IRA insists Jean McConville was a tout

Diogenes

joebhoy1916 wrote:

Here we go more B/S stay on the fcuking topic.

Well if you read it you might know why.

really maybe you can point out the exact point where it explains that dispite warnings McConville stayed on a spy

Inexplicably McConville went back to spying on the IRA, this time with fateful consequences. Although by this stage the British Army must have been aware that the IRA knew all about her activities and that she was now in terrible danger, her handlers carried on regardless and supplied with a second transmitter. Her spying recommenced, and it did not take long before the IRA worked out that she was back in business, once more betraying IRA volunteers and operations. The Belfast Brigade decided that this time she had to die, but its senior members disagreed violently about what to do with her body. The question bitterly divided the Belfast Brigade staff. Some argued that her body should be dumped in the street so that her face would act as a deterrent to other would-be informers in accordance with IRA custom and practice. But one figure disagreed, arguing that the publicity attached to her death, the fact that she was a widowed mother of ten, would work strongly against the IRA, and he urged that she be buried in secret, effectively disappeared.

The job of "disappearing" Jean McConville was given to "the unknowns" in a move that guaranteed that the story of what had really happened to her would be confined to the smallest number of IRA activists. According to one well-informed source, the order to "disappear" McConville was give to the Turf Lodge-based commander of one of the "unknown" units by a senior member of the Belfast Brigade. Whether, as alleged by one well-informed source, or not the order was given by Adams himself, it is inconceivable that such an order would have been issued without his knowledge. Her court martial was held — although McConville was not present to defend herself — she had been found guilty and sentence pronounced. The task of the "unknown" was to fetch her and carry out the sentence. McConville was taken down to a beach near Carlingford just across the County Down–County Louth border, where she was shot in the back of the head and her body buried in the sand. Her remains have never been recovered.

Jean McConville's death and disappearance came back to haunt Sinn Féin during the height of the peace process in the mid-1990s. A campaign to discover her fate was launched by her children, all of whom had been dispersed to foster homes after her abduction, and their efforts won the support of President Bill Clinton and the Irish government, two of Adams's strongest allies in his new foray into constitutional politics. Adams met the chief campaigner's, McConville's daughter Helen McKendry and her husband Seamus, but initially denied all knowledge of events. Only after Clinton's intervention did he and the IRA admit that she had been "disappeared" by the organisation.

What it does acknowledge is for years the IRA lied about the reason for her disapperance, they' claimed she ran off with a soldier, for years, despite the pain this caused to the family, who recieved a obscene degree of bullying from the community. Decades after her death ,the IRA changed their tune to to "she was a tout", an unoffical story they paraded for years. However, again they offered no proof. Now, seeing as they made up one story about Mc Conville, why should we trust their new story about her being a tout, who would not stop despite their pleadings? Forcing them to murder her. B*ll**** more like.... And you've not offered a shred of actual evidence to change anyone's mind.

joebhoy1916

My uncle was burnt out of his home in east Belfast because his family was catholic! It happens on both sides like I said stay on topic.

Well anyways you wanna talking about people been run out of there homes!

How many people had to flee the north because they were burnt out because they were catholic and the british were helpnig them a hell of alot more than the IRA burnt out well that wasnt even the IRA just young people acting cool!

STAY ON TOPIC

You asked for my proof so I showed you can say all you want he doesnt tell who his sources are all that bull**** but he tells the truth even bad stuff about the IRA he isnt all one way.

I dont give a sh!t what you believe your talknig out your a$$ that you know nothing about.

Like I said enjoy your stay make sure you read the charters.

Diogenes

joebhoy1916 wrote:

My uncle was burnt out of his home in east Belfast because his family was catholic! It happens on both sides like I said stay on topic.

Well anyways you wanna talking about people been run out of there homes!


How many people had to flee the north because they were burnt out because they were catholic and the british were helpnig them a hell of alot more than the IRA burnt out well that wasnt even the IRA just young people acting cool!

STAY ON TOPIC

Rigghhhhhtttttt....anyway your points is? Our president was burnt out of her home and her family attacked yet she can meet with loyalist paramilitaries, my family was born up north, doing the "I'm harder than you" routine is the last act of a desperate argument. My family are from derry I moved here as boy, I'm aware of the difficults of the troubles. We all coped. The IRA meanwhile couldn't deal with a woman offering comfort to a soldier.

However playing the "I'm more streetwise" card is generaly the last act of a desperate man. You've spouted insinuations and speculation, and failed to back them up.

You asked for my proof so I showed you can say all you want he doesnt tell who his sources are all that bull**** but he tells the truth even bad stuff about the IRA he isnt all one way.

Again thats not even beginning to be proof. Just because he adds some less than salubrious comments RE: Adams doesn't mean its proof. Furthermore by his own admittion he cannot explain why she'd continue being a tout, hardly a ringing endorsement of your claim that the ira went in there, met her, asked her not be spy, she refused, so they were forced to shoot her.

I dont give a sh!t what you believe your talknig out your a$$ that you know nothing about.



Like I said enjoy your stay make sure you read the charters.

Something about personal abuse in the charter? Hmmm what was that about the charter and my stay? :rolleyes:

joebhoy1916

And what proof is there that she was not an informer.

The army would hardly say she was because then the death would be put on them.

Oh yeah im acting harder than you. Like I said believe what you want im telling you what I believe, wouldnt be surprised if you made your 100th post tonight.

Diogenes

joebhoy1916 wrote:

And what proof is there that she was not an informer.

The army would hardly say she was because then the death would be put on them.

Joebhoy the onus is on the person who makes the claim. Not on the person who's having the claim made aganist them. It would be nigh on impossible for you or Adams, or Mc Guinness to offer irrafutible proof that they

A) Weren't informers for the british army

Didn't engage in a pagan orgy sometime between 1977 and 2001

C) Haven't been to the moon.

D) Haven't ever had sex with a hamster called cynthia.

Honestly this is pretty basic stuff. I mean what evidence can you offer that without a shadow of a doubt that you've never done any of the above. While I'm sure you can offer some evidence you cannot prove at no time was it concievable impossible that you could not have done any of the above.

So simply put using any form of logic its impossible for the friends or family of Mrs Mc Conville to prove that it no way could she not be a british agent? Could you joeyboy prove to within a shadow of a doubt by offering accountable evidence that you were or not doing something at every second of your day?

Hardly.

Therefore it is the lowest form of trial by mob, akin to, salem witch trials to try and demand a human being prove to not being an informer.

You are making a claim the onus is on you to support it. You say Jean Mc Conville is an informer the onus is on you or the IRA to prove it, not for Mrs Mc Conville to disprove it.

You cannot scream "witch" or "informer" and demand the accused disprove it. Not that has stopped the IRA.

You or the IRA need to prove she was an informer not vice versa. The onus is on you. You've state speculation as fact, the spotlight is on you to support.

my_house

Malone wrote:

Its easy for people who have never had to live under foreign rule to condem people who had to take up arms.

thats standard issue for the boards politics forum. if you keep on about it you'd get banned and your posts deleted. that'll probably happen to me soon.

I dont think any republican anywhere in this country (the 32 county one) revels in the fact that mrs mcconville died. logically when you think of it, its doubtfull those that killed and buried her kept a map of the exact location, so finding the remains is obivoulsy going to be very hard. its is a fact that the IRA have given information, as they know it, on locations of bodies but theres a few things to remember:

1) Where are the people who buried her? have they died? have they bad memories? it could br feasible they dont really know where they buried mrs mcconville. maybe the ira has given as much information as it knows.

2) i know many republicans from the north - they arent monsters. those involved are people who through circumstance were forced to do things many of them would never have done otherwise. I could go on about the forms of provocation that if endured by many on here, would have certinaly changed their prospective, but i wont. thats what makes this a war scenario. t hats why theres political prisioners, thats why the hunger strikes happened. the point is that theres no point in trying to goad republicans in this thread, as all of us agree that the war in the 6 counties caused unnecessary deaths on all sides. No-one enjoys hearing of people dying no matter what the cause, nor revels in the fact they are dead.

3) Earthman mentioned atrocities that happened and said the people of ireland gave no mandate. many many people in the north gave the IRA their mandate to continue what they were doing, for reasons more than likely unfathonable unless you were one of those people. its a cold fact, but true.

4) I aint even going to bother continuing as this thread will continue as is anyway, and Im sure I'll get a few one worded replys that explain nothing.

my_house

murphaph wrote:

Murdering people maybe?

are you saying all members of sinn fein are murders? wouldnt you have to 'prove' that? If posters are members of sinn fein isnt that attacking the poster?

No they didn't. They told the priest mediator the body was on beach x, it was searched and nothing found. Some time later, a member of the public found the body on beach y while out walking their dog.

Can you be correct in the assumption that the republican movement didnt give information to help recover bodies?

taken from: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/5157978.stm

[

The bodies of four of the Disappeared - people abducted and murdered by the IRA - have been recovered. Five more have not been found.

Sinn Fein President Gerry Adams said he had been "meeting with the McConville family for some time".

"My sole interest has been to help the family. Whatever about the circumstances surrounding Jean McConville's killing, the burial of her remains was a great injustice to the family."

He added: "Sinn Fein has worked hard in recent years to resolve the issue of those remains buried by the IRA and still not recovered and we continue to talk to the Irish government on this matter."

Adams is visibly squirming when asked about it. It hits a raw nerve.

see above ...

my_house

Diogenes wrote:

the onus is on you or the IRA to prove it, not for Mrs Mc Conville to disprove it.

thats a bit of a tall order considering the elapsed time

Jackie laughlin

God, but this thread has been active; I've been reading for ages to catch up!

There has never been a time in the lifetime of Sinn Fein when political violence was justified in this country. The bloody and undemocratic cult of Pearse, Collins etc. with which I grew up contributed to the survival of SF.

Someone spoke of the revolutionary Dail. It didn't have a mandate either. The SF candidates did not go into the 1918 election saying they would abstain from the British parliament. If they had, they would have lost.

The real heros of recent years were the members of the Civil Rights Movement and the SDLP who sought the peaceful route to equality in Northern Ireland. They put their lives on the line and faced down the Green as well as the Orange fascists.

It is important that the SF/IRA murders be discussed now because the IRA still exists. I saw them march in their jackboots at the head of a SF parade in Dublin earlier this year. ("Make Partition History" was the theme of the march.)

There are swathes of working class areas north and south under SF/IRA rule.

SF/IRA have 10% of the vote and threaten our democracy. We have a convicted gun runner elected to the Dail and he is allowed speak on all manner of subjects as if he were a normal person. In the unlikely event of a convicted paedophile being elected to the Dail, would a docile media allow him to witter on about, say, drainage?

After decades of killing for a united Ireland, SF now recognise partition and want seats in Stormont and Dublin.

sceptre

joebhoy1916 wrote:

Here we go more B/S stay on the fcuking topic.

Well if you read it you might know why.

Do yourself a really big favour and watch your tone. You can make your points without being abusive and if you can't you shouldn't be posting them.

Additionally I've mentioned that you've strayed from the topic yourself (I believe I used the term "irrelevant") without me telling you to stop so you could do worse than to get your own house in order before preaching to anyone else on off-topickness. In other words, you're playing the pot just because someone else is playing the kettle (except you played the pot first)

joebhoy1916 wrote:

And what proof is there that she was not an informer.

I'm stating the obvious but it doesn't work like that in a rational society. We've moved rather away from "guilty until proved innocent under penalty of death and burial in an unmarked grave if you can't prove it" in the normal universe.

my_house wrote:

thats a bit of a tall order considering the elapsed time

Of course if the IRA were the type of people who considered evidence a necessary step towards proving guilt in the first place, verifiable evidence would still be available - it's available in the normal court system that democratic societies enjoy.

joebhoy1916

sceptre wrote:

Of course if the IRA were the type of people who considered evidence a necessary step towards proving guilt in the first place, verifiable evidence would still be available - it's available in the normal court system that democratic societies enjoy.

I will watch what I say!

Would the north have been a democratic society back then anyways?

They do have a tribunal for cases like this one!

Not saying anything by it just thought I would let you know, where many people have gone and not came back but some have come back alive innocent until proven guilty.

my_house wrote:

are you saying all members of sinn fein are murders? wouldnt you have to 'prove' that? If posters are members of sinn fein isnt that attacking the poster

Yes my house there all saying there killers.

Yes indeed SDLP should get all the credit shouldn't they!

Are they the largest catholic party in the north?

And why do you think that is?

Diogenes

joebhoy1916 wrote:

I will watch what I say!

Would the north have been a democratic society back then anyways?

They do have a tribunal for cases like this one!

I'm not sure what you are trying to say here.

Not saying anything by it just thought I would let you know, where many people have gone and not came back but some have come back alive innocent until proven guilty.

What do you mean by this? Who came back? from where?

Yes my house there all saying there killers.

Yes indeed SDLP should get all the credit shouldn't they!

Are they the largest catholic party in the north?

And why do you think that is?

Fianna Fail are the largest party in Ireland, it doesn't mean they are the best, furthermore SF don't tend to consider themselves a "catholic" party rather they see themselves as a republican party, and not bow down to secterian lines.

myhouse wrote:

thats a bit of a tall order considering the elapsed time

See thats the dandy bit, SF paramilitary wing don't see themselves as common garden variety thugs they see themselves as an army and hold their little "tribunals" and "trials" of course asking them to show what evidence came to this trial is a bit much.

I mean an obvious point is if there was a radio, whatever became of it?

joebhoy1916

joebhoy1916 wrote:

Yes my house there all saying there killers.

No they are not.I think the problem is they glorify the killers.Mind youI'd imagine thats fading a bit publically.It's not something that you sell yourself on National TV with,so theres probably less parading of the IRA at SF Árd'fhéiseanna these days.
It does boil to the surface though when "awkward" questions are asked on questions and answers and of course here.

Yes indeed SDLP should get all the credit shouldn't they!

Well they'll get no credit for supporting the violence anyway thats for sure.

Are they the largest catholic party in the north?

And why do you think that is?

Because the IRA stopped the campaign-thats when their vote rose isnt it? To around a quarter of the vote up there source and hovering around 8 or 9% in the 26 counties.

murphaph

my_house wrote:

are you saying all members of sinn fein are murders?

Certainly not. Not all members of the IRA murdered people either, but we can still make the claim that "the IRA murdered people". You appear confused about this rather simple claim. Another example; the axis killed millions of people during WWII, not every mamber of axis forces killed someone. However, the members of SFIRA cannot seem to condemn as murder even the most callous events such as the riddling with bullets of Detectives Jerry McCabe and Ben O'Sullivan as they performed their duty for this country.

my_house wrote:

If posters are members of sinn fein isnt that attacking the poster?

Don't make me laugh. What a ridiculous last grasp.

my_house wrote:

Can you be correct in the assumption that the republican movement didnt give information to help recover bodies?

I didn't assume or state that. A poster claimed that the IRA had told the authorities where the body was. It was not where they said. The body was subsequently found elsewhere by a member of the public, so the IRA did not tell them where the body was. That's all I said. You then made an assumption based on that.

Quite frankly, after murdering these people in cold blood, it's the fcuking least the 'republican movement' can do to help recover their bodies. Do you think they deserve a slap on the back for this?

RedPlanet

Maybe the reason the IRA today do not say what folks want them to is that they cannot admit publicly that they did wrong.
Just like GWBush or anyone of the US Administration regarding Iraq, or even anyone of the folks involved with Bloody Sunday etc.
They loose too much face to admit they did wrong so they therefore dig-in.
Seems a human enough thing to do really.

Diogenes

RedPlanet wrote:

Maybe the reason the IRA today do not say what folks want them to is that they cannot admit publicly that they did wrong.
Just like GWBush or anyone of the US Administration regarding Iraq, or even anyone of the folks involved with Bloody Sunday etc.
They loose too much face to admit they did wrong so they therefore dig-in.
Seems a human enough thing to do really.

A) There is nothing human about murdering a woman in cold blood, dumping her body, and then creating a tissue of lies about why it happened. At least nothing decent and human.

Holding up a mirror to the wrongdoings of others doesn't make their behaviour any more acceptable. Trying to justify reprehensible behaviour by pointing out anothers reprehensible behaviour is the last gasp of those trying to excuse the inexcusable.

RedPlanet

Diogenes wrote:

A) There is nothing human about murdering a woman in cold blood, dumping her body, and then creating a tissue of lies about why it happened. At least nothing decent and human.

Holding up a mirror to the wrongdoings of others doesn't make their behaviour any more acceptable. Trying to justify reprehensible behaviour by pointing out anothers reprehensible behaviour is the last gasp of those trying to excuse the inexcusable.

Well Diogenes what do you want to happen?
I mean besides using Jean McConville as a convenient stick to bash SF with.
Because i think you know as well as i, that the hype surrounding JMcConville will more than likely come to naught.

my_house

murphaph wrote:

Don't make me laugh. What a ridiculous last grasp.

laugh all you want, but its what you insinuated.

murphaph wrote:

I didn't assume or state that. A poster claimed that the IRA had told the authorities where the body was. It was not where they said. The body was subsequently found elsewhere by a member of the public, so the IRA did not tell them where the body was. That's all I said. You then made an assumption based on that.

the poster claimed the IRA had given info to find bodies, you claimed they hadnt. its all there in yourpost so plaease dont assume Im a thicko who cant read. maybe you posted something that wasnt correct?

Quite frankly, after murdering these people in cold blood, it's the fcuking least the 'republican movement' can do to help recover their bodies. Do you think they deserve a slap on the back for this?

i've stated what I think and Im at a loss to see how you have come to that conclusion, unless of course you are purposely trying to get me to argue.

sceptre wrote:

Of course if the IRA were the type of people who considered evidence a necessary step towards proving guilt in the first place, verifiable evidence would still be available - it's available in the normal court system that democratic societies enjoy.

considering what has happened in Ireland, isnt it a bit unrealistic to assume the IRA would keep records? You have to keep things in perspective and view what happened with some degree of realism.

my_house

RedPlanet wrote:

Well Diogenes what do you want to happen?
I mean besides using Jean McConville as a convenient stick to bash SF with.
Because i think you know as well as i, that the hype surrounding JMcConville will more than likely come to naught.

i fear for the success of the peace process for reasons I cant really go into as I might end up attacking a few posters rather then the posts. some of the attitudes in southern politics by voters scare me quite frankly, especially when one looks at the number of sticks SF get beat with. Im sure someone will have a really really funny quip about beatings to add to this.

oscarBravo

my_house wrote:

i fear for the success of the peace process for reasons I cant really go into as I might end up attacking a few posters rather then the posts.

If you can't make a point without attacking someone personally, then maybe you need to have a long think about the validity of that point.

my_house wrote:

some of the attitudes in southern politics by voters scare me quite frankly, especially when one looks at the number of sticks SF get beat with.

Have you heard the phrase "making a rod for your back"? The sticks SF get beaten with are such rods. If they don't want to get beaten with them, maybe they should think about walking away from them.

Diogenes

RedPlanet wrote:

Well Diogenes what do you want to happen?
I mean besides using Jean McConville as a convenient stick to bash SF with.

Theres a constant motif in your comments that people are lunging onto this issue as an excuse to "bash" SF, it seems to escape you that most people dislike SF because of their attitude and handling of things like this. This is not mindless SF bashing, it is because of this and other atrosities, that people are outraged by SF. It is not that we are outraged by SF and are looking for filmsy excuses to "bash" them with.

Because i think you know as well as i, that the hype surrounding JMcConville will more than likely come to naught.

Hype? Hype? Superman returns has hype, Jean Mc Conville has the IRA perpetuating lies about her 20 years after her death.

my_house

oscarBravo wrote:

If you can't make a point without attacking someone personally, then maybe you need to have a long think about the validity of that point. Have you heard the phrase "making a rod for your back"? The sticks SF get beaten with are such rods. If they don't want to get beaten with them, maybe they should think about walking away from them.

if i were a gossipping old woman then maybe I might agree, but in grown up political debate where one takes into consideration the real life politics of ireland, then maybe such techniques (or rods as you say) should be avoided as it doesnt help anyone.

as for the attacking the poster - obviously I thought about it and decided not to post what I thought as that was what I had said. if i had though, just because i personally may believe some peoples attitudes may be a bit immature, it doesnt mean that that thought might not be valid.

jackie - i find so many flaws with your reasoning.

sceptre

I've moved the posts discussing the support for SF as support for the IRA and voter complicity (or not) in the actions of the latter to this new thread.

Pal

my_house wrote:

I will stay out of this as the topic seems to be for SF bashers only, but NO war is ever santioned. To pretend a war is only a war when a government or a people says it is, is pretty pedantic. Iraq, Vietnam and millions of other wars werent santioned by that countrys (whereever the war is) people and the killing of jean mcconville was wrong as all killings are wrong. It was a long time ago and since none of us know exactly what went on and exactly what the circumstances were, then it cant be argued for or against. these things happen in a war. I sometimes wonder what the point of threads like these are in the first place.

if you are staying out why bother with the rest of the post ?

oscarBravo

Not exactly a constructive contribution, Pal.

Lemming

RedPlanet wrote:

Well Diogenes what do you want to happen?
I mean besides using Jean McConville as a convenient stick to bash SF with.
Because i think you know as well as i, that the hype surrounding JMcConville will more than likely come to naught.

Ah .... Jean McConville is a convenient stick to bash SF with. It's all so clear now!! :rolleyes:

It's a stick that SF made which with to "beat" her and smear her name. I believe proverbs about chickens and roosting are most apt.

Inconvenient of her isn't it? Being murdered and preventing SF from "shutting" her up now eh? You can't silence the dead. Funny that ... :rolleyes:

The "hype", as you put it, surrounding Jean McConville has been going on for years, and I suspect will do for a long time yet. I also suspect it's one of SF's dirty little secrets that they wish would just .... disappear. Oddily enough, like they thought the woman would do in the first place ....

joebhoy1916

Lemming wrote:

The "hype", as you put it, surrounding Jean McConville has been going on for years, and I suspect will do for a long time yet. ....

True.
[/QUOTE]that the hype surrounding JMcConville will more than likely come to naught.....[/QUOTE]

True.

[/QUOTE]Oddily enough, like they thought the woman would do in the first place ....[/QUOTE]

Then why is it they told where her body was! I wonder if they regret saying where she was I mean if she wasn't found ye wouldn't even be talking about it!

Lemming

joebhoy1916 wrote:

True.

that the hype surrounding JMcConville will more than likely come to naught.....

True.

It's come to naught? Doesn't look that way to me. SF are under the hammer continually over her murder. Less some times than others. But she never goes away. Poetic justice really. The ghost that never stops haunting you for your poor decisions.

Every time SF try to get somewhere politically, obscene attrocities (or to skewer SF with their own sword, I should probably use the term 'warcrime' instead since they always claim they were at "war") like her murder are brought out to beat them with and remidn everyone of what servile self-serving scum that they are as a collective entity.

Then why is it they told where her body was! I wonder if they regret saying where she was I mean if she wasn't found ye wouldn't even be talking about it!

What? ROFL. Ohhhhh that is naeive thinking at best, if you thought that SF would be forgiven their crimes once they told peopel where the body was. ANd incidentally, people have been talking about her since long before her body was ever found. So I don't see what your point here is other than the classic "look over there" tactic so favoured by chuckies.

You might want to look at SF's initial lie regarding her disappearance. That she had abandoned her family and run off to Britain with a soldier. When that was exposed as b*llocks they then resorted to the "tout" claim. So if she was a tout in the first place, why lie int he first place?

SF made this ghost (literally and proverbially). This is why people have talked about the McConville murder for the last thirty odd years. Oh yeah, and because it was an outrageously vile act perpetrated by utter, utter scum. Defended by scum and woefully blinkered people.

joebhoy1916

I didnt say they would be forgiven! There hardly going to come out in the 1970's and admit to killing a mother of 10 in cold blood!

And I guess the scum bit is to me! The question of the IRA been right/wrong legit/illegal all the rest still divides this country today and more than likely always will! Everyone can have there say I always believed she was telling on the IRA and she got killed as people like that were! You cant say for sure that wasn't nor can I say she was. If people would act like this to the bosy been found how could you ever expect the IRA to tell where all the body's were it's bringing up old wounds where as if they left it as now the truth is most people more than likely wont give a sh!t. I can remember the family saying all they wanted was the body at least they got that not like so many other's.

Lemming

So the family should be "grateful" that they got the body back? NoIdontthinkso ... . I think this has gone a little "beyond" gratitude wouldn't you think?

If SF/IRA were so right in their assertions that she was a tout, then why did they lie? They are not stupid (as an organisation at least) and are quite adept at propoganda. They would not have made such a blind error in judgement had she actually been a tout.