Poblachtach wrote: » I wouldn't say that. It's highly likely a member or members of the IRA carried it out, but it wasn't an official operation.
Phlann wrote: » I was reading about it earlier and apparently the intelligence reports from informants indicated that it may well have been sanctioned by one or two members of the council without the knowledge of the others (if we're talking about the Kingsmill incident).
But it's always murky waters with the IRA... what they knew or didn't know, what they sanctioned or didn't sanction, the only people who know for sure are the ones who were there and for the most part they're not talking.
stovelid wrote: » Thanks for clearing that up. If that's so, do you know offhand if they were punished, or expunged from the IRA as a result?
In 1983, men claiming to represent the Catholic Reaction Force used machine guns to attack a Pentecostal Church in Keady, Armagh. Three members of the congregation were killed.
Phlann wrote: » I see. I should have noticed your username before replying.
Poblachtach wrote: » I don't know at all, and never will I'm sure. I don't know for certain if it was IRA members, but I reckon it was, with the weapons that were used and that.
Poblachtach wrote: » Is that a problem?
stovelid wrote: » Sure, nobody knows if it was approved at council level, and I admit that a cell structure does give rise to these things....but given that the IRA reacted with such alacrity to issues such as informing or 'collaboration', allowing sectarian spectaculars in their name (and with their weapons - which I assumed must have come from a dump/quartermaster) to go unpunished is at best a tacit approval. Even republicans must concede that the 'unapproved' option is always trotted out for operations with a toxic publicity effect, while the relatively 'popular' ones like your Warrenpoint or Brighton are readily admitted to.
stovelid wrote: » If I had a user name like Billy Windsor McViolence, you must admit you'd look at any of my posts in this thread differently...
Phlann wrote: » Nothing personal, man It's just that, in my experience, as far as republicans are concerned every informant is 'unreliable' or 'discredited', every former Sinn Fein member who criticises the inner workings of the party is a 'malcontent with an agenda'... and so on.
There's just no valid criticism of the Republican movement as far as some people are concerned. I'm not saying you're one of those people but I've heard that stuff so often it's made me a little cynical!