Sinn Féin - IRA split?

ReefBreak

Oh no, another Shinner/'RA-bashing thread. Not quite.

Does anyone out there belive that the Northern Bank raid has resulted in a split in the so-called "Republican Movement"? Moderate 'RA-heads such as Gerry Adams who might have been looking to close the deal back in December versus militant 'RA-heads that want some sort of ridiculous Independent Socialist Ireland. Martin McGuinness sounded a little bit annoyed with the IRA on Today FM on Thursday last...

Villain

ReefBreak wrote:

Oh no, another Shinner/'RA-bashing thread. Not quite.

Does anyone out there belive that the Northern Bank raid has resulted in a split in the so-called "Republican Movement"? Moderate 'RA-heads such as Gerry Adams who might have been looking to close the deal back in December versus militant 'RA-heads that want some sort of ridiculous Independent Socialist Ireland. Martin McGuinness sounded a little bit annoyed with the IRA on Today FM on Thursday last...

I object to you calling Gerry Adams a "RA-head", can you not discuss the issues at hand instead of just mouthing off insults.

You see ReegBreak, the issue is this, Martin McGuinness and Gerry Adams are NOT on the IRA army council despite all the crap written in the papers, so they do not control the IRA. Maybe people will actually believe that now, Sinn Fein is dedicated to the peace process and through negoiations they managed to get the IRA to agree to disarm but now we all know that they have now withdrawn that offer.

You see I know most anti-SF people here will laugh at me but, do you not think its possible that Adams and McGuinness are p***ed because all their hard work has been undone, these men have put more hours in this peace process than anyone else. Believe what you want people, but SF are not the enemy here, they are totally committed to the peace process.

lomb

irish1 wrote:

I object to you calling Gerry Adams a "RA-head", can you not discuss the issues at hand instead of just mouthing off insults.

You see ReegBreak, the issue is this, Martin McGuinness and Gerry Adams are NOT on the IRA army council despite all the crap written in the papers, so they do not control the IRA. Maybe people will actually believe that now, Sinn Fein is dedicated to the peace process and through negoiations they managed to get the IRA to agree to disarm but now we all know that they have now withdrawn that offer.

You see I know most anti-SF people here will laugh at me but, do you not think its possible that Adams and McGuinness are p***ed because all their hard work has been undone, these men have put more hours in this peace process than anyone else. Believe what you want people, but SF are not the enemy here, they are totally committed to the peace process.

rofl, gerry adams and the ira are one and the same, army council what a crock of ****

Villain

Great post :rolleyes:

Maybe you might like to discuss the actual topic insted of just posting crap like that.

lomb

do you actually believe there is any difference between the ira and gerry adams? your talking about people who are murderers and thugs, do u really trust anything that such people say?
im not saying the catholics in northern ireland werent treated badly, they were and perhaps these terrorists are a product of that treatment but times have to move on. forgive and forget. ipersonally wouldnt trust these people if my life depended on it.
army council- what a crock. do u think these guys actually sit about planning parties? they are interested in criminal activities for the oldest reason in the world-money.
they run prostitution, drugs and counterfeit goods operations. illegal fuel smuggling and cigareete smuggling and now they have branched into being bank robbers.
gerry adams is merely a puppet of these people who no doubt is a dangerous criminal and murderer or accesorry to murder. but dont let the truth get out :rolleyes:

Raskolnikov

Cop on lomb, I think Sinn Féin have been instrumental in bring about an IRA ceasefire and been close in getting IRA decommissioning. Look at the compromises that have been made over the past few years.

Sinn Féin changing its constitution to recognise a Northern Assembly; supporting the amendments of Articles 2 & 3 as a concession to unionist sensibilities; compromising and accepting the Patten proposals on new policing; the IRA suffering a split over the issue of engaging with the International Decommissioning body (IICD), which led to the formation of the Real IRA; the IRA putting three large tranches of weapons beyond use; and offering total decommissioning of weapons by Christmas, independently witnessed by Protestant and Catholic clerics.

If you honestly think that all the talks were some sort of ruse then you're deluded.

The important thing now is to ensure that there is no split within the IRA and we get back to the stage where the IRA were prepared to decommission before Christmas. Remember, the last time there was a split we got the Real IRA, the people of Omagh know all about that.

lomb

Raskolnikov wrote:

Cop on lomb, I think Sinn Féin have been instrumental in bring about an IRA ceasefire and been close in getting IRA decommissioning. Look at the compromises that have been made over the past few years.

If you honestly think that all the talks were some sort of ruse then you're deluded.

The important thing now is to ensure that there is no split within the IRA and we get back to the stage where the IRA were prepared to decommission before Christmas. Remember, the last time there was a split we got the Real IRA, the people of Omagh know all about that.

of course they have they have been masterful in manipulating people. its great isnt it for a terrorist to take up running a country. thats the dream afterall. the ira have been good at scaring people, sinn fein of taking advantage of it and turning the business of terror into the business of power.

Mercury_Tilt

This post has been deleted.

Mad Cyril

lomb wrote:

of course they have they have been masterful in manipulating people.

Which is exactly what has made them an effective political party.

A Dub in Glasgo

In modern times, the IRA split into the Official IRA (associated with SF The Workers Party -> The Workers Party -> Democratic Left -> into Labour) and the Provisional IRA (associated with SF). The Officials further split into the INLA and the IRSP. The Provisionals split in 1986 due to the taking up of seats in the Dail and Republican SF and the Continuity IRA were born. The vast majority stayed within the Provisionals. During the 90s and because of the opposition to the ceasefires, the IRA split again and the Real IRA was born with its associated 32 County Sovereignty Commitee.

The last thing we need is another round of splits/defections to bolster the Real IRA/Continuity IRA position.

lomb

Mad Cyril wrote:

Which is exactly what has made them an effective political party.

threat of terror and semtex under the table

Mad Cyril

lomb wrote:

threat of terror and semtex under the table

Your point please caller?
:rolleyes:

Sand

The last thing we need is another round of splits/defections to bolster the Real IRA/Continuity IRA position.

Conceivable, but its more likely a ploy by SF/IRA to intimidate their critics into backing off. The usual " The boyos are hopping mad, so they are, theyre ****ing headcases, Im not sure I can hold them back if ya keep up with this thing of holding us accountable for our actions!!!"

If the IRA are going to go back to "war" then theyll lose again and find themselves back at the table facing even harsher terms. Every time theyve kicked up a fuss they simply raise the bar they need to hop over to reassure Unionists that they can cut a lasting deal with SF/IRA in good faith.

mr_angry

I'd agree with you Sand, except for the fact that Hugh Ord and the Irish government produced absolutely no evidence to back up their assertion that the IRA carried out the Northern bank robbery. Now I admit that its not easy to give these people the same "innocent until proven guilty" benefit of the doubt as other people, but it is at least possible that they are actually hard done by this time. And to be honest, I wouldn't bet an entire peace-process on mere suspicion.

Cork

Sand wrote:

The boyos are hopping mad, so they are, theyre ****ing headcases, Im not sure I can hold them back if ya keep up with this thing of holding us accountable for our actions!!!"
.

I agree. The IRA will not go back to war. They are simply engaged in sabre rattling to get the governments to ease off regarding criminality.

But their little ploy won't work as everybody is united on the need for IRA criminality to end except the IRA and their friends in SF.

The IRA is like the big bad wolf - huffing and puffing but both governments should call their bluff.

Using a threat to go back to war is yet another low for the IRA.

Sand

I'd agree with you Sand, except for the fact that Hugh Ord and the Irish government produced absolutely no evidence to back up their assertion that the IRA carried out the Northern bank robbery.

Well, Hugh Orde said he believed the IRA carried out the robbery and the investigation was moving in that direction. With that statement, Hugh Orde has effectively put his career and his reputation on the line. If he's right and can prove it on a court of law, then he merely gets to keep his job in what will definitly be interesting times. If hes wrong, then he is discredited, ridiculed as the man who damaged the peace process and no doubt is demoted/sacked. He had to know this before he made that statement.

Both governments are in a similar position - they are making statements that could be very, very, very politically embarrassing/damaging if theyre shown as wrong. The pressure on their intelligence sources to be right and to be conservitive must be immense. Ahern and Blair arent securocrats - they've prostitued themselves and their governments to the IRA for years now. If theyre wrong, theyre in pretty much the same boat as Orde. This is an extremely high risk venture - for them to embark on it they must be absolutely convinced by their sources that they can support their position.

On the other hand Adams and the IRA have said they didnt do it. If theyre right, they get to have the last laugh on both governments and see the PNSI's reputation and credibility destroyed. If theyre wrong - nothing will happen to them. They can deny involvement and suffer no consequences even if theyre later shown to have been involved. The murder of McCabe and the Colombia Three, both of which were angrily denied by SF/IRA were actually shown to be SF/IRA jobs later. This is very low risk for them.

As such, I either lean towards belieiving Orde, the Gardai and both governments who have a lot to lose if theyre wrong or SF/IRA who are an illegal organisation engaged in continuing criminality to begin with, who shamelessly reverse denials of involvement in murders and crimes, and who have nothing to lose if theyre shown to be wrong.

And to be honest, I wouldn't bet an entire peace-process on mere suspicion.

Neither would I, and it should never have reached this crisis point if the Government had not turned a blind eye to IRA breaches of the ceasefire and criminality before this. The conventional wisdom even as recently as november/december when the TD O Snotnaighs Sinn Fein election buddies were unmasked as an IRA punishment squad was to turn a blind eye to it for fear of damaging the sacred peace proccess.

Unfortunately, that wisdom has led to an ongoing problem becoming a show stopping crisis.

true

President McAleeses controversial remarks, comparing the hatred of Catholics in N. Ireland to the Nazi hatred of Jews, did not help the peace process either. It alienated an entire community, many of whom thought they were being unfairly singled out and compared to the greatest murderers Europe has ever seen, who caused tens of millions of deaths through WW2. It gave the IRA a perceived mandate : after all, why would it decommission when its enemies included those comparable to the Nazis ?

Mad Cyril

The Protestant community are not the IRA's enemy. In fact, many protestants have been members of the organisation throughout the years.

Cork

true wrote:

It gave the IRA a perceived mandate : after all, why would it decommission when its enemies included those comparable to the Nazis ?

The IRA does not have a mandate - It continues to see it's army council as a legitimate government.


President McAleese apolised for her comments. We are still awaiting the IRA to even acknowledge murder is a crime.

fester

I'd be of the view that Sinn Fein have been becoming more acceptable as a peace seeking party (albeit slowly over the last few years). And that has given them more credibility in my eyes. I see them becoming more independent of the IRA.
I think it's unfair by both governments to reward those efforts by suggesting there links are stronger than ever.

mr_angry wrote:

And to be honest, I wouldn't bet an entire peace-process on mere suspicion.

Agreed

Cork

I think it's unfair by both governments to reward those efforts by suggesting there links are stronger than ever.

Bertie Ahern put a lot of effort into the Peace Process - He is the Taoiseach on this country and he has information that senior SF members were aware of this raid.

Should he have just turned a blind eye to IRA activity.

Both governments have tolerated much stalling by the IRA & have tolerated continued punishment beatings by that bunch of thugs.

Villain

Cork wrote:

Bertie Ahern put a lot of effort into the Peace Process - He is the Taoiseach on this country and he has information that senior SF members were aware of this raid.

Should he have just turned a blind eye to IRA activity.

Both governments have tolerated much stalling by the IRA & have tolerated continued punishment beatings by that bunch of thugs.

Well Gerry asked him to stand up that claim and he couldn't. The Taoiseach also stated in the dail that he did not know who was on the IRA army council, Bertie is going on assumptions and we all know that "assumptions are the mother of all f**k ups"

Sand

I'd be of the view that Sinn Fein have been becoming more acceptable as a peace seeking party (albeit slowly over the last few years). And that has given them more credibility in my eyes. I see them becoming more independent of the IRA.

Fester, theyll never be independant from the IRA for as long as the IRA is in existence. The republican movement *is* the IRA. The Army Council is viewed as the legitimate inheritors of the 1916 declaration of Republic, the one body never to have abandoned that state or its principles - and thus the legitimate government of the 32 County Irish Republic!

Why do you think the IRA fan boys refer to Ireland as the "free state" and to the Gardai as "free state bastards!", to quote O Snotnaighs wife in her drunken tirade? This state, its citizens and institutions have all betrayed the Republic of the 1916 declaration - we're all traitors according to their theology. We had a civil war over it afterall.

Given all that, it is the Army Council that directs the Republican movement. If Sinn Fein have risen in prominence to take center stage in the "struggle" it is because Adams/McGuinness have won control of the Army Council. The Real IRA split came because Adams/McGuinness didnt control the Army Executive - they control it solidly now because they dont want a repeat of that. Adams and McGuinness will never split the political wing from the armed wing because they prefer to retain the option to threaten to use the IRA if political negotiation isnt going there way. Thats why this IRA statement has come, this is why the supposed return to violence is being mooted and this is why Adams is suddenly declaring he cant act as interpreter for the IRA anymore.

Its a tactic to intimidate their critics, to make the situation seem desperate. I think its fair to say there is no faction in the Republican movement that can rival Adams/McGuinness control. Look at what they have accomplished in the face of "Never can be done, there will be a split" - they have taken seats in the Dail, they have taken seats in Stormont, they have recognised the principle of consent ( the rejection of which was a sacred principle of the anti-treaty IRA ), they have taken offices at westminster, and they have decommissioned some weapons - all of which should have led to splits. They can turn off punishment beatings whenever they feel it politically appropriate. These guys arent independant of the IRA - they *are* the fricking IRA.

Villain

Sand wrote:

These guys arent independant of the IRA - they *are* the fricking IRA.

LOL, one word: PROOF.

Without it your simply speculating, read my last post.

marco murphy

lomb wrote:

they run prostitution, drugs and counterfeit goods operations. illegal fuel smuggling and cigareete smuggling and now they have branched into being bank robbers.
:rolleyes:

prostitution is bull**** black propaganda, as is drugs. I could care less about fuel and smokes, and the bank business isn't new. I could care less if they steal from a bank. it's not stealing from the people

Lets face it,you actually dont care if it was saddam hussein or the IRA that robbed the bank,i bet it had no effect on you(the bank robbery)

Mad Cyril

Adams and McGuinness will never split the political wing from the armed wing because they prefer to retain the option to threaten to use the IRA if political negotiation isnt going there way.

I think the Tactical Use of Armed Struggle has been an extremely effective strategy and SF's progress in recent years is testament to that. The republican movement was in a rut which they have now removed themselves from. The movement is progressing and the leadership is firmly in control of the direction it is taking.

lomb

Poblachtach wrote:

prostitution is bull**** black propaganda, as is drugs. I could care less about fuel and smokes, and the bank business isn't new. I could care less if they steal from a bank. it's not stealing from the people

Lets face it,you actually dont care if it was saddam hussein or the IRA that robbed the bank,i bet it had no effect on you(the bank robbery)

not stealing from the people. :rolleyes: they threatened and traumatised innocent woman put 2 familys through hell. they robbed alot of money that affects customers as these things are passed on. they are out and out criminals and all the ****^rs should be locked up including adams and the keys thrown away. these animals have no place in a civilised society.

lomb

Sand wrote:

Fester, theyll never be independant from the IRA for as long as the IRA is in existence. The republican movement *is* the IRA. The Army Council is viewed as the legitimate inheritors of the 1916 declaration of Republic, the one body never to have abandoned that state or its principles - and thus the legitimate government of the 32 County Irish Republic!

Why do you think the IRA fan boys refer to Ireland as the "free state" and to the Gardai as "free state bastards!", to quote O Snotnaighs wife in her drunken tirade? This state, its citizens and institutions have all betrayed the Republic of the 1916 declaration - we're all traitors according to their theology. We had a civil war over it afterall.

Given all that, it is the Army Council that directs the Republican movement. If Sinn Fein have risen in prominence to take center stage in the "struggle" it is because Adams/McGuinness have won control of the Army Council. The Real IRA split came because Adams/McGuinness didnt control the Army Executive - they control it solidly now because they dont want a repeat of that. Adams and McGuinness will never split the political wing from the armed wing because they prefer to retain the option to threaten to use the IRA if political negotiation isnt going there way. Thats why this IRA statement has come, this is why the supposed return to violence is being mooted and this is why Adams is suddenly declaring he cant act as interpreter for the IRA anymore.

Its a tactic to intimidate their critics, to make the situation seem desperate. I think its fair to say there is no faction in the Republican movement that can rival Adams/McGuinness control. Look at what they have accomplished in the face of "Never can be done, there will be a split" - they have taken seats in the Dail, they have taken seats in Stormont, they have recognised the principle of consent ( the rejection of which was a sacred principle of the anti-treaty IRA ), they have taken offices at westminster, and they have decommissioned some weapons - all of which should have led to splits. They can turn off punishment beatings whenever they feel it politically appropriate. These guys arent independant of the IRA - they *are* the fricking IRA.

well said they ARE the IRA

Villain

lomb wrote:

well said they ARE the IRA

Mods I really think these people shouldn't be allowed to post such comments without proof, it's not as if their posting these comments by saying "IMHO......"

They are posting their comments as if they are facts, and if the Taoiseach of our state can't say who is on the army council I don't see how these people can say.

Dyr

Sand wrote:

Well, Hugh Orde said he believed the IRA carried out the robbery and the investigation was moving in that direction. With that statement, Hugh Orde has effectively put his career and his reputation on the line. If he's right and can prove it on a court of law, then he merely gets to keep his job in what will definitly be interesting times. If hes wrong, then he is discredited, ridiculed as the man who damaged the peace process and no doubt is demoted/sacked. He had to know this before he made that statement.

Not necessarily true, Orde has been been quite willing to tell pork pies in regard to a number of other incidents, like the raid on M15s HQ and the Shinner spy ring in stormont. On each occasion he was little more than trimbles personal calvary riding to the rescue. This hasnt affected his career in the slightest, but the peace proccess could, so he has a vested interest in helping jam on the brakes there.

Tony Blair and the British security services "got it wrong" (or just plain lied) on the WOMD issue. if they were willing to go into a globally significant war on bad intelligence/lies, do you think they would hesitate to lie about this bank raid when it suits their agenda? You dont have to be a rampant republican to be sceptical of the security services on either side of the border claims about this robbery. Just study the form.

Just like the previous security "incidents" blamed on the provos this happens at a time when Bertie and Tony desperately want to kick for touch on the peace process as they don't like the way that the elections in the north have stacked the cards. Damn, if i was conspiracy theorist....

The other interesting issue here is that there is no way at this stage that any trail that leads to anywhere but the IRA will be followed up by the Security services. The political fallout would be far too great for bertie and Tony if it turned out to be anybody but the provos who pulled this off. So if the IRA did'nt do it, whoever did is off scot free. Interesting...

swiss

Mods I really think these people shouldn't be allowed to post such comments without proof, it's not as if their posting these comments by saying "IMHO......"

For a change, I agree with this sentiment. In order to clarify this, let me make an analogy. We all know Martin Cullen awarded a lucrative contract to Monica Leech, one of his staunchest supporters. Now, to the average person, this smacks of cronyism. My own view is that yes, personal considerations played a part in this lucrative contract. However, were I to turn around and say: "I know Martin Cullen gave this contract to Mrs. Leech because she was a supporter.", without proof, these comments would be potentially libellous.

Similarly, there is little doubt in my mind that Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness are members of the IRA army council. It is also my considered view that the IRA and Sinn Féin are so inextricably linked that for many intents and purposes they are the same organisation. I agree with Sands assessment of the situation. However, as firm as I am in my convictions, I cannot definitively prove that the IRA and Sinn Féin are the same organisation, or that Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness are members of the IRA army council, in the same manner that the US cannot prove that Osama Bin Laden was responsible for the attacks on the World Trade Centre, or did not prove WMD's in Iraq.

So when stating an opinion, make sure people know it's an opinion. When stating fact, back it up with proof when asked.

Sparks

swiss wrote:

So when stating an opinion, make sure people know it's an opinion. When stating fact, back it up with proof when asked.

Of course, there is also the point that if someone says that Adams et al are not members of the Army Council, that they would be stating an opinion rather than fact, because we don't have a list of the members of the Army Council and thus cannot verify that Adams is not a member.

And to go further, since we have no list of members of the Provisional IRA, we cannot state that the statement from "P. O'Neill" is in fact, an IRA statement because we can't verify it was written by them.

In other words, it's rather hard to talk about an illegal terrorist organisation with any degree of confidence in details, not because people are demonstrating the similarities between opinions and rectal cavities, but because any proof regarding such organisations would result in the arrest and sentencing of the people involved...

true

Mad Cyril wrote:

The Protestant community are not the IRA's enemy. In fact, many protestants have been members of the organisation throughout the years.

Regarding your second point, no they have not, not in the last troubles.

Regarding your first point, why then did the IRA murder Protestant workmen in the minibus just because these were workmen in the 70's ? Why bomb Enniskillen in the 80's ? Why ambush part time and retired Protestants security force personell along the border and shoot them in the back / put bombs under their cars ?

Sand

Just like the previous security "incidents" blamed on the provos this happens at a time when Bertie and Tony desperately want to kick for touch on the peace process as they don't like the way that the elections in the north have stacked the cards. Damn, if i was conspiracy theorist....

Just like the McCabe killing - Gerry Adams actually stated that whoever carried out the McCabe murder was an enemy of the peace process, now hes fecking campaigning for their release - and the Colombia Three, who SF denied even knowing until it was pointed out they included the SF Cuban representitive.

I mean, do they even keep a database of whose allowed to speak in their name?

So when stating an opinion, make sure people know it's an opinion. When stating fact, back it up with proof when asked.

Sure thing,

Gerry Adams

Convicted IRA bomber Dolours Price, described Gerry Adams as her commanding officer at the time of her involvement in a 4 car bomb on London, March 8th, 1973 at a republican event in February 2001 – Irish Echo Newspaper Corp, March 2001.

His father was a IRA member convicted for shooting RUC officers.

He was interned in 1971, but was senior enough in some republican organisation to be released in July 1972 to take part in secret talks between the IRA and NI Secretary Whitelaw. He was 23 years old. He did not become president of SF for another 11 years.

Has refused to confirm or deny his IRA membership, claiming he could get 10 years for it.

The fact that he was negotiating on behalf of the IRA long before he became president of Sinn Fein tells its own story. Price confirms his status as a IRA commander.

Martin McGuiness, Derry:
2nd in command of the IRA in Derry from the early 70s. Travelled as part of the IRA delegation that secretly met with NI secretary Whitelaw in 1972.

Imprisoned several times in the Republic in connection with IRA activities but has always denied he ever became Chief of Staff for the IRA, despite many claims to the contrary. Renowned for promising informers who had fled IRA threats that they would be safe if they returned and had a little chat with the boys.

Persuaded Frank Hegartys mother to get him home to Belfast with a promise of safety – within two weeks he was abducted, tortured, murdered and dumped in Castlederg, Country Tyrone.

Again, senior enough to negotiate on behalf of the IRA long before he became as involved in Sinn Fein. Mr Hegartys mother can attest to the value of his word.

Now, if Irish1 would like to back up his statements where he has declared that he *knows* Adams and co arent on the Army Council with some backup of his own, Id be much obliged. Id settle for a list of the Army Council where he can show me Adams or McGuinness's names arent on it.

Actually as Sparks also noted, can Irish1 prove that P O Neill is indeed mouthpiece of the IRA and is allowed to speak in their name? If he cant, why should we accept anything in statements signed by P O Neill?

Villain

Sand wrote:

Just like the McCabe killing - Gerry Adams actually stated that whoever carried out the McCabe murder was an enemy of the peace process, now hes fecking campaigning for their release - and the Colombia Three, who SF denied even knowing until it was pointed out they included the SF Cuban representitive.

I mean, do they even keep a database of whose allowed to speak in their name?



Sure thing,



The fact that he was negotiating on behalf of the IRA long before he became president of Sinn Fein tells its own story. Price confirms his status as a IRA commander.



Again, senior enough to negotiate on behalf of the IRA long before he became as involved in Sinn Fein. Mr Hegartys mother can attest to the value of his word.

Now, if Irish1 would like to back up his statements where he has declared that he *knows* Adams and co arent on the Army Council with some backup of his own, Id be much obliged. Id settle for a list of the Army Council where he can show me Adams or McGuinness's names arent on it.

Actually as Sparks also noted, can Irish1 prove that P O Neill is indeed mouthpiece of the IRA and is allowed to speak in their name? If he cant, why should we accept anything in statements signed by P O Neill?

Sand your posting articles that relate to the 1970's, how does this have anything to do with the IRA army counil of today?? FF were meant to have been involved in gun running in the past does that mean they are today?? Your logic here is crazy.

I have stated that I know they are not on the army council because I have not seen a single shred of evidence to prove otherwise and I happen to believe the leaders of the party I support, perhaps you may want more proof, but I thought accusations had to proven by those who make them, I mean how I can prove your wrong when you haven't proven your right??

As for P O'Neill I really don't care what his statements say.

So give us some proof instead of going back 30 years ago when there was no peace process.

true

You cannot compare elements in Fianna Fail , with a smaller group like Sinn Fein / IRA. Haughey and Blaney are not at the top of the Fianna Fail organisation today, nor are democratic governments of the 21st century sympathetic to terrorists. McGuinness and Adams were very senior people in the republican movement 30 years ago : in this hi-tech surveillance age I believe the intelligence authorities know who is on the army council as well.

mycroft

irish1 wrote:

Mods I really think these people shouldn't be allowed to post such comments without proof, it's not as if their posting these comments by saying "IMHO......"

They are posting their comments as if they are facts, and if the Taoiseach of our state can't say who is on the army council I don't see how these people can say.

Uh huh, heres a catch though.

We don't know who is on the IRA council. They won't tell us or expose themselves.

A number of years ago both Adams and Mc Guinness denied membership of the IRA and we're now in position to know Mc Guinness for example was in a senior position in the IRA and had for example foreknowledge of the assasination of Mountbatten.

So what we have here is a situation wereby we are aware that Sinn Fein and the IRA are connected in some manner, and senior members of Sinn Fein were in the IRA.

So your petutlant whinging about the seperation between the IRA and SF is suprious. Yes we don't know who is on the council, but then;

We know you've lied about being on ceasefire (call me nuts any organistion which comes up with the Padreo Peo form of punishment isn't really on ceasefire.

And we know that you've lied about the membership of senior Sinn Fein members in the IRA.

So this yeah prove it attitude reeks. We don't know, we suspect, so therefore because you've been proven liars before we must be suspicious of everything you say

Cork

irish1 wrote:

Bertie is going on assumptions and we all know that "assumptions are the mother of all f**k ups"

Irish1 - Punishment beatings are a criminal act.

They go on. Bertie is not assuming that the IRA ae engaged in criminality - He knows it.

Such criminality has to end & I wish SF well in their efforts to get the IRA to end it's criminality.

SF should be soley involved in democratic politics. It should not be linked to an armed illegal grouping.

But SF cannot have links to an illegal group engaged in criminality. I think that same would go for other political partys if they had links to the criminal underworld.

Villain

True,
I wsa simply using the FF gun running story as an example to show how stupid Sand's logic was.

MyCroft,
McGuinness never denied he was a member for of the IRA, and btw I don't support the IRA in any way.

Cork,
I agree totally that punishment beatings are a criminal act, I was referring to the taoiseachs remarks about SF known the robbery was going to happen, he couldn't stand that claim up. Gerry Adams also stated this week that all punishments were wrong but nobody would post that because they can't bash it.

mycroft

MyCroft,
McGuinness never denied he was a member for of the IRA, and btw I don't support the IRA in any way.

And it finally was admitted his role as a senior member of the Derry Brigade. The fact that senior members of the party you support, have been and still could be on the IRA council. The fact that they've lied about their level of involvment in the past means we must be suspicious about their claims about their level of involvment with the council and the make up of the council

Cork,
I agree totally that punishment beatings are a criminal act, I was referring to the taoiseachs remarks about SF known the robbery was going to happen, he couldn't stand that claim up. Gerry Adams also stated this week that all punishments were wrong but nobody would post that because they can't bash it.

Brilliant so they're wrong, but SF can't do anythng to stop it. Remind me why they're in the peace process again?

Villain

Because they represent the Majority of nationalists in the North, I though that was obvious.

true

irish1 wrote:

True,
. Gerry Adams also stated this week that all punishments were wrong but nobody would post that because they can't bash it.

So Gerry Adams said it was wrong. Big deal. Certain people also said the "killing" ( not murder , murder only happens to nationalists ) of Jean McConville was wrong, but when pressed , said it was not a crime.

So Gerry Adams says punishment beatings are wrong. Does he mean they should never be carried out ? Are they just wrong because they should not have to be carried out in the first place. Maybe, in the twisted logic of Sinn Fein / IRA, punishment beatings are wrong, they are regrettable because it shows certain elements of society are not afraid enough of Sinn Fein / IRA ?

If you sup with the devil you need a long spoon.

mycroft

irish1 wrote:

Because they represent the Majority of nationalists in the North, I though that was obvious.

Yes that is correct.

However it's readily becoming apparent that when it comes to the peace process it's rapidly becoming clear that either sf don't have any power or infulence over the IRA, or don't object to their criminal activity

Villain

true wrote:

So Gerry Adams said it was wrong. Big deal. Certain people also said the "killing" ( not murder , murder only happens to nationalists ) of Jean McConville was wrong, but when pressed , said it was not a crime.

So Gerry Adams says punishment beatings are wrong. Does he mean they should never be carried out ? Are they just wrong because they should not have to be carried out in the first place. Maybe, in the twisted logic of Sinn Fein / IRA, punishment beatings are wrong, they are regrettable because it shows certain elements of society are not afraid enough of Sinn Fein / IRA ?

If you sup with the devil you need a long spoon.

I would take it he meant they should not be carried out, thats just my opinion based on the interview I heard.

monument

The only visual split I’ve seen so far is between SF, and the IRA - from Adams saying SF will no longer interpreted IRA statements, to calls for the governments to talk to the IRA directly…

All I have to say to the SF bashers is well done lads, you lot have forced what is effectively a PR clean up for SF, making the two organization appear more separate.

Well done!

Victor

irish1 wrote:

Mods I really think these people shouldn't be allowed to post such comments without proof, it's not as if their posting these comments by saying "IMHO......"

They are posting their comments as if they are facts, and if the Taoiseach of our state can't say who is on the army council I don't see how these people can say.

In fairness: "The dogs on the street know." - Martin McGuinness

true

monument wrote:

The only visual split I’ve seen so far is between SF, and the IRA - from Adams saying SF will no longer interpreted IRA statements, to calls for the governments to talk to the IRA directly…

Ah, so if you have only seen a small visual split, this is consistant with the two organisations being virtually the same : one a political wing, one a "military" wing ?

monument wrote:

All I have to say to the SF bashers is well done lads, you lot have forced what is effectively a PR clean up for SF, making the two organization appear more separate.

Are those who do not agree with Sinn Fein / IRA "bashers" ? To use words against an organisation which has used stronger weapons against its enemies ( AK 47s, semtex , baseball bats, whatever ) merits being called a basher ?

I think it would take a lot to clean up an organisation that refuses to condemn the murder of a mother of ten as a crime. If the two organisations "appear" more seperate, will that make them more seperate ?
Adams, the leader of Sinn Fein , has always said they were seperate anyway : how could they appear more seperate ?

monument

My point still stands; the SF bashers are just doing their normal work, which ends with SF gaining.

And ‘SF bashers’ would be the people who only really got up in a huff when SF started to make real political gains, the people who bash SF for their own political gain and don’t give a flying f about the north.

true

monument wrote:

My point still stands; the SF bashers are just doing their normal work, which ends with SF gaining.

And ‘SF bashers’ would be the people who only really got up in a huff when SF started to make real political gains, the people who bash SF for their own political gain and don’t give a flying f about the north.

You have not answered my points, Monument. I would imagine the people were equally "up in a huff" as you say when SF/IRA were shooting people in the back, and bombing innocent civilians, and wrecking our economies.

I do not "bash" anyone for my own political gain : I am not a politician.
I do however, happen to care a lot about the North, for lots of reasons, not least because I know a lot of people there from both religions very well, and who happen to get on quite well as it happens. I have spent quite a bit of time there.

iguana

....

mycroft

monument wrote:

My point still stands; the SF bashers are just doing their normal work, which ends with SF gaining.

And ‘SF bashers’ would be the people who only really got up in a huff when SF started to make real political gains, the people who bash SF for their own political gain and don’t give a flying f about the north.

Actually lets take sinn fein and some of the non peace process issues.

Sinn Fein played an important part of the anti iraq war movement. Yet when bush summoned them for the summit in the north two years ago they scampered off to attend. When challenged on this (and I have talked to Justin Moran about this) they pretty much dismissed any argument that this was just poo poo ing and acting all high and mighty and meanwhile SF had to ignore the the kiddy table and go speak to the adults. This is my opinion about the attitude of senior members of SF who had been moraly outraged about the Iraq war but saw no problem with meeting bush. A president who's head would explode if you tried to explain that last year that mc aleese was the president of ireland, ahern was the taoiseach (kind like a pm, boss) but also bertie was president of europe (non elected) Bush couldn't give a flying f*ck about ireland and SF caved at the first chance about showing some backbone to bush.

Sinn Fein's much vaunted talked about fighting against privatisation in the north, fell into the way side when hospitial privatisation came up and Sinn Fein voted for it. Again SF voted for it, and then justified it as it was important to ensure the continuation of the peace process.

In sligo SF an "anti bin charge party" voted for bin charges on the Sligo CC. Quietly....

My contempt for SF is the level of duplicity in the organisation. When challenged on political decisions they site the peace process as a "greater good" a process in which they can't even condemn the cold blooded murder of a mother as a crime, and yet will happily sell out their "morals" if george bush needs them to fall in for a photo op.

My contempt for SF is on so many levels. Their inability to truly condemn violence, while at the same time engaged in political decisions which run contray to their alledged politics and justifying it as "necessary for the peace process" a process in which they'll decline to define murder as a crime, or do anything to really sort out punishment beatings.

i feel they are poltical opportuntists who have easily shrunk off their "ethics" for political gains.