[articles] The Provos and the Docks

monument

Originally posted by ReefBreak
Irish Facist Party

The PDs? Right? Mainly the Justice minister? Right?

[O, sorry that’s just the impression the Phoenix gave me.]

Mighty_Mouse

My apologies Reefbreak, It had just been the two of us for so long!!

But I hope the rest of the posts are ok for you.

Ok. Apart from the above blunder, I just want to say that my position and reasons for my positions have been stated repeatedly.

I explained all the points ye have raised etc etc etc

Earthman, I cant undertand where your logic comes from in the above explanation saying you havent been "blind posting".

Finally, I've read back and realised that my posts were a little forceful...... but I was posting angrily , responding to some of the crazy comments made! I suppose I became a little frustrated at some of the repeated "speakerfone" arguments which fail to engage or discuss.

bonkey

Originally posted by Earthman
It would have been open season on FG from the other parties and probably that would include ironically Sinn Féin.

I draw your attention once again to CJH, who - despite being removed as minister for allegations of gun-running - was later able to become leader of the nation under the same party.

Correct Bonkey, but this is 2004, do you want us to go back to the turn of the century and wind back all the foward motions of society since then?

No, I'm simply asking you to accept reality.

Sinn Fein's association with the IRA is a fact. Now, you can either simply say "no, we won't deal with you because you're bad people, so you should go back to being worse people because you'll never achieve a political solution", or we can say "yes, we will put your past in the past and give you a fresh start as we try and work out a peaceful solution".

Just as when the state was formed, standing on a platform of "oooh - you have a criminal conviction, ergo you can't be a politician" is quite simply not applicable.

I would suggest that your rigidly black-and-white stance is what is winding back "all the forward motions of society since then", not my suggestion that we accept the imperfection of reality in order to try and improve our situation, rather than condemning it for principles' sake and potentially dooming ourselves to a resumption of violence......especially when - as I have pointed out - many of our own politicians (current and recent) are far from the upstanding models of citizenship that you claimed were all people would accept.

The GFA is there,it doesn't countenance raceteering or punishment beatings as far as I'm aware.

Nor do I. I have not made a single post which says that these things are - or should be - acceptable.

Bonkey I'm surprised that you would say that, it's clear what I was responding to...

Were you not responding to the content of the post that you had quoted directly above what I took from your post?

Allow me to post it here again, lest we both get further confused. Its easier if we just collate everything together.....

Original quote - from MM :
The fact that our Minister for justice cant keep his trap shut for two mins doesnt make the PD's the main party making wild accusations about SF

Now where in that is any suggestion of gagging anyone????? I see none, but this is what you went about in your response where you quoted exactly what I have above.....and this is what I was pointing out.

Here's your response to that quote again - you can verify that you did indeed have the same quote from M_M above it if you scroll back the posts.

Response from Earthman:
He's entitled to speak it is a democracy, we are all speaking.
But remember, SF were gagged by section 32 for a long long time, and gave out about it so it might not be a good idea to be advocating gagging other people.

Now can you show me the connection, because to me it is clear that your response (i.e. discussing gagging) completely ignores that the point you apparently were responding to never mentioned gagging anyone, nor did it suggest that anyone was wrong to be discussing anything.

All it said was that one person - our MfJ - (and yes, I stupidly wrote the wrong name - apologies) being outspoken does not mean his party are the main critics.

Now, if thats not what you were responding to, you can hardly blame me for not understanding that you were referring not to what you quoted, but to something that you didn't quote, neh?

Now could you explain to me the context of where I am not reading posts,

I just have. M_M said - to paraphrase - the Minister for Justice being outspoken does not mean his party is the main group of critics. Your response was (again paraphrasing) "I'd be very careful about suggesting people be gagged - they have a right to speak".

I see no possible way of obtaining your gagging claim from his statement. So, I concluded you couldn't have properly read what was written. If I'm misunderstanding you, I apologise....

jc

Originally posted by bonkey

I see no possible way of obtaining your gagging claim from his statement. So, I concluded you couldn't have properly read what was written. If I'm misunderstanding you, I apologise....

jc

I took the phrase of can't keep his trap shut as instructional.
This misunderstanding is arising out of the language used as I'm sure Mighty Mouse wouldn't want the Minister for Justice to shut up...

I draw your attention once again to CJH, who - despite being removed as minister for allegations of gun-running - was later able to become leader of the nation under the same party.

Indeed he was, the same as Martin Ferris can get elected in Kerry, he was a cute politician, but as far as I can recall when he was leader of that party, he never got an over-all majority.
Indeed his first position as Taoiseach arose out of an internal coup in that party.
His next term as Taoiseach was curtesy of a vote purchase from Tony Gregory.
After that he lead a minority government, with his cabinet shaking in their boots...
Indeed theres a famous story where the late Jim Gibbons was beat up in Dáil Éireann for simply causing trouble to Haugheys leadership.

I'm not holding Haughey up as an example of what is acceptable, and never have, but in the current climate, with tribunals galore all politians are open to thorough scrutiny and Sinn Féin should be no exception.
Or at the very least, if they don't want to be subject to the same scrutiny, they shouldn't expect to hold any higher moral ground than any of the other parties.
Thats the point I was making all along as the constant impression I was getting from Might Mouse was that they shouldn't...
I'd have thought it was an imperative of joining the democratic fold in the fullest manner rather than being aspirational on our part as voters.

Sinn Fein's association with the IRA is a fact. Now, you can either simply say "no, we won't deal with you because you're bad people, so you should go back to being worse people because you'll never achieve a political solution", or we can say "yes, we will put your past in the past and give you a fresh start as we try and work out a peaceful solution".

But I'd never argue against that logic, I'll actually wait and see if there are prosecutions arising out of this Docks thing...

I would suggest that your rigidly black-and-white stance is what is winding back "all the forward motions of society since then", not my suggestion that we accept the imperfection of reality in order to try and improve our situation, rather than condemning it for principles' sake and potentially dooming ourselves to a resumption of violence......especially when - as I have pointed out - many of our own politicians (current and recent) are far from the upstanding models of citizenship that you claimed were all people would accept.

Yes but, they do throw them out when they are found out, Sinn Féin don't as far as I'm aware.
Now you know very well from this board the kind of impressions corruption within FF create.
The same is true of SF, theres no escaping that.

bonkey

Originally posted by Earthman
I took the phrase of can't keep his trap shut as instructional.
This misunderstanding is arising out of the language used as I'm sure Mighty Mouse wouldn't want the Minister for Justice to shut up...

OK. Confusion cleared up. Thanks.

I'm not holding Haughey up as an example of what is acceptable, and never have, but in the current climate, with tribunals galore all politians are open to thorough scrutiny and Sinn Féin should be no exception.

I agree, but I still feel that a distinction needs to be made about what is being scrutinised.

If you want to say some member of Sinn Fein is unacceptable because they have been - or may have been - members of the IRA and/or because they have served prison sentences for actions which took place prior to the GFA, then I would disagree.

On the other hand, any criminal activity subsequent to the GFA is definitely fair game for criticism, and in that case I would be more inclined to say that Sinn Fein should face harsher scrutiny, because amongst all of the parties they notionally have the most to prove in terms of having left their past behind them.

Or at the very least, if they don't want to be subject to the same scrutiny, they shouldn't expect to hold any higher moral ground than any of the other parties.

Unquestionably.

But I'd never argue against that logic, I'll actually wait and see if there are prosecutions arising out of this Docks thing...

I very much doubt that anyone convicted from this Docks thing would be allowed to remain in the party....but yes...lets wait and see.

Yes but, they do throw them out when they are found out, Sinn Féin don't as far as I'm aware.

Here, I would have to ask "found out for what"? I'm harking back to the pre/post GFA distinction I made earlier. Have Sinn Fein members been convicted of crimes post-GFA? (I don't know and don't have time to check right now, so this is a genuine question for anyone who knows).

Now you know very well from this board the kind of impressions corruption within FF create.

You're lucky Cork is on a break. His indignation at such an unfounded slandering of FF would be truly an impressive sight

As for the impression it creates...I'm well aware that the vast majority of posters here condemn it. I'm also well aware that this is not representative of the population in general, or else we'd have a government where FF would have a seat-count similar to what the PDs have at present.

The same is true of SF, theres no escaping that.

Again...I know the impression Sinn Fein's activities create here on the forum. I'm unsure as to how that would translate into the real world, as - quite frankly - I've never been able to understand the general public's voting habits.

jc

They are among the best at looking after their constituents and that translates into votes, where said voters don't have a problem with any other activities they may be associated with.

Secondly I am mostly referring to any criminal activities that may be happening post GFA.

The GFA in my view represented closure in terms of the requirements for Sinn Féin to be fully part of the Democratic process once they and their associates in the IRA fully adhere to its principals, something which I've always recognised ain't easy, given the climate up North.
Indeed I've argued that fully adhering to it would give Paisley the kind of head ache that would make his position very difficult to maintain.
Alas a lot of unionists have moved to his position ( unionists that previously supported the GFA ), imagine the headache if they had seen no reason to do that.

Mighty_Mouse

I took the phrase of can't keep his trap shut as instructional.

I thought it was a pretty straight forward sentance to be honest but then again it would be unlike you (to try and make out all SF supporters as militant, instruction-giving, bullys....

I'm sure Mighty Mouse wouldn't want the Minister for Justice to shut up...

No I welcome him. I've never heard so many people talk about SF. You'd swear SF were on their way to rivaling the biggest party in the country......

Surely this isn't possible?:eek:

the same as Martin Ferris can get elected in Kerry, he was a cute politician

Why should Martin Ferris not of got elected? You make out like some criminaly-active gang lord got elected through cuteness!!!!:rolleyes:

...open to thorough scrutiny and Sinn Féin should be no exception.

I dont think SF are closed to scrutiny. What makes you think they are? If anything I would say SF are the most scrutinised party in the country!!

Thats the point I was making all along as the constant impression I was getting from Might Mouse was that they shouldn't...

Sorry if you got the WRONG impression! I honestly dont think SF have anything to hide.
I really believe that SF politicians are too smart and too motivated to be caught for something stupid!! Anyways, 30 years of constant surveilance by the worlds secret services will make you pretty straight!!

I'll actually wait and see if there are prosecutions arising out of this Docks thing...

You'll be waiting .:D

Sinn Féin don't as far as I'm aware

Who in you opinion do you think should be thrown out of SF?

They are among the best at looking after their constituents and that translates into votes,

A compliment!:eek:

where said voters don't have a problem with any other activities they may be associated with.

Ok, this has come up before. Do you have a problem with SF lobbying traditional non-voting working class areas for votes? Areas of high crime maby? Do you have a problem with these areas participating in a democracy?
I dont see what the problem is. The electorate is there for all parties to canvass. The problem is that FF, PD's and FG have never bothered to campaign to these "non-voting" areas beacuse they didnt matter. It was a bad mistake.

where said voters don't have a problem with any other activities they may be associated with.

What activities? Can you name some convictions?

Basically what your saying here is that disadvantaged areas/areas of high crime vote for SF bacause they are all crims themselves.
That is completely false.
(Also rem: in any community only a small precentage of the people are responsible for much of the crime.)

Indeed I've argued that fully adhering to it would give Paisley the kind of head ache that would make his position very difficult to maintain.

yes lets focus on making Paisely uncomfortable enough so he will see the light and want to participate in a democracy. !! I'm sorry I think Sf are better off focusing on republican goals and not hindering SF.
PS: so you know its the same mistake that the current parties, the unionists, SDLP etc etc keep making.
I personally believe that any given party is better off having its primary focus on what its own policies are, what it stands for etc etc instead of focusing on trying to undermine the opposition.

Alas a lot of unionists have moved to his position ( unionists that previously supported the GFA ), imagine the headache if they had seen no reason to do that.

I respect your opinion. But honestly .... won't work... ever!!! The likes of Paisely and will never be satisfied!

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse

Why should Martin Ferris not of got elected? You make out like some criminaly-active gang lord got elected through cuteness!!!!:rolleyes:

Never said he shouldn't.
Theres where my rare praise, for SF vote getting comes in.
But then topping the poll in a PR ellection never meant a majority in your constituency agreed with you or liked your politics...
Who topped the poll in the Assembly elections in that most nationalist of NI constituencies, Newry and South Armagh?

I'll give you a clue, he's young, has a singing voice that would rival that of Box car Willie McCrea and is in the same party the DUP...

Ok, this has come up before. Do you have a problem with SF lobbying traditional non-voting working class areas for votes? Areas of high crime maby? Do you have a problem with these areas participating in a democracy?

No , not at all...
I meant some voters( but they are in the minority ) don't give a hoot about SF associations with the IRA.
I never attached a social class to them, indeed they could come from any.

The likes of Paisely and will never be satisfied!

I'd agree with you, but theres no need to be handing him PR opportunities, and the IRA have been doing that.
Lets show him up that would be my view, rather than giving him a reason to go crying crocodile tears to Downing street....
In the meantime keep Breeding like rabbits and have fun doing so

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Villain

Originally posted by daveirl
As was described in the paper yesterday, when McGuinness said that McDowell was being unhelpful to the peace process, he recieved a call telling him where to go and that McDowell spoke for the cabinet. I can see how the IRA can whine about the acceptance of the decommissioning, but they just give cannon fodder to us, with all this other stuff.

The FF/PD's interests are only in elections, the peace process is second to that in their eyes, thats IMHO.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Villain

Originally posted by daveirl
Exacltly my point and smuggling has nothing to do with the peace process so is fair comment. Correct?

It does if your a accusing a main player in that process of these crimes WITHOUT PROOF

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Villain

Originally posted by daveirl
What constitues proof? I'd imagine that what was published in the media yesterday would qualify as proof. You can't have a debate only using absolute proof. In that case 99% of what is said couldn't be said.

Sinn Féin go on about British collusion with loyalist paramiliatries, but their is no absolute proof on that, so would you think they shouldn't be allowed comment on that - I wouldn't

Oh if it's in the paper it's proof :rolleyes: come on daveirl thats just crazy!!

I don't think SF should accuse the British of Collusion without proof, theres a report out end of this month that should shine some light on that situation.

I retracted a statement on that issue here because I couldn't prove it, even do there a lot of reports on the issue.

Mighty_Mouse

smuggling has nothing to do with the peace process so is fair comment. Correct?

I agree. I mean holding up a peace process because of a few republicans selllign cheap ciggarettes is crazy.

But dave the facts of the matter are -
- the RUC were colluding with british forces and loyalist terrorists to murder catholics
- SF are not responsible for smugling & punishment beatings
- the IRA doesnt fund SF activities
- stories are created to make SF look bad at vital political times. This whole media fresy is just becasue FF are afraid before the upcoming elections

As for Gerry Adams IRA membership. I'd be very surprised if he was an official member of the IRA after his recent denials. I mean he has nothing to gain from denying it!! Theres many other former IRA, SF politicians whose ex-IRA membership hasnt hurt them politically.

Eartman - is it just the impression i get .. but do you put SF success down to good vote management or the fact that an increasing number of the electorate want them to be in government

But then topping the poll in a PR ellection

No it was a general election earthman.

Mighty_Mouse

Who topped the poll in the Assembly elections in that most nationalist of NI constituencies, Newry and South Armagh?

I'll give you a clue, he's young, has a singing voice that would rival that of Box car Willie McCrea and is in the same party the DUP..

NEWRY and Armagh 2003 election results:

Electorate: 68,731 Turnout: 68.93% Total Valid Poll: 47,378 Quota: 6,769

Paul Berry (DUP) 8,125
Conor Murphy (SF) 7,595
Danny Kennedy (UUP) 7,347
Davy Hyland (SF) 5,779
Patricia O'Rawe (SF) 5,478
Dominic Bradley (SDLP) 4,111


Sinn Féin's total first preference vote was 18,852 (39.79%)

I no the point your trying to make. But vote management is not whats driving SF. The fact is increasing number of people are voting for them.

I think it would do well to compare the above results with the 2001 :
Newry and Armagh 2001 Election Results

Seamus Mallon: (SDLP) 20,784 37.37%
Conor Murphy: (SF) 17,209 30.94%
Paul Berry: (DUP) 10,795 19.41%
Sylvia McRoberts: (UUP) 6,833 12.28%

Not a bad increase for SF!!!!

The point I was making which , you have seen and proven there, is that just because a party's candidate tops the poll doesn't mean that parties view is in the majority in the constituency.

Mr Berry, a hardline unionist DUP man topped the poll in Newry and South Armagh...

Martin Ferris topped the poll in North Kerry in 2002 but nearly 76% of the voters there gave their first preferences to the other established parties...
Thats more than three quarters of the voters.

Sinn Féin ended up with one seat less than the greens and three seats less than the PD's even though they had 6% of the national vote which was more than the greens or the PD's.
The reason for that of course was because, where SF were winning the seats was where most of their votes were concentrated.
Sinn Féin are around a lot longer than either of those parties and should be doing better than that...

During the troubles hardly anyone down in the South would vote for them , their vote explosion came after the GFA.
The same is true in the North to a lesser extent, but their vote has exploded there since the ceasefires.

Now there again is the problem for Sinn Féin, they still have to cast off the effects of the dark shadow of their association with the IRA.
It isn't helped at all in my view by the current stories in the media.

Thats why 76% of the people of North Kerry did not give them a first preference and why 94% of the people of the 26 counties didn't either.

I have no doubt that the SF vote will grow further in the South, thanks in no small measure to their excelent vote management and constituency work.
But it is limited in the extent that it can grow here as the SF trump card as used in the North ie the fight against unionist intransigence post GFA doesn't apply in the South.
In fact most 26 county voters are probably ambivalent towards that.
They probably care more about whats in their wallets at the end of the day and their perceptions of the parties for which they can vote.

Mighty_Mouse

to their excelent vote management and constituency work

That was the point I was making. Vote management is secondary IMO.

But it is limited in the extent that it can grow here as the SF trump card as used in the North ie the fight against unionist intransigence post GFA doesn't apply in the South.

No but their anti-corruption, socialist ideals might help restore the balance in a increasingly money and power oreiented governement and society.

I think the policies SF stand for will be increasingly attractive to those people on the wrong side of the Celtic tiger........

ishmael whale

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
I think the policies SF stand for will be increasingly attractive to those people on the wrong side of the Celtic tiger........

True, armed robbery is very attractive to people who feel they have nothing to lose.

Mighty_Mouse

True, armed robbery is very attractive to people who feel they have nothing to lose

Never heard SF advocate armed robbery! Could you provide a link?

ReefBreak

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
Never heard SF advocate armed robbery! Could you provide a link?

If you'd like a picture of Gerry Adams or Arthur Morgan smiling with the people that murd...er I mean "manslaughtered" a Garda while armed-robbing the Post Office in Adare, I'll be happy to oblige.

Mighty_Mouse

If you'd like a picture of Gerry Adams or Arthur Morgan smiling with the people that murd...er I mean "manslaughtered" a Garda while armed-robbing the Post Office in Adare, I'll be happy to oblige.

Does that mean SF advocate armed robbery to members of its electorate at the lower end of the social scale?

Maby you have a problem with the GFA being implemented in full.

See while I can feel sorry for the family Gerry McCabe who was killed during the Adare robbery...........I belive that the GFA needs to be implemented in full!

ishmael whale

Sorry, my mistake. They just have a hands-on no smoking policy.

http://home.eircom.net/content/unison/national/2737208?view=Eircomnet

Extracts From: The Irish Independent Sunday, 14th March, 2004
JIM CUSACK and ALAN MURRAY EXCLUSIVE
INTELLIGENCE reports identify Gerry Adams, Martin McGuinness and Martin Ferris as still being members of the Provisional IRA's ruling Army Council despite their claims to the contrary, the Sunday Independent has learned.
Security sources say the three are part of a seven-member leadership council that includes south Armagh farmer Thomas 'Slab' Murphy and a man in his 40s who lives near the Border, the veteran Belfast hardliner Brian Keenan and another Belfast man who was in charge of the IRA's bombing campaign in the city in the 1980s and 1990s.
All except Keenan publicly deny IRA membership. Adams said he was "flabbergasted" when the Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, recently said he assumed the Sinn Fein President had been a member of the IRA. Martin Ferris, a Sinn Fein TD, said recently that he left the IRA after being released from prison in 1994. Ferris had served a 10-year sentence for arms smuggling.
…………………….
In particular, the IRA's hijacking of container-loads of cigarettes at the Border and Dublin docks has caused serious problems for cross-Border trade. There is now a no-go area along a stretch of the main Belfast to Dublin road north of the Border for the movement of shipments of tobacco since the IRA hijacked a lorry containing €2.4m worth - including duty worth €1m - in December. The main cigarette manufacturer in the North, Gallahers, now ships cigarettes to the Republic by ferry to Liverpool and then into Dublin Port.
…………………………………………………..
Elsewhere, gardai continue to find evidence of the IRA's growing involvement in crime in Dublin and along the Border.

Mighty_Mouse

Whats the point Ishmael?

ishmael whale

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
Whats the point Ishmael?

What's the question, Mighty_Mouse?

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Zombrex

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
I agree. I mean holding up a peace process because of a few republicans selllign cheap ciggarettes is crazy.

How exactly do you define "peace"???

I think the IRA robbing trucks of cigarettes would be classified as a breach of the peace.

Mighty_Mouse

ITELLIGENCE reports identify ...

The article is a little non-specific for my liking. What I've said previously is that I can't understand Gerry Adams saying he wasn't in the IRA if in fact he was. I mean there would be less controversy if he said he was still the chief of staff!!!!!!

For that reason alone I think that he never was "officially" a member. The rest of the report refers to the history of SF members before the peace process.

So do the rest of us. Here's a fair deal, disband the IRA, hand over the weapons and McCabes killers can go free!

- thats not the Good Friday AGREEMENT
- disbandment won't happen until republicans feel that they have a police force they can turn to, a government to represent them, loyalist cease-fires (at the very least a high degree of political pressure for loyalists to go on cease fire)

Thats not a "bargaining threat" , negotiation techniques etc........... Just as much as peopl have sympathy for Trimble's position in convincing hardline unionists, SF have a equal difficulty in bringing hardline republicans. Its' not possible for the IRA to go much further (the only step left is disbandment!!) when absolutely no good will has been shown by all the other parties.

hand over the weapons

Already being done! Theres not much the IRA can do on this front. All this can ever be is a gesture towards unionists and the british government that the IRA are committed to supporting the peace.

Because the process can never be verified in a manner that will ever be suitable to unionists. Its smoke and mirrors stuff,,,,,,,,,,,,

How exactly do you define "peace"???

The absence of war or other hostilities.
An agreement or a treaty to end hostilities - dictionary.com

I think the IRA robbing trucks of cigarettes would be classified as a breach of the peace.

I disagree with you

ishmael whale

Mighty_Mouse,

I take it that short of an affidavit by Gerry Adams to the effect that he is on the Army Council, you are simply going to deny that this is the case. To be honest there’s not much any of us can do about that. But it places a strong limitation on your ability to contribute sensibly as, unless we are simply repeating party rhetoric, a necessary condition for a useful discussion is accepting these realities.

On a point of detail, I notice you say you feel he was never "officially" a member. (your quotes). Does this mean that you feel he was in some sense an ‘unofficial’ member, or am I reading too much into this?

As to the GFA, events have simply moved on. Different people from different perspectives will argue as to why it all went wrong, but the key point is the need to take things from here.

The idea that we should be satisfied with the IRA engaging in crime is simply not on. There is a wide gap in perception between the IRA and the rest of the community if they think its acceptable to say ‘we only meant we’re not doing the political stuff anymore, robbing to line our pockets is a different thing’.

Zombrex

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
The absence of war or other hostilities.
An agreement or a treaty to end hostilities - dictionary.com

peace (ps)
n.

1. The absence of war or other hostilities.
2. An agreement or a treaty to end hostilities.
3. Freedom from quarrels and disagreement; harmonious relations: roommates living in peace with each other.
4. Public security and order: was arrested for disturbing the peace.
5. Inner contentment; serenity: peace of mind.

http://www.dictionary.com/


"Peace" is peace in every form, it is not just the absence of war.

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
I disagree with you

Ok, explain how it is not a breach of the peace for the IRA, as an organisation, to rob trucks?