Gerry Adams. The Bible A history

[Gaffer]

Gerry aint claustophobic anyway.
Did ye see him crawling into that underground tomb?
I couldn't do that in a fit

[orangeman]

Gerry aint claustophobic anyway.
Did ye see him crawling into that underground tomb?
I couldn't do that in a fit

He might have been in tighter holes than that before.


( That didn't sound good did it ? ).

[ziggysego]

Gerry aint claustophobic anyway.
Did ye see him crawling into that underground tomb?
I couldn't do that in a fit

He might have been in tighter holes than that before.


( That didn't sound good did it ? ).

He said something akin to that in the programme.

[Tony Baloney]

Must have been lonely in Long Kesh.

[ardmhachaabu]

I thought that his conversation with Alan McBride showed he has become hardened to death and the hardship and suffering that it brings upon a family, I am fully aware many of his friends and colleagues have been killed/died as a result of the conflict.  The only thing I will give him is that he said to McBride that people like him (McBride) have a lot to educate the rest of us in

[Jim_Murphy_74]

Adams nearly had a crow bar out at one stage, he was trying to hard to create parrallels between Jesus' struggle and that of Irish Republicanism.

Interesting distinction in the language used to describe the two incidents:  The volunteers were on a (poorly planned) mission and caused hurt and pain to civiliams while targetting unionist paramilitaries, but Finucane was murdered by a unionist death squad.


Years of practice I guess.

/Jim.

[Ulick]

Adams nearly had a crow bar out at one stage, he was trying to hard to create parrallels between Jesus' struggle and that of Irish Republicanism.

Interesting distinction in the language used to describe the two incidents:  The volunteers were on a (poorly planned) mission and caused hurt and pain to civiliams while targetting unionist paramilitaries, but Finucane was murdered by a unionist death squad.


Years of practice I guess.

/Jim.

You think 'mens rea' was present in both cases? How did Begley end up in a hole in the ground then?

[Jim_Murphy_74]

You think 'mens rea' was present in both cases? How did Begley end up in a hole in the ground then?

Recklessness can be used to establish subjective "mens rea" so in that sense, yes.  I know Adams laboured the point about Begley's youth, lack of education etc..  I don't know in a personal sense if he knew that his bomb would cause widespread damage beyond it's intended target.  I believe those that planned the attack did though, and didn't give a damn. 

I was commenting more in the broadest sense that Adams potrayed a righteousness in republican violence but was careful to distance loyalist violence from this by using the terms he did.   

/Jim.

[haveaharp]

You think 'mens rea' was present in both cases? How did Begley end up in a hole in the ground then?

Recklessness can be used to establish subjective "mens rea" so in that sense, yes.  I know Adams laboured the point about Begley's youth, lack of education etc..  I don't know in a personal sense if he knew that his bomb would cause widespread damage beyond it's intended target.  I believe those that planned the attack did though, and didn't give a damn. 

I was commenting more in the broadest sense that Adams potrayed a righteousness in republican violence but was careful to distance loyalist violence from this by using the terms he did.   

/Jim.

And he would have been right.
Loyalist violence = any taig will do
republican violence = military targets etc

there is a difference

[Jim_Murphy_74]

And he would have been right.
Loyalist violence = any taig will do
republican violence = military targets etc

there is a difference

Sorry too simplistic for me.

Do you genuinely think Pat Finucane was the victim of a random sectarian attack?

Le Mons, Enniskillen etc.. military targets?

Either way, if it is that obvious why not say it outright?  Why the obviously carefully picked phrases?  Even the usage of unionist, rather than loyalist paramilitaries to cast the net of blame as wide as possible.

I'm just saying it's interesting how crafted the guy is when it comes to his speech/phraseology.  Whether you agree with the sentiment is another matter but it has to be acknowledged he does it.

/Jim.

[haveaharp]

And he would have been right.
Loyalist violence = any taig will do
republican violence = military targets etc

there is a difference

Sorry too simplistic for me.

Do you genuinely think Pat Finucane was the victim of a random sectarian attack?

Le Mons, Enniskillen etc.. military targets?

Either way, if it is that obvious why not say it outright?  Why the obviously carefully picked phrases?  Even the usage of unionist, rather than loyalist paramilitaries to cast the net of blame as wide as possible.

I'm just saying it's interesting how crafted the guy is when it comes to his speech/phraseology.  Whether you agree with the sentiment is another matter but it has to be acknowledged he does it.

/Jim.

It maybe simplistic but broadly speaking its accurate with the notable exceptions you mention. Gerry is a skilled politician and like all politicians are very careful in their choice of words.

[Nally Stand]

Jim it might sound simplistic but when you look at the bare basics, it's how it was. The vast majority of republican victims were military while the vast majority of loyalist attacks were sectarian killings. As for the term "unionist violence", is that not exactly what it was? I could be wrong but with the media we were scourged with over the years, perhaps it is they who are playing word games by terming it loyalist and not unionist violence.

[trileacman]

Jim it might sound simplistic but when you look at the bare basics, it's how it was. The vast majority of republican victims were military while the vast majority of loyalist attacks were sectarian killings. As for the term "unionist violence", is that not exactly what it was? I could be wrong but with the media we were scourged with over the years, perhaps it is they who are playing word games by terming it loyalist and not unionist violence.

Jim's right. There is a concentrated effort to revise the troubles now that Sinn Fein are in power. The sad thing is that in order to accomadate the SF revisionism, loyalist atrocities are also being dumbed down and swept away.

[Ulick]

Recklessness can be used to establish subjective "mens rea" so in that sense, yes.  I know Adams laboured the point about Begley's youth, lack of education etc..  I don't know in a personal sense if he knew that his bomb would cause widespread damage beyond it's intended target.  I believe those that planned the attack did though, and didn't give a damn. 

I was commenting more in the broadest sense that Adams potrayed a righteousness in republican violence but was careful to distance loyalist violence from this by using the terms he did.   

Therein maybe lies the reason for your observation. One was a very deliberate and unquestionable murder of a civilian, the other maybe a 'reckless' endeavour which ended up claiming the lives of many innocent civilians. One is quite obviously murder, while the other is as you quite rightly say, a more subjective call. Obviously Adams has a different (subjective) interpretation of the the Shankill bombing than those who subjectively claim that it was murder in the same manner as Finucane. However as McBride said on the radio this morning, that does not mean the hurt is any less, indeed that is something the family of Thomas Begley would also agree with and understand.

[Puckoon]

Recklessness can be used to establish subjective "mens rea" so in that sense, yes.  I know Adams laboured the point about Begley's youth, lack of education etc..  I don't know in a personal sense if he knew that his bomb would cause widespread damage beyond it's intended target.  I believe those that planned the attack did though, and didn't give a damn. 

I was commenting more in the broadest sense that Adams potrayed a righteousness in republican violence but was careful to distance loyalist violence from this by using the terms he did.   

Therein maybe lies the reason for your observation. One was a very deliberate and unquestionable murder of a civilian, the other maybe a 'reckless' endeavour which ended up claiming the lives of many innocent civilians. One is quite obviously murder, while the other is as you quite rightly say, a more subjective call. Obviously Adams has a different (subjective) interpretation of the the Shankill bombing than those who subjectively claim that it was murder in the same manner as Finucane. However as McBride said on the radio this morning, that does not mean the hurt is any less, indeed that is something the family of Thomas Begley would also agree with and understand.

Heard it all now.

Trying to paint the Shankhill bombing - or indeed any other bombing as a "reckless endeavour" is beyond pathetic.

Different handle - same shite.