Messages

[Q: Who killed Jean McConville?A: Gerry Adams]

I think you should give this up Nally

Dixie is running rings round you with reason and logic.

You sure?  Cos last time I checked,  Adams was an innocent man!

Another opinion poll this time on whether voters think Gerry is innocent or not - half reckon he's not innocent.

Indo.

NEARLY half of voters believe Sinn Fein leader Gerry Adams was involved in the murder of mother-of-ten Jean McConville, an Irish Independent/Millward Brown opinion poll reveals.

In a damning finding for Mr Adams, the poll shows that less than a quarter of voters believe him when he says that he had no role in the IRA's abduction and murder of Mrs McConville, a widow from Belfast.

I'm sure they all know something the police still didn't after four days of questioning. What's the chance that almost 100% of those who believe Brendan Hughes' allegation of Adams' involvement would also point blank refuse to accept his claim that she was informer. Suits the agenda better to claim she was abducted and killed for helping a wounded british soldier after all. Makes Adams look like an big bad ogre sure 

To borrow a specific piece from an article I linked yesterday from Jude Collins:

Finally,  a short Catechism q and a to see if you have a firm grasp on this matter:

Q: Who killed Jean McConville?

A: Gerry Adams

Q: Why did he kill her?

A: Because she put a coat under the head of a dying soldier.

Q: Has her body ever been recovered?

A: No.

Q: Why does Gerry Adams say he wasn't in the IRA?

A: Because he likes telling lies.

Q: Some people claim that Jean McConville was an informer. Do you believe that?

A: I most certainly do not.

Q: Why do you say that?

A: The papers hardly ever mention it.

Q:OK, pick up you BT Certificate of Merit on the way out.

I think you should give this up Nally

Dixie is running rings round you with reason and logic.

You sure?  Cos last time I checked,  Adams was an innocent man!

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.

Dixie give it up ffs. Like I keep asking and like you keep not answering, why the fcuk should you or he get the knickers in a twist over Delours Price making unsubstantiated allegations about his activities during the conflict over anybody else doing the exact same? She was just yet another person in the queue with A: a grudge against Gerry; B: An allegation to throw up at him; and C: no evidence to substantiate their claims. Perhaps he had the sense to know he'd never be out of courtrooms if he set a precedence of taking action against them all. And perhaps he knew that one day he'd make himself available for questioning and/or be arrested over his past and knew that he would walk out a free man and that his decision not to run to court to take action against every tom, dick, harry or Delours would be vindicated by his walking out a free, innocent man on his own terms. And again, why your obsession with Delours' unsubstantiated allegations over any one of the countless others you could pull out of the air?

Tommy Gorman, one of the interviewees for the Boston College Project, had this letter in todays Irish News


Some years ago, I was asked to take part in a project which, it was hoped, would help enhance understanding of the decades of political bloodletting that blighted our land and people.

I felt the plan to construct the archive by getting the thoughts and experiences of former combatants, and to examine the factors that led to people like us deciding to risk all in pursuance of our differing causes, would be valuable and instructive to future generations who may want to know what it was all about and hopefully help ensure it doesn't happen again.

And with eyes wide open and no hesitation I offered to help in any way I could.

I did the interviews in which I tried to describe the feeling of the community and the mood within the republican movement when the conflict was at different stages as well the prison struggle.

I didn't speak of any other volunteers just as I didn't expect them to speak of me. They were, after all, personal reminiscences from a very bloody period in our history.

Unfortunately, those at Boston College have not lived up to declarations made at the onset of the project in regards to confidentiality and assurances that the archive would remain secure from any external snooping.

The resulting media frenzy has allowed Shinner spinners and semi-literate graffitists to go into overdrive in attacking those of us among the many interviewees who don't agree that what is being peddled by Sinn Fein as 'the great leap forward' is anything of the sort.

In socio-economic, constitutional and inter-community development the opposite is true.

With the recent exposure of  post-ceasefire gunrunning by those 'fully committed to the peace process and support for the PSNI' we all should be dubious as to any excuse offered as to why, in this period of peace, there is a need for guns that are untraceable with no history or connection to any person or group.

One thing is sure: there is no way they are to be turned on the old enemy.

In all of our actions we must always strive to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable by refusing to be silenced

Further evidence, as if it were needed, that the only ones allowed to participate in this "history project" were people with a grudge against Sinn Féin. It's laughable at this stage!

It's hardly definitive. Neither you nor I know exactly who was interviewed, or indeed who declined to be interviewed.

Indeed but it's "further evidence" as I said. We don't know everyone who took part but all those we do know the identities of (particpants and organisers) have, to a man, got that one key think in common.

http://www.judecollins.com/2014/03/research-boston-college-tapes/

It's only further evidence of another anti SF contributor, nothing more.

There's no evidence that only people with such views were allowed to contribute. And not that you'll give it much credence, but those behind the project say two strong SF supporters gave interviews to the project.

There's also nothing to indicate that anyone was denied the opportunity to contribute - surely we'd have heard if that was the case. Therefore your claim that the "only ones allowed" to contribute... has no basis whatsoever.

I said "evidence" of. Easy to claim that two "pro-SF" people contributed when it's confidential! But again,  to a man, everyone we do know to be associated with the project held the same particular grudge. Could be a coincidence of course, but going on what we DO know, I think that's not bloody likely.

Given the position SF has taken on the project, any supporters who might have contributed can't admit to it.

But whatever about who did contribute, you have absolutely no basis for claiming that only certain people were allowed to participate, or that people of a certain political persuasion were not allowed to participate.

I'd repeat myself but I'll not bother.

Tommy Gorman, one of the interviewees for the Boston College Project, had this letter in todays Irish News


Some years ago, I was asked to take part in a project which, it was hoped, would help enhance understanding of the decades of political bloodletting that blighted our land and people.

I felt the plan to construct the archive by getting the thoughts and experiences of former combatants, and to examine the factors that led to people like us deciding to risk all in pursuance of our differing causes, would be valuable and instructive to future generations who may want to know what it was all about and hopefully help ensure it doesn't happen again.

And with eyes wide open and no hesitation I offered to help in any way I could.

I did the interviews in which I tried to describe the feeling of the community and the mood within the republican movement when the conflict was at different stages as well the prison struggle.

I didn't speak of any other volunteers just as I didn't expect them to speak of me. They were, after all, personal reminiscences from a very bloody period in our history.

Unfortunately, those at Boston College have not lived up to declarations made at the onset of the project in regards to confidentiality and assurances that the archive would remain secure from any external snooping.

The resulting media frenzy has allowed Shinner spinners and semi-literate graffitists to go into overdrive in attacking those of us among the many interviewees who don't agree that what is being peddled by Sinn Fein as 'the great leap forward' is anything of the sort.

In socio-economic, constitutional and inter-community development the opposite is true.

With the recent exposure of  post-ceasefire gunrunning by those 'fully committed to the peace process and support for the PSNI' we all should be dubious as to any excuse offered as to why, in this period of peace, there is a need for guns that are untraceable with no history or connection to any person or group.

One thing is sure: there is no way they are to be turned on the old enemy.

In all of our actions we must always strive to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable by refusing to be silenced

Further evidence, as if it were needed, that the only ones allowed to participate in this "history project" were people with a grudge against Sinn Féin. It's laughable at this stage!

It's hardly definitive. Neither you nor I know exactly who was interviewed, or indeed who declined to be interviewed.

Indeed but it's "further evidence" as I said. We don't know everyone who took part but all those we do know the identities of (particpants and organisers) have, to a man, got that one key think in common.

http://www.judecollins.com/2014/03/research-boston-college-tapes/

It's only further evidence of another anti SF contributor, nothing more.

There's no evidence that only people with such views were allowed to contribute. And not that you'll give it much credence, but those behind the project say two strong SF supporters gave interviews to the project.

There's also nothing to indicate that anyone was denied the opportunity to contribute - surely we'd have heard if that was the case. Therefore your claim that the "only ones allowed" to contribute... has no basis whatsoever.

I said "evidence" of. Easy to claim that two "pro-SF" people contributed when it's confidential! But again,  to a man, everyone we do know to be associated with the project held the same particular grudge. Could be a coincidence of course, but going on what we DO know, I think that's not bloody likely.

Tommy Gorman, one of the interviewees for the Boston College Project, had this letter in todays Irish News


Some years ago, I was asked to take part in a project which, it was hoped, would help enhance understanding of the decades of political bloodletting that blighted our land and people.

I felt the plan to construct the archive by getting the thoughts and experiences of former combatants, and to examine the factors that led to people like us deciding to risk all in pursuance of our differing causes, would be valuable and instructive to future generations who may want to know what it was all about and hopefully help ensure it doesn't happen again.

And with eyes wide open and no hesitation I offered to help in any way I could.

I did the interviews in which I tried to describe the feeling of the community and the mood within the republican movement when the conflict was at different stages as well the prison struggle.

I didn't speak of any other volunteers just as I didn't expect them to speak of me. They were, after all, personal reminiscences from a very bloody period in our history.

Unfortunately, those at Boston College have not lived up to declarations made at the onset of the project in regards to confidentiality and assurances that the archive would remain secure from any external snooping.

The resulting media frenzy has allowed Shinner spinners and semi-literate graffitists to go into overdrive in attacking those of us among the many interviewees who don't agree that what is being peddled by Sinn Fein as 'the great leap forward' is anything of the sort.

In socio-economic, constitutional and inter-community development the opposite is true.

With the recent exposure of  post-ceasefire gunrunning by those 'fully committed to the peace process and support for the PSNI' we all should be dubious as to any excuse offered as to why, in this period of peace, there is a need for guns that are untraceable with no history or connection to any person or group.

One thing is sure: there is no way they are to be turned on the old enemy.

In all of our actions we must always strive to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable by refusing to be silenced

Further evidence, as if it were needed, that the only ones allowed to participate in this "history project" were people with a grudge against Sinn Féin. It's laughable at this stage!

It's hardly definitive. Neither you nor I know exactly who was interviewed, or indeed who declined to be interviewed.

Indeed but it's "further evidence" as I said. We don't know everyone who took part but all those we do know the identities of (particpants and organisers) have, to a man, got that one key think in common.

http://www.judecollins.com/2014/03/research-boston-college-tapes/

http://cedarlounge.wordpress.com/2014/05/15/gerry-adams-and-his-slow-removal-from-sinn-fein-2014-election-leaflets/

Wishful thinking taken to extreme levels there!! He hasn't gone away you know and here's hoping he won't for quite some time. And one thing's for sure, it won't be as a result of links like that when he does step down

Tommy Gorman, one of the interviewees for the Boston College Project, had this letter in todays Irish News


Some years ago, I was asked to take part in a project which, it was hoped, would help enhance understanding of the decades of political bloodletting that blighted our land and people.

I felt the plan to construct the archive by getting the thoughts and experiences of former combatants, and to examine the factors that led to people like us deciding to risk all in pursuance of our differing causes, would be valuable and instructive to future generations who may want to know what it was all about and hopefully help ensure it doesn't happen again.

And with eyes wide open and no hesitation I offered to help in any way I could.

I did the interviews in which I tried to describe the feeling of the community and the mood within the republican movement when the conflict was at different stages as well the prison struggle.

I didn't speak of any other volunteers just as I didn't expect them to speak of me. They were, after all, personal reminiscences from a very bloody period in our history.

Unfortunately, those at Boston College have not lived up to declarations made at the onset of the project in regards to confidentiality and assurances that the archive would remain secure from any external snooping.

The resulting media frenzy has allowed Shinner spinners and semi-literate graffitists to go into overdrive in attacking those of us among the many interviewees who don't agree that what is being peddled by Sinn Fein as 'the great leap forward' is anything of the sort.

In socio-economic, constitutional and inter-community development the opposite is true.

With the recent exposure of  post-ceasefire gunrunning by those 'fully committed to the peace process and support for the PSNI' we all should be dubious as to any excuse offered as to why, in this period of peace, there is a need for guns that are untraceable with no history or connection to any person or group.

One thing is sure: there is no way they are to be turned on the old enemy.

In all of our actions we must always strive to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable by refusing to be silenced

Further evidence, as if it were needed, that the only ones allowed to participate in this "history project" were people with a grudge against Sinn Féin. It's laughable at this stage!

Gerry is always quick off the mark to call people liars when they say something that involves himself. He forgets the lies he told to the Irish nation about not having anything to do with his child rapist brother for 15 years. The evidence produced in court proved that he was in fact a liar, and not the media who he and his followers claimed.

Here is the full court transcript of his cross examination in full:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/08_10_2013_cross_exam_gerry_adams.pdf

Also, as most people will recall, Gerry has always claimed that Dolours Price was a liar when she claimed he was behind the disappearance of several people in the early 70's in interviews carried by the Irish News, The Sunday Life, and the Telegraph.

Gerry Adams had the opportunity to go to court and challenge Dolours over her claims. He refused saying he couldn't afford it. Now that she is dead, he can call her a liar all day long. He had a chance to prove he was telling the truth when she was alive, but he refused. Now she is dead, he can say what he wants.

Gerry has no problem raising millions over the years from lavish dinners in 5 star hotels. The party rakes in millions from Stormont and the Dail through salaries and expenses. Now call me stupid if you may, but in my book, if Gerry wanted to prove his innocence he could have challenged her claims in a court of law in order to clear his name while she was still alive.

Everyone in Sinn Fein repeats the claim by Gerry that he is innocent, yet not one single one of them stepped forward and said Gerry, we will stand behind you in a court action against Dolours, and no matter what it costs, we will do everything in our power to raise the money to cover your expenses. That would have been the ultimate show of faith in his innocence, but somehow, they maybe didn't believe him enough to risk going to court to prove it...........

Dixie, not sure if you've seen the news in recent weeks but Gerry was actually arrested and questioned for four days about IRA membership and the disappeared. He was released without charge. Ergo, he is innocent.

Nally, I think you missed my point, and my previous posts where I did know he was arrested and released without charge pending a file sent to the DPP to decide if he will face charges or not.

Dolours Price was interviewed by 2 people and she claimed Gerry Adams was involved in the disappearance of several people. That interview was carried by 3 major reputable newspapers a couple of years ago.

He had a chance to take Dolours or the papers to court to prove his innocence and challenge the very serious claims. He refused citing he couldn't afford to.

Now tell me this. If I was to make the same claims against Peter Robinson say, or Enda Kenny, or Micheal Martin, or indeed yourself in the same 3 papers, what do you think you or they would do?

Do you think they would challenge the claims in any way they could, including going to court no matter what the costs were? Would you challenge me in court no matter what the cost, or would you sit back and do nothing?

When Gerry said he couldn't afford the costs, he didn't know then that he would be arrested years later and given a chance to clear his name. From then until Dolours died, those claims went unchallenged legally. It was his word against hers.

Over the past few years we have seen serious allegations made about many famous people in the press. Those alleged to have committed the offenses stood up and said they were innocent of all charges, and would fight tooth and nail to defend themselves.

Several high profile people were arrested, questioned, and released. Files were sent to the DPP, and charges were brought against several of them. They had their day in court to defend themselves, and from what we have seen, many of them were convicted, and some found not guilty. In defending themselves, some had to sell their houses and borrow money to pay legal fees.

What they all had in common was a determination to refute the claims made against them no matter what the cost, and no matter what the outcome.

When is the last time you ever seen a high profile person accused of serious crimes in the papers refuse to challenge the claims in a court of law?

Using the excuse of not been able to afford court costs was a very very weak excuse to use given how serious the allegations were.

Dixie so what if Delours Price made such allegations. A woman who didn't like him made claims about him without any evidence? Big woop. You seem to think she is the only one to have ever made a wholly unsubstantiated claim about Gerry Adams past. If he were to take all such people to court like you suggest he should have to Delours, he'd never be out of courtrooms ffs. So why should he have? As it stands he is an innocent man anyway.

Nally, how do you know Dolours had no evidence? You ask why should he have taken her or others to court. As I see it, she was one of very few who went to the national media and had mainstream publications carry the story. Given that he is the leader of a large political party, would it not be in his best interests, and the interests of the public, to put her in the dock and ask her to back up up claims? After all, he declared to everyone, without any evidence, that she was telling lies?

As it stands, he told us all that he couldn't afford to go to court to challenge her claims that he was involved in several murders, yet he can afford to hire Paul Tweed to go after 2 newspapers who carried a story in which his sister in law claims he spoke to the police before he was due to give evidence at his brothers trial.

Does it not strike you or anyone else as odd that he would lets claims of his involvement in murders go unchallenged, yet hire a lawyer who usually works for Hollywood stars to defend claims he spoke to a policeman?

I don't know what Paul Tweed costs, but given he has represented people such as Britney Spears and the Duchess of York, i'm sure he doesn't come cheap. Maybe McGuinness worked out a special deal a couple of weeks ago when he was dining with the Windsors in Windsor?

With respect Dixie, you're talking nonsense. Martin McGuinness and Gerry Adams have faced more unsubstantiated allegations in the national press and television than you or I have had hot dinners. As I said,  if they were to bring to court every last person to accuse them, they'd get nothing else done. Considering the sheer number of people to have accused them both without providing any evidence whatsoever, why should you, or indeed Adams, get the knickers in a twist of just one of them. Dolours Price despised Adams and made claims against him without providing a scrap of evidence. Big fecking woop. She was just another in the line to do so. Meanwhile Adams is an innocent man.

Gerry is always quick off the mark to call people liars when they say something that involves himself. He forgets the lies he told to the Irish nation about not having anything to do with his child rapist brother for 15 years. The evidence produced in court proved that he was in fact a liar, and not the media who he and his followers claimed.

Here is the full court transcript of his cross examination in full:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/08_10_2013_cross_exam_gerry_adams.pdf

Also, as most people will recall, Gerry has always claimed that Dolours Price was a liar when she claimed he was behind the disappearance of several people in the early 70's in interviews carried by the Irish News, The Sunday Life, and the Telegraph.

Gerry Adams had the opportunity to go to court and challenge Dolours over her claims. He refused saying he couldn't afford it. Now that she is dead, he can call her a liar all day long. He had a chance to prove he was telling the truth when she was alive, but he refused. Now she is dead, he can say what he wants.

Gerry has no problem raising millions over the years from lavish dinners in 5 star hotels. The party rakes in millions from Stormont and the Dail through salaries and expenses. Now call me stupid if you may, but in my book, if Gerry wanted to prove his innocence he could have challenged her claims in a court of law in order to clear his name while she was still alive.

Everyone in Sinn Fein repeats the claim by Gerry that he is innocent, yet not one single one of them stepped forward and said Gerry, we will stand behind you in a court action against Dolours, and no matter what it costs, we will do everything in our power to raise the money to cover your expenses. That would have been the ultimate show of faith in his innocence, but somehow, they maybe didn't believe him enough to risk going to court to prove it...........

Dixie, not sure if you've seen the news in recent weeks but Gerry was actually arrested and questioned for four days about IRA membership and the disappeared. He was released without charge. Ergo, he is innocent.

Nally, I think you missed my point, and my previous posts where I did know he was arrested and released without charge pending a file sent to the DPP to decide if he will face charges or not.

Dolours Price was interviewed by 2 people and she claimed Gerry Adams was involved in the disappearance of several people. That interview was carried by 3 major reputable newspapers a couple of years ago.

He had a chance to take Dolours or the papers to court to prove his innocence and challenge the very serious claims. He refused citing he couldn't afford to.

Now tell me this. If I was to make the same claims against Peter Robinson say, or Enda Kenny, or Micheal Martin, or indeed yourself in the same 3 papers, what do you think you or they would do?

Do you think they would challenge the claims in any way they could, including going to court no matter what the costs were? Would you challenge me in court no matter what the cost, or would you sit back and do nothing?

When Gerry said he couldn't afford the costs, he didn't know then that he would be arrested years later and given a chance to clear his name. From then until Dolours died, those claims went unchallenged legally. It was his word against hers.

Over the past few years we have seen serious allegations made about many famous people in the press. Those alleged to have committed the offenses stood up and said they were innocent of all charges, and would fight tooth and nail to defend themselves.

Several high profile people were arrested, questioned, and released. Files were sent to the DPP, and charges were brought against several of them. They had their day in court to defend themselves, and from what we have seen, many of them were convicted, and some found not guilty. In defending themselves, some had to sell their houses and borrow money to pay legal fees.

What they all had in common was a determination to refute the claims made against them no matter what the cost, and no matter what the outcome.

When is the last time you ever seen a high profile person accused of serious crimes in the papers refuse to challenge the claims in a court of law?

Using the excuse of not been able to afford court costs was a very very weak excuse to use given how serious the allegations were.

Dixie so what if Delours Price made such allegations. A woman who didn't like him made claims about him without any evidence? Big woop. You seem to think she is the only one to have ever made a wholly unsubstantiated claim about Gerry Adams past. If he were to take all such people to court like you suggest he should have to Delours, he'd never be out of courtrooms ffs. So why should he have? As it stands he is an innocent man anyway.

Gerry is always quick off the mark to call people liars when they say something that involves himself. He forgets the lies he told to the Irish nation about not having anything to do with his child rapist brother for 15 years. The evidence produced in court proved that he was in fact a liar, and not the media who he and his followers claimed.

Here is the full court transcript of his cross examination in full:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/08_10_2013_cross_exam_gerry_adams.pdf

Also, as most people will recall, Gerry has always claimed that Dolours Price was a liar when she claimed he was behind the disappearance of several people in the early 70's in interviews carried by the Irish News, The Sunday Life, and the Telegraph.

Gerry Adams had the opportunity to go to court and challenge Dolours over her claims. He refused saying he couldn't afford it. Now that she is dead, he can call her a liar all day long. He had a chance to prove he was telling the truth when she was alive, but he refused. Now she is dead, he can say what he wants.

Gerry has no problem raising millions over the years from lavish dinners in 5 star hotels. The party rakes in millions from Stormont and the Dail through salaries and expenses. Now call me stupid if you may, but in my book, if Gerry wanted to prove his innocence he could have challenged her claims in a court of law in order to clear his name while she was still alive.

Everyone in Sinn Fein repeats the claim by Gerry that he is innocent, yet not one single one of them stepped forward and said Gerry, we will stand behind you in a court action against Dolours, and no matter what it costs, we will do everything in our power to raise the money to cover your expenses. That would have been the ultimate show of faith in his innocence, but somehow, they maybe didn't believe him enough to risk going to court to prove it...........

Dixie, not sure if you've seen the news in recent weeks but Gerry was actually arrested and questioned for four days about IRA membership and the disappeared. He was released without charge. Ergo, he is innocent.

Letter in the Examiner a few days back:

http://www.irishexaminer.com/viewpoints/yourview/time-for-truth-on-1974-bombings-268334.html#.U3HSBY66m6Q.facebook

This Friday will be the 40th anniversary of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings, in which 34 people were killed, including a pregnant woman and her unborn child, as well as a family of four (a four-month-old baby, her 18-month-old sister and their parents).

The bombings caused maximum carnage on Dublin's busiest day and at its busiest time — rush hour, Friday, between 5.30pm and 6pm. Three, massive bombs went off without warning, and a further bomb, a diversion to allow those responsible to escape, exploded a short while later in the border town of Monaghan.

This was the biggest mass murder in the history of the Irish State. The Taoiseach, Liam Cosgrave, said in the Dáil a few days after the bombings: "It was, without exception, the worst single outrage in these islands, since the end of the Second World War."

In fact, in terms of human casualties, it has been the worst single atrocity of the Troubles. However, this atrocity has been brushed under the carpet by our political establishment.

Those in power at the time failed to bring those responsible to justice and all investigations were wound down in weeks, without any credible explanation or follow-up.

Only in recent years, as a result of efforts by the families and friends of the victims, has any effort been made to revisit the events.

However, these efforts fall far short of what is required by any democratic regime that prioritises the protection of its citizens.

In 1999, the Barron inquiry, headed by Justice Henry Barron, was established to examine the bombings. This inquiry, while limited in scope, revealed extremely worrying facts, including the discovery that all files had simply disappeared from the Department of Justice.

While it may seem inconceivable that these files have vanished, they are apparently the only files missing from that period, so no effective efforts have been made to get to the bottom of this serious breach in State security.

In his report, Judge Barron also noted that the Government of the day "showed little interest in pursuing those responsible for the attacks".

The failure of our political establishment to pursue this matter is one of the greatest political scandals in the history of the State. Senior politicians, in power at the time, displayed scant regard for their duties and also little concern for the families of the victims.

In 1981, Cosgrave refused to attend an Oireachtas sub-committee discussing the issue, saying that he had retired from public life.

He may have retired from public life, on a generous State pension, but he still had a duty to account for his time in office. Similarly, Paddy Cooney, Justice Minister at the time of the bombings, challenged the finding of the Barron Report. He also, has a duty to help uncover the mystery of the files missing from his department.

Many of the victims of that terrible day were young people. These murders need to be given the attention they deserve, and their families and loved ones deserve justice and the truth.

If abuse of the penalty points system and other, less serious issues, can be the focus of such massive political and media attention, then surely a failure, and possible cover-up, by the State, relating to the loss of so many innocent lives, is deserving of similar attention.

Patricia McKenna
Iona Road
Glasnevin
Dublin

Stirring words.

A senior police officer has rejected Sinn Féin allegations that the arrest of Gerry Adams was the work of a "dark side" within the PSNI.

Ch Supt Nigel Grimshaw said police officers had a duty to investigate crime "without fear or favour".

He added that he was concerned that support for the police seemed to depend on who was being investigated.

Martin McGuinness has claimed there is a "cabal" in the PSNI opposed to Sinn Féin.

The deputy first minister made the comments after Gerry Adams was arrested and questioned about the 1972 murder of Belfast woman Jean McConville.

He said that "there was still a dark side within policing here in the north of Ireland".

Speaking at the Police Superintendents' Association annual conference on Wednesday evening, Ch Supt Grimshaw said: "Only last week, we heard strong and, what many see, as sinister words suggesting that there was an old guard operating within the PSNI leadership, and that there had been a manifestation of a 'dark side'.

"The law is very clear. The Police Act of 2000 charges the police service with a responsibility to investigate crime.

"All of our officers must follow this duty, in the words of Sir Robert Peel, 'without fear or favour'.

"As an association, we reject all attempts to differentiate between our members and to single out as being different those who lead on serious and terrorist crime."

Ch Supt Grimshaw, who is the PSNI's district commander for north and west Belfast, also said he was concerned that "support for policing seems to depend on their investigative strategies or the perspectives of the adversarial political arena".

He added: "Worryingly, there remains a mindset on the part of some that seems to regard good policing as only that which tackles the other side, and bad policing as that which seeks to deal with 'our side'."

Cop defends cops. Wouldn't exactly call it stirring. If it weren't a case of political policing, where then was the "operational independence" if Villiers knew about the arrest before it happened?

Doesn't bother me. But those who start every sentence with either "listen" or "lookit", should be shot with a ball of their own sh*te.

Rumours that following more player resignations, Donegal have purchased this beauty for a steal