No public enquiry in Pat Finucane Murder

downcow

tdf7187 wrote: »

I don't believe an inquiry commissioned by the UK government would be allowed to get to anything like the truth. So, I actually welcome the decision. There is no point in setting up pretendy inquiries.

Their push-back on setting up on inquiry, by contrast to, say, Bloody Sunday, suggests that the collusion extended to much more senior on the food chain than has been hitherto acknowledged. That's what they don't want coming out and in my view is the logical conclusion. With Bloody Sunday - much as I condemn it - they were able to attempt to pin the blame on a few individual grunts on the ground. Obviously, with the Finucane murder, they must run the risk of opening a huge can of worms if they were to look into it properly.

Fantasy land stuff.
Investigate the murderer in the current NI executive

gourcuff

the british consistently show themselves to be utterly untrustworthy, willing to deceive, willing to break laws, willing to collude with terrorists to murder civilians,

then they either cover up their involvement or refuse to investigate..

The British Supreme Court ruled that the UK had failed to hold an "effective investigation" into the Belfast lawyer's death at the hands of loyalist paramilitaries...

the only pressure the british understand is when the americans get involved, which i am sure they will now...

downcow

Should public inquiries be held into the TDs in the dail who arranged the sectarian murder of Protestants?
If not, why not?

FrancieBrady

Sorry day for those who have defended the British presence in Ireland. Just as actual British citizens are finding out that they were fundamentally lied to about Brexit and what it meant (see ex pats and EU property owners as well as others) because the establishment wanted a certain outcome, now those loyal to them in Ireland have found out that the killing of a solicitor does not warrant inquiring into even though the evidence strongly suggests state involvement.
Like Bloody Sunday and the various wrongful arrest cases this is just going to run in until they face up to it and do what makes a state different to those who attack it and examine themselves with no fear of the truth they might find.

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

Should public inquiries be held into the TDs in the dail who arranged the sectarian murder of Protestants?
If not, why not?

Present the evidence in the way this family have and in the way the Bloody Sunday etc family did.
If the highest court in the land directs that there should be an inquiry I think you would get one here.
Nobody is going to act on a loyalist/unionist/republican insinuating stuff anonymously on the sidelines or an internet forum.

Samsonsmasher

McMurphy wrote: »

I'd stop digging if I were you, now you're implying someone deserves to be murdered because they are a republican?

I'm not, and never have, nor would I ever lower myself to try and justify a prison officers death the way you have with Finnucane, similarly I would never lower myself to refer to them as "scum" like you did with Finnucane. .

Are you referring to Finnucane as "scum" because he was from a republican family, or because he had represented republicans (his firm had represented loyalists also), or is it because his son grew up to become a lawyer too like his murdered father, and simultaneously a Sinn Fein MP?

Personally, I think your remarks are disgusting and you should take a long hard think about yourself.

In a war anyone who is an enemy or collaborates with the enemy has to expect death.
It didn't matter if a soldier is in uniform on armed patrol on the Falls Road or having pints in a pub in Birmingham.
It didn't matter if a republican was sitting at home watching TV with his kids or armed with a gun attacking an RUC station.
Pat Finucane was getting republicans off scot free who were going back to war as soon as they came out of prison.
Too bad

Pasteur.

Samsonsmasher wrote: »

In a war anyone who is an enemy or collaborates with the enemy has to expect death.
It didn't matter if a soldier is in uniform on armed patrol on the Falls Road or having pints in a pub in Birmingham.
It didn't matter if a republican was sitting at home watching TV with his kids or armed with a gun attacking an RUC station.
Pat Finucane was getting republicans off scot free who were going back to war as soon as they came out of prison.
Too bad

Summary

He was doing his job so deserved to die

Samsonsmasher

Pasteur. wrote: »

Summary

He was doing his job so deserved to die

He was involved in the war like anyone else. Nobody deserves to die. He was a brave man who believed in his cause. There's no point being a crybaby. War is ugly.
A generation on from the end of the conflict Protestant and Catholic young people socialize whereas if the war was still on they would be killing eachother.
The majority of the British Army who were killed were boys in their late teens and early twenties and they were shooting at kids their own age.
If the situation had been different they would have been drinking pints together.
It's sad but it can't be helped.

FrancieBrady

Samsonsmasher wrote: »

In a war anyone who is an enemy or collaborates with the enemy has to expect death.
It didn't matter if a soldier is in uniform on armed patrol on the Falls Road or having pints in a pub in Birmingham.
It didn't matter if a republican was sitting at home watching TV with his kids or armed with a gun attacking an RUC station.
Pat Finucane was getting republicans off scot free who were going back to war as soon as they came out of prison.
Too bad

The British government need to say that though...not you.
If that was the case then that must be the justification for it.

Samsonsmasher

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The British government need to say that though...not you.
If that was the case then that must be the justification for it.

You can work it out for yourself and move on.
The victims of IRA bomb and gun attacks have to forgive and move on.
The war is over the troops are off the streets and a generation of young people have grown up in peace.
Opening old wounds serves no purpose.
Stop being bitter and move on.

Pedro K

Samsonsmasher wrote: »

He was involved in the war like anyone else. Nobody deserves to die. He was a brave man who believed in his cause. There's no point being a crybaby. War is ugly.
A generation on from the end of the conflict Protestant and Catholic young people socialize whereas if the war was still on they would be killing eachother.
The majority of the British Army who were killed were boys in their late teens and early twenties and they were shooting at kids their own age.
If the situation had been different they would have been drinking pints together.
It's sad but it can't be helped.

Is the legal team representing Soldier F fair game?

FrancieBrady

Samsonsmasher wrote: »

You can work it out for yourself and move on.
The victims of IRA bomb and gun attacks have to forgive and move on.
The war is over the troops are off the streets and a generation of young people have grown up in peace.
Opening old wounds serves no purpose.
Stop being bitter and move on.

The 'IRA' have done more jail time than any other cohort involved in the conflict/war. They haven't walked away nor been forgiven, they are still liable if there is evidence against them.

Baggly

costacorta wrote: »

And you’re the expert on everything?in you own provo head maybe !As pointed out in another post Finucane was as much a target as a prison officer, or any other innocent victims murdered by your scummy friends . He was a well known republican but you will deny that like you deny Gerry was in the IRA as well . Maybe you need to take a break from posting 24/7 and go enjoy the good things in life rather than posting tripe day in day out ..Maybe have an inquiry to find out where ye buried jean Mc Conville ? Eh

Mod

Dont post in this thread again.

Samsonsmasher

Pedro K wrote: »

Is the legal team representing Soldier F fair game?

The war is over now so not any more but back in the bad old days if the IRA could have taken F and his legal eagles out they would have no question about it.
The paras who were blown up at Warrenpoint were from 3 Para and not 2 Para who actually shot people on Bloody Sunday and most of them would have been school kids in 1972.
The IRA hit them to get back at their regiment for Bloody Sunday but more importantly because they were an elite unit - 3 Para later captured Goose Green in 1982 - and they took out senior officers.
Taking out Finucane who came from a prominent IRA family was a devasrating blow to the higher ranks of SF/IRA. Finucane would undoubtedly have played a role in the peace process and today's Northern Ireland in later years.
Anyone who lived through that time knew it was a war and called it a war and accepted the unwritten rules.

Samsonsmasher

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The 'IRA' have done more jail time than any other cohort involved in the conflict/war. They haven't walked away nor been forgiven, they are still liable if there is evidence against them.

I think anyone involved be they Brit loyalist or republican should not face legal repercussions anymore. It was a war and we should move on. We should have a Truth and Reconciliation Commission where everyone can come clean about what they did and who they killed and why and air it all out. Then move on for goodness sake.

FrancieBrady

Samsonsmasher wrote: »

The war is over now so not any more but back in the bad old days if the IRA could have taken F and his legal eagles out they would have no question about it.
The paras who were blown up at Warrenpoint were from 3 Para and not 2 Para who actually shot people on Bloody Sunday and most of them would have been school kids in 1972.
The IRA hit them to get back at their regiment for Bloody Sunday but more importantly because they were an elite unit - 3 Para later captured Goose Green in 1982 - and they took out senior officers.
Taking out Finucane who came from a prominent IRA family was a devasrating blow to the higher ranks of SF/IRA. Finucane would undoubtedly have played a role in the peace process and today's Northern Ireland in later years.
Anyone who lived through that time knew it was a war and called it a war and accepted the unwritten rules.

Again, if this is the case then the British need to say this and stop hiding.
Why won't they say he was a legitimate target and move on.


In other words, why are the British lying?

Samsonsmasher

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Again, if this is the case then the British need to say this and stop hiding.
Why won't they say he was a legitimate target and move on.


In other words, why are the British lying?

Because of legal repercussions for senior politicians beaucrats and senior intelligence and military officers from that time who signed off on the activities of the SAS, 14th Intelligence Company, the FRU and other groups in the security forces who worked hand and glove with loyalist groups. The majority of the people involved whether they were giving orders running operations or pulling triggers are long since retired and comfortably retired.
We are talking about household names at cabinet level decorated veterans and at least one or two best selling novelists and prominent media personalities.

Nobody will be convicted of the Bloody Sunday killings for the same reason. Michael Jackson who later was the British top general was a junior officer in Derry that day. F had a long career finishing up as senior noncom in the Paras. Several of the men were involved in plainclothes assassinations as well as patrolling in uniform in their official roles and a few served in the SAS and top secret undercover work.
To keep that hush hush they were protected.

FrancieBrady

Samsonsmasher wrote: »

Because of legal repercussions for senior politicians beaucrats and senior intelligence and military officers from that time who signed off on the activities of the SAS, 14th Intelligence Company, the FRU and other groups in the security forces who worked hand and glove with loyalist groups. The majority of the people involved whether they were giving orders running operations or pulling triggers are long since retired and comfortably retired.
We are talking about household names at cabinet level decorated veterans and at least one or two best selling novelists and prominent media personalities.

Nobody will be convicted of the Bloody Sunday killings for the same reason. Michael Jackson who later was the British top general was a junior officer in Derry that day. F had a long career finishing up as senior noncom in the Paras. Several of the men were involved in plainclothes assassinations as well as patrolling in uniform in their official roles and a few served in the SAS and top secret undercover work.
To keep that hush hush they were protected.

So cover-ups at the highest level.

That's fine, you go ahead and live in that kind of state if you wish.

The Irish will continue to fight to expose it. The UK's reputation is in tatters over Brexit. Looks like it isn't going to improve anytime soon.

The_Fitz

Completely unsurprising result.

Resistance from the British state on this case does not bode well for the future of legacy issues. This current British government is all about the protection of themselves, what message does that send out to victims? The British state considers people in the north to be their citizens. Facilitating and carrying out the murder of one of these citizens via a British state agent, to me means that a public inquiry needs to be held, and not simply delayed. The British government distinguish themselves from other actors of the conflict.

We need to find a way of dealing with the past in order to progress. Letting bygones be bygones does not work. All victims deserve to hear the truth.

Samsonsmasher

The_Fitz wrote: »

Completely unsurprising result.

Resistance from the British state on this case does not bode well for the future of legacy issues. This current British government is all about the protection of themselves, what message does that send out to victims? The British state considers people in the north to be their citizens. Facilitating and carrying out the murder of one of these citizens via a British state agent, to me means that a public inquiry needs to be held, and not simply delayed. The British government distinguish themselves from other actors of the conflict.

We need to find a way of dealing with the past in order to progress. Letting bygones be bygones does not work. All victims deserve to hear the truth.

That's utterly naive

FrancieBrady

The_Fitz wrote: »

Completely unsurprising result.

Resistance from the British state on this case does not bode well for the future of legacy issues. This current British government is all about the protection of themselves, what message does that send out to victims? The British state considers people in the north to be their citizens. Facilitating and carrying out the murder of one of these citizens via a British state agent, to me means that a public inquiry needs to be held, and not simply delayed. The British government distinguish themselves from other actors of the conflict.

We need to find a way of dealing with the past in order to progress. Letting bygones be bygones does not work. All victims deserve to hear the truth.

Exactly. And like Bloody Sunday and the Birminghan 6 Guilford 4 etc etc the British are going to have to be dragged kicking and screaming to the truth of it.

By ordinary people by the looks of it too.
Michael Martin is only 'disappointed' by this decision, so no help from that quarter by the looks of it.
Our foreign minister said before the decision that the outcome would show 'if Britain was interested in reconciliation'...he has his answer, what is he going to do about it, is the next question.

The_Fitz

Samsonsmasher wrote: »

That's utterly naive

How is it naive?

downcow

The_Fitz wrote: »

Completely unsurprising result.

Resistance from the British state on this case does not bode well for the future of legacy issues. This current British government is all about the protection of themselves, what message does that send out to victims? The British state considers people in the north to be their citizens. Facilitating and carrying out the murder of one of these citizens via a British state agent, to me means that a public inquiry needs to be held, and not simply delayed. The British government distinguish themselves from other actors of the conflict.

We need to find a way of dealing with the past in order to progress. Letting bygones be bygones does not work. All victims deserve to hear the truth.

So are you expecting 3,700 inquiries like Bloody Sunday That’s many many billions and maybe even trillions.
Or do you think just a few should have inquiries?

downcow

Fr Denis faul has just said on radio Ulster that all sides secretly don’t want the truth. The pain of retelling and exposing the 1,000s of informants still living in both communities

downcow

It is very difficult to raise the Finucane family above all others for an enquiring when john finucane point blank refused again yesterday to condemn the killing of another solicitor in Belfast Edwin Graham

FrancieBrady

downcow wrote: »

Fr Denis faul has just said on radio Ulster that all sides secretly don’t want the truth. The pain of retelling and exposing the 1,000s of informants still living in both communities

That's a neat trick...he has been dead since 2006

McMurphy

downcow wrote: »

It is very difficult to raise the Finucane family above all others for an enquiring when john finucane point blank refused again yesterday to condemn the killing of another solicitor in Belfast Edwin Graham

Have you a source for this?

Here's the latest I could find on him commenting on Edgar Graham.

He was challenged over the issue on Good Morning Ulster yesterday, as his family waits to hear if they will get a public inquiry into the murder of his father, the lawyer Pat Finucane.

A presenter told Mr Finucane that people like Anne Graham, the sister of solicitor Edgar Graham, say that she just wants Sinn Fein to condemn her brother’s murder. “Are you prepared to condemn his killing?” he asked.

Mr Finucane replied: “We are straying into the different hats that I wear, but the hurt that anybody else has went through – I mean I have went through this – I am not going to play games with that.

“I think that there is a danger that people have tried to target me with selective condemnation and I don’t think that is particularly helpful in the context of legacy.”

The presenter responded that for some people, condemnation would make a difference and that even though he too had been through the pain of his father’s murder “you still struggle to say it was wrong ... and doesn’t that say something in itself?”.

Mr Finucane replied: “No, I don’t have any difficulty, I mean any death was wrong. Any death in the context in which it happened here was wrong. I think that people realise that there was a conflict here. There are very different narratives as to what happened in that conflict.” He added: “I don’t elevate the pain which my family has went through above any other family.”

I'll shorten that for you so the most pertinent information is laid out.

The presenter wrote:

responded that for some people, condemnation would make a difference and that even though he too had been through the pain of his father’s murder “you still struggle to say it was wrong .

John Finnucane wrote:

No, I don’t have any difficulty, I mean any death was wrong. Any death in the context in which it happened here was wrong

The_Fitz

downcow wrote: »

So are you expecting 3,700 inquiries like Bloody Sunday That’s many many billions and maybe even trillions.
Or do you think just a few should have inquiries?

Everybody is entitled to the full truth. Public inquiries are not there for every type of murder, unfortunately.

downcow

FrancieBrady wrote: »

That's a neat trick...he has been dead since 2006

Hahaha. I stand corrected. Who was the guy done the victim stuff with Eams. Was it Denis Bradley?

downcow

McMurphy wrote: »

Have you a source for this?

Here's the latest I could find on him commenting on Edgar Graham.





I'll shorten that for you so the most pertinent information is laid out.

That’s it. He refused to condemn it. A blind man with a stick could see that.
He was asked to say 'i condemn the murder of Edwin Graham’ and he ducked it. Disgraceful for someone seeking an enquiry into the murder of another solicitor