Surely it’s a more damning indictment of the British State than of Sinn Fien?
Why did a rape victim feel more comfortable going to a paramilitiary organisation than the police?
What did the rape victim expect the paramilitaries to be able to do beyond shooting or expelling the person?
They were never going to be able to try him in a court of law and give him 20 years hard labour.
[QUOTE=“TreatyStones, post: 1034521, member: 1786”]Surely it’s a more damning indictment of the British State than of Sinn Fien?
Why did a rape victim feel more comfortable going to a paramilitiary organisation than the police?
What did the rape victim expect the paramilitaries to be able to do beyond shooting or expelling the person?
They were never going to be able to try him in a court of law and give him 20 years hard labour.[/QUOTE]
They should at a minimum, subject him to reading Adams tweets for all eternity.
this is groundhog day…sinn fein do well in the opinion polls and a story comes out to hammer them back down with tales from their murky past …it doesn’t matter because a lot of their followers can’t read and others are too busy acting as rent-a -crowd for the water meter punch ups with the fuzz to follow the story on tv…its all a load of cock…
[QUOTE=“TheUlteriorMotive, post: 1034512, member: 2272”]If a parliamentary member of FF, FG, LAB tried to deal with something like this “in house” and summoned the victim for questioning they would be gone.
Yes the abuse was institutional at a State level but that was to do with the power of the Catholic Church in the South. No politician dared go up against the Church. Many of the abused were also marginalised and nobody to fight their corner.
The issue here is that SF/IRA have been exposed doing something they criticised others for doing. In those circumstances then a head has to be offered which SF are having trouble doing given the legacy. Other parties have to be laughing as they are able to make SF come out and try and defend the indefensible and each time they do it they lose credibility. Adams is caught by his lies around the IRA membership. Can he resign because of the IRA actions of which he says he had no authority or does he hang tough and damage the party.
A politicians first instinct is self preservation but as most recently seen in the Shatter case, these things build momentum and as more revelations emerge the pressure to go builds to a crescendo. Look at who from SF is on radio and TV on this - they are also being offered up to an extent. If I was handling SF I would keep Pearse Doherty a million miles away from this as you don’t want next leader tainted.[/QUOTE]
Completely irrelevant as the O6’s governing powers and judicial system was sectarian and people of a nationalist background had zero trust in it.
yep fair enough but these cases shine a light on the fact that the self styled community protection element of SF/IRA were more concerned with protecting their own than protecting the community
in this case people in SF/IRA were in effect the “establishment” in that community and were protected in the same way the establishment is protected in other more normal societies
[QUOTE=“TheUlteriorMotive, post: 1034548, member: 2272”]yep fair enough but these cases shine a light on the fact that the self styled community protection element of SF/IRA were more concerned with protecting their own than protecting the community
in this case people in SF/IRA were in effect the “establishment” in that community and were protected in the same way the establishment is protected in other more normal societies[/QUOTE]
About an hour ago you were complaining that the IRA “summoned the victim for questioning.” That was a loaded term, but the point is they were apparently investigating the case. You described this as being “in house.”
Now you’re all for the “in house” investigation and think the IRA came up with the wrong conclusion.
Two things strike me here:
[QUOTE=“Rocko, post: 1034549, member: 1”]About an hour ago you were complaining that the IRA “summoned the victim for questioning.” That was a loaded term, but the point is they were apparently investigating the case. You described this as being “in house.”
Now you’re all for the “in house” investigation and think the IRA came up with the wrong conclusion.
Two things strike me here:
+1
[QUOTE=“Rocko, post: 1034549, member: 1”]About an hour ago you were complaining that the IRA “summoned the victim for questioning.” That was a loaded term, but the point is they were apparently investigating the case. You described this as being “in house.”
Now you’re all for the “in house” investigation and think the IRA came up with the wrong conclusion.
Two things strike me here:
Not what I said at all. Attacking an argument I have not advanced.
My point is senior IRA/SF members were treated differently from other people by their own organisation. Hardly a revelation but when they start denying it and it involves this taboo then they are damaged so Adams has to go.
Wonder how many other parliaments would give over a day of emergency debate on an alleged rape in another jurisdiction?
Shows how fucked our “democracy” is
[QUOTE=“TheUlteriorMotive, post: 1034574, member: 2272”]Where did you come up with that or how?
Not what I said at all. Attacking an argument I have not advanced.
My point is senior IRA/SF members were treated differently from other people by their own organisation. Hardly a revelation but when they start denying it and it involves this taboo then they are damaged so Adams has to go.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=“Rocko, post: 1034614, member: 1”]- Hello, how can I help you?
where are you off to with this shit??..he told you that’s not what he meant …
Pictures tell a thousand words
[QUOTE=“Rocko, post: 1034614, member: 1”]- Hello, how can I help you?
Adams own blog post says
Despite the alienation from the RUC it was the accepted de facto practice that they dealt with traffic accidents, car insurance and such matters. Incidents of rape were also reported to them in some cases and no thinking person would have made a case against that
It’s just wonderful that Fianna Fail and Independent Newspapers have the best interests of sexual abuse victims at heart and are so intent on punishing the perpetrators and not pushing any kind of political agenda here.
You’d almost forget that this is the party that bailed out the Catholic Church with €1billion euro of public money for compensation to sexual abuse victims, and that Independent Newspapers were their main cheerleaders.
http://bocktherobber.com/2014/10/gerry-adams-statement-mairia-cahill/
The striking aspect of Sinn Féin’s reaction was its similarity to the way the Roman Catholic clergy circled the wagons when confronted with accusations of child abuse. Indeed, the very nature of Mairia Cahill’s IRA investigation bears striking similarities to the way in which priests and bishops treated victims of clerical sexual abuse. Both groups saw themselves as the primary investigating authority, both saw the protection of the organisation as the primary consideration, and both intimidated their victims into silence. In the case of the Catholic church, it was threats of hellfire and damnation such as Father (later Cardinal) Sean Brady inflicted on the children he interrogated, while in the case of the IRA, the threat was rather more tangible and immediate.
Following Maria Cahill’s decision to go public, every right-on, socially-aware, cool, savvy Sinn Féin mouthpiece, from Mary-Lou McDonald to Dessie Ellis, queued up on the radio to cast doubt on and belittle her. This was unfortunate for SInn Féin since Mairia Cahill turned out to be a far more articulate and composed performer than any of them, and far from the abused 17-year-old girl who was compelled to appear before a jury of republicans to account for herself after being raped.
Imagine if a crowd of priests and bishops had dismissed a rape victim in the way these politicians did. There would be war, if you’ll excuse the expression, and yet every one of these fine public representatives uttered words reeking of threat and intimidation.
[QUOTE=“TheUlteriorMotive, post: 1034653, member: 2272”]http://bocktherobber.com/2014/10/gerry-adams-statement-mairia-cahill/
The striking aspect of Sinn Féin’s reaction was its similarity to the way the Roman Catholic clergy circled the wagons when confronted with accusations of child abuse. Indeed, the very nature of Mairia Cahill’s IRA investigation bears striking similarities to the way in which priests and bishops treated victims of clerical sexual abuse. Both groups saw themselves as the primary investigating authority, both saw the protection of the organisation as the primary consideration, and both intimidated their victims into silence. In the case of the Catholic church, it was threats of hellfire and damnation such as Father (later Cardinal) Sean Brady inflicted on the children he interrogated, while in the case of the IRA, the threat was rather more tangible and immediate.
Following Maria Cahill’s decision to go public, every right-on, socially-aware, cool, savvy Sinn Féin mouthpiece, from Mary-Lou McDonald to Dessie Ellis, queued up on the radio to cast doubt on and belittle her. This was unfortunate for SInn Féin since Mairia Cahill turned out to be a far more articulate and composed performer than any of them, and far from the abused 17-year-old girl who was compelled to appear before a jury of republicans to account for herself after being raped.
Imagine if a crowd of priests and bishops had dismissed a rape victim in the way these politicians did. There would be war, if you’ll excuse the expression, and yet every one of these fine public representatives uttered words reeking of threat and intimidation.[/QUOTE]
maria cahill’s case went to court and there was no conviction. I cant see what the issue is here?
GO
[QUOTE=“TheUlteriorMotive, post: 1034653, member: 2272”]http://bocktherobber.com/2014/10/gerry-adams-statement-mairia-cahill/
The striking aspect of Sinn Féin’s reaction was its similarity to the way the Roman Catholic clergy circled the wagons when confronted with accusations of child abuse. Indeed, the very nature of Mairia Cahill’s IRA investigation bears striking similarities to the way in which priests and bishops treated victims of clerical sexual abuse. Both groups saw themselves as the primary investigating authority, both saw the protection of the organisation as the primary consideration, and both intimidated their victims into silence. In the case of the Catholic church, it was threats of hellfire and damnation such as Father (later Cardinal) Sean Brady inflicted on the children he interrogated, while in the case of the IRA, the threat was rather more tangible and immediate.
Following Maria Cahill’s decision to go public, every right-on, socially-aware, cool, savvy Sinn Féin mouthpiece, from Mary-Lou McDonald to Dessie Ellis, queued up on the radio to cast doubt on and belittle her. This was unfortunate for SInn Féin since Mairia Cahill turned out to be a far more articulate and composed performer than any of them, and far from the abused 17-year-old girl who was compelled to appear before a jury of republicans to account for herself after being raped.
Imagine if a crowd of priests and bishops had dismissed a rape victim in the way these politicians did. There would be war, if you’ll excuse the expression, and yet every one of these fine public representatives uttered words reeking of threat and intimidation.[/QUOTE]
You can’t have it both ways.
Were the IRA the primary investigating authority? If they weren’t then their investigation is irrelevant. If they were, then why are people complaining that they kept it in house.
[QUOTE=“Rocko, post: 1034660, member: 1”]You can’t have it both ways.
Were the IRA the primary investigating authority? If they weren’t then their investigation is irrelevant. If they were, then why are people complaining that they kept it in house.[/QUOTE]
The issue is that a political party and its current leadership covered up serious sexual offences and not only failed to report them to the authorities but facilitated the continuing role of the perpetrators in the organisation. The Cause and the Organisation came first. When exposed they lied about it and when exposed over lying about it then said but what else were we supposed to do.
Mairia Cahill didn’t recognise the RUC as a legitimate police force, Gerry Adams told Joe Cahill to tell her to go to the RUC.
The case eventually came to court, she withdrew her testimony. That was only in April.