Colombia 3 Innocent!

Mighty_Mouse

Actually they were Sinn Féin republicans, which means that there was a very good chance they were up to no good

Why has representatives of SF a history of being "up to no good" when travelling abroad?

So, these ex-IRA men travelled on false passports to Columbia for a few pints to sympathize with the FARC fellas?

I don't know do you? What I'm saying is that there is a history of revolutionaries travelling to regions in similar circumstances to share experiences, gain knowledge, non-military stuff.

ReefBreak

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
Why has representatives of SF a history of being "up to no good" when travelling abroad?

Ask Martin Ferris. He was convicted of gun-running, so he possibly has a history of travelling abroad in order to acquire arms to murder people, including innocent men, women and children.

Hobart

Originally posted by ReefBreak
They were caught with false passports travelling in an area controlled by murderous narco-terrorists, reponsible some of the most sickening atrocities on the continent. Why should any government "demand their immediate release"? If I'm caught (say) smuggling arms/exporting drugs/travelling on a false passport, do you think I'll expect the government to "stand up for the rights of their citizens, in a foriegn land, and demand" my "immediate release"?

Under these specific circumstances, yes. Did you actually read my post? You being caught smuggling peanuts has got SFA to do with what happened in these specific circumstances/ Look back at the history of this shambolic trial and tell me that they were treated "fairly".

Mighty_Mouse

Theres a few facts people need to remember in all this:

- only one of the men arrested,
Jim Monaghan, has ever been charged with membership in the IRA,
and that was over 25 years ago. Since 1980, he has been a well-known political
and community activist in the north of Ireland. Martin McCauley, though
permanently injured because of it, is the only living survivor of the RUC's 1980's
Shoot To Kill Policy, and has lived with his family in the Republic of Ireland for years.
Niall Connolly, never connected with northern Irish politics, has been long known for his humanitarian and international aid work, for Ireland and in South America.

- Hundreds of activists, aid workers, journalists, government officials and even royalty regularly
visit the FARC's demilitarized zone to observe and participate in the ongoing
Colombian peace process. Recent visitors include
Massachusetts Congressman William Delahunt, a Papal envoy, the Queen of Jordan,
the deputy head of the New York Stock Exchange

- In the June edition of their magazine Resistencia, the FARC discusses its regular
festivals of theatre, dance and music in the central square
to which it invites those in solidarity and foreign tourists

- Within days of the arrests, the Colombian government admitted it had nothing to
charge the men with except the minor offense of false travel papers (usually
calling for deportation) and reported that if a case was brought against the men,
the government would lose based on lack of evidence

- It was widely reported that the men would be deported, until the U.S. government
stepped in to provide the "evidence" needed to hold the men on pending charges

-None of the evidence originally claimed in the mainstream media has been presented. Three
is no video, no satellite photos, no tape recording has been presented, the "clothing
evidence" is negligible based on the conditions under which it was collected.

-It has now emerged that the Colombian government did NOT test the men's clothing at all.
Baggage from the holding container of the airplane was tested and still no solid
evidence could be found. "Traces of explosives, chemicals and drugs" were
not found until U.S. government employees in Colombia insisted on testing the items
in their own offices, the results of which were recorded on a small piece of
notebook paper. This was the "evidence" used to hold the men in La Modelo.

- The United States Congress held an International Relations Committee Hearing
regarding "IRA activity in Colombia" but heard testimony only from US, British and
Colombian intelligence and political representatives. In fact, when the hearing
concluded, many members of the Committee publicly declaimed it and stated
that the evidence provided was hollow and inaccurate. Evidence was not
presented that even could imply the Three were culpable of what they had been accused

-Much of the "intelligence Information" provided by Colombian
authorities to the Congressional hearings came from Peter Robinson!
Then-President Pastrana, in an article in the Washington Post, stated that
the men were "guilty as charged" - even before their case had been heard

source

Also here is a statement of Martin McCauley if anyone is interested.

Ask Martin Ferris. He was convicted of gun-running, so he possibly has a history of travelling abroad in order to acquire arms to murder people, including innocent men, women and children.

"man eats baby" headline! Point is he wasnt a SF representative.

Sleipnir

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
Why has representatives of SF a history of being "up to no good" when travelling abroad? I don't know do you? What I'm saying is that there is a history of revolutionaries travelling to regions in similar circumstances to share experiences, gain knowledge, non-military stuff.

Are you kidding? Let's be honest, they were not holidaying in Columbia where the capital city is the most dangerous in the world.
You make it sound like they sat around the campfire telling stories and singing Kum-bah-yah.
If what they were doing was all above-board and byond reproach, why travel on false documentation?
They were not there as representatives of Sinn Fein, at least not in any official capacity. If they were, they wouldn't need false documentation.

share experiences, gain knowledge

You mean like when I go to my training course tomorrow to "gain knowledge"?

They were there to advise and or train FARC. Trying to convince me that they were travelling on false passports just so they could go and have a knees-up with other terrorists is outside the bounds of reality.

BuffyBot

Revolutionaries

Ahh, objectiveness

Villain

Can anyone tell me how all 3 got different sentences for the same crime, i.e travelling with false documents???

What kind of Justice system do they have in Columbia???

capistrano

Originally posted by Hobart
Are you sure of your facts there? I know that Connolly was a member of SF, and their rep in Cuba. What do you know of the political allegiences of the others?
[/B]

And Monaghan was on the platform at a SF Ard Fheis a few years ago. Face it they're all SF Republicans and likely IRA members too.

You're using the "I don't know, do you?" argument that SF always uses when trying to blow hot air up your ass.

When they get home, the special branch should question them about their trip.

Mighty_Mouse

and likely IRA members too.

wow ! thats a big statement. Lots of SF members aren't IRA members.

I don't know, do you?" argument that SF always uses when trying to blow hot air up your ass

Yes the old "wow thats news to me" "could you tell me where you got that information from so I can maby read it for myself trick ". A really deceptive ploy that should be watched out for at all costs.
Ony thing is though it only works with people that are inventing allegations!!:)

capistrano

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
wow ! thats a big statement. Lots of SF members aren't IRA members.

But they're all IRA supporters. I have never heard a Shinner condemn the IRA - and with a shared leadership that's no surprise.

Yes the old "wow thats news to me" "could you tell me where you got that information from so I can maby read it for myself trick ". A really deceptive ploy that should be watched out for at all costs.
Ony thing is though it only works with people that are inventing allegations!!:)

Back to the shared SF/IRA leadership. Last week Gerry said on RTE news that he didn't know if any SF leaders were IRA leaders. Nobody can believe this. the IMC, Taoiseach, Minister for Justince, the Gardai, the PSNI and the British government all say that the IRA/SF are linked. So do we disregard all these sources just to believe Gerry? Absolutely incrediuble!

Mighty_Mouse

But they're all IRA supporters. I have never heard a Shinner condemn the IRA

Fair enough but you might want to be careful about the use of "all". I don't think you or I could speak for "all" SF supporters.

with a shared leadership that's no surprise.

See you just about to put together a nice anti-SF argument but you couldn't resist wandering into fantasy land.I severaly doubt that they have the same leadership. IMO they're 100% two different organisations. It wouldn't make sense that both groups would have the same leadership

Back to the shared SF/IRA leadership. Last week Gerry said on RTE news that he didn't know if any SF leaders were IRA leaders.

Did he really? He said that! I think your mis-quoting. But I don't know different.

Nobody can believe this.

I believe it. (tip: if you start using "vast majority" or "mostly" etc etc you won't be as wrong all the time)

the IMC, Taoiseach, Minister for Justince, the Gardai, the PSNI and the British government all say that the IRA/SF are linked.

IMC: The commission is comprised of Richard Kerr, a former deputy director of the Central Intelligence Agency; Commander John Grieve, former head of the Metropolitan Police's anti-terrorist squad; Lord Alderdice, the former Speaker of the Assembly and retired Irish civil servant Joe Brosnan and is outside the remit if the GFA
Taoiseach: said thought Gerry Adams was in the IRA.Not a very serious allegation, just a wrong one
Minister for Justice: same minister of Justice that mis-quoted refugee figures to turn referendum into a racist exercise, accused the Gardai of taking bribes while failing to back it up, etc etc
the PSNI : the RUC in different uniform?
British government : :eek: :eek: lol. no comment
Believe the above sources if you wish. I don't.
My point is look at the sources and consider the political climate that the north and south is going through at the moment. I would think its a lot of a)electioneering b)lobbying for unionism

Hobart

Originally posted by capistrano
And Monaghan was on the platform at a SF Ard Fheis a few years ago. Face it they're all SF Republicans and likely IRA members too.

Lol. You should try and not be such a media whore. I was at the SF Ard Fheis last year. That does not make me a member of SF or the IRA.

You're using the "I don't know, do you?" argument that SF always uses when trying to blow hot air up your ass.

When they get home, the special branch should question them about their trip.

The bottom line is that I don't know. And neither do you. That's a fact whether you like it or not. Why should the special branch investigate them when/if they get back? My information is that only 1 of them actually resides in the republic, should we fly the dpecial branch out to Cuba to "talk to" Mr Connolly? If so why?

Hobart

Originally posted by capistrano
But they're all IRA supporters. I have never heard a Shinner condemn the IRA -

Yea like it's so so hard to find any member of SF condemning any act of violence by the IRA. :rolleyes:

ReefBreak

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
See you just about to put together a nice anti-SF argument but you couldn't resist wandering into fantasy land.I severaly doubt that they have the same leadership. IMO they're 100% two different organisations. It wouldn't make sense that both groups would have the same leadership

If you think SF and the 'RA are 100% separate, then you're a bigger fool than I thought.

Plus, I don't see anything wrong with the makeup of the IMC. It appears to me that the only way that the cretins in SF/IRA would be happy with the IMC is if it was completely made up of 'RA-sympathisers.

Victor

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
Victor just to clarify. Are you saying that these men are guilty of training FARC gorillas because they have been found guilty of carrying false documents?

No, all I am saying is that on the face of it, having false documents lead to greater weight to the other allegations. I am saying that weight merits investigation, not (pre)judgement.

Villain

Originally posted by Victor
No, all I am saying is that on the face of it, having false documents lead to greater weight to the other allegations. I am saying that weight merits investigation, not (pre)judgement.

Yes and that investigation led to them being prosecuted for training farc guerilla's but they were found Not Guilty. So apart from travelling with false documentation they are innocent!.

And in relation to that I already asked

Can anyone tell me how all 3 got different sentences for the same crime, i.e travelling with false documents???

Mighty_Mouse

Plus, I don't see anything wrong with the makeup of the IMC. It appears to me that the only way that the cretins in SF/IRA would be happy with the IMC is if it was completely made up of 'RA-sympathisers.

Personally I think that any cross community commissions should include people that both communities find acceptable. So its not really wheter you find them acceptable or not but whether both communities in the North do. This is clearly not the case in this instance.

Victor

Originally posted by irish1
Can anyone tell me how all 3 got different sentences for the same crime, i.e travelling with false documents???

Perhaps because they had varying amounts of falsified documentation? Or there was varying levels of cooperation with the authorities? Look at the Annabels case where the three convicted also got different sentences. Rather than accusing people here of not knowing the exact reasoning of the judgement, why don't you go find out for yourself? google is your friend

Hobart

Totally off subject, but ROFL at the google ads for this subject!!

Villain

.

Originally posted by Victor
Perhaps because they had varying amounts of falsified documentation? Or there was varying levels of cooperation with the authorities? Look at the Annabels case where the three convicted also got different sentences. Rather than accusing people here of not knowing the exact reasoning of the judgement, why don't you go find out for yourself? google is your friend

My friend google isn't much help in this case unless you have a few days to search.

I thought the only false documentation they had was their passports and they all had the same legal team so would have all been advised the same.

Maybe I'm incorrect, but if not 3 different sentences for the exact same crime doesn't make sense

Hobart

Originally posted by Victor
Perhaps because they had varying amounts of falsified documentation? Or there was varying levels of cooperation with the authorities? Look at the Annabels case where the three convicted also got different sentences. Rather than accusing people here of not knowing the exact reasoning of the judgement, why don't you go find out for yourself? google is your friend

Annabels is a bad example. From memory each was convicted of a different charge. Hence the difference in terms. Also age,educational needs, and co-operation with Gardai was a factor. It would seem to me that previous convictions was a factor in this particular case and was shown in the differiing sentences.

Victor

Originally posted by irish1
I thought the only false documentation they had was their passports

It's quite possible there were visa, tickets, credit cards, etc. involved.

capistrano

Originally posted by Hobart
Yea like it's so so hard to find any member of SF condemning any act of violence by the IRA. :rolleyes:

Did you read you own reference?

"Mid Ulster MP Martin McGuinness issued his strongest condemnation yet of the Real IRA and Continuity IRA"

Of course, he'll quite happily comdemn splinter terrorist groups!

So get your facts straight before you next take such a condescending stand!

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Hobart

Originally posted by capistrano
I have never heard a Shinner condemn the IRA -

Thats your quote above. Not mine. I provided a reference. You are the one splitting hairs. But 5 mins on Google gives me this

Belfast Ard Chomhairle member, Geraldine Taylor, spoke in favour of a resolution, which was passed, condemning "attempts by former Republicans to intimidate true Republicans by abductions and threats in preparation for an attempt to enforce a British-imposed settlement in collaboration with London, Dublin and Stormont parties". link

There you go. Is that evidence enough for you?

Victor

Originally posted by irish1
I thought the only false documentation they had was their passports

http://home.eircom.net/content/unison/national/3088497?view=Eircomnet

convicted of travelling on false passports and identity documents for which they were fined and received short prison terms. Legal experts said the three would automatically be credited with time served in prison during the trial.

sceptre

Originally posted by Hobart
There you go. Is that evidence enough for you?

I doubt it will be.

That's a resolution passed at a Republican Sinn Fein Ard Fheis (Ruairi O'Bradaigh's rebellious branch from 1983) condemning both the Provisional IRA and what we used to call Provisional Sinn Fein (these days we call them Sinn Fein) for being wimps who they imply are kidnapping members of RSF.

Villain

Originally posted by daveirl
Same way you think Judge Brian Curtain is innocent because he wasn't convicted too.

Show me where I said he was Guilty???

I said I believed in my opinion he was a paedophile, I certianly never said he was Guilty, I think in fact if you read the thread I stated that quite clearly.

Thanks for the link Victor, I still find it a little odd that the difference in sentence given the 3 were convincted in the same trial in same court by the same Judge

Victor

Originally posted by irish1
I said I believed in my opinion he was a paedophile, I certianly never said he was Guilty

If he isn't guilty, what are you basing your opinion on?

Originally posted by irish1
I still find it a little odd that the difference in sentence given the 3 were convincted in the same trial in same court by the same Judge

What if one had a forged driving licence and another didn't (other than passports, I have no idea what doucments they had) - note "convicted of travelling on false passports and identity documents"? What if one passport was merely forged / falsified, but another was stolen and then forged? Do you think someone convicted of two parallel crimes should get the same sentence as one who only committed one. Or that a first time offender should be sentenced the same as someone with a previous conviction?

If you think it "odd" do you have any theories.

Villain

Originally posted by Victor
If he isn't guilty, what are you basing your opinion on?

Circumstantial evidence and gut feeling.

Originally posted by Victor

What if one had a forged driving licence and another didn't (other than passports, I have no idea what doucments they had) - note "convicted of travelling on false passports and identity documents"? What if one passport was merely forged / falsified, but another was stolen and then forged? Do you think someone convicted of two parallel crimes should get the same sentence as one who only committed one. Or that a first time offender should be sentenced the same as someone with a previous conviction?

If you think it "odd" do you have any theories.

I don't think its make any difference what type of false documents they used.

As for reoffending, I don't think any of these men had previous convinctions in Columbia.

As I said I just thought in my opinion that it was odd there sentences varied so much, its just my opinion.