Sunday world alledges Sinn Féin benefit from racketeering-Are they going to sue ?

Rock Climber

In Todays Sunday world Paul Williams has a large article alledging that Sinn Féin are using monies from Racketeering to fund their party.
(They don't have an online version to link to unfortunately but I'll try post up some of the article later)

Are they going to sue this time? He also points out that the gang responsible for the Lusk robbery are sub contractors for the PIRA.

If ever there was an opportunity for Sinn Féin to sue then here it is.

If they don't well whats their excuse this time? They cant run with that Gerry Adams one about his peers....
If they dont sue, well then its a damning indictment of them.

And yes I know the republicans are going to say it's a rag etc, its a rag none the less that has over a million readers every week.
My point here is entirely in relation to the accusation and whether Sinn Féin will sue

SkepticOne

Rock Climber wrote:

If they dont sue, well then its a damning indictment of them.

Especially with the libel laws stacked in their favour with the burden of proof totally on the newspaper.

A Dub in Glasgo

Rock Climber wrote:

My point here is entirely in relation to the accusation and whether Sinn Féin will sue

Maybe you should contact them, you may just get what you are looking for ie an answer to your question as all you will get here is speculation. But, of course, you already know that!

Sinn Féin
44 Parnell Square
Dublin 1
Ireland

Tel: (353) 1 8726100/8726932
Fax: (353) 1 8733441

Sinn Féin
53 Falls Road
Belfast, BT12 4PD
Ireland

Tel: 02890 223000
Fax: 02890 223001

Rock Climber

I'd prefer to discuss it here actually, thats why I come here, for a good read.
what do you think, should they sue, will they sue, and can they sue?

A Dub in Glasgo

Should they sue? Yes
Will they sue (the question in your thread title and first post)? I do not know
Can they sue? I am no legal expert so I do not know


There you go.... easy

Can I ask you ADIG seeing as you're here.
If they don't sue do you think it would be damaging?
It would certainly be a bad precedent to be setting as it would in my view open the flood gates to more of this.

I'd be of the view that if the Sunday world(and like it or lump it post Veronica Guerin and his campaigns against various Dublin criminal gangs etc Paul williams is held in high regard) continues with this line, their point will inevitably be floating in front of SF target swing voters here in the south ie middle class people.

A Dub in Glasgo

If the story is complete rubbish, SF should sue and if they do not sue, it would be a bad reflection on them.

I would like to see the story 1st.... so Rockclimber get your keyboard going and transcribe the article.

shltter

TBH

they should sue

But if they dont I dont think it will be damaging to them People who vote SF are well used to hearing lies about SF

The sub contracting nonesense seems to be the latest way to go with the lies as it allows the journalist to link events to the provos with out having to provide a link to
the Provisional movement

Of course the obvious question is if the IRA stole 40 million euro at christmas why they would need a couple of thousand from the lusk post office

Villain

Well I haven't read the article yet, heading to the shops shortly so when I do I'll let you know my opinion.

shltter

shltter wrote:

TBH

they should sue

But if they dont I dont think it will be damaging to them People who vote SF are well used to hearing lies about SF

The sub contracting nonesense seems to be the latest way to go with the lies as it allows the journalist to link events to the provos with out having to provide a link to
the Provisional movement

yup they should sue, all would be washed then.

Of course the obvious question is if the IRA stole 40 million euro at christmas why they would need a couple of thousand from the lusk post office

I thought most of the northern bank money was rendered useless?
That said, if theres a law suit all the Sunday worlds evidence if any and if reliable would have to come out.
That further presses the point that they should sue.

Rock Climber

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

If the story is complete rubbish, SF should sue and if they do not sue, it would be a bad reflection on them.

I would like to see the story 1st.... so Rockclimber get your keyboard going and transcribe the article.

On page 12 of the Sunday World in an article titled Crime exclusive-Lusk Gang is linked to Sinn Féin and the IRA, Paul williams says and I quote:

We can reveal that it was Griffin who organised the systematic robbery of millions of euro worth of containers from Dublin Docks.
The racket, which was first exposed by the sunday world three years ago is used to part fund Sinn Féin election campaigns and pay for their constituency offices.
It also provides more proof that the party is heavily involved in criminal rackets and is in bed with drug dealers throughout Dublin

It goes on,I'm sure Irish1 will type up the rest for ye...

So bring on the suit

Villain

Well just got the papers, I see the Indo have lead with a simalar story, so i'll go do a bit of reading.

But my first impressions would be that it would be hard to sue as they haven't said the funding is directly raised by Sinn Fein. What I mean is that the Sunday World may be saying that they believe the IRA have raised money and this money has ended up with Sinn Fein. It doesn't appear to any different to what McDowell has said in the past i.e. the IRA are involved in criminality at the Docks and he believes Adams and McGuinness are on the IRA amry council so he believes they are the same group in affect. I don't yet see any clear cut accusation against the Party that they could sue for.

m1ke

SF/IRA won't sue because it's true and having a spotlight put over it would prove extremely embarrasing. It's much easier in the short term to just let it go. Tactically speaking, it is a lot easier to just let it pass and keep denying it without actually doing anything about it.... people will soon forget... if they can easily forget the violent atrocities that the SF/IRA have committed they'll easily forget this.

pete

shltter wrote:

The sub contracting nonesense seems to be the latest way to go with the lies as it allows the journalist to link events to the provos with out having to provide a link to
the Provisional movement

That would certainly appear to be the case:

Sunday Independent wrote:

THE ruthless gang leader shot dead by undercover gardai at Lusk post office had "robbed to order" for the Provisional IRA, the Sunday Independent has learned.

Colm Griffin had worked for the terrorist organisation in the recent past, although security sources say they have no reason to believe that the attempted post office robbery last week was ordered by the IRA.

gandalf

Talk about a win win situation.

SF don't sue it reaffirms everyones belief that they are a front organisation for criminals.

SF sue and win and the Slumday World is shown up for the complete and rag that it is and gets hit with a major settlement. (Extra win win points if it goes out of business ).

Villain

I don't see anything new here apart from the thread tbh, it's the same things that have been said in the past. I really don't see how SF could sue.


I love the way the INDO and others always quote their security sources, I sometimes wonder if these security sources really excist, I mean they can write anything they like as long as they say "according to security sources".

It's all pure speculation and tbh I'm very dissapointed that they have chosen this speculation to lead the front pages rather than write about the 6 reports over the past 15 years on school bus safety that our governments ignored.

irish1

irish1 wrote:

I don't see anything new here apart from the thread tbh, it's the same things that have been said in the past. I really don't see how SF could sue.

Are you seriously suggesting that SF cant sue a paper that says their election campaigns and offices are funded by racketeering monies?
I'd have thought that would be a pretty straight foward case.

On what grounds could they not sue this time?

Rock Climber

irish1 wrote:

tbh I'm very dissapointed that they have chosen this speculation to lead the front pages rather than write about the 6 reports over the past 15 years on school bus safety that our governments ignored.

Are you even reading the same sunday world that I have here, the first 6 pages are about that bus crash and on page 6 theres an article about Charlie McCreevy's penny pinching on school bus safety titled Shame on you mentioning the very 6 reports you are on about...

Seriously now getting back to the topic, what possible reason could Sinn Féin have for not sueing??

Villain

Well earthman it's not that straight forward IMO, how does the money get to Sinn Fein is it direct? Are Sinn Fein members involved in obtaining this money or is it just donations from supporters? Are Sinn Fein aware that the money has been obtained illegally??

As I have said this article says nothing new, McDowell has said more or less the same thing in the past and yet no arrests were made or evidence produced.

If the Sunday World said " Sinn Fein are carrying out illegal activities and raising money from this activity that they use for elections" then Sinn fein could sue.

Oh and Rock Climber I have seen those pages I just thought it should have lead the front page.

irish1

irish1 wrote:

Well earthman it's not that straight forward IMO, how does the money get to Sinn Fein is it direct?

holy smoke! To pose that question you'd have to be conceding that unaccounted monies got there in the first place.By direct are you implying indirect would be laundered ?

Are Sinn Fein members involved in obtaining this money or is it just donations from supporters? Are Sinn Fein aware that the money has been obtained illegally??

Don't you think SF would have to be seen to be inquiring into this at the very least?

As I have said this article says nothing new, McDowell has said more or less the same thing in the past and yet no arrests were made or evidence produced.

or libel writs wrote

If the Sunday World said " Sinn Fein are carrying out illegal activities and raising money from this activity that they use for elections" then Sinn fein could sue.

Is that it? A paper says racketeering is used to fund SF and they cant sue.
I find that hard to believe to be honest,If I was in their shoe's I'd be sueing.
Also if things are as you say they are,SF should be having a root and branch inquiry into the funds received to pay for SF activities to determine where the money came from.

Of course if it can be determined that its not from the sources that the Sunday World claim, then law suit them immediately.

At a very minimum though there should be an inquiry to rule out this(resulting of course in the law suit for the wrong that was said) as the money would be as dirty as any builders brown envelope going into the hands of an FF or FG politician.

Villain

Earthman wrote:

holy smoke! To pose that question you'd have to be conceding that unaccounted monies got there in the first place.By direct are you implying indirect would be laundered ?

Nope I speaking in terms if one was to believe it

Earthman wrote:

Don't you think SF would have to be seen to be inquiring into this at the very least?

Certainly.

Earthman wrote:

Is that it? A paper says racketeering is used to fund SF and they cant sue.
I find that hard to believe to be honest,If I was in their shoe's I'd be sueing.
Also if things are as you say they are,SF should be having a root and branch inquiry into the funds received to pay for SF activities to determine where the money came from.

Of course if it can be determined that its not from the sources that the Sunday World claim, then law suit them immediately.

At a very minimum though there should be an inquiry to rule out this(resulting of course in the law suit for the wrong that was said) as the money would be as dirty as any builders brown envelope going into the hands of an FF or FG politician.

Well IMO the article is very vague on detail and as I said doesn't really accuse Sinn Fein of anything directly. I would like to hear what Adams has to say on this matter and would love to see the Sunday Worlds evidence that led them to write this article, as much as I would love to see McDowell's evidence and ask why people haven't been arrested.

irish1

irish1 wrote:

Well IMO the article is very vague on detail and as I said doesn't really accuse Sinn Fein of anything directly.

But it does, its here in black and white in front of me and I quote"It also provides more proof that the party is heavily involved in criminal rackets and is in bed with drug dealers throughout Dublin"
Is the SF party heavily involved in criminal rackets or not?
That should be a straight foward yes or no-theres no grey area in the sentence printed in the Sunday World.

Theres nothing grey about stating that offices and campaigns are being funded by racketeering either.
Thats all black and white and the clearest rebuttable statement ever about SF in an Irish paper.

They should sue if its wrong or a lie.

Villain

Earthman wrote:

But it does, its here in black and white in front of me and I quote"It also provides more proof that the party is heavily involved in criminal rackets and is in bed with drug dealers throughout Dublin"
Is the SF party heavily involved in criminal rackets or not?
That should be a straight foward yes or no-theres no grey area in the sentence printed in the Sunday World.

Theres nothing grey about stating that offices and campaigns are being funded by racketeering either.
Thats all black and white and the clearest rebuttable statement ever about SF in an Irish paper.

They should sue if its wrong or a lie.

Earthman your getting carried away here, this is nothing new and I think you know only too well that all this has been said before.

The paper says invovled, what exactly do they mean is Sinn Fein as a party invovled in robberies or is there a few provo's somewhere invovled and thus they support Sinn Fein and so Sinn Fein are involved??

As for being in bed with drug dealers, well it must be a big bed to hold of all of Sinn Fein. Seriously this is just taploid crap that is going on sources who probably get paid to tell journalists crap.

If you want to believe what the paper says feel free, but I for one don't believe it and won't until they provide proof. Seriously guys never heard the expression "paper never refused ink".

There is a lot more bigger stories that relate to politics than this rubbish but if you want to have a song and dance about this go ahead. I'm sure the government are only happy to see Sinn Fein hitting the front pages while our health system is a mess and 5 young school children have lost their lives while several governments have refused to spend money on new safer school buses and implement safer guidlines.

irish1

irish1 wrote:

Earthman your getting carried away here, this is nothing new and I think you know only too well that all this has been said before.

SF dont want to rebutt what they clearly think are lies in papers? why?

The paper says invovled, what exactly do they mean is Sinn Fein as a party invovled in robberies or is there a few provo's somewhere invovled and thus they support Sinn Fein and so Sinn Fein are involved??

It does more it says SF is funded by Dublin port racketeering. Why leave that unchallenged, if its such rubbish? why let such a golden opportunity go?

If you want to believe what the paper says feel free, but I for one don't believe it and won't until they provide proof. Seriously guys never heard the expression "paper never refused ink".

so no law suit then the paper is fine with saying this type of thing?

There is a lot more bigger stories that relate to politics than this rubbish but if you want to have a song and dance about this go ahead. I'm sure the government are only happy to see Sinn Fein hitting the front pages while our health system is a mess and 5 young school children have lost their lives while several governments have refused to spend money on new safer school buses and implement safer guidlines.

And you wouldnt be starting a thread if the papers were saying said government was being funded by racketeering?

Villain

Earthman wrote:

SF dont want to rebutt what they clearly think are lies in papers? why?

Dub in Glasgo gave their addresses and phone numbers give them a call and ask them if your so bothered.

Earthman wrote:

It does more it says SF is funded by Dublin port racketeering. Why leave that unchallenged, if its such rubbish? why let such a golden opportunity go?

It says part fund Sinn Féin election campaigns and pay for their constituency offices actually, as I said give them a call they often let people inspect their books. Have a look and let us know what you find out.

Earthman wrote:

And you wouldnt be starting a thread if the papers were saying said government was being funded by racketeering?

I would be if it was only the first or even second time it was been said, but this is just an old record been played out again to sell a few papers, I really am surprised you can't see that.

irish1

irish1 wrote:

Dub in Glasgo gave their addresses and phone numbers give them a call and ask them if your so bothered.

It doesnt bother me at all,I'm just wondering why thats all.

It says part fund Sinn Féin election campaigns and pay for their constituency offices actually, as I said give them a call they often let people inspect their books. Have a look and let us know what you find out.

At least Dub agreed with me and said if the accusations were rubbish SF should sue.

I would be if it was only the first or even second time it was been said, but this is just an old record been played out again to sell a few papers, I really am surprised you can't see that.

It's the first time I've ever seen it as clear cut in print by a newspaper about the party and not individuals.
It should be easy as pie to walk into court and ask for evidence of this by the accuser threatening a law suit or injunct them
The SF party is clearly being seen to separate itself from the IRA of late.
You seem to not to want to say if they should sue or not why is that?

DMC

An article such as that by the foremost crime journalist in the country, in a Sunday paper with a large nationalist/republican readership both north and south....

I can't think that the SF leadership can either ignore nor sit on their hands on this one.

axer

Rock Climber wrote:

In Todays Sunday world Paul Williams has a large article alledging that Sinn Féin are using monies from Racketeering to fund their party.
(They don't have an online version to link to unfortunately but I'll try post up some of the article later)

Are they going to sue this time? He also points out that the gang responsible for the Lusk robbery are sub contractors for the PIRA.

If ever there was an opportunity for Sinn Féin to sue then here it is.

If they don't well whats their excuse this time? They cant run with that Gerry Adams one about his peers....
If they dont sue, well then its a damning indictment of them.

And yes I know the republicans are going to say it's a rag etc, its a rag none the less that has over a million readers every week.
My point here is entirely in relation to the accusation and whether Sinn Féin will sue

Wow, those are some statements to make.
Paul Williams works for a sensationalist newspaper. You seem to try and justify this by saying that the paper has over a million readers week. did you know that the national enquirer sold 2,088,182 copies between july and november 2000? The more publicity they get out of making extreme allegations the better for them.
Also the accusation came from Paul Williams' newspaper article so dont try to curb people from attacking the credibility of the newspaper.
Now moving on to your "point". The Sinn Fein leadership cannot sue (well they could but I very much doubt that they would be successful) - not because it is true - but because they would have to sue that it is an attack on their character. This would not stand as the minister for justice in this country believes similiarly that the sinn fein leadership are involved in crime and are members of the IRA. This as a result is the view of the government - whether with evidence or just conjecture. It would also be brought to the court that Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness were believed to be leaders of the IRA, at least at some point in the past and as a result do not hold good character that they can defend.
If the Sinn Fein leadership do not take action on this report - I would not read anything into it as they may be limited by the above and more like it - whether true or false.
I must point out that I have not read the newspaper report but I would not believe everything I read, especially from sensationalist newspapers, no matter how much proof etc they say they have.

jman0

They will not sue because it is not possible for an irish republican organisation to get "justice" from HMG's system.

axer

axer wrote:

Wow, those are some statements to make.

Hang on a second-lets have a look at what you just said too.

Paul Williams works for a sensationalist newspaper. You seem to try and justify this by saying that the paper has over a million readers week. did you know that the national enquirer sold 2,088,182 copies between july and november 2000? The more publicity they get out of making extreme allegations the better for them.

A million plus readers would be a quarter of the country-what percentage of the U.S would read the national inquirer.It's a valid point to make that an accusation is being made in a paper with one of the biggest readerships in the land.

Also the accusation came from Paul Williams' newspaper article so dont try to curb people from attacking the credibility of the newspaper.

Paul williams wrote the article, are you not concerned that the countries foremost and respected crime writer would write such stuff unchallenged?

Now moving on to your "point". The Sinn Fein leadership cannot sue (well they could but I very much doubt that they would be successful) - not because it is true - but because they would have to sue that it is an attack on their character.

With respect the statements made that SF offices and campaigns are funded by Dublin port racketeering are either true or false-theres no inbetween.They should be sueing for damages based on the falseness of the statement and at the very least a retraction on page one.It should be fairly simple for to ask the Sunday world in court to present evidence or withdraw the accusation as unfounded.

This would not stand as the minister for justice in this country believes similiarly that the sinn fein leadership are involved in crime and are members of the IRA. This as a result is the view of the government - whether with evidence or just conjecture. It would also be brought to the court that Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness were believed to be leaders of the IRA, at least at some point in the past and as a result do not hold good character that they can defend.

That might be mentioned in court, but it has nothing to do with asking for evidence regarding party funding or asking for a retraction in court if its not presented.
The only counter as I see it that SF have against this besides going to court about it, would be to have a full independent inquiry into the source of their funding as they *may* want to make the case that they unwittingly got funds from a questionable source.
If that was shown to be the case then, they should make contributions equal to the amount found to charity.
Regardless of whatever else, they should at a minimum be seen to be establishing beyond doubt the truth of the matter ie whether what was in the SW was a lie or not and if it was they should sue.
Otherwise it leaves the door wide open to the accusation that they know theres something to the accusation.

jman0 wrote:

They will not sue because it is not possible for an irish republican organisation to get "justice" from HMG's system.

It was published in Dublin, capital of a country independent of HMG for a long long time

jman0

Earthman wrote:

It was published in Dublin, capital of a country independent of HMG for a long long time

Really?
I always thought the Sunday World was a british paper.

You would probably be thinking of the news of the world,sunday times or one of those?

The SW is owned by the Indo group,its head offices used be in terrenure iirc but now they are here

A nice fish for SF to sue.

jman0

Those tabloids are rubbish. They are just printed to wind people up with a view toward selling more papers.
Why give them the satisfaction (not to mention free advertising by taking them to court)
If SF does it, i'd argue that it's a waste of time and resources.

Lemming

jman0 wrote:

They will not sue because it is not possible for an irish republican organisation to get "justice" from HMG's system.

Justice as opposed to "justice" eh? I'm curious as to the emphasis on the word justice there. What kind of justice would you be perhaps implying? Knee-cappings? Beatings? Disappearances? :rolleyes:

You also might want to look up an atlas. Ireland, the republic of is not under the jursdiction of the United Kingdom. Just thought I'd let you know in case you hadn't been paying attention in geography class.

1000 lines "Geography is not boring".

Lemming

jman0 wrote:

Those tabloids are rubbish.

As opposed to the tendency by SF/IRA supporters on these boards to make direct references to, and insist upon the integrity of, "provo rags"?

Why give them the satisfaction (not to mention free advertising by taking them to court)
If SF does it, i'd argue that it's a waste of time and resources.

Why give them the satisfaction? Ummm .... because they've a large readers base and well ... readers = voters, not to put too fine a point on it.

A Dub in Glasgo

Another day dawns and we are no further forward to actually reading the whole article.....

gandalf

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

Another day dawns and we are no further forward to actually reading the whole article.....

Yep anyone got a scan of this literary masterpiece. There is no way I wanted to be seen buying the Slumday World.

(I suppose it is a change from their normal pieces on Vice Rings thou!)

Dub,if my head didnt hurt today I'd transcribe it for you.
Suffice it to say it goes along the lines of sources,sources sources.

The crucial part to my eyes is what it states as fact.In my view it would be imperative to rebutt that statement in court, by asking for the evidence or a retraction, the costs of course going to the winner.

Villain

Lemming wrote:

As opposed to the tendency by SF/IRA supporters on these boards to make direct references to, and insist upon the integrity of, "provo rags"?

Does that sweeping remark include all SF supporters on Boards?

BTW Earthman did you get in contact with Sinn Fein to get an answer to your questions??

axer

Earthman wrote:

Hang on a second-lets have a look at what you just said too.
A million plus readers would be a quarter of the country-what percentage of the U.S would read the national inquirer.It's a valid point to make that an accusation is being made in a paper with one of the biggest readerships in the land.

Well - it is a fair amount of readership at 852,000 which does amount to 21% of total population - thats true. Of that 852,000 readers, skilled working class (described as skilled manual workers) and working class (described as semi and unskilled manual workers) account for 539,000 (over half) of those readers. But it is a valid point a it does have alot of readership.

Earthman wrote:

Paul williams wrote the article, are you not concerned that the countries foremost and respected crime writer would write such stuff unchallenged?

what do you mean - unchallenged? By who? You do realise that the two biggest selling sunday newspapers and the biggest (by nearly double of its nearest competitor) selling daily newspaper are all owned by the same person.

Earthman wrote:

With respect the statements made that SF offices and campaigns are funded by Dublin port racketeering are either true or false-theres no inbetween.They should be sueing for damages based on the falseness of the statement and at the very least a retraction on page one.It should be fairly simple for to ask the Sunday world in court to present evidence or withdraw the accusation as unfounded. That might be mentioned in court, but it has nothing to do with asking for evidence regarding party funding or asking for a retraction in court if its not presented.

Yes sinn fein could sue the Sunday World but on what grounds? Libel? As I have already said they would not succeed in this for reasons aforementioned in my last post. What other grounds can they sue on? Also it is not cheap to sue the sunday world.

Earthman wrote:

The only counter as I see it that SF have against this besides going to court about it, would be to have a full independent inquiry into the source of their funding as they *may* want to make the case that they unwittingly got funds from a questionable source.

Why would they do this if they believe that the claims are unfounded? Who would pay for such an inquiry?

Earthman wrote:

Regardless of whatever else, they should at a minimum be seen to be establishing beyond doubt the truth of the matter ie whether what was in the SW was a lie or not and if it was they should sue.

How could they go about this? tell me

Earthman wrote:

Otherwise it leaves the door wide open to the accusation that they know theres something to the accusation.

Do you believe everything that is written in Newspapers?

axer

Lemming wrote:

Justice as opposed to "justice" eh? I'm curious as to the emphasis on the word justice there. What kind of justice would you be perhaps implying? Knee-cappings? Beatings? Disappearances? :rolleyes:

As earthman would say - thats off topic - you are more than welcome to start a new topic about this.

irish1

irish1 wrote:

BTW Earthman did you get in contact with Sinn Fein to get an answer to your questions??

This is a discussion board where we are discussing the topic.
I hope you arent suggesting that I need to contact SF directly to get an answer to a question I posed about your post.

Mighty_Mouse

Yawn! Does it not strike anyone here as a little desperate to have to resort to tabloid accusations to link SF to criminal assets.

Surely the Gardai could make a few arrests? I mean if Paul Williams knows shouldnt the gardai?

ps
did he do his usual trick of a page of black faces to lend weight to his argument. "Black face 1 is a leading IRA man who deals heroin to 6 year olds and sick babies.Undisclosable sources stated that he was Gerry Adams gay lover for 15 years before turning to drugs after scorned love!!"

"Black face 2 is ....................."

etc

axer

axer wrote:

As earthman would say - thats off topic - you are more than welcome to start a new topic about this.

Correct, but report the post please, my head hurts today so I cant promise you the usual diligence unless you do that.

Villain

Earthman wrote:

This is a discussion board where we are discussing the topic.
I hope you arent suggesting that I need to contact SF directly to get an answer to a question I posed about your post.

You asked:

SF dont want to rebutt what they clearly think are lies in papers? why?

and

It does more it says SF is funded by Dublin port racketeering. Why leave that unchallenged, if its such rubbish? why let such a golden opportunity go?

How can anyone here answer those questions??. If you really want those questions answered I suggest you contact Sinn Fein.

BTW you keep saying sue, on what gorunds though what type of lawsuit can they take??

Rock Climber

Mighty_Mouse wrote:

Yawn! Does it not strike anyone here as a little desperate to have to resort to tabloid accusations to link SF to criminal assets.

And the reason they wont sue on a dead cert like this is....

Surely the Gardai could make a few arrests? I mean if Paul Williams knows shouldnt the gardai?

sources would have to come out in the law suit, otherwise the allegations wouldnt stand-so why not sue.

ps
did he do his usual trick of a page of black faces to lend weight to his argument. "Black face 1 is a leading IRA man who deals heroin to 6 year olds and sick babies.Undisclosable sources stated that he was Gerry Adams gay lover for 15 years before turning to drugs after scorned love!!"

"Black face 2 is ....................."

etc

Dissing Paul Williams, yeah thats a creditable approach to take,next thing I'll hear here is he's biased :rolleyes:

gandalf

The main question I would have is this, if Sinn Fein want to make the breakthrough into mainstream politics then they will have to meet allegations like this* head on and challange them in a court of law and prove that they are rubbish. Until they do this then the mud will stick whether they are true or not.

* Obviously I have to read the offending article.

gandalf

irish1 wrote:

How can anyone here answer those questions??. If you really want those questions answered I suggest you contact Sinn Fein.

As a self professed Sinn Fein supporter I am sure you are more than capable of enlightening people with your opinion. I think that is what people are looking for here. Although a statement from Gerry and the boys would be most welcome.

Villain

gandalf wrote:

As a self professed Sinn Fein supporter I am sure you are more than capable of enlightening people with your opinion. I think that is what people are looking for here. Although a statement from Gerry and the boys would be most welcome.

Yes but he didn't ask for my opinion, he asked direct questions that nobody here can answer and if he really wanted to know the answers he should contact the party.

axer

axer wrote:

what do you mean - unchallenged? By who?

SF for the lie they are going to say was printed.

You do realise that the two biggest selling sunday newspapers and the biggest (by nearly double of its nearest competitor) selling daily newspaper are all owned by the same person.

yes

Yes sinn fein could sue the Sunday World but on what grounds?

As I said a retraction-It's not that difficult actually,I was involved in getting one done recently.

Also it is not cheap to sue the sunday world.

It's black and white axer,the costs would have to be paid by the SW as they are the ones that would have to retract the lie.

Why would they do this if they believe that the claims are unfounded? Who would pay for such an inquiry?

They should establish this beyond doubt and sue the SW for all reasonable costs when they get their retraction

How could they go about this? tell me

It would be imperative in my view to be seen to have a standard whereby an accusation like this was put to bed.It should be simple enough to clear up if SF knows where its party donations have originated.
As I said earlier, they could donate to charity any amount if they turn some up that has unwittingly came from a dodgy source.
In that case they would also want to make sure that there were mechanisms in place to make sure theres no recurrance.

Do you believe everything that is written in Newspapers?

NO
But thats not the point here, the point is,that a statement has been published that SF camaigns and offices have been funded by racketeering which if untrue is as clear a case as any for going to law to get a retraction printed.

gandalf

irish1 wrote:

Yes but he didn't ask for my opinion, he asked direct questions that nobody here can answer and if he really wanted to know the answers he should contact the party.

Well the comments you quoted looked like someone trying to get a discussion started rather than directly aimed at Sinn Fein offices themselves. What format of wording should we use in future to engage in a discussion, maybe earthman should put a disclaimer in his replies so you realise that he is looking for other members of boards input rather than a source outside boards :rolleyes: