
Epistemic nuisance
He means the establishment not the average Brit.
Joe Reilly
Well-Known Member
Brendan Hughes has been a personal hero of mine since the time of the first hunger strike, which he led. He had a legendary status as an IRA leader on the Falls, but I have to say now that the specific references he made in those interviews were very ill-advised. Those conducting the interviews had their own agenda and I believe that Brendan, being at a very low ebb in his life, was used in order to settle old scores. The worst thing is that his reputation has now been sullied by this...
I think SF may have to rethink their whole attitude to Truth and Reconciliation and the possibility of negotiating an amnesty across the board. That's the only way to stop these historical investigations from impacting upon republicans of all shades. However, a change in strategy also throws up the unedifying prospect of the party losing the support of family justice campaigns which demand the prosecution of state forces.
As far as I know, Adams offered himself for questioning 6 weeks ago and the PSNI refused. Now, in the midst of an election campaign, they decide to call him in for questioning... draw your own conclusions.
Surely the point is if the Hughes allegation is to be regarded as anything other than hearsay then he would have to admit to having been present and thus being involved in the abduction and execution himself?
Which makes you wonder exactly how many senior IRA commanders (Ivor Bell being another) were required to arrest a single mother of 11?
hipipol
Peckham Wry
Clarified for you
N_igma
Epistemic nuisance
Hughes was OC of the Belfast Brigade at the time. He would have been aware of all actions carried out at the time even if he wasn't directly involved in them himself.
toggle
wobbly
Thinking back here, my copy is in Plymouth, I think his argument was that if the killing had been carried out at that place, at that time, the person who would have given the order for it to go ahead must have been adams, the command structure was such that no one else could have ordered it.
Really? The general view I get is "But not everyone wants it!!!!"
N_igma
Epistemic nuisance
Aye I'm the same gave my copy away and can't remember exactly what the fuck he said lol.
hipipol
Peckham Wry
Really?
Why would anyone want the North?
Eire doesn't
Perhaps they can get Putin to annex them
I meant because the loyalists want in on the union. The little Englanders argue this point.
hipipol
Peckham Wry
Merely an extension of the Thatcherite "Care in the Community" bollocks
Do you want to be in any way associated with those crazies?
On the name "Loyalist"
The only time I really admired Ed Heath was when he was being interviewed and the news guy said Loyalist
"Loyalist???Loyalist?????? Loyal to what? I will NOT have that word used to describe a gang of thugs"
Do I really want to be associated with ours?
Joe Reilly
Well-Known Member
Hardly better than hearsay then.
Joe Reilly
Well-Known Member
So how come Ivor Bell is in the slammer on the same charge? And who dobbed him in?
toggle
wobbly
IDK, I'm just saying what I can remember of what I read in the book.
Joe Reilly
Well-Known Member
Fair enough. The questions are general ones addressed to all others on the thread.
N_igma
Epistemic nuisance
Himself most likely. He participated in those Boston tapes, some of the material has been handed to the authorities before their deaths.
toggle
wobbly
when I was reading this, I was writing an essay on the political manouverings that led up to the gfa, so was looking at it in terms of the accusations against adams and the general case against him that he was a manipulative bastard. so my focus was very much in looking at who was speaking against him and how that compared to the 'official' line.
Joe Reilly
Well-Known Member
If true, that is remarkably naive. Any wonder GA has stayed stum on his own role in events.
N_igma
Epistemic nuisance
Well they were given assurances that none of it would be made public until their deaths. Might be for another thread though if you want to debate that debacle.
toggle
wobbly
i do recall being told that the subjects were extraordinarily candid about their roles in events. the involvement of boston college led people to trust them and I believe moloney was also a known quantity, he was considered to be someone who would do a good job of writing up their stories. but the interviewees were led to believe that the non disclosure agreement was something far more solid than it actually was. I think they were given the impression that the agreement would be legally binding, that courts would uphold it. which should IMO, never have happened.
In some ways, if a project like that was going to happen, it should have been embargoed for a number of years, get the information for future generations of historians, but accept it won't be used until all the major players of that period were dead. not just the interviewee. which would be frustrating for the people involved, but would have been a lot more sensible and ethical. my reasoning for this is that it is very likely that the other tapes will not be released now, and at least one other OH project looking at the troubles has been cancelled after this debacle.
Joe Reilly
Well-Known Member
Precisely.
Casually Red
tomorrow belongs to me
I was just thinking there today, if Adams ends up charged he could be in a right pickle . Hed be faced with 2 choices, given the fact general population is a firm non starter . Hed either have to go cap in hand and beg admission to the republican wing , who Im pretty sure would be very reluctant to grant him admission..unless they are in the mood for a good laugh . Or hed have to go down to the protected wing with the nonces and grasses . Where his brother is, the brother he testified against in court solely to save his own political skin . Thatd be a family reunion and a half .
I think its highly unlikely he will be , unless he has broke like a plate . But its a scenario that makes me grin quite a lot .
I think its highly unlikely he will be , unless he has broke like a plate . But its a scenario that makes me grin quite a lot .
Have a look at the IRA convention in Donegal in 1998 then.
Adams et al went there genuinely concerned that the Army would vote against them. Lots of well-got people were deeply concerned at where Gerry, Martin and Gerry were taking them. It was on a knife edge. Then the other mob got up and started calling all and sundry traitors and brit agents (a bit like CR earlier on this thread). Cue lots of key players saying 'Fuck this. Who are these cunts, calling our comrades touts?' etc and voting FOR the peace strategy rather than against it as they had intended... and had previously pledged. Plucking defeat from the jaws of victory.
Cue the traditionalists - despite their having all the traditional trump cards of tradition, lineage, history etc - became the 'dissidents'.
They have never been able to accept their responsibility for their own shortcomings and failures in how this came to pass.
Hence their increasingly hysterical and vitriolic denunciations of those who won not just this key battle, but the larger one for the hearts and minds of republican Ireland.
Casually Red
tomorrow belongs to me
It needs to be remembered though that it was Adams himself who met the McConville family, coming to them as a friend..as he usually does..and who told them he was interned when the abduction took place . Not only was that a lie it was basically laying the blame for it at Brendan Hughes door . Because if it wasnt Adams who ordered it it could only have been Hughes . Those guys were very high profile figures in the lower falls in 72, everyone knew their roles. So basically he started out fingering Hughes for it in a very public fashion . Although not naming him, the fact was he didnt need to name him .
He cynically repeated the exercise some years later when he was giving his oral history of the Hunger Strikes. He was asked by Peter Taylor who in his opinion was responsible for the deaths of the ten Hunger strikers. His answer was both astounding and disgusting . He publicly blamed Brendan Hughes for the ten deaths .
So, regardless of the failings of the Boston project there were very compelling personal, political and historical reasons for Brendan Hughes and others to set the record straight . What Adams was laying at their doors in a very public fashion had to be addressed in some forum . And sadly that was the only forum available to those people . If Adams hadnt been lying through his teeth and making these accusations against others then there might not have been any need for the issue to be addressed .
Casually Red
tomorrow belongs to me
well its not just one killing, it was a tactic of deliberately disappearing people that began with that killing . And like I said everyone in the Divis and Lower falls knew what Brendan Hughes and Gerry Adams role was there in 72 . They were top dogs . Adams lied to the family and told them hed been interned at the time . But not only that, told them had he been at liberty hed have ensured it never happened . That laid the blame for the whole thing at Hughes door .
Casually Red
tomorrow belongs to me
have a look at that video of McGuiness spitting vitriol about ceasefires and calling people traitors and then get back to me .
and anyone at that convention was sent there as a delegate to represent their areas whod already voted beforehand . Your tale is a handy excuse for some to cover up the fact they betrayed the people who sent them to represent their views. To come back with an excuse as to why they didnt, and why they did the exact opposite of what they were sent there to vote upon . Such occasions arent dinner parties or embroidery classes , theyre a venue for plain speaking . It was a crunch juncture in republicanism were they were being presented with an outright betrayal . People arent going to oppose it on the grounds they couldnt be arsed . They rejected it as a betrayal and treachery against the republican position , so its inevitable some very harsh words indeed are going to be used to denounce such a betrayal . They wernet being asked to choose some nice wallpaper for Connolly house . They were being asked to sell the entire struggle down the river .
They were, afterall, IRA men being asked to accept partition and British rule as legitimate . That will do more than raise the odd eyebrow .
Last edited:
Similar threads
