Sinn Fein? They have gone away, you know.

[Nally Stand]

Nail on the head there. The Shinners missed a huge chance - they only had to shut the fcuk up for 3 or 4 days and wait until their leader was released and their journey from the political wilderness to mainstream political party would've been complete. Instead, Marty threw a tantrum and set them back about 20 years.

Good man yourself Myles. Top drawer political analysis from you as always!

EU Poll: Sinn Fein to top the poll in Dublin - first survey since Gerry Adams arrest points to rise in party support

Poll suggests SF & Independents' support has increased since 2009 local elections

The 2nd of those polls has 'don't knows' running at 25%, so I wouldn't get too carried away just yet. Both polls seem to have a 26 county focus too. Let's face it, if SF can't improve their vote in a state which has been living with austerity budgets for several years, there's something wrong. Let's see how they do in the north. I still think that Marty, Mary lou and Bobby Storey have between them scuppered their party's chances of increasing their vote up here.

Right!  So a 25% unknown rate and both polls only taking place in the 26 counties but still showing SF gains will mean SF are going to go back to 1994 levels of support? You crack me up! 

Polls aren't election results. Wait and see.

Haha ok Myles! Chat then 

[lawnseed]

The week in politics this morning.. Pearse v joan burton. He destroyed her start to finish. I was surprised the state broadcaster didnt do more to try and save her. In the end she tried to shout him down. Sad

[give her dixie]

Does anyone else think Glens is very like the Israeli spokesman Mark Regev?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMd_js_oQAk

[armaghniac]

The week in politics this morning.. Pearse v joan burton. He destroyed her start to finish. I was surprised the state broadcaster didnt do more to try and save her. In the end she tried to shout him down. Sad

Just as GAABaord is full of people who can  manage teams better than the managers that actually have to manage them, it is easy to propose untested solutions from the outside.

[give her dixie]

Marty boy been a bit economical with the truth.....

http://m.derryjournal.com/news/politics/is-this-standing-up-for-derry-eastwood-asks-mcguinness-1-6066481

[glens abu]

Mac Coitir Abú

He def has a fighting chance of being elected.

[trueblue1234]

Dixie, no harm you keep quoting the Dolours Price allegations as if they're proof of Gerry being involved. Had it been the other way about you would be clamering for evidence. You can't have it both ways.

The point I am making is simple.

Woman says Gerry was involved in murders. Gerry says he can't afford to go to court.

Woman says Gerry spoke to a policeman. Gerry hires in the worlds top libel lawyer.

And my point is that your point is nonsense. AQMP has already explained why.

I'll ask a simple question, Do you believe every allegation you hear about anyone if that person doesn't challenge it in Court?

No I don't believe any allegation that I hear about anyone, but usually, as a general rule of thumb, if I read allegations of a high profile person been involved in murders in reputable newspapers, then I want to see what becomes of it. Wouldn't you have the same curiosity?

Also, as a general rule of thumb, I have generally found that anyone accused of a serious crime in a reputable newspaper usually challenges the newspaper or the person making those claims in a legal manner.

2 weeks RTE had to apologise to Gerry Adams in relation to a complaint he made as in relation to a failure on their behalf to use the word "allegedly" in a news report relating to the DPP seeking a review of a decision not to prosecute Gerry for withholding evidence about his brother, Liam.

This was their apology:

On the 7th of October, Drivetime broadcast an inaccurate report which was repeated on a number of news bulletins during the programme in relation to Mr Gerry Adams TD.

This report incorrectly stated that the Northern Ireland Director of Public Prosecutions had asked for a review of the decision not to prosecute the Sinn Féin leader Gerry Adams for withholding evidence about his brother.

The reports should have stated that the Northern Ireland Director of Public Prosecutions had asked for a review of the decision not to prosecute the Sinn Féin leader for allegedly withholding evidence about his brother.

RTE apologises to Gerry Adams for this error.

Now, i'm sure you have read the full transcript of Gerry's cross examination......

Then, this week Gerry hires the worlds leading libel lawyer to go after the Independent Newspaper group because they reported on the Police Ombusman investigating a claim by his sister in law, Liams wife, that Gerry was briefed in a public meeting by a policeman on Liams case prior to him giving evidence against his brother.

Now, considering the above examples of how Gerry went after RTE because they left out the word "alledged" in an article, and had to issue a public apology, and how he has hired the worlds leading libel lawyer to challenge the claim printed in 2 major newspapers by his sister in law that he was de briefed by a police man on his brothers rape trial, a claim that is been investigated by the police Ombusman, doesn't it strike you as odd that he didn't go after the Irish News, The Sunday Life, or the Telegraph when they printed claims by Dolours Price that he was involved in the execution of Jean McConville and others, claiming he couldn't afford the costs to prove those claims were false?
After all, he got RTE to apologise for leaving out the word "Allegedly" in their report, and if you were to have read Gerrys testimony in the link I posted earlier, you can understand how RTE made the simple error.

If they used the word alledged regarding Dolours alledgations he would have had no legal grounds to challenge them. You're logic is backwards. You are using the fact that he didn't challenge alledgations as proof that they are true. Totally twisted logic and if you can't see that then we'll agree to differ.

[orangeman]

Marty boy been a bit economical with the truth.....

http://m.derryjournal.com/news/politics/is-this-standing-up-for-derry-eastwood-asks-mcguinness-1-6066481

To be fair it was a letter sent by one of the depts and Marty signed it and might not have read it. I'm sure he signs loads of letters every day.

[give her dixie]

Mac Coitir Abú

He def has a fighting chance of being elected.

Yo Glens, any chance you can explain what you mean by "The brothers in law"?

Its been a few days now and I am not the only one looking to know?

If you dont want to tell me on here publicly, then send me a pm.

Or if you are brave enough, I can meet you anywhere it suits and you can tell me face to face.

I cant be much fairer than that.

[give her dixie]

Dixie, no harm you keep quoting the Dolours Price allegations as if they're proof of Gerry being involved. Had it been the other way about you would be clamering for evidence. You can't have it both ways.

The point I am making is simple.

Woman says Gerry was involved in murders. Gerry says he can't afford to go to court.

Woman says Gerry spoke to a policeman. Gerry hires in the worlds top libel lawyer.

And my point is that your point is nonsense. AQMP has already explained why.

I'll ask a simple question, Do you believe every allegation you hear about anyone if that person doesn't challenge it in Court?

No I don't believe any allegation that I hear about anyone, but usually, as a general rule of thumb, if I read allegations of a high profile person been involved in murders in reputable newspapers, then I want to see what becomes of it. Wouldn't you have the same curiosity?

Also, as a general rule of thumb, I have generally found that anyone accused of a serious crime in a reputable newspaper usually challenges the newspaper or the person making those claims in a legal manner.

2 weeks RTE had to apologise to Gerry Adams in relation to a complaint he made as in relation to a failure on their behalf to use the word "allegedly" in a news report relating to the DPP seeking a review of a decision not to prosecute Gerry for withholding evidence about his brother, Liam.

This was their apology:

On the 7th of October, Drivetime broadcast an inaccurate report which was repeated on a number of news bulletins during the programme in relation to Mr Gerry Adams TD.

This report incorrectly stated that the Northern Ireland Director of Public Prosecutions had asked for a review of the decision not to prosecute the Sinn Féin leader Gerry Adams for withholding evidence about his brother.

The reports should have stated that the Northern Ireland Director of Public Prosecutions had asked for a review of the decision not to prosecute the Sinn Féin leader for allegedly withholding evidence about his brother.

RTE apologises to Gerry Adams for this error.

Now, i'm sure you have read the full transcript of Gerry's cross examination......

Then, this week Gerry hires the worlds leading libel lawyer to go after the Independent Newspaper group because they reported on the Police Ombusman investigating a claim by his sister in law, Liams wife, that Gerry was briefed in a public meeting by a policeman on Liams case prior to him giving evidence against his brother.

Now, considering the above examples of how Gerry went after RTE because they left out the word "alledged" in an article, and had to issue a public apology, and how he has hired the worlds leading libel lawyer to challenge the claim printed in 2 major newspapers by his sister in law that he was de briefed by a police man on his brothers rape trial, a claim that is been investigated by the police Ombusman, doesn't it strike you as odd that he didn't go after the Irish News, The Sunday Life, or the Telegraph when they printed claims by Dolours Price that he was involved in the execution of Jean McConville and others, claiming he couldn't afford the costs to prove those claims were false?
After all, he got RTE to apologise for leaving out the word "Allegedly" in their report, and if you were to have read Gerrys testimony in the link I posted earlier, you can understand how RTE made the simple error.

If they used the word alledged regarding Dolours alledgations he would have had no legal grounds to challenge them. You're logic is backwards. You are using the fact that he didn't challenge alledgations as proof that they are true. Totally twisted logic and if you can't see that then we'll agree to differ.

Now, could you point out to me where I claimed that the allegations are true? I was merely pointing out that he claimed he couldn't afford the costs to challenge the claims carried in 3 newspapers that he was involved in murder, yet he can afford to hire a lawyer who acts for a member of the Royal family?

Gerry has a long history of threatening to sue over different claims about him. I just found it odd he couldn't afford a lawyer, and merely pointed it out. People can make from it what they want, and you are entitled to draw your conclusions, which I respect.

This is the paragraph in whole where he talks about cost:

Mr Adams today described the Ms Price's allegations as "very, very serious" as well as "untrue" and "false". Asked why he did not attempt to sue Ms Price, Mr Adams said: "Because I don't have the money."



Some examples of Gerry threatening to sue newspapers:

The Evening Hearld

The Sinn Fein leader sent a letter to this paper after we published an interview with Ms McKendry in which she said Adams was "in fact dancing on Jean's grave" by running in the same constituency, Louth, where her mother's body was found in 2003.

Adams's solicitors McCartan & Burke claimed the article represented a "serious defamation" of their client who is "considering all legal remedies open to him". Ms McKendry said today she has never personally got a legal letter from the Sinn Fein chief. However, she added: "We did a programme one time and he threatened then to sue, but it came to nothing."

http://www.herald.ie/news/adams-now-threatens-to-sue-us-over-his-ira-past-27973466.html

And when the Sunday Tribune carried the story of his alleged involvement in child abuse coverup, which relates to the story posts 2 pages back,  A Sinn Fein spokesman said:

"The party was considering suing the Sunday Tribune because the "allegations were founded on innuendo and sensationalism and not facts".

He went on: "Gerry Adams and the party refute absolutely any allegation of covering up instances of abuse. Our position on these matters is crystal clear. At all times the welfare of children is paramount...

"If an allegation of sexual abuse is made against a Sinn Fein member the party ensures that the matter is reported to the relevant statutory authorities. The member is suspended from the party without prejudice."

He added: "It is not the job of Sinn Fein to establish guilt or innocence and we will await the outcome of the police investigation."

Read more: http://www.theweek.co.uk/politics/17255/gerry-adams-centre-sinn-fein-child-abuse-row#ixzz32AacVcoa

[Nally Stand]

Dixie, no harm you keep quoting the Dolours Price allegations as if they're proof of Gerry being involved. Had it been the other way about you would be clamering for evidence. You can't have it both ways.

The point I am making is simple.

Woman says Gerry was involved in murders. Gerry says he can't afford to go to court.

Woman says Gerry spoke to a policeman. Gerry hires in the worlds top libel lawyer.

And my point is that your point is nonsense. AQMP has already explained why.

I'll ask a simple question, Do you believe every allegation you hear about anyone if that person doesn't challenge it in Court?

No I don't believe any allegation that I hear about anyone, but usually, as a general rule of thumb, if I read allegations of a high profile person been involved in murders in reputable newspapers, then I want to see what becomes of it. Wouldn't you have the same curiosity?

Also, as a general rule of thumb, I have generally found that anyone accused of a serious crime in a reputable newspaper usually challenges the newspaper or the person making those claims in a legal manner.

2 weeks RTE had to apologise to Gerry Adams in relation to a complaint he made as in relation to a failure on their behalf to use the word "allegedly" in a news report relating to the DPP seeking a review of a decision not to prosecute Gerry for withholding evidence about his brother, Liam.

This was their apology:

On the 7th of October, Drivetime broadcast an inaccurate report which was repeated on a number of news bulletins during the programme in relation to Mr Gerry Adams TD.

This report incorrectly stated that the Northern Ireland Director of Public Prosecutions had asked for a review of the decision not to prosecute the Sinn Féin leader Gerry Adams for withholding evidence about his brother.

The reports should have stated that the Northern Ireland Director of Public Prosecutions had asked for a review of the decision not to prosecute the Sinn Féin leader for allegedly withholding evidence about his brother.

RTE apologises to Gerry Adams for this error.

Now, i'm sure you have read the full transcript of Gerry's cross examination......

Then, this week Gerry hires the worlds leading libel lawyer to go after the Independent Newspaper group because they reported on the Police Ombusman investigating a claim by his sister in law, Liams wife, that Gerry was briefed in a public meeting by a policeman on Liams case prior to him giving evidence against his brother.

Now, considering the above examples of how Gerry went after RTE because they left out the word "alledged" in an article, and had to issue a public apology, and how he has hired the worlds leading libel lawyer to challenge the claim printed in 2 major newspapers by his sister in law that he was de briefed by a police man on his brothers rape trial, a claim that is been investigated by the police Ombusman, doesn't it strike you as odd that he didn't go after the Irish News, The Sunday Life, or the Telegraph when they printed claims by Dolours Price that he was involved in the execution of Jean McConville and others, claiming he couldn't afford the costs to prove those claims were false?
After all, he got RTE to apologise for leaving out the word "Allegedly" in their report, and if you were to have read Gerrys testimony in the link I posted earlier, you can understand how RTE made the simple error.

If they used the word alledged regarding Dolours alledgations he would have had no legal grounds to challenge them. You're logic is backwards. You are using the fact that he didn't challenge alledgations as proof that they are true. Totally twisted logic and if you can't see that then we'll agree to differ.

Now, could you point out to me where I claimed that the allegations are true? I was merely pointing out that he claimed he couldn't afford the costs to challenge the claims carried in 3 newspapers that he was involved in murder, yet he can afford to hire a lawyer who acts for a member of the Royal family?

Gerry has a long history of threatening to sue over different claims about him. I just found it odd he couldn't afford a lawyer, and merely pointed it out. People can make from it what they want, and you are entitled to draw your conclusions, which I respect.

This is the paragraph in whole where he talks about cost:

Mr Adams today described the Ms Price's allegations as "very, very serious" as well as "untrue" and "false". Asked why he did not attempt to sue Ms Price, Mr Adams said: "Because I don't have the money."



Some examples of Gerry threatening to sue newspapers:

The Evening Hearld

The Sinn Fein leader sent a letter to this paper after we published an interview with Ms McKendry in which she said Adams was "in fact dancing on Jean's grave" by running in the same constituency, Louth, where her mother's body was found in 2003.

Adams's solicitors McCartan & Burke claimed the article represented a "serious defamation" of their client who is "considering all legal remedies open to him". Ms McKendry said today she has never personally got a legal letter from the Sinn Fein chief. However, she added: "We did a programme one time and he threatened then to sue, but it came to nothing."

http://www.herald.ie/news/adams-now-threatens-to-sue-us-over-his-ira-past-27973466.html

And when the Sunday Tribune carried the story of his alleged involvement in child abuse coverup, which relates to the story posts 2 pages back,  A Sinn Fein spokesman said:

"The party was considering suing the Sunday Tribune because the "allegations were founded on innuendo and sensationalism and not facts".

He went on: "Gerry Adams and the party refute absolutely any allegation of covering up instances of abuse. Our position on these matters is crystal clear. At all times the welfare of children is paramount...

"If an allegation of sexual abuse is made against a Sinn Fein member the party ensures that the matter is reported to the relevant statutory authorities. The member is suspended from the party without prejudice."

He added: "It is not the job of Sinn Fein to establish guilt or innocence and we will await the outcome of the police investigation."

Read more: http://www.theweek.co.uk/politics/17255/gerry-adams-centre-sinn-fein-child-abuse-row#ixzz32AacVcoa

Still wondering why you're singling out Delours' unsubstantiated allegations over the unsubstantiated allegations from so many countless others with grudges against him.

[give her dixie]

Dixie, no harm you keep quoting the Dolours Price allegations as if they're proof of Gerry being involved. Had it been the other way about you would be clamering for evidence. You can't have it both ways.

The point I am making is simple.

Woman says Gerry was involved in murders. Gerry says he can't afford to go to court.

Woman says Gerry spoke to a policeman. Gerry hires in the worlds top libel lawyer.

And my point is that your point is nonsense. AQMP has already explained why.

I'll ask a simple question, Do you believe every allegation you hear about anyone if that person doesn't challenge it in Court?

No I don't believe any allegation that I hear about anyone, but usually, as a general rule of thumb, if I read allegations of a high profile person been involved in murders in reputable newspapers, then I want to see what becomes of it. Wouldn't you have the same curiosity?

Also, as a general rule of thumb, I have generally found that anyone accused of a serious crime in a reputable newspaper usually challenges the newspaper or the person making those claims in a legal manner.

2 weeks RTE had to apologise to Gerry Adams in relation to a complaint he made as in relation to a failure on their behalf to use the word "allegedly" in a news report relating to the DPP seeking a review of a decision not to prosecute Gerry for withholding evidence about his brother, Liam.

This was their apology:

On the 7th of October, Drivetime broadcast an inaccurate report which was repeated on a number of news bulletins during the programme in relation to Mr Gerry Adams TD.

This report incorrectly stated that the Northern Ireland Director of Public Prosecutions had asked for a review of the decision not to prosecute the Sinn Féin leader Gerry Adams for withholding evidence about his brother.

The reports should have stated that the Northern Ireland Director of Public Prosecutions had asked for a review of the decision not to prosecute the Sinn Féin leader for allegedly withholding evidence about his brother.

RTE apologises to Gerry Adams for this error.

Now, i'm sure you have read the full transcript of Gerry's cross examination......

Then, this week Gerry hires the worlds leading libel lawyer to go after the Independent Newspaper group because they reported on the Police Ombusman investigating a claim by his sister in law, Liams wife, that Gerry was briefed in a public meeting by a policeman on Liams case prior to him giving evidence against his brother.

Now, considering the above examples of how Gerry went after RTE because they left out the word "alledged" in an article, and had to issue a public apology, and how he has hired the worlds leading libel lawyer to challenge the claim printed in 2 major newspapers by his sister in law that he was de briefed by a police man on his brothers rape trial, a claim that is been investigated by the police Ombusman, doesn't it strike you as odd that he didn't go after the Irish News, The Sunday Life, or the Telegraph when they printed claims by Dolours Price that he was involved in the execution of Jean McConville and others, claiming he couldn't afford the costs to prove those claims were false?
After all, he got RTE to apologise for leaving out the word "Allegedly" in their report, and if you were to have read Gerrys testimony in the link I posted earlier, you can understand how RTE made the simple error.

If they used the word alledged regarding Dolours alledgations he would have had no legal grounds to challenge them. You're logic is backwards. You are using the fact that he didn't challenge alledgations as proof that they are true. Totally twisted logic and if you can't see that then we'll agree to differ.

Now, could you point out to me where I claimed that the allegations are true? I was merely pointing out that he claimed he couldn't afford the costs to challenge the claims carried in 3 newspapers that he was involved in murder, yet he can afford to hire a lawyer who acts for a member of the Royal family?

Gerry has a long history of threatening to sue over different claims about him. I just found it odd he couldn't afford a lawyer, and merely pointed it out. People can make from it what they want, and you are entitled to draw your conclusions, which I respect.

This is the paragraph in whole where he talks about cost:

Mr Adams today described the Ms Price's allegations as "very, very serious" as well as "untrue" and "false". Asked why he did not attempt to sue Ms Price, Mr Adams said: "Because I don't have the money."



Some examples of Gerry threatening to sue newspapers:

The Evening Hearld

The Sinn Fein leader sent a letter to this paper after we published an interview with Ms McKendry in which she said Adams was "in fact dancing on Jean's grave" by running in the same constituency, Louth, where her mother's body was found in 2003.

Adams's solicitors McCartan & Burke claimed the article represented a "serious defamation" of their client who is "considering all legal remedies open to him". Ms McKendry said today she has never personally got a legal letter from the Sinn Fein chief. However, she added: "We did a programme one time and he threatened then to sue, but it came to nothing."

http://www.herald.ie/news/adams-now-threatens-to-sue-us-over-his-ira-past-27973466.html

And when the Sunday Tribune carried the story of his alleged involvement in child abuse coverup, which relates to the story posts 2 pages back,  A Sinn Fein spokesman said:

"The party was considering suing the Sunday Tribune because the "allegations were founded on innuendo and sensationalism and not facts".

He went on: "Gerry Adams and the party refute absolutely any allegation of covering up instances of abuse. Our position on these matters is crystal clear. At all times the welfare of children is paramount...

"If an allegation of sexual abuse is made against a Sinn Fein member the party ensures that the matter is reported to the relevant statutory authorities. The member is suspended from the party without prejudice."

He added: "It is not the job of Sinn Fein to establish guilt or innocence and we will await the outcome of the police investigation."

Read more: http://www.theweek.co.uk/politics/17255/gerry-adams-centre-sinn-fein-child-abuse-row#ixzz32AacVcoa

Still wondering why you're singling out Delours' unsubstantiated allegations over the unsubstantiated allegations from so many countless others with grudges against him.

What other newspapers carried interviews with someone who accuses Gerry with involvement in murder?

Nally, I merely singled out the interview with Dolours Price, her claims, and his refusal to sue her or the papers because "He couldn't afford it"

However Nally, as we seen this week when he hired the top libel lawyer, he had no problem with cost.

And as you have seen, I posted 4 different stories where Gerry and Sinn Fein are straight out of the blocks threatening to sue.

Over the past number of years I have seen how when even the slightest thing is put to George Galloway, his 1st reaction is to threaten to take legal action. Given he has won quite a few high profile cases against the mainstream press, the media walk on egg shells around him.

I wonder how many times Gerry followed through on those threats to take legal action?

[give her dixie]

Marty boy been a bit economical with the truth.....

http://m.derryjournal.com/news/politics/is-this-standing-up-for-derry-eastwood-asks-mcguinness-1-6066481

To be fair it was a letter sent by one of the depts and Marty signed it and might not have read it. I'm sure he signs loads of letters every day.

Here is a better grip on the topic, and Marty isn't the only one with egg on their face 

http://thepensivequill.am/2014/05/project-kelvin-in-their-own-words.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+bigmackers+%28The+Pensive+Quill+-+Anthony+McIntyre%27s+blog%29&utm_content=FaceBook

[seafoid]

Does anyone else think Glens is very like the Israeli spokesman Mark Regev?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMd_js_oQAk

I think that Shinners and Zionists have many similarities in terms of the centrality of the ideology to any discussion of the
issues. What did the sons of Roisin die for? Maybe nothing. Or perhaps a new Debenhams superstore, which may not have been the original desire. 
The contingency of life doesn't get a look in.

[give her dixie]

Does anyone else think Glens is very like the Israeli spokesman Mark Regev?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMd_js_oQAk

I think that Shinners and Zionists have many similarities in terms of the centrality of the ideology to any discussion of the
issues. What did the sons of Roisin die for? Maybe nothing. Or perhaps a new Debenhams superstore, which may not have been the original desire. 
The contingency of life doesn't get a look in.

And they are frequent guests at several "Northern Ireland Friends Of Israel" events

http://nifriendsofisrael.wordpress.com/