Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Colombia wants three republicans back in jail

Options
124

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    Allah Hu Akbar wrote: »
    Oh so now they were paid in drugs? :rolleyes:

    You really are a joke ain't ya.
    what was in it for them then?


    Allah Hu Akbar wrote: »
    You've been asked loads of times where are you from? Because on everything you talk about it seems your either a loyalist or from England.
    and?
    Allah Hu Akbar wrote: »
    The men are safely at home where they belong end of story they ain't gonig back, they helped them build barrack busters, that's want you want to hear? Fine there you go now get over it.


    aah, the prodigal sons return from spreading terrorism far and wide. lets all have a ****ing party.


  • Options
    #93
    Allah Hu Akbar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 218 ✭✭Allah Hu Akbar




    and?




    aah, the prodigal sons return from spreading terrorism far and wide. lets all have a ****ing party.


    Look your questions were answered not once but plenty of times.

    I don't know what they got out of it but if you want to start saying the IRA are drug dealers then show one bit of proof? How many shipments of arms were stopped how many drugs were on them? You can't because it doesn't happen it's the other way around.

    And? Well I'd like the answer to be honest. Where are you from?

    I actually think they already had the big party heard there was alot of white stuff involved :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #94
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    I find it rather disengenous of people to throw in off-topic remarks that are clearly designed to draw a response.
    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    So, we have three convicted terrorists and members of an organisation linked to organised crime and drug dealing, who travel illegally to the drug producing capital of the world, returning back to Ireland and we all wonder why it is that Ireland has such a big drugs problem and witnesses involved in gangland criminal cases are being intimidated by the use of pipe bombs. Go figure.

    Its quite well known where that 'technology' is coming from, and its not the IRA. Start a thread on the matter, should you wish to discuss it further.

    Furthermore, theres never been a serious suggestion that the IRA was involved in the current increase in Cocaine usage (or the "big drugs problem" as you call it). You can start a thread on that too, with your evidence, should you wish to.
    Maybe if someone knows otherwise they could shed some light on the matter, which, incidentally, has nothing to do with Guildford, Equitorial guinnea or the death of Aiden McAnespie

    Guilford and Birmingham were raised as examples of wrongful conviction using dubious evidence. You, however refused to accept that stating
    that is a completely different set of circumstances,
    yet failed to elaborate as to what the difference was. However you weren't content to leave it at that....
    but on the subject and seeing as Sinn Fein and the IRA has an unending search for justice, maybe they could have handed over the real bombers, that would have got them out of prison a lot quicker.

    ...thus dragging us even more into a Guilford/Birmingham tangent. You also failed to acknowledge that your question was essentially answered in Message 79, by placing this in Message 80.
    Oh. well, if the IRA said they didn't do it, then that's ok I suppose? why did they not hand over evidence to show who the real cuprits were? surely standing idly by and letting innocent people rot in prison is just as bad as those who framed them in the first place?

    ...one might almost assume you were trying to derail the whole discussion.


  • Options
    #95
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    Nodin wrote: »
    I find it rather disengenous of people to throw in off-topic remarks that are clearly designed to draw a response.

    Its quite well known where that 'technology' is coming from, and its not the IRA. Start a thread on the matter, should you wish to discuss it further.

    Furthermore, theres never been a serious suggestion that the IRA was involved in the current increase in Cocaine usage (or the "big drugs problem" as you call it). You can start a thread on that too, with your evidence, should you wish to.

    Maybe we should. Maybe I should stop taking for granted what I read in the media.
    Nodin wrote: »
    Guilford and Birmingham were raised as examples of wrongful conviction using dubious evidence. You, however refused to accept that stating yet failed to elaborate as to what the difference was. However you weren't content to leave it at that....

    ..thus dragging us even more into a Guilford/Birmingham tangent. You also failed to acknowledge that your question was essentially answered in Message 79, by placing this in Message 80.

    ...one might almost assume you were trying to derail the whole discussion.


    Actually I was trying to get the thread back on topic, as per the instructions of the mod.


  • Options
    #96
    djpbarry
    Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    FTA69 wrote: »
    Why? I think they handled it spot on to be honest, they don't have to justify themselves to the likes of Colombia.
    That's not the point. Terrorism doesn't become acceptable just because it takes place in a country with a two-bit government.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    gandalf
    Registered Users Posts: 26,458 ✭✭✭✭gandalf


    djpbarry wrote: »
    That's not the point. Terrorism doesn't become acceptable just because it takes place in a country with a two-bit government.

    Ah but given some of the apologists classified shooting taxi drivers in the back and blowing kids up as collateral damage of the "war" on their own doorsteps. What makes you think they would have differing views when it occurs in another country far far away.

    My own view on this is that there has been no proper explanation of these guys activities in Columbia. It is highly suspect that they were in an area where the FARC were in control and they are suspected of training these people in whatever skills they had to offer. What I find surprising is SF/IRA are willing to stand up for these guys given their quite strong stance against drugs given FARC fund themselves from the highly destructive Cocaine trade.

    Does these mean that stance is purely on cosmetic grounds until it effects some of their own supporters?


  • Options
    #98
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    Maybe we should. Maybe I should stop taking for granted what I read in the media..

    As I said, if you want to start a thread, with whatever evidence you might have to hand (links to news sources etc) fire away.
    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    Actually I was trying to get the thread back on topic, as per the instructions of the mod.

    emmm....were that the case, you wouldn't have thrown in allegations of pipe bombs, 'the big drugs problem' etc and at least had the decency to acknowledge refutations of other statements of yours.

    The facts pertaining strictly to the topic - Columbia wants them, but (a) we have no extradition treaty with that country and (b) it would appear that the system over there offers slim hope of a fair trial.


  • Options
    #99
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    Nodin wrote: »
    The facts pertaining strictly to the topic - Columbia wants them, but (a) we have no extradition treaty with that country and (b) it would appear that the system over there offers slim hope of a fair trial.

    this would be a pretty boring place if we only discussed facts :D


  • Options
    #100
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    this would be a pretty boring place if we only discussed facts biggrin.gif

    ...in which case we might say they were there to watch the tweety birds and are being harrassed by the Columbians as its the off season for football, and they're bored.


  • Options
    #101
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    Nodin wrote: »
    ...in which case we might say they were there to watch the tweety birds and are being harrassed by the Columbians as its the off season for football, and they're bored.

    which again, is more believeable than the excuse they gave.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    jhegarty
    Registered Users Posts: 6,440 ✭✭✭jhegarty


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    OK, so ireland has rules over and above the general extradition agreements. its unusual because for terrorist offences there doesn't usually need to be an extradition treaty in place. Maybe that is why Ireland has got so much grief over the whole thing

    I don't know why you are not getting this. We don't have an extradition treaty.

    If we don't have one for drugs , for murder , for drinking driving then we don't have one for terrorist offenses.

    It's just that simple. We don't have one. Until we have one the Irish government don't have to do anything , nothing , not a thing.

    Why do you think many senior nazi officers fled to south America after the war ?
    It's because they don't have extradition treaties with Eurepean countries


  • Options
    #103
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    which again, is more believeable than the excuse they gave.

    I got a laugh out of the orginal excuse anyway....

    However, we may assume that there is a possibility that they were there in connection with FARC. Beyond that, it goes into speculation. We know that the odds of them receiving a fair trial there are between slim and none. Therefore sending them back isn't really an option. Pressing for an inquiry or explanation of why they were actually there might be done, but I'd imagine theres little possibility of either at this stage.


  • Options
    #104
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    jhegarty wrote: »
    I don't know why you are not getting this. We don't have an extradition treaty.

    If we don't have one for drugs , for murder , for drinking driving then we don't have one for terrorist offenses.

    It's just that simple. We don't have one. Until we have one the Irish government don't have to do anything , nothing , not a thing.

    Why do you think many senior nazi officers fled to south America after the war ?
    It's because they don't have extradition treaties with Eurepean countries

    Christ, you're llike a dog with a bone, I did get it, did you not read my post properly?

    does this make everything ok? an Irish citizen can go to columbia and do whatever they like, **** the consequences, be smuggled out of the country when they are caught and treated like heroes when they return all because there is no extradition treaty in place.

    Imagine if some columbian drug baron bombed Grafton street, and fled home, there would be absolute outrage here.


  • Options
    #105
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Fratton Fred wrote: »

    and treated like heroes when they return all because there is no extradition treaty in place..

    ...and because the Columbian justice system is highly untrustworthy.
    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    Imagine if some columbian drug baron bombed Grafton street, and fled home, there would be absolute outrage here.

    We don't know if they did anything remotely comparable.


  • Options
    #106
    jhegarty
    Registered Users Posts: 6,440 ✭✭✭jhegarty


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    Imagine if some columbian drug baron bombed Grafton street, and fled home, there would be absolute outrage here.

    Yes there would be. But there would be sfa we could do about it.


  • Options
    #107
    FTA69
    Registered Users Posts: 9,252 ✭✭✭FTA69


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    They are convicted of training rebel terrorists (using dubious evidence) and travelling under false passports. They decide to ignore the convictions and leave the country returning to Ireland where, although not members of SF, the SF leader treats them like heros.

    Nope, they were acquitted and then in a remarkable display of judicial corruption, the verdict was simply overturned for political reasons.
    So, we have three convicted terrorists and members of an organisation linked to organised crime and drug dealing

    The IRA has never been linked to drug dealing.
    , who travel illegally to the drug producing capital of the world, returning back to Ireland and we all wonder why it is that Ireland has such a big drugs problem and witnesses involved in gangland criminal cases are being intimidated by the use of pipe bombs. Go figure.

    Right, so now Republicans are to blame for the drug problem in Ireland? Are they behind the recent financial crisis as well? Don't talk rubbish. While on the issue of drugs, state-sponsored paramilitaries such as the AUC and their allies in the Colombian Military are the prime movers in the drug trade. The state you are calling for these men to be extradicted to plays as big a part in the drug trade as anyone else.


  • Options
    #108
    FTA69
    Registered Users Posts: 9,252 ✭✭✭FTA69


    djpbarry wrote: »
    That's not the point. Terrorism doesn't become acceptable just because it takes place in a country with a two-bit government.

    What about when the state itself practices terrorism? Armed action is perfectly justifiable in the context of state repression.


  • Options
    #109
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    FTA69 wrote: »
    What about when the state itself practices terrorism? Armed action is perfectly justifiable in the context of state repression.

    so you support the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan then?

    Just so we're sure.


  • Options
    #110
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    FTA69 wrote: »
    Right, so now Republicans are to blame for the drug problem in Ireland? Are they behind the recent financial crisis as well? Don't talk rubbish. While on the issue of drugs, state-sponsored paramilitaries such as the AUC and their allies in the Colombian Military are the prime movers in the drug trade. The state you are calling for these men to be extradicted to plays as big a part in the drug trade as anyone else.

    Not republicans no, the vast majority don't attempt to defend bomb makers.


  • Options
    #111
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    so you support the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan then?

    Just so we're sure.

    Well the former is rather a subject unto itself. Support or disagreement with it could signal either position, depending.
    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    Not republicans no, the vast majority don't attempt to defend bomb makers..

    And again, if you want to make that kind of allegation, start a thread. I'll be more than happy to discuss the subject.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    FTA69
    Registered Users Posts: 9,252 ✭✭✭FTA69


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    so you support the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan then?

    Just so we're sure.

    Yes, I do support the right of Iraqis to take up arms agains those occupying their country to get their hands on oil reserves.


  • Options
    #113
    jhegarty
    Registered Users Posts: 6,440 ✭✭✭jhegarty


    FTA69 wrote: »
    Yes, I do support the right of Iraqis to take up arms agains those occupying their country to get their hands on oil reserves.

    There is occupying troops in Iraqi ?

    Last time I checked any troops there was at the request of the democratically elected Iraqi government, who also have a UN mandate to protect that government...

    anyway , to get things back on topic....

    Can I presume that everyone who wants them sent back believe that politicians and not judges show pass judgment on trials ?


  • Options
    #114
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    jhegarty wrote: »
    There is occupying troops in Iraqi ?

    Last time I checked any troops there was at the request of the democratically elected Iraqi government, who also have a UN mandate to protect that government...

    anyway , to get things back on topic....

    Can I presume that everyone who wants them sent back believe that politicians and not judges show pass judgment on trials ?

    I don't see what is wrong with a normal extradition process (If one existed between Ireland and Columbia;))

    Country makes a formal request, suspect is picked up, suspect appeals, case goes to court, court decides if extradition conditions have been met. This would include things such as will the defendant get a fair trial, is the death penalty involved, is it a political case etc etc etc.

    if a Dublin court rules that there is no case to answer as it was not a fair trial then fair enough, it gives these guys the chance to clear their name (existing convictions aside) and it would stop cynics like me from pointing the finger of blame at them.


  • Options
    #115
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    FTA69 wrote: »
    Yes, I do support the right of Iraqis to take up arms agains those occupying their country to get their hands on oil reserves.

    I think you have just demonstrated a nice pair of double standards there.


  • Options
    #116
    jhegarty
    Registered Users Posts: 6,440 ✭✭✭jhegarty


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    I don't see what is wrong with a normal extradition process (If one existed between Ireland and Columbia;))

    Country makes a formal request, suspect is picked up, suspect appeals, case goes to court, court decides if extradition conditions have been met. This would include things such as will the defendant get a fair trial, is the death penalty involved, is it a political case etc etc etc.

    if a Dublin court rules that there is no case to answer as it was not a fair trial then fair enough, it gives these guys the chance to clear their name (existing convictions aside) and it would stop cynics like me from pointing the finger of blame at them.

    But that's the reason why don't have a treaty with Columbia. What would be the point when every case would get thrown out of court in Ireland.

    I am sure one will be considered on the day the Columbia has fair trials provided over by an independent judiciary...


  • Options
    #117
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    This thread has seen more attempts to derail it than the Dublin-Belfast route.
    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    I think you have just demonstrated a nice pair of double standards there.

    Hardly, as the nature of the previous regime doesn't justify the sequestering of a majority of the states oil wealth (63 wells out of 80 in Foriegn hands, as far as I recall). Nor the shoehorning of an occupation-force backed government into various strictures by an unelected body (the economic conditions imposed by decree via the CPA and 'Governor' Bremmer.) Support of the invasion is therefore not the support of force against a repressive state, but the support of post-colonial looting of an already impoverished peoples resources.

    You'll note theres no rush to free the people of Burma, Zimbabwe or the West Bank from their various persecutors.


  • Options
    #118
    jhegarty
    Registered Users Posts: 6,440 ✭✭✭jhegarty


    Nodin wrote: »
    This thread has seen more attempts to derail it than the Dublin-Belfast route.

    very good :D


  • Options
    #119
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    Nodin wrote: »
    This thread has seen more attempts to derail it than the Dublin-Belfast route.

    pointing out the double standards in someone's arguement is no reason to go off on a tangent ;)


  • Options
    #120
    FTA69
    Registered Users Posts: 9,252 ✭✭✭FTA69


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    I think you have just demonstrated a nice pair of double standards there.

    Eh? I think you'll find I'm quite consistant in my beliefs that British and US imperialism are wrong. Anyway, that's the last I'm saying on this topic.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    djpbarry
    Registered Users Posts: 13,104 ✭✭✭✭djpbarry


    FTA69 wrote: »
    The IRA has never been linked to drug dealing.
    Are you serious?
    FTA69 wrote: »
    What about when the state itself practices terrorism? Armed action is perfectly justifiable in the context of state repression.
    No, it is not. But then, I thought you might say something like that. Terrorism is relative, eh?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement