WikiLeaks & Sinn Fein

Fratton Fred

dlofnep wrote: »

No. The wikileaks project is an important one - regardless of what files it discloses. Whether it be related to Sinn Féin, the American Government or North Korea.

This file didn't release anything that wasn't already known. Certain suspicions with regards to the northern bank robbery, but not an iota of evidence.

It is great living in Ireland, where an accusation is more than enough to prove someone's guilt. Evidence, schevidence! Who needs something like that..

I thought we all took the word of the dogs on the street. They appear to get quoted at times like this.

I would be very very surprised if sinn fein, if at least its senior members had any involvement in this to be honest. They aren't that stupid. Similarly I would be very very surprised if there were no retired "volunteers" involved.

As for a plot to discredit SF, please, we can blame fianna fail for a lot if things, but this has zip all to do with them.

NSNO

I love how some people in this thread think that Bradley Manning, Julian Assange and others got together and conspired to infiltrate the U.S. military intelligence systems to release videos of gunship attacks and airstrikes on journalists and civilians, and to release hundreds upon thousands of potentially war starting diplomatic cables while risking life imprisionment and possibly death just to ensure that Sinn Féin don't win a couple of extra seats in a Dáil election next year :rolleyes:

PomBear

So this is a leak saying FF had cement evidence proving Adams knew...

The same party who had evidence of 'the cheapest bailout in the world', bit of a joke really

Bottle_of_Smoke

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I would be very very surprised if sinn fein, if at least its senior members had any involvement in this to be honest. They aren't that stupid. Similarly I would be very very surprised if there were no retired "volunteers" involved.

no one's suggesting they were involved - just that they knew about it. Which I didn't doubt before the page was released

Lonesome Boatman

The pat finucane leak is much more worthy of discussion than this, not even a thread about it yet pages upon pages of hyperbole on this.

junder

So is wikileaks telling the truth about British and American Secrets but lying about sinn fein / PIRA secrets?

BlaasForRafa

junder wrote: »

So is wikileaks telling the truth about British and American Secrets but lying about sinn fein / PIRA secrets?

A lot of the people drinking the Sinn Fein kook-aid seem to believe this.

whippet

Lonesome Boatman wrote: »

The pat finucane leak is much more worthy of discussion than this, not even a thread about it yet pages upon pages of hyperbole on this.

well the fact that a commander / former commander of an illegal terrorist group guilty of murders, bombings, bank robberies, drug dealing, intimidation etc ..... is now looking for election to our national parliament is big news.

dlofnep

junder wrote: »

So is wikileaks telling the truth about British and American Secrets but lying about sinn fein / PIRA secrets?

No that is not the case. All wikileaks cables appear to be genuine, this one is no different.

The leak is merely the commentary of the opinion of one man, in what he believed with regards to the northern bank robbery. It doesn't make it fact, nor did it bring any evidence to light.

DeVore

danbohan wrote: »

sadly that sometimes happens in war winty , its over since 1994 you know , you will find many innocent people died in fermanagh winty , many killed by loylist/ british forces strangely enough

Yes, but they aren't looking for my vote to form my government.

DeV.

dlofnep

DeVore wrote: »

Yes, but they aren't looking for my vote to form my government.

So don't vote for them. Problem solved. That's the world of politics.

DeVore

This isn't the table tennis forum you know

DeV.

junder

dlofnep wrote: »

No that is not the case. All wikileaks cables appear to be genuine, this one is no different.

The leak is merely the commentary of the opinion of one man, in what he believed with regards to the northern bank robbery. It doesn't make it fact, nor did it bring any evidence to light.

I believe its the Irish governments opinion nd not just the opinion of one man

dlofnep

junder wrote: »

I believe its the Irish governments opinion nd not just the opinion of one man

It is still opinion. You understand the difference between opinion and fact, right? Sometimes they seem to conveniently melt together on this forum, especially with regards to Sinn Féin threads.

Reality of the matter is, this report doesn't bring anything new to the table. Alot of people had suspicions that the IRA were involved, but no evidence was ever brought forward to confirm it.

deise go deo

junder wrote: »

I believe its the Irish governments opinion nd not just the opinion of one man

Perhaps then the Government should clarify its position, Admit or deny the existence of Rock Solid Evidience claimed in the leak

PomBear

whippet wrote: »

well the fact that a commander / former commander of an illegal terrorist group guilty of murders, bombings, bank robberies, drug dealing, intimidation etc ..... is now looking for election to our national parliament is big news.

Have you any proof or drug dealing or that Gerry Adams commanded this?
If not, stop making unfounded allegations

danbohan

junder wrote: »

So is wikileaks telling the truth about British and American Secrets but lying about sinn fein / PIRA secrets?

for you that cannot read , or are deaf , what wiki leaks report is a message from US ambassador stating that the irish taoiseach ie the bert believes that sinn fein ie gerry adams , martin mcguinness etc had links to top of the ira and knew about the bank robbery , end of story , news dont think so , proof most defiantly not !

danbohan

deise go deo wrote: »

Perhaps then the Government should clarify its position, Admit or deny the existence of Rock Solid Evidience claimed in the leak

unfortunately its in the anglo irish bank files and those nasty little bankers still wont give the passwords

Yo Buddy. You still alive?

I have no doubt the police will issue arrest warrants because of all of this.

They have to? Right?

PomBear

Yo Buddy. You still alive? wrote: »

I have no doubt the police will issue arrest warrants because of all of this.

They have to? Right?

The leak claims that FF had this evidence, they can demand FF produce this evidence and hold FF in contempt of court for failing to disclose evidence if they do actually have evidence.

If they lied about having evidence which is likely, not sure what can happen.

caseyann

I call bull****,Very convenient when the rising popularity in Sinn Féin by Irish people and the threat they made.All of a sudden this stuff comes out.:rolleyes: Because how long ill it take to prove this? In mean time Sinn Féin has lost its popularity and election come and gone,so when proven false to late.

Rebelheart

It's forever amusing the wide variety of bitter little people who come out of the woodwork and wish to harp on about Gerry Adams's alleged membership of the IRA.

So what if he was/is a leader of the Provisional IRA? The vast majority of people in Ireland would assume he was/is and that is why he can "persuade" the Army (cue apoplexy from the usual suspects) to call a ceasefire. It's not rocket science. That you're getting all hurt by his denial is simply a sign of emotional immaturity.

If this allegation is the best you all have on Gearóid Mac Ádhaimh, you're pretty hard up.

Denying membership of Óglaigh na hÉireann is invariably tactical: in the real world, being somebody who continued on the struggle for Irish freedom against British colonial occupation is a source of ineffable pride, honour and respect. Obviously. Duh.

All the seoinín notions in the world won't detract from that reality on the ground in Ireland.

PS: Just for the record, the same people who think this is a big deal, were also gloriously wrong about Fine Gael's success in the Donegal byelection - where their vote collapsed from 23% in 2007 to 18% in 2010. Talk about a disconnect between the delusions of the disproportionate number of Fine Gaelers in this Forum and the real Ireland.

Liam Byrne

Rebelheart wrote: »

Denying membership of Óglaigh na hÉireann is invariably tactical

Why would anyone deny membership of the Official Irish Defence Forces ?

Bottle_of_Smoke

Rebelheart wrote: »

It's forever amusing the wide variety of bitter little people who come out of the woodwork and wish to harp on about Gerry Adams's alleged membership of the IRA.

So what if he was/is a leader of the Provisional IRA? The vast majority of people in Ireland would assume he was/is and that is why he can "persuade" the Army (cue apoplexy from the usual suspects) to call a ceasefire. It's not rocket science. That you're getting all hurt by his denial is simply a sign of emotional immaturity.

If this allegation is the best you all have on Gearóid Mac Ádhaimh, you're pretty hard up.

Denying membership of Óglaigh na hÉireann is invariably tactical: in the real world, being somebody who continued on the struggle for Irish freedom against British colonial occupation is a source of ineffable pride, honour and respect. Obviously. Duh.

All the seoinín notions in the world won't detract from that reality on the ground in Ireland.

PS: Just for the record, the same people who think this is a big deal, were also gloriously wrong about Fine Gael's success in the Donegal byelection - where their vote collapsed from 23% in 2007 to 18% in 2010. Talk about a disconnect between the delusions of the disproportionate number of Fine Gaelers in this Forum and the real Ireland.

I agree with a lot of your points and I wish the discussion of it would end. I think people arguing he wasn't in the IRA are as much of the problem though.

Anyone who can call a spade a spade knows in their heart he was in the IRA or was at least able to give executive orders to the IRA.

He obviously can't admit it or he risks being the next Gerry McGeough. INLA members have also been imprisoned for membership before the GFA recently.

So it is not worth bringing up anymore. There's not gonna be a resolution to it. And if someone does bring it up it is just as much not worth arguing against.

HQvhs

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

I agree with a lot of your points and I wish the discussion of it would end. I think people arguing he wasn't in the IRA are as much of the problem though.

Anyone who can call a spade a spade knows in their heart he was in the IRA or was at least able to give executive orders to the IRA.

He obviously can't admit it or he risks being the next Gerry McGeough. INLA members have also been imprisoned for membership before the GFA recently.

So it is not worth bringing up anymore. There's not gonna be a resolution to it. And if someone does bring it up it is just as much not worth arguing against.

I think it is worth mentioning. Like you said, people know in their heart of hearts Gerry Adams was a member of the IRA, a terrorist organisation responsible for the murders of innocent lives. He is the leader of Sinn Fein, so I think it is perfectly relevant. And I don't think it's proper or right to wish it away just because it is awkward for you to accept.

A big problem over the past few years is that we have politicians and leaders with no moral backbone or credibility. Just as Bertie's dig-outs and Haughey's financial irregularities are and were relevant, so too is Sinn Fein's current leadership's link to a terrorist organisation.

If you don't think that is relevant or that it doesn't matter, then that says more about you than anything else. If you say "we must move on from this", then I agree. But moving on doesn't involve ignoring the past, it involves accepting it and taking the consequences. I don't think Sinn Fein can move on and be taken seriously as a credible political party here until it finally burns the bridges with the IRA.

Bottle_of_Smoke

HQvhs wrote: »

I think it is worth mentioning. Like you said, people know in their heart of hearts Gerry Adams was a member of the IRA, a terrorist organisation responsible for the murders of innocent lives. He is the leader of Sinn Fein, so I think it is perfectly relevant. And I don't think it's proper or right to wish it away just because it is awkward for you to accept.

A big problem over the past few years is that we have politicians and leaders with no moral backbone or credibility. Just as Bertie's dig-outs and Haughey's financial irregularities are and were relevant, so too is Sinn Fein's current leadership's link to a terrorist organisation.

If you don't think that is relevant or that it doesn't matter, then that says more about you than anything else. If you say "we must move on from this", then I agree. But moving on doesn't involve ignoring the past, it involves accepting it and taking the consequences. I don't think Sinn Fein can move on and be taken seriously as a credible political party here until it finally burns the bridges with the IRA.

Ideologically it might be worth mentioning. In practical terms it has reached its logical conclusion - everyone knows he won't admit it because it will cost him his career at best prison at worst.

The reality is people voting for him know he was IRA.

Wolfe Tone

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Ideologically it might be worth mentioning. In practical terms it has reached its logical conclusion - everyone knows he won't admit it because it will cost him his career at best prison at worst.

The reality is people voting for him know he was IRA.

I wonder whether or not he actually engaged in operations..... I doubt he ever played the role of a "normal" volunteer tbh.

Bottle_of_Smoke

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

I wonder whether or not he actually engaged in operations..... I doubt he ever played the role of a "normal" volunteer tbh.

Couldn't say that for sure but I have no doubt he gave orders. There's no way of defining a 'normal' volunteer really.

Wolfe Tone

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Couldn't say that for sure but I have no doubt he gave orders. There's no way of defining a 'normal' volunteer really.

I would say he gave orders all right, but I don't think he was a Gerry Kelly or a McGuinness type figure.

Bottle_of_Smoke

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

I would say he gave orders all right, but I don't think he was a Gerry Kelly or a McGuinness type figure.

Well in the voices from the grave documentary Delours Price said he'd never travel in a car with guns so that could well be true.

Though would that mean he wasn't a member? Surely not. Wouldn't that be like a General in the British army claiming he wasn't in the British Army because he didn't carry out operations?