Inquiry into IRA Collusion

Cork

SF/IRA played a little part being part of the problem.

What did violence achieve?

SF/IRA agreed on the principle of consert.

At the end of the day you can deny that great progress has been made

Yes - But illegal armies holding onto weapons is hindering progress.

Mighty_Mouse

What did violence achieve?

I hate to say it but it made the british government address the situation in NI as regards civil rights for nationalists. Sectarian police force, voting rights, etc...............(u get the gist)

Similar to the coarse of action Nelson Mandela took when he founded MD. Sometimes voilence is necessary. Everybody wishes "if we all could just get along" but im afraid thats an idealist attitude.

Im afraid the principle of voilence is never necessary just doesnt apply in real world situations. NI nationaists in the end had to fight for their rights.

I dont believe a terrorists organisation arises for the sake of terrorism but for the need for terrorism. The need for terrorism no longer exists and therefore neither does the need for the IRA to.

It just doesnt make sense to say the IRA are murderers .......end of story , no gevernement with Sinn Fein etc..............but at the end of the day where is the practical solution in that argument.

A democratic government is necessary which represents the community and I personally have gotta say fair due to the sinners for playing a big role.

The SDLP for years got absolutely nothing. Folded to british demands every single time ............and the sinners in the end negotiated an end to voilence and the start of the peace process.

Mighty_Mouse

Cork -- > Yes - But illegal armies holding onto weapons is hindering progress.

But it doesnt have to when these weapons are not been used. Im afraid if you cant see decommissioning for what it is as a somkescreen to progress then not much i can do to convice you.

Consider this though. Suppose De CHastelain came out in the morning and stated specific amounts of what had been decommissioned and it was a huge amount of arms, i mean massive.

What would happen...........teh unionists would have no choice but to enter governement for maby 6 months and then "we believe theres more weapons" government breaks down.

Its the same repeated process of moving the goalposts which has been going on for years.

What you are proposing is realistically an end to political progress.

It just wont work the way you are suggesting so what do you do about it?

Cork

Is there a perceived threat by an illegal army holding arms?

Mighty_Mouse

Cork - Is there a perceived threat by an illegal army holding arms?

Silly argument given the context of the nortern ireland or any other conflict situation. I have stated already you have to move from idealist to realistic thinking when considering the resolution to the conflict in NI.

IRA will always be illegal, what are you gonna do, shut-down the political progress in NI?
Shut down the political progress until the IRA publicaly disbands and accounts for all of its weapons?

---

wont happen


So how can we resolve issues. We effectively create a society where terrorism is not necessary any more by creating a democratic, representative governement and move towards long-term peace.

By the way remember that the IRA have effectively stated that the war is over and made two sizeable decommissioning of arms. Also note that decommissioning can only ever be a gesture because both you and I know republicans will never decommission enough arms for the unionists and british governement.

Also note the lack of pressure on unionist/loyalist terrorists to decommission

mike65

Is there a perceived threat by an illegal army holding arms?

Sinn Fein know the power of "Speaking softly and carrying a big stick". The threat is implied, it need be
nothing more....

Mike.

bonkey

Originally posted by Cork
Is there a perceived threat by an illegal army holding arms?

About the same as the perceived threat of an illegal army who has no arms but all the necessary means to acquire them.

jc

Mighty_Mouse

"mike65 "

Sinn Fein know the power of "Speaking softly and carrying a big stick". The threat is implied, it need be
nothing more...."

If this is your belief; what would you have Sinn Fein do about it?

IRA Decommission? --> already being undertaken significantly .Do you accept that it can only ever be a token gesture because who can officially verify that the IRA dont have any weapons left?

IRA Disband? --> wont happen, but the necessity for the IRA will just fade out over time as it has to date. But maby at some stage when they might 'officially' disband, when there is a non-sectarian police force, de-militarisation etc ie when the climate for a terrorist organisation to exist no longer exists

IRA statement "the war is over" --> we have that

Cork

IRA statement "the war is over"

This from an organisation that was responsible for Warrington?

when there is a non-sectarian police force, de-militarisation etc ie when the climate for a terrorist organisation to exist no longer exists

Are the SF/IRA non-sectarian?

There was never a need for a terrorist organisation to exist

When you are trying to build a normal soceity - illegal armies have no place

Mighty_Mouse

Warrington was 1993 (I think) which is 10 years ago
Attrocities happened on both sides during the war.

But whatever the distaste you may have for those attrocities; the question still stands............how do you resolve the current situation and move past these attrocities towards and democratic peacful NI?

Are the SF/IRA non-sectarian?

Did I say different. I think the point I was making was the police force shouldnt be.

here was never a need for a terrorist organisation to exist

This may be your any many many other peoples opinion but it still does not affect the current situation.

At the time a large part of NI society felt differently and felt a strong need for the IRA. No man turns to voilence naturally. Its not a lifestyle many people choose to live but one their forced into when no other option exists.

When you are trying to build a normal soceity - illegal armies have no place

They wont in a 'normal' society.




Again: bear in mind the complete lack of political pressure on loyalists terrorists in this respect

Cork

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
Warrington was 1993 (I think) which is 10 years ago
Attrocities happened on both sides during the war.

But whatever the distaste you may have for those attrocities; the question still stands............how do you resolve the current situation and move past these attrocities towards and democratic peacful NI?

An illegal army holding onto illegal arms is now seen by a signifcant part of the population of NI as a big part of the problem.

What use has SF/IRA have of these arms?

AS a political party - it would be an insult to use them as some type of bargaining chip.

Mighty_Mouse

What use has SF/IRA have of these arms?

The answer to your question is they dont have any use for them. Thats why their being decommissioned!

Do you have a better proposal?

Cork

But how much of its total arms are now decommissioned?

What is left to decommission?

Do you not think that people on this island desere answers.

Mighty_Mouse

Cork -->

"But how much of its total arms are now decommissioned?

What is left to decommission?

Do you not think that people on this island desere answers."

As I stated earlier I dont think decommissioning is important.
I couldnt care less how much rust weapons are gathering as long as their not being fired, as long as assurance are given that the cease-fire is permanant etc

which have all being met.

I think your asking for the unanswerable and the impossible. You asking to give one side a vistory which wont work, it will never work.

"IRA 1500 bullet, 1500 machine guns, 1500 gernades " will only serve to demoralise republicans and hand a victory to the unionists.

Is not enough that an world-wide respected independant inspector is "satisfied"?

Cork --> "whats left to decommission?"

I seriously doubt even the IRA themselves know!

But again its not what should be important.

can i ask you a question: Why is decommissionig important?

Cork

As I stated earlier I dont think decommissioning is important.
I couldnt care less how much rust weapons are gathering as long as their not being fired, as long as assurance are given that the cease-fire is permanant etc .

Do you not think an illegal army holding on to a cache of weapons is a threat to the security of the state?

How do you think the victims of IRA violence feel about an illegal army still having arms hidden around the country?

If not as a bargaining chip - why does the IRA want to keep these weapons?

Could you list any political partys with similar amounts of weapons?

Mighty_Mouse

Do you not think an illegal army holding on to a cache of weapons is a threat to the security of the state?

in a word , No. They have stated that their war is over and held a cease-fire long enough under extremely difficult circumstances to convince me.

How do you think the victims of IRA violence feel about an illegal army still having arms hidden around the country?

I dont know. Can you speak on behalf of victims of IRA voilence

If not as a bargaining chip - why does the IRA want to keep these weapons?

They dont thats why there has been decommissioning



Im afraid Cork Ive tried to address all your questions but you have ignored mine. This conversation has gone around in a circle.

but ask yourself.
Why does decommissioning matter?
Can desommissioning ever really be completed? (or will it continue to act as a obstacle)
Why is there a lack of political pressure on loyalists terrorists?

gurramok

Originally posted by Cork
Do you not think an illegal army holding on to a cache of weapons is a threat to the security of the state?

The real threat to the 'state'(i'd rather say people as they suffer most) is drugs gangs(armies in your language) who have murdered at least 17 people last year, the worst year on record for organised-crime killings.
Something like 50 unsolved gangland killings over the last 5 years.

An ira on 8 yr ceasefire (silent guns hardly kill as much as loud guns) in contrast to vicious random gang killings is not the primary threat.

And nothing been done.

Cork

Originally posted by gurramok
The real threat to the 'state'(i'd rather say people as they suffer most) is drugs gangs(armies in your language) who have murdered at least 17 people last year, the worst year on record for organised-crime killings.
Something like 50 unsolved gangland killings over the last 5 years.

An ira on 8 yr ceasefire (silent guns hardly kill as much as loud guns) in contrast to vicious random gang killings is not the primary threat.

And nothing been done.

Has SF/IRA ceased punishment beatings?

How much does it cost to run an illegal army these days?

How does the IRA finance itself??

SF has got to decide - what it is.

If It wants to be a bona fide political party - it cannot have links to an illegal army.

It is about time they made up their minds.

The IRA has ultimately to disband. IRA weapons cannot be used as a cheap bargaining chip.

SF/IRA have accepted consent. They have admitted the war is over.

But why do punishment beatings continue?

What is the SF line on these??

Mighty_Mouse

Has SF/IRA ceased punishment beatings?

As stated earlier. The republican community have needed to police their own communitys for the last thirty years due to a sectarian police force. When a non-sectarian judicial system/police force is in place, this will no longer be required.


How much does it cost to run an illegal army these days?

Why you starting one?


How does the IRA finance itself??

Dont know do you.
If I was to guess I'd say SFA. Its not running a war any more so a lot less than whatever it did cost


SF has got to decide - what it is.

SF have always been a political party. No decision
IRA have decided - the war is over


If It wants to be a bona fide political party - it cannot have links to an illegal army.

It doesnt
Anyways the IRA are on long lasting cease fire, have undertaken decommissioning and declared the war to be over.


It is about time they made up their minds.

Like I said theres no decision to be made


The IRA has ultimately to disband. IRA weapons cannot be used as a cheap bargaining chip.

They have said their campaign is over, and undertaken decommissioning. The republicans have fullfiled their side of the bargain the ball is in Uniionist court.

Disbandment wont happen anytime soon. Not possible. Look at it this way. At least IRA members are under orders/control which could be a lot more difficult is the IRA were disbanded at the present time


SF/IRA have accepted consent. They have admitted the war is over.

The have accepted consent - "the war is over"


But why do punishment beatings continue?

See above. History of sectarian police force etc................


What is the SF line on these??

Don't know. 'that they shouldnt be taken place'

im sure if patten was implemented many problems would be resolved



Again.
Disbandment not gonna happen. Where do you go. What are your suggestions for political progress

and again do you not think that loyalist terrorists should be under the same scrutiny/ pressure

What you have suggested just wont work so its silly to suggest them.

Cork

If It wants to be a bona fide political party - it cannot have links to an illegal army.
It doesnt

Do you honestly believe this?

SF & the IRA are linked.

The republican community have needed to police their own communitys for the last thirty years due to a sectarian police force. When a non-sectarian judicial system/police force is in place, this will no longer be required.

So intead of the PSNI - we have bunchs of thugs engagged in punishment beatings?

Explain punishment beating south of the boarder?

Mighty_Mouse

Cork -->"
Do you honestly believe this?"

Sinn Fein doesnt have an illegal army. Its a really crude statement to say so.

links exist but only in the same way as there would of been in FF after the civil war.

I dont think your making allowances for 30 years of war in NI.


Cork -->"

The republican community have needed to police their own communitys for the last thirty years due to a sectarian police force. When a non-sectarian judicial system/police force is in place, this will no longer be required.

So intead of the PSNI - we have bunchs of thugs engagged in punishment beatings"

People dont beat people for the enjoyment of it. Thuggery doesnt exist for the sake of it but for the necessity for it.

Once the necessity for republicans to police there own areas, once trust in the PSNI has been established, punishment beatings will stop.

Right or wrong thats the situation.

Cork

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse

Once the necessity for republicans to police there own areas, once trust in the PSNI has been established, punishment beatings will stop.

Right or wrong thats the situation.

So a bunch Of thugs roaming the streets is better than the PSNI.

Can you explain punishment beatings south of the boarder?

I dont think your making allowances for 30 years of war in NI.

What war?

How does planting bombs in trash cans constitute a war?

SF/IRA now accept consent.

The SDLP could have told them that 30 years ago.

But the IRA has not gone away as Gerry Adams once said.

Why is an illegal army being maintained?

Why are illegal arms being held?

Why are punishment beatings happening?

SF while media savy - have decisions to make.

They have got to choose the armed struggle or politics.

They can't have it both ways.

gurramok

Originally posted by Cork
Has SF/IRA ceased punishment beatings?

How much does it cost to run an illegal army these days?

How does the IRA finance itself??

SF has got to decide - what it is.

If It wants to be a bona fide political party - it cannot have links to an illegal army.

It is about time they made up their minds.

The IRA has ultimately to disband. IRA weapons cannot be used as a cheap bargaining chip.

SF/IRA have accepted consent. They have admitted the war is over.

But why do punishment beatings continue?

What is the SF line on these??

I'm not debating any of these parrot soundbites, off-topic to the subject of an inquiry.
My qualm with your 1st post and subsequent follow-ups is where you quoted McDowell about criminality and the status of the real threat to the security of the state, you seem to agree on this with minister McDowell.

The last murder in a long list of murders commited where i live was less than 50 metres from my house. I could even see the covered body of the victim who was gunned down by the local posse of drug barons.

Do you agree or disagree on what is the real primary threat to the security of the state, republicans or drug ganglords ??

Cork

Gangs pose a big threat.

But it does not lessen the need to get rid of illegal arms and illegal armies.

Mighty_Mouse

The IRA no longer poses a threat to the state. They have proved this by their conduct throughout the peace proccess.

Anyways all my points are made above. You dont vary much from the one-liner DUP quips do ya Cork.

The IRA has little more to give. The have made all the concessions without receiving anything in return.

You have repeatedly avoided my direct questions.

What is the purpose of decommissioning?
How do you propose to resolve the issues you have with decommisioning?

my feeling is that You are asking the impossible because certain people in this world would never be satisfied that decommissioning had be completed.

Cork

The IRA has little more to give. The have made all the concessions without receiving anything in return.

Where prisoners not released? Are you refering to these people as "nothing".

What about the victims of the IRA?

Complete disbandment and decommissioning would bring solace.

Why does SF/IRA want these weapons for?

SF/IRA is now an obstacle to peace in this country. No government should allow armed illegal armies to exist in their countries.

ishmael whale

If the IRA still exists as an entity, it shows that they are not fully integrated into the normal processes of the State. Will this ever amount to a threat ? Maybe, considering the stories about vigilante activity in North Kerry.

Vigilantism seems so much better than legitimate law enforcement until they target the wrong person, or until they broaden the definition of what they regard as a crime. The Legal Aid scheme won’t do much for you then.

If public decommissioning is trivial, then there’s no reason for the IRA to avoid it. By avoiding it they have become the DUP’s best canvassers.

Mighty_Mouse

Cork -->
"Where prisoners not released? Are you refering to these people as "nothing"."

Yes, they were prisoners of war. What else should happen to prisioners of war?


What about the victims of the IRA?
"What about victims of RUC, brtiish army, secret forces, loyalist gangs and terrorists?"

Whats your point?

"Complete disbandment and decommissioning would bring solace."

How would you assure COMPLETE decommissiing?
Its an impossible request which will never be met in good enough to suit unionists
What would convince you complete decommissioning had taken place?

"Why does SF/IRA want these weapons for?"

IRA doesnt need them thats why they decomissioned them

Sinn Fein doesnt have any

"SF/IRA is now an obstacle to peace in this country. No government should allow armed illegal armies to exist in their countries."

Hence cease fire, decommissioning, "war is over" etc
If you believe it is Sinn Fein who are blocking political progress you are fooling yourself.

ishmael whale -->"
If the IRA still exists as an entity, it shows that they are not fully integrated into the normal processes of the State."

Im sure IRA members would be happy to integrate into a society which the feel is acceptable. And from my knowledge have done so admirably since being released.


"Vigilantism "
Is wrong. I accept, sometimes understable in the north though when theres no police force to turn to.


"If public decommissioning is trivial, then there’s no reason for the IRA to avoid it"

you looking for victories on one side here. What wud the DUP said if a full list of weapons was published?

ishmael whale

I’m sure IRA members would be happy to integrate into a society which they feel is acceptable. So would we all. But for my part, and for most people with democratic values, we accept that we must integrate with societies that contain much that we do not agree with, and much that restricts us. We do this out of respect for the rights of others and a belief that the joint enterprise is better than anarchy.
I am glad that we agree on vigilantism, and would only underline that the cases I am referring to occurred in the Republic and not the North. For all the quibbles we might have about it, the Republic is still one of the few place in the world with a functioning democratic state. Vigilantism undermines this, and seems to have been practiced by the IRA. I am saying this just to point out that the threat to this State from the IRA is not some vague theoretical proposition. When there’s no police force to turn to it is clearly not the same, but can Sinn Fein and the IRA claim to have contributed to building an acceptable police force in Northern Ireland? They can’t have their cake and eat it.

I’m not looking for victories in the area of public decommissioning, but I am suggesting that the DUP’s success is the result of the IRA’s stance. The argument that public decommissioning is purely cosmetic cuts both ways – if one side wants it and there’s no concrete objection to it, why not accede to it?

Mighty_Mouse

"DUP’s success is the result of the IRA’s stance"

Not entirely convinced of this. I always thought of DUP success resulting from disorganistion within the UUP. UUP have weak leadership, lack of focus, direction and dont know what they stand for. If really and truly believe that if Trimble had supported what he signed up to and there was a smoothly functioning government in the north - the DUP would remain minority.

If he had showed strong leadership from the start none of the Jeff Donaldson probs would of bed in.

ie. the problems within unionism is of their own making

"for most people with democratic values, we accept that we must integrate with societies that contain much that we do not agree with, and much that restricts us. We do this out of respect for the rights of others and a belief that the joint enterprise is better than anarchy."

I accept this. Remember though vigilantiasm in North Kerry wasnt proved.

And so will republicans when an appropriate period of time has passed for those people to adjust to social norms.

I do feel however that while IRA activity is uncondonable to a democracy people need to develop an understanding within the NI situation.

Completely public decommissioning will never happen. It just wouldnt be possible to carry the majority of republicans through the process.

Rem - the terms of decomissioning were agreed before the acts took place and would not of taken place without those terms.

Unionists need to understand and realise that they cant keep moving the ****ing goalposts.

I agree with what you say but norms of a domocratic society have never operated in NI.