Should McCabe killers be release as part of IRA disbandment deal?

Rock Climber

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
There was a delay of one week while the IRA undertook internal investigations. Therefore the IRA had accepted that these men were acting for the organisation before the GFA.

How does it come under the GFA when the IRA initially denied responsibility?

The killing of Garda McCabe happened four months after the breakdown of the first IRA ceasefire in 1996 and initially the IRA denied any involvement.It later admitted that individual members were involved - the IRA said "in contravention of its orders".

a bit of BBC background information
If the IRA didn't know this robbery was taking place as clearly they initially denied all knowledge of it...
Then it's safe to assume they were murdering bank robbers who were intent on keeping the loot for themselves.
Thats so far from the spirit of the GFA its agnostic!

Mighty_Mouse

There should be a smily for pulling you hair out!! I give up!!! Most these questions have been asked (and answered) by the same people a million times! And yet its the republicans that are accused of chanting a mantra!

Rock Climber

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
There should be a smily for pulling you hair out!! I give up!!! Most these questions have been asked (and answered) by the same people a million times! And yet its the republicans that are accused of chanting a mantra!

You must ask yourself why you feel the need to pull your hair out...

could it be per chance that your opinions are so widely divergent from that of the majority of people in Ireland;)

Mighty_Mouse

could it be per chance that your opinions are so widely divergent from that of the majority of people in Ireland

Is it wrong to have divergent views? Do you take pride from the fact that your views are the same as everyone elses?

How does it come under the GFA when the IRA initially denied responsibility?

Didnt know that this was factored into the GFA.
The argument for them being included is that the are IRA men and were on IRA commissioned activity. At the time there was a one week period before the IRA accepted responsibility. I can guarantee that at that time you (or anybody else for that matter)did not have a problem with the IRA accepting responsibility. The IRA claimed it and everyone accepted it because this whole "not IRA activity" is an afterthought.(an excuse)

From my understanding of the IRA the whole organisation is broken into small cells with little knowledge of other cells, senior staff etc etc . Therefore its hardly surprising that the whole IRA organisation wasnt fully informed of the plans for robbery. Therefore it took a week for them to undertake an internal investigation. Aside from this they were arrested tried and imprisoned as IRA men. The fact that you constantly refer to them as IRA men...................well anyways, the GFA covers the Republic of Ireland Britain and NI. These actions were committed within this area so they're covered.

Finally why do people here insist that the difference is that these IRA men, with IRA weapons, who were treated as IRA prisoners were not in fact operating for the IRA. (I even remember a paedophilia comparison in here.) The GFA does incorporate a certain amount of good faith. Has the IRA lied or failed to honour their commitments from the start of the process? If the IRA says these were their IRA men,if the government says these were IRA men, if you accept that these were IRA men then........................
If this agreement is gonna work then people have to consider the larger picture and understand what releasing prisoners under the agreement means. Looking for excuses, offereing false technicalities etc is not what the GFA is about.

Its only purpose can be to tear at the fabric of the agreement hoping it will fall apart (mmmmmm.......is there a DUP person in the house?). So the really important question here is do you agree with the GFA. Do you support the bloody thing or not? If you don't, your a fool because theres no other way forward.



(or at this point maybe we can revert to: "NI is not part of Ireland, tear it off and sink it, I don't care, murderers, murderers, but they killed a human being, do the time do the crime", etc etc )

oscarBravo

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
Aside from this they were arrested tried and imprisoned as IRA men.

What's your basis for this assertion? They were charged with, tried for, and convicted of the "manslaughter" of Det Gda Gerry McCabe (among other things). How does one go about being arrested, tried and imprisoned as an IRA man?

Finally why do people here insist that the difference is that these IRA men, with IRA weapons, who were treated as IRA prisoners were not in fact operating for the IRA.

My problem is, quite simply, that these people cold-bloodedly murdered (sorry, manslaughtered) a garda in the commission of a venial crime, and that I voted for the GFA in the understanding that they were not covered under its terms.

I'm annoyed in various measure with the government, if they are seriously negotiating on this; with Sinn Fein, for allowing the future of peace in Ireland to become conditional on the fate of these murdering thieves; and most particularly with these men themselves, who got off extremely lightly as is, and who - if they are seriously committed to peace - would not be sacrificing much, in the grand scheme of things, by shutting the **** up and takin' the rest of their batin', so to speak.

If this agreement is gonna work then people have to consider the larger picture and understand what releasing prisoners under the agreement means. Looking for excuses, offereing false technicalities etc is not what the GFA is about.

I honestly didn't think it was about holding up the entire process over a couple of years for bank robbers. But what do I know?

Its only purpose can be to tear at the fabric of the agreement hoping it will fall apart (mmmmmm.......is there a DUP person in the house?).

What, if you're not 100% Sinn Fein, you're DUP? Get a friggin' grip.

So the really important question here is do you agree with the GFA. Do you support the bloody thing or not? If you don't, your a fool because theres no other way forward.

How many Sinn Fein representatives are there on the Policing Board?

(or at this point maybe we can revert to: "NI is not part of Ireland, tear it off and sink it, I don't care, murderers, murderers, but they killed a human being, do the time do the crime", etc etc )

When you're done with your little arm-waving episode, we'll get back to discussing the topic at hand.

Mighty_Mouse

What's your basis for this assertion?

The government has never argued that they are not IRA prisoners, only that they do not come under the terms of the Agreement. All five men were accepted and treated as IRA prisoners while in Portlaoise prison and they were moved to Castlerea as part of the IRA unit. They continue to be seen as IRA prisoners by the Dublin government and the prison authorities

My problem is, quite simply, that these people cold-bloodedly murdered (sorry, manslaughtered) a garda in the commission of a venial crime,

Yes. Its terrible that murderers and killers are being released (arm-waving?). But I do agree thats its not very nice. But very simply these men committed a terrible act. Very simply freeing people who committed terrible acts is part of the GFA which you voted for and the Irish government gave its committment to.

and that I voted for the GFA in the understanding that they were not covered under its terms.

You were misled or maybe you didn't fully understand what you were voting for!! Republicans had a different understanding. And Sinn Fein had a different understanding.

I'm annoyed in various measure with the government

I think this is the best direction for your anger.The Irish gov sent out completely different signals to what they signed up for

with Sinn Fein, for allowing the future of peace in Ireland to become conditional on the fate of these murdering thieves;

Whether they negotiate or not ...........it is. What its about here is the Irish government showing some commitment to the GFA. Commitment which the IRA both needs and deserves to take things to a historic level

if they are seriously committed to peace - would not be sacrificing much, in the grand scheme of things, by shutting the **** up and takin' the rest of their batin', so to speak.

Yes lets now blame the prisoners for wanting to get out.

I honestly didn't think it was about holding up the entire process over a couple of years for bank robbers.

What its about is showing commitment to the agreement which is currently under serious threat . You can hardly argue that the Irish government is committed to the peace process if they dont agree to releasing IRA prisoners in their own juristiction

But what do I know?

mmmmm;)

How many Sinn Fein representatives are there on the Policing Board?

There seems to be many ppl here who want to talk about policing. Read this: http://sinnfein.ie/peace/document/108 and start a new thread if you want. but in the mean time one word - accountablility

When you're done with your little arm-waving episode, we'll get back to discussing the topic at hand

yes because I was way off the mark with the above comments

Rock Climber

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
Is it wrong to have divergent views? Do you take pride from the fact that your views are the same as everyone elses?

Good one...not!
When it comes to murder,I don't have to take pride that my views are similar to most people,in fact I'm thankfull that they are.

From my understanding of the IRA the whole organisation is broken into small cells with little knowledge of other cells, senior staff etc etc . Therefore its hardly surprising that the whole IRA organisation wasnt fully informed of the plans for robbery. Therefore it took a week for them to undertake an internal investigation.

Interesting concoction there, doesn't hold water though...
You are trying to say the IRA's comand and control structure is disorganised.
You may as well tell me Bertie Ahern is the leader of Fine Gael,I'd have as much faith in the assertion.
With respect, to assert that the IRA is so badly organised is totally unbelievable.
If thats all you can say about the IRA's initial denial , then i rest my case.
It's clear that they owned the armed robbery and murder in Adare as their friends that did it would rot in jail for definite otherwise.
Owning the operation gave them some chance of coming under the GFA in the opinion of the IRA.
What they forgot was that the government and the bulk of the Irish people didn't come down in the last shower.

For the record by the way, I will accept their release if it is part of a new deal to move the process on in NI but I will have an even lower opinion of the IRA for using Garda murdering bankrobbers as bargaining chips.
My respect for Sinn Féin will have lowered greatly also for them acquiessing in such a smelly plan

sceptre

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
You were misled or maybe you didn't fully understand what you were voting for!! Republicans had a different understanding. And Sinn Fein had a different understanding.

Wasn't it made very clear by the Irish government before the referendum was voted upon that the McCabe killers wouldn't qualify to be released under the GFA?

BuffyBot

Yes lets now blame the prisoners for wanting to get out.

Well yes to an extent. If they had any remorse about what they had done, they would opt to serve out their full sentence. I can't see that happening though.

oscarBravo

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
The government has never argued that they are not IRA prisoners, only that they do not come under the terms of the Agreement. All five men were accepted and treated as IRA prisoners while in Portlaoise prison and they were moved to Castlerea as part of the IRA unit. They continue to be seen as IRA prisoners by the Dublin government and the prison authorities

Point me to a statutory (or any legal) definition of "IRA prisoner."

Yes. Its terrible that murderers and killers are being released (arm-waving?). But I do agree thats its not very nice. But very simply these men committed a terrible act. Very simply freeing people who committed terrible acts is part of the GFA which you voted for and the Irish government gave its committment to.

Point me to the section of the GFA that offers a blanket amnesty for all "terrible acts."

You were misled or maybe you didn't fully understand what you were voting for!! Republicans had a different understanding. And Sinn Fein had a different understanding.

I read the agreement. I understood from it (and still do) that every prisoner release was to be decided on its merits. The legal basis for prisoner releases in NI confirms this, as has been pointed out in this thread. I haven't seen the corresponding Irish legislation, but it's fair to assume that it's on a similar basis.

There is no absolute entitlement to early release under the terms of the GFA. By making this a sticking point, it's Sinn Fein who are showing a lack of commitment to the peace process.

I think this is the best direction for your anger.

At least I'm prepared to acknowledge that there are multiple parties at fault here. Pinning the blame entirely on the government, or claiming that those who voted for the agreement didn't understand what they were voting for, is typical of republican arrogance.

What its about here is the Irish government showing some commitment to the GFA. Commitment which the IRA both needs and deserves to take things to a historic level

Showing some commitment? How many IRA prisoners have been released under the GFA? How many have not?

How many Sinn Fein representatives on the policing board? Oh sorry, we're not allowed to talk about that here - even though it's directly relevant to the question of commitment to the GFA.

Yes lets now blame the prisoners for wanting to get out.

I'm more inclined to blame them for robbing a post office, murdering a garda, getting off lightly with a manslaughter charge, and then putting the peace process in jeopardy for their own selfish motives.

What its about is showing commitment to the agreement which is currently under serious threat .

See above.

You can hardly argue that the Irish government is committed to the peace process if they dont agree to releasing IRA prisoners in their own juristiction

What, they haven't released any? How many Sinn Fein representatives on the policing board?

There seems to be many ppl here who want to talk about policing. Read this: http://sinnfein.ie/peace/document/108 and start a new thread if you want. but in the mean time one word - accountablility

So I get a 133-page reply and a one-word reply. Care to compromise by offering a reasoned argument instead? I'm not talking about the whole policing issue, I'm talking about the hypocrisy of claiming that the Irish government is stalling the GFA by keeping these murderers behind bars like they promised us they would, while simultaneously refusing to keep up other ends of the bargain themselves.

minority

As far as i am concerned a bank/po robbery is NOT AT ALL political no matter who planned it.

This guys were common criminals robbing a bank/po an in the process murdered a cop no less.

As such they should not come under any agreement and should rot in jail.
Pity they cant be hung.

Mighty_Mouse

This is getting repetitive and tiresome.

Pity they cant be hung.

Thanks for your insightful contribution Minority. Welcome to the POLITICS boards! You feel right at home here with this type of sentiment towards republicans

Point me to a statutory (or any legal) definition of "IRA prisoner."

why? Oh! I get it..........your still hung up on tearing the GFA apart to suit youself...............mmmmmmmm but thats definitely not similar to"no-side" unionism.

Point me to the section of the GFA that offers a blanket amnesty for all "terrible acts

Scheduled offences bla bla bla ie amnesty for prisoners ie terrible act = murder, killing ie early release. My big fat finger points towards section on releasing prisoners

At least I'm prepared to acknowledge that there are multiple parties at fault here. Pinning the blame entirely on the government, or claiming that those who voted for the agreement didn't understand what they were voting for, is typical of republican arrogance.

Who else is at fault? ah yes I remember - the prisoners for wanting to be released and SF for wanting them to be released. Maybe it was SF who has created the athmosphere of ambiguity through their constant positional change on the issue? oops no, Im wrong...........that would be the government.

that every prisoner release was to be decided on its merits.

Criminal prosecutions in Ireland go before the DPP. If the DPP decides against bringing a case of murder before the courts, does that mean that murder cannot be defined as murder? Its completely ridicoulous to argue that becase theirs a legislative clause which allows the AG to review a criminal case in the North, that a scheduled offence can only be defined per incident uniquely. The GFA was designed to cover the acts of members of terrorist organisations. Do you take the GFA in good faith or not?

There is no absolute entitlement to early release under the terms of the GFA

Which the supreme court in Ireland substantiated. Does this mean that the GFA didnt origionally intend that prisoners be released across the board when on ceasefire?

I'm more inclined to blame them for robbing a post office, murdering a garda, getting off lightly with a manslaughter charge, and then putting the peace process in jeopardy for their own selfish motives.

As I said, blaming prisoners for wanting to be released. (as they believe they are entitled)

How many Sinn Fein representatives on the policing board? Oh sorry, we're not allowed to talk about that here - even though it's directly relevant to the question of commitment to the GFA.

Im not a mod but if you are really really desperate to talk about policing I promise i wont stand in the way of any points u feel you need to get off your chest.

What, they haven't released any?

do you need me to answer this?

Care to compromise by offering a reasoned argument instead?

care to offer a reasoned argument?

while simultaneously refusing to keep up other ends of the bargain themselves.

oh, a revelation to me. Its SF who are not keeping their end of the bargain in terms of policing in NI. wow! I feel so enlightened by your insight. Please do stop there. Have you anything to add in terms of SF and policing apart from typical (struggling for a different term...........ah fvck it.....) unionist-like soundbites.

sceptre

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
This is getting repetitive and tiresome.

Indeed.

So you're discounting the statements made by the Irish government prior to the referendum that the killers of Jerry McCabe would never qualify for release under the GFA? I asked this above but you ignored it.

Mighty_Mouse

So you're discounting the statements made by the Irish government prior to the referendum that the killers of Jerry McCabe would never qualify for release under the GFA? I asked this above but you ignored it.

yes. I believe that the government indicated differently to Sinn Fein. The government was playing politics. Its hardly a unique situation to find esp with FF.
(me looks around and cant seem to spot 2,000 extra gardai)

The responsibility for the confusion that has been created here lies at the governments doorstep.

Rock Climber

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
Who else is at fault? ah yes I remember - the prisoners for wanting to be released and SF for wanting them to be released. Maybe it was SF who has created the athmosphere of ambiguity through their constant positional change on the issue? oops no, Im wrong...........that would be the government.

Oh worse these posts are getting
We know the prisoners who murdered Garda McCabe think they should be released, thats not very insightfull..
Their opinion and what the people voted for don't coincide though.


What constant positional change on the issue do you think the government have been making?
They have only changed their position on the McCabe murderers once when conducting a deal with SF...
That deal fell through.

The government take the decisions on behalf of the people not the IRA.
The government have the mandate to take these decisions and not the IRA.

Now you could wait untill this government leaves office and chance a FG/Labour/Green governments opinion on the IRA...
Or you could wait for a single party SF majority government...
Thats democracy for ya

sceptre

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
yes. I believe that the government indicated differently to Sinn Fein.

So you've got conjecture on the one hand that you believe an indication was given to Sinn Fein, despite (for example) the explicit statement on the Dail by the Minister for Justice that people convicted of the killing of McCabe would never fall within the remit of the Agreement and that it had been made clear in contacts with all groups that this was the case, tied to a statement the same day in the same place saying the same thing from the Tanaiste and you're running with that?

Mind boggles.

Mighty_Mouse

Oh worse these posts are .We know the prisoners who murdered Garda McCabe think they should be released, thats not very insightfull..

Maybe you should take the time to read the post and what the post was responding to again.

What constant positional change on the issue do you think the government have been making?They have only changed ................

Thank you for asking and answering you own question

The government take the decisions on behalf of the people not the IRA.

Is this the "insightfullnessnessness" I should be aiming for?

Now you could wait untill this government leaves office and chance a FG/Labour/Green governments opinion on the IRA...

wait for what?

Or you could wait for a single party SF majority government...Thats democracy for ya

I don't understand what you point is here. ? wait for what? for the government to support the agreement? for FF "the republican party" (gasp) to want a united Ireland.........well of coarse a SF majority would be preferable.

Mighty_Mouse

Both Governments will put in place mechanisms to provide for an accelerated programme for the release of prisoners, including transferred prisoners, convicted of scheduled offences in Northern Ireland or, in the case of those sentenced outside Northern Ireland, similar offences (referred to hereafter as qualifying prisoners).

Yes I know the confusion , the confusion. What would make a person believe the government intended to release the IRA prisoners in caslterea? Can I ask you why the government previously decided to release these prisoners and are currrenltly considering it if they never gave a committment to do so? boggle boggle

Rock Climber

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
What constant positional change on the issue do you think the government have been making?

Thank you for asking and answering you own question

Constant change?
Thats only one change so I didn't answer my own question and it was directed at you and you didn't answer it either...
Thats one change of opinion in response to what...
Ah yes SF pressure.

wait for what?

A mandate for to release the bankrobbers,I won't describe them as murderers this time as that seems to offend you.
The government and the opposition were campaigning for the people of the ROI to support the GFA on the basis that the Adare robbers who killed a Garda did not qualify for release under its terms-thats my recollection and that of many posters here.

As I said many posts back, you seem to want jam on both sides of the bread.

Paulw

Leave all those murderers to rot in prison.

They don't deserve freedom. They took a life, and they should pay by spending the rest of their lives in jail.

It should be the same if they're IRA, INLA, UDA, UVF etc etc.

oscarBravo

Originally posted by Mighty_Mouse
why? Oh! I get it..........your still hung up on tearing the GFA apart to suit youself

Why? Because you keeping lobbing the phrase in as if it had any meaning in the discussion.

...............mmmmmmmm but thats definitely not similar to"no-side" unionism.

You're right, it's definitely not similar.

Scheduled offences bla bla bla ie amnesty for prisoners ie terrible act = murder, killing ie early release. My big fat finger points towards section on releasing prisoners

That section doesn't mention the McCabe killers. It doesn't mention "IRA prisoners". It doesn't define who is and is not eligible. We've had this discussion. Point me to an unambiguous legal document that establishes the right of these men to be released under the terms of the GFA.

You've already quoted this:

Both Governments will put in place mechanisms to provide for an accelerated programme for the release of prisoners, including transferred prisoners, convicted of scheduled offences in Northern Ireland or, in the case of those sentenced outside Northern Ireland, similar offences (referred to hereafter as qualifying prisoners).

Note that it doesn't say "the release of all prisoners" - just "the release of prisoners". That's a significant difference.

Who else is at fault? ah yes I remember - the prisoners for wanting to be released and SF for wanting them to be released. Maybe it was SF who has created the athmosphere of ambiguity through their constant positional change on the issue? oops no, Im wrong...........that would be the government.

"Constant" positional change? How often is "constant"? Every five minutes? Every week? Once? How about you tone down the hyperbole and smart-ass rhetoric, and answer the questions?

Criminal prosecutions in Ireland go before the DPP. If the DPP decides against bringing a case of murder before the courts, does that mean that murder cannot be defined as murder?

What are you talking about?

Its completely ridicoulous to argue that becase theirs a legislative clause which allows the AG to review a criminal case in the North, that a scheduled offence can only be defined per incident uniquely. The GFA was designed to cover the acts of members of terrorist organisations. Do you take the GFA in good faith or not?

How many Sinn Fein members on the policing board? What percentage of IRA weapons decommissioned?

Which the supreme court in Ireland substantiated. Does this mean that the GFA didnt origionally intend that prisoners be released across the board when on ceasefire?

That was my understanding, based on the government's publicly stated position at the time.

Im not a mod but if you are really really desperate to talk about policing I promise i wont stand in the way of any points u feel you need to get off your chest.

No, but will you answer the questions you're asked?

do you need me to answer this?

It was a rhetorical question, whose point I believe you've tacitly accepted. It's nonsense to claim that the government has shown no commitment to the GFA.

care to offer a reasoned argument?

I'll take that as a "no".

oh, a revelation to me. Its SF who are not keeping their end of the bargain in terms of policing in NI. wow! I feel so enlightened by your insight. Please do stop there. Have you anything to add in terms of SF and policing apart from typical (struggling for a different term...........ah fvck it.....) unionist-like soundbites.

The GFA provided for police reform. The Patten Report provided the framework for that reform. It is in the process of being implemented. One part of that process was the establishment of an accountable Policing Board, to which Sinn Fein are refusing to contribute.

Who's not committed to the GFA?

sceptre

Originally posted by oscarBravo
You've already quoted this: Note that it doesn't say "the release of all prisoners" - just "the release of prisoners". That's a significant difference.

Especially when tied into this report from the Irish Examiner from April 22, 1998 (please note, a clear month prior to the referendum vote for anyone thinking of playing the "we presumed and didn't know" card)

McCabe's IRA killers will never get early release, says Minister.

by Mark Hennessy - Political Correspondent

JUSTICE Minister John O'Donoghue last night gave a formal guarantee to the Dáil that the IRA killers of Detective Garda Jerry McCabe would never benefit from early release under the Stormont peace deal.

So far, there have been no convictions for the murder, during the break in the IRA ceasefires, of the Limerick-based garda during a post office robbery in Adare, Co. Limerick in June, 1996.

Two former ministers, ex-Labour leader Dick Spring and ex-PD leader Des O'Malley adopted a hardline stance: "If convicted they should serve 40 years," Mr. O'Malley bluntly declared.

Referring specifically to Det Garda McCabe, Minister O'Donoghue said he felt "it right" to comment on the case: "The Government has made it clear in its contacts with all groups its view that persons who may be convicted in connection with this murder will not come within the ambit of the agreement."

Meanwhile, the Loyalist Volunteer Force is believed to have been responsible for the murder of a Catholic council worker in Co. Armagh yesterday in a bid to deal a death blow to peace hopes.

The victim, Adrian Lamph, was gunned down in a council skip yard in Portadown by a lone gunman on a push-bike. He was shot in the head and back and despite frantic attempts by surgeons to save his life, died in Craigavon Area Hospital three hours after the shooting.

Under the terms of the Good Friday peace deal, paramilitary prisoners belonging to organisations holding a ceasefire could be out within two years if they are cleared by the Department of Justice, or the Northern Ireland prison authorities.

"It would not be helpful at this point to speculate on how the proposed review will impact on individual cases. That will be the task of the review itself," said Minister O'Donoghue, during the Dáil's marathon debate on the North.

"What has to be understood is that it will be necessary ... to facilitate the release of as many prisoners as possible who are affiliated to organisations which have established and are maintaining ceasefires in the period ahead," he went on.
However, the line in the sand will raise Unionist tempers, who believe they are being asked to tolerate the release of those who killed members of the RUC, or those who carried out sectarian brutalities on either side of the divide.

Defending this last night, the Government said the McCabe killing could not be portrayed as having anything to do with "a struggle in Northern Ireland: It was a post office robbery."

Meanwhile, Sinn Féin TD Caoimhghín O´ Caoláin said he could not do "anything other than abstain" on the Dáil vote on the peace deal, timed to ensure a referendum can take place on May 22.

Earlier, Taoiseach Bertie Ahern indirectly warned Sinn Féin its attempt to maintain a distance from the deal in the Republic will not be acceptable: "The settlement needs strong public support, North and South, to get off to a good start."

Cork

Originally posted by minority
As far as i am concerned a bank/po robbery is NOT AT ALL political no matter who planned it.

This guys were common criminals robbing a bank/po an in the process murdered a cop no less.

As such they should not come under any agreement and should rot in jail.
Pity they cant be hung.

If IRA gangs are cought involved in rackeering - Do thay expect an Irish government to give them a "Get out of Jail Card".

Willie O Dea has written about this subject & I think his observations are apt.

Ongoing demands for further inducements to do what they have already agreed to are stomach churning. Foot dragging and slacking on the implementation of the agreement, whether it be from Unionism or Republicanism cannot and must not be rewarded. The lessons of Northern Ireland are that what gets rewarded, gets repeated.

Sinn Fein’s repeated insistence on putting this issue at the top of every agenda is most illustrative of their self obsessed motivations. For Sinn Féin, releasing McCabe’s killers is not about injustice or putting the past behind us, it is about a political party claiming not to speak for terrorists, yet pandering to their demands.

Back in June 1996 in the immediate aftermath of the killing of Det. Sgt. McCabe, Gerry Adams said that the killing had no place in the "republican struggle".

These quotations come from Link

bonkey

Originally posted by Cork
If IRA gangs are cought involved in rackeering - Do thay expect an Irish government to give them a "Get out of Jail Card".

Cork - your constant restating of the same questions over and over and over and over is beginning to get a touch annoying.

If you have something new to add to a discussion, sirely you can manage it without repeating yourself over and over and over and over.

If you have nothing new to add to a discussion, then what possible benefit do you think you get from restating yoru case over and over and over and over?

This isn't the Dail, where fillibustering may win the day. This isn't the media, where trotting out the same nice little catch-phrases to a dozen different interviewers may seem smart.
Its a discussion forum, where the people reading your comments are most likely teh same people who read your previous comments.

So for pity sake...could you at least try and limit yourself - like others do - to making a comment once, unless there is a clear reason why it needs to be brought up again.

You've asked this question several times before, and completely ignored any response to it, so its clear that you're not even interested in dicussing the point.....so why don't you just leave the discussion to those that are clearly interested in discussing, and go start your own thread entitled "repetitive rhetorical statements I'm not interested in discussing" or something instead?

jc

Villain

Here Here Bonkey!

Rock Climber

OK we've established so far:

• That it was made very clear before during and after the GFA vote in the 26 counties that the killers of McCabe were not to be released under its terms
  
• That the IRA denied responsibility initially which would indicate that it wasn't initially a sanctioned operation and ergo that it never did qualify for that reason
  
• That the IRA claimed the act after their initial denial which transparently looks like a fishy attempt to hoover up the murder as an act of IRA official service.
  
• That the government only changed it's mind on whether McCabes murderers could be released under pressure from SF when they started to use their release as a further bargaining chip to kick start the peace process.

Bearing that in mind what reason could there possibly be for releasing these killers other than pragmatism.
It's not that they deserve release for any moral or legal reason.

Villain

Originally posted by Rock Climber

[*] That it was made very clear before during and after the GFA vote in the 26 counties that the killers of McCabe were not to be released under its terms

Was it really do??, can you provide a link quoting the government of the day??

Originally posted by Rock Climber

[*] That the IRA denied responsibility initially which would indicate that it wasn't initially a sanctioned operation and ergo that it never did qualify for that reason

It denied it initially then after investigation it said it was IRA activity, as I have said they were using a weapon that used in 4 previous robberys' and these were sanctioned by the IRA, the men involved were raising money for the IRA.

Originally posted by Rock Climber

[*] That the IRA claimed the act after their initial denial which transparently looks like a fishy attempt to hoover up the murder as an act of IRA official service.

It was because the members broke an IRA rule, it was IRA activity.

Originally posted by Rock Climber

[*] That the government only changed it's mind on whether McCabes murderers could be released under pressure from SF when they started to use their release as a further bargaining chip to kick start the peace process.
.

It changed its mind because the IRA said they wanted the parts of the GFA that favoured them implemented before they would Decomission more weapons, and because they saw other prisioners who were convicted after the GFA released in the north ( this was a reason why the supreme court here denied the men release).

Originally posted by Rock Climber

Bearing that in mind what reason could there possibly be for releasing these killers other than pragmatism.
It's not that they deserve release for any moral or legal reason.

Have a read of the cases I linked to earlier, the man Convicted of James Morgans murder was released after 1 year! and those convicted of killing the last soldier in the North were also released, show me why these men are entitled to early release and not those convicted of MANSLAUGHTER of Jerry McCabe??

Rock Climber

Originally posted by irish1
Was it really do??, can you provide a link quoting the government of the day??

You are ignoring Sceptres article then are you?
I see... why?
Minister for Justices comments one month before the vote not good enough?
Theres plenty more-Come on now you're not doing your position any good there.

It denied it initially then after investigation it said it was IRA activity, as I have said they were using a weapon that used in 4 previous robberys' and these were sanctioned by the IRA, the men involved were raising money for the IRA.

Denial is denial, are there any cases in NI where there was an initial denial and then a claiming in or about the time of the negotiation or vote for the GFA? Links if you have them please otherwise what you are doing is attempting rather shallowly to re-invent the wheel of the GFA and it cannot be done.

the men involved were raising money for the IRA.

How do you know ? Thats hearsay unless you have proof, the evidence in the public domain actually suggests as I said to Mighty_Mouse that if they were, then the IRA's command structure is /was very disorganised.
That doesn't wash so the only reasonable conclusion is that the army council of the IRA either actually did not know about the robbery in which case it was unsanctioned ...
or they denied it in fear of the furore only to claim it as their friends were worried they would not get out under the GFA other wise..

You have presented no credible reasoning to counter that position in my view.

Have a read of the cases I linked to earlier, the man Convicted of James Morgans murder was released after 1 year! and those convicted of killing the last soldier in the North were also released, show me why these men are entitled to early release and not those convicted of MANSLAUGHTER of Jerry McCabe??

I already have...
The people voted in the knowledge that they wouldn't be, theres rakes of evidence for that and you've already conveniently ignored sceptres article which doesn't help your position
And secondly, the IRA denied that the manslaughters of McCabe were acting on theior behalf, only to claim them afterwards.
Theres clear water between the cases you mention and the manslaughter of McCabe more commonly refered to as murder by the people as they are well aware that the intimidation of withnesses made the sustainence of a murder conviction difficult.

Mighty_Mouse

I'm so annoyed. I put a lot of effort into a comprehensive answer and I lost it because I logged out automatically. This answer won't have the same amount of effort.

If IRA gangs are cought involved in rackeering - Do thay expect an Irish government to give them a "Get out of Jail Card".

What else if the GFA early release programme. Are you surprised that criminals are getting a "get out of Jail card"? What else was the GFA!!!!!!!You dont seem to have an origional thought in your head cork. Will O Dea!! Do I see him accuse SF of been self -obsessed!! 1. is every party not "seelf-obsessed" with their own agenda? 2. Talk about the kettle calling the pot black

That it was made very clear before during and after the GFA vote in the 26 counties that the killers of McCabe were not to be released under its terms

It wasn't made clear to the SF negotiating team during the GFA

That the IRA denied responsibility initially which would indicate that it wasn't initially a sanctioned operation and ergo that it never did qualify for that reason

That is what YOU are arguing and maybe clear to you. From my understanding of the IRA, its an organisation which is broken down into cells with each cell not knowing names of other cells or higher authority. I think its very likely that the higher management of the organisation didn't sanction the robbery and wouldn't of sanctioned it. But these men certainly received sanction from the IRA at some level. A bad decision was made in the chain of command. This still means that it was an IRA act. There was a delay of one week in which the IRA investigated the incident and accepted responsibility. At the time I can guarantee you were only too happy for the IRA to accept responsibility. I can't recall any arguments from the time saying the IRA should not of accepted responsibility because in fact these men were not acting for the IRA. I cannot recall any newspaper making the point that the IRA was not to blame and that these men were common criminals(maybe I didnt read enough papers). The Irish government and judicial system continues to view these prisoners as IRA prisoners and has treated them as such from day one.

That the government only changed it's mind on whether McCabes murderers could be released under pressure from SF when they started to use their release as a further bargaining chip to kick start the peace process.

SF didn't "start" applying pressure or recently use it as a bargaining chip. SF position has been crystal clear from day one. The fact of the matter is the Peace process is requiring that the IRA disband (not in the agreement) while the Irish government doesn't even fulfill whats in the agreement. Its madness to even believe that hardline republicans are gonna disband without at least seeing that both governments are serious about the agreement. And thats a simple fact. Theres nothing that can be done. The situation hasnt been "invented" as a negotiating chip.

Bearing that in mind what reason could there possibly be for releasing these killers other than pragmatism.

I think your still on the moral argument here Rockclimber. Do you mean to say that the agreement was drafted amongst the two governments and the various parties with the belief that its implementation would be subject to national laws, DUP requirements and stipulations, publica opinion. Whats happening here goes completely the good faith that the agreement was drafted in.

That section doesn't mention the McCabe killers. It doesn't mention "IRA prisoners". It doesn't define who is and is not eligible. We've had this discussion

Do you think that because an piece of legislation has an "escape clause" that the whole document is pointless due to this one escape clause. My point here is that a scheduled offence is defined in this document and the escape clause is not there to undermine these definitions. Whats the point in taking the trouble of defining a scheduled offence or any law for that matter. Why not just write "every crime is defined uniquely and independantly by the AG/DUP"?

Especially when tied into this report from the Irish Examiner from April 22, 1998 (please note, a clear month prior to the referendum vote for anyone thinking of playing the "we presumed and didn't know" card)

So government politiking means that the Castlerea prisoners are not covered by the agreement. Give me a break.

Note that it doesn't say "the release of all prisoners" - just "the release of prisoners". That's a significant difference

The point here is that the agreement was intended for the release of all prisoners convicted of a scheduled offence (on ceasefire). This is not happening

How about you tone down the hyperbole and smart-ass rhetoric, and answer the questions?

Ok. the government is responsible for the ambiguity surrounding this issue. You seem to think that "everyone is a little wrong and a little right and we all have a part to play"......... Its not. The governement has caused this. The government has changed its position.As for constant change there have been many conflicting statements from government sources over the last few weeks. (sorry was there not? Did McDowell not say different to Bertie? etc )

How many Sinn Fein members on the policing board? What percentage of IRA weapons decommissioned?

Ok. Your insistent. 1. give an answer to decommissioning and you will receive the nobel prize. Understand that decommissioning can only ever be a symbolic gesture towards the unionist camp that the IRA are serious. As negotiated in the agreement the IRA has completely fulfilled its commitements. How can you measure when decommissioning is finished? Whats the point of decommissioning outside of the above? Why does an organisation not using guns (ever again) need to get rid of them? Whats the point? If the immeasureable "completed" decomissioning was achieved , can the IRA not buy more?
Policing:

The Patten Report provided the framework for that reform. It is in the process of being implemented. One part of that process was the establishment of an accountable Policing Board, to which Sinn Fein are refusing to contribute

Dont know whether to laugh or cry here. Patten has been implemented as far as the PSNI is concerned. Thats it done!! Recently Alex Attwood met with the Police Federation. After the meeting Mr. Attwood claimed that members of the Federation who are members of the PSNI were not committed to the Patten reforms!!! Whats the point in regulating an organisation which is unacceptable? Whats the point in nationalists joining the RUC when the special branch, interfering with evidence, collusion, murdering of catholics members are all still existing in their senior positions!!!The SDLP have consistently claimed that such an acceptable policing service had already been achieved!!!! Sinn Fein stayed out of the current arrangements and instead focused on negotiating with the British government on getting policing structures right and I think their right. Remember in all this that a significant porportion of NI society does not have a police force. Why? If you say its because SF wont join. your wrong. refer above and maby read patten.
Now because of your narrow insistent "answer the question" type retoric I have answered your silly misleading close-ended questions again.

You have presented no credible reasoning to counter that position in my view

By that argument your own reasoning is illogical!!

Villain

Rock Climber,

I'm not going to bother going over and over the same arguments here, I'm sure people are fed up of this thread.

I saw what the Minister said in Sceptres article but I dont see where the Government clearly stated that these men were outisde the agreement to the voters, I dont remember reading it in the leaflets that were circulated by the government at the time explaining what the agreement was. I at the time like a lot of other common voters would not have known what was said in the Dail.

Also remember the Government agreed to release these men in October!!

I believe it was IRA activity and have reasons to believe that, you believe otherwise and all I can do is agree to disagree.

In regards to the other people I spoke about the only reason you can give that these men were entitled to early release and the men convicted of MANSLAUGHTER are not is that you believed they were excluded by the Irish government, why wasn't the man convicted of the MURDER or James Morgan excluded, his act was not political it was racial and he was released after 1 year!!!