Gerry Adams' Address @ 90th Anniversary of An Chéad Dáil

by skeptomaniac Thu Jan 22, 2009 23:15

Once upon a time there were men living in Ireland., Republicanism and nationalism is the cause to which young and old alike stood against tyrany and showed there mettle. Adams and McGuinness were once such men but to fall so rapidly in line with Neo-Con and Neo-Colonialism, and to bring the good name of Republicanism with them is, Im afraid, to much for a soul who struggles with the principles and those who sell them to those they once oposed for the Queens ransome and Uncle Sams military killing machine dollars. Adams is a disgrace to Republicanism.
Peace.....but look at the cost....As to harking back to the past for validation, he has no more right to claim our republican heritage than Bertie Aherne, or Cowen.

by oracle Fri Jan 23, 2009 02:36

once apon a time a generation of men and women rose that faught harder and smarter and longer than any other generation, despite there efforts they were isolated and there message didn't get out and the numbers joining there fight wasn't enough to win. so this generation instead of crying about it changed tactic and tryed to restructure there movement in a way that would incourage all those wise people out there who supported there aim but didn't agree with there methods and add new numbers to a new fight for the same aim. but somepeople didn't like that some people see a virture in staying small and isolated some people seem more interested in running the race than winning the race or second guessing the end of the story instead of reading it to it's conclusion.

by Honest John Fri Jan 23, 2009 11:09

Siinn Fein is basically the SDLP for slow learners.
This speech is basically an admission that the armed struggle was a total failure.
I would never vote for Sinn Fein in a million years but Adams is clearly haunted and regrets the needless tragedy that he and his close colleagues were responsible for and he is doing what he can to set things right knowing that he can never wash the blood of innocent from his hands. The reality is that Sinn Fein faces political oblivion as it becomes a mainstream party and no longer the political wing of a private army. Now it is essentially just a poor competitor with the big republican party Fianna Fail. For the time being Sinn Fein will be left to twist in the wind and outside of the likely future coalitions of FG/Labour or FF/Labour.

by Gearóid Fri Jan 23, 2009 17:59

The sooner Adams and co enter into junior partnership with their ideological bedfellows in Fianna Fáil and go the same way as the PDs and Greens, the sooner the path will be clear for republicans and socialists to get on with the task of truly honouring the sentiments expressed by the architects of An Chéad Dáil.

The duplicity of feigning sympathy with the democratic and socialist principles espoused in 1919 and simultaneously propping up a centre-right, partitionist British parliament in east Belfast is superceded only by the duping of their followers into thinking that there is a united ireland at the end of the rainbow. Trouble is, the closer they think they're getting, the further away it appears to be!

by Emmett - ÓSF Sat Jan 24, 2009 07:23

Sinn Féin lead the way, you know your doing something right when naysayers and guttersnipes pop up. An Phóblacht abú!

For genuinely interested people, here is more footage of the event.

Caption: Video Id: WXypUNr1Kbg&feature= Type: Youtube Video
Embedded video Youtube Video

by Jed Sat Jan 24, 2009 18:05

Well said Boys oh boys.
Gone are the good oul days of drive by shootings, tit-for-tat killings and blowing things up.
Sure didn't we have the Brits on their knees and they were ready to leave and take the Orange men with them.
Now we'll have to wait another 30 or so years in order to bring about a united Ireland.
30 years, at say, 100 lives a year plus say 100 million in security costs, compensation, property damage and the like

30 years at 100 people....now that 3000 lives.
30 years at 100 million, thats about 3 billion squid.

Aye, sure reunification is more important than all these lives and all that money that could be put towards lesser important stuff like healthcare, creating new jobs, education and the like. What can the Shinners be thinking of, putting the overall welfare of the people and the country before their romantic and idological views of a free and united Ireland at any price. All this peace and co-operation in order to get what we want. Over-rated I say. Damn them for their narrow-mindedness and lack of sight into the big picture.

by Fíor-guttersnipe Sun Jan 25, 2009 17:17

Forsooth, doth Emmet mocketh detractors of PSF with Shakesperian disdain?

'Naysayers' is it? 'Guttersnipes' how are ye?

The aspiring middle class, hero-worshippers of Ógra, in their efforts to outdo the Malone Road followers of SDLP Youth are now affecting the language of the Daily Telegraph and the Daily Mail to describe working class republican opposition to their 'leading the way' up the Newtownards Road to Carson's statue.

Socialist republicans of an older generation (35+) have heard it all before Emmet. Only during my youth as a Sinn Féin supporter in the early eighties, the lines you're parroting now came from the 'respectable constitutional politicians' of the SDLP, Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael, Alliance, etc. More a signal of where your politics have ended up Emmet.

by redneck Sun Jan 25, 2009 17:28

Jeb...
...To count the 'cost' of idioligy in those terms is a rediculous notion. But as you do, think about the lives lost and those which will be lost in Sinn Feins new ideoligical partnership with Blair/Bush and the rest.
You quote 3000 lives 'saved' by Adams / SF by ceasing their killing spree..what a stupid notion.... What will be the death toll in Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon, Colombia, San Salvadore, El Salvadore, Guatamala, Nicaragua, etc, by the time they finish-if they finish. And the future wars with Russia, Chechnya, Iran...When you make accusations about not looking at the bigger picture you should widen your view a little further than the North.
Adams dealing with the Brits as 'partners for peace' is a sure sign that SF/republicanism is dead. Peace in the North is no more than a saccharin coating on a k-2 suicide pill. ''Peace'' in the North, and silence from Sinn Fein on the global atrocities their new war criminals are about to unleash......this is a new facism ....this is the bigger picture. Stay in your parish jeb, it's much uglier than you thought out here.
Watch what happens to ETA...spot the difference.

by kevin murphy - 32 csm Mon Jan 26, 2009 05:00

""He spoke of the failure of the Dublin governments to challenge partition and the inherent inequalities that come with it

Mr Adams is leader of a party thats a signatory of the Belfast agreement , a very enthusiastic signatory at that . That British treaty states very clearly that the partition of Ireland is completely legitimate and democratic and wholly justified by a unionist veto . Furthermore Mr Adams has gone on record repeatedly stating that there is no alternative to this British treaty which fully legitmises the partition of Ireland . Therefore one is distinctly bemused to hear him criticise a fellow signatory of the Belfast agreemnt for adhering to the conditions of that British treaty . As his party does also .
On what basis can a Dublin governemnt fail to challenege partition when his party has signed the very same treaty which makes repeatedly clear partition is a legitimate exercise and completely democratic . And cant change until unionists give their consent regardless of how many other Irish people , the majority , want it to end .

I fail to see the logic of Mr Adams criticisms of the failure of others to challenge partition when he himself is unable to challenge its basis due to the position he signed up to and negotiated - that partiton is fully legitmate and conceivably permanent if thats what unionists desire it to be . The place to challenge partition surely was at the downing street negotiations . However Mr Adams and his fellow leaders accepted the George Mitchell " principles" that meant it couldnt be challenged and had to be accepted as democratic and legitmate otherwise one would not be admitted to talks . Thereby pre-determining the outcome of those negotiations as regards partition .

For one governemnt to challenge another governemnt s regards the partiton of the national territory would also require that governemnt to posses a constitutional claim over the national territory . Yet not only did the Belfst agreemnt which Mr Adams negotiated demand that such claims were dropped , former Taoiseach albert reynolds revealed last year that he had done a secret deal with Adams which saw the sinn fein leader ensure his party did not campaign against the Dublin governemnts removal of its claim to the national territory . Leaving it with no basis at all on which to challenge partition . Furthermore the campaign to drop articles 2 & 3 was initiated by John Hume , during the very same period he and Mr Adams were persuing the Hume adams initiative and releasing the Hume Adams document . If that was Humes position , which it certainly was , how could Mr Adams have arrived at political agreement with him and opposed their removal ?
Mr Adams needs to spell out clearly on what basis he believes the Dublin governemnt can actually challenge parition . He has failed to do so in his speech .

Partition can only be challenged by the Dublin governemnt by recourse to international law and upholding ones right to national sovereignty at the UN general assmbly , challenging Britian to justify its claim to sovereignty over our national territory . Why didnt Mr Adams demand this as a condition of peace . To actually persue a united Ireland by peaceful means , as opposed to adopting a treaty that states it can only happen when unionists opt to become nationalists and that there can be no Irish counter claim to British sovereignty over Irish territory .

There is no logical basis to Mr Adams criticisms as regards falure to challenge partiton when the treaty he signed up to and negotiated , and the preconditions of entry to those negotiations makes clear there is no basis to challenge partiton on . In order to challenge partition one must repudiate the Belfast agreement . The very treaty Mr Adams claims there is no alternative to