Why is Sein Fein such a dirty word down south?

anonymous_joe

conchubhar1 wrote: »

ah your point about their economic policies make sense now

Does it?

I suppose driving out foreign business would be a-ok with you then?

RandomName2

briktop wrote: »

as i said before , a party of knackbags , and scummers who used to murder people , are a dirty word

Many nationalists in the north feel that such murders were justifiable, that it was the part of a military movement. In this context there is a perceptible zeitgeist whereby the IRA, and SF as their political representatives, embody the most active and potent nationalist force within Ireland.

This combining of paramilitary force and political movement (armalite and ballot box) is inherent to the binary opposition of the public in relation to SF (both north and south). The fact that SF manipulate their military arm to gain political leverage is a strategy which produces both admiration and revulsion; the former because they have formed their own police force and opposed the B-Specials and British forces, and the latter due to the fact that their military potential has proved most effective in the form of 'spectacular' terrorist atrocities. Moreover, their undermining of the state in northern Ireland (in the form of abstentionism, military independence, etc) has been an acceptable aspect of their profile in the north among nationalists who do not recognise the legitimacy of Stormont (with or without home-rule), but such an attack on the legitimacy of Dublin (due to the Anglo-Irish Treaty c.1920) does not sit so well with the southern electorate.

Having said that, SF's far more vocal and 'active' pursuit of a 'united Ireland' than FF has given the party something of a mandate south of the border. Their somewhat cookie economic policies (which may be mostly rhetoric) and anti-european stance are consistent with their message of autarky.

themont85

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Does it?

I suppose driving out foreign business would be a-ok with you then?

Essentially that poster saw that you lived in south Dublin and basically discounted it because of that. Ironic when in your post you mentioned Ringsend and Irishtown, two areas with a considerable amount of working class and shock shock horror is in D4.

SF are a party who would be a disaster for Government. Their policies are in dreamland. Their objection to Lisbon was taken in my view just to be different than the other partys, i heard one of them championing the commisioner thing which was ''son'' which is bad for Europe and Ireland. Their candidates talk like robots most of the time and are clearly instructed rigidly. Their spiel on their IRA connections, people saying ''they were a fundamental part of the GF agreement and the ceasefire was ages ago'' are masking it from a party which still has certain election shops with IRA propaganda t-shirts and have robotic answers to any question of IRA murders-ie ''3,000 people died in a conflict, of course their were causalties''. Not good enough.

I'm not a fan of FF, Labour ect but there is something really distasteful about SF.

Hagar

Has everyone forgotten that both Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael were also both born out of armed struggle? Both had private armies, both committed atrocities in the name of the people and both are still fighting the civil war. At least Sinn Féin have moved on with the Good Friday Agreement.

A poster above mentioned that SF were good at a local level, given the circumstances they work in and the day to day opposition and obstacles they face I think that is quite an achievement.

People are always dragging out the lives that the IRA, or SF/IRA if you really must, have ruined. Step back and have a good look at the lives FF/FG have buggered up. Look at the number of people struggling to pay off unneccessary debt incurred by the greed of politicians working hand in hand with developers. Those lives are just as blighted by the effects of greed and wholesale corruption as are any lives blighted by violence. The only difference is that the dead are no longer suffering. Can the same be said of the many thousands upon thousands of people who have been ripped off by builders and are now paying off the builders debts while still struggling to pay their own debts?

Fear of Sinn Féin has been artificially engendered in the Irish people to cloud much bigger issues.

ilkhanid

Hagar wrote: »

Those lives are just as blighted by the effects of greed and wholesale corruption as are any lives blighted by violence. The only difference is that the dead are no longer suffering. Can the same be said of the many thousands upon thousands of people who have been ripped off by builders and are now paying off the builders debts while still struggling to pay their own debts?

Well, given a chance between poor and struggling and dead or maimed, I'd choose the former.
And there a lot of people still alive troubled by the legacy of the "armed struggle":the widows (and widowers),orphans,the bereaved, those in wheelchairs, the blind, crippled,burnt,disfigured, legless....

Hagar

Yeah, very emotive. I'm deeply moved etc.
You forgot the gutless.
Now spend the next twenty years of your life working to hand over the wages from two full days a week of your hard work to a builder that bribed your oh so holy TD. It's robbing you, it's robbing you children and their children.
Good luck with that.

RandomName2

Hagar wrote: »

Has everyone forgotten that both Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael were also both born out of armed struggle? Both had private armies, both committed atrocities in the name of the people and both are still fighting the civil war. At least Sinn Féin have moved on with the Good Friday Agreement.

[...] Step back and have a good look at the lives FF/FG have buggered up. Look at the number of people struggling to pay off unneccessary debt incurred by the greed of politicians working hand in hand with developers. Those lives are just as blighted by the effects of greed and wholesale corruption as are any lives blighted by violence. The only difference is that the dead are no longer suffering. Can the same be said of the many thousands upon thousands of people who have been ripped off by builders and are now paying off the builders debts while still struggling to pay their own debts?

Fear of Sinn Féin has been artificially engendered in the Irish people to cloud much bigger issues.

Okay: 90 years of history summed up into two periods:
A) 1916-1922
1998-2009

First, (A). You are mostly talking about Sinn Fein 2 here, followed by the split (CnG, SF3). Probaby not the place to start talking Collins VS DeV here (a little bit anachronistic). In terms of the civil war still being fought? Look, the Four Court fires were extinguished a good while back now, and while the civil war set up the party polarity in the Dail (right wing and ... erm... right wing) FF and FG are not aparti to murder.

You didn't mention 1922-1998. What about this? FF held Ireland in the vice of an insular, culturally anal outlook that espoused the Church above the People - leaving the country both economically and psychologically retarded. However, in this regard FF largely did reflect the society from which it was begot and can not be directly blamed for having been the genesis of this condition.

(B) Ireland was poor for a very long time, and looks set to be poor again due to
1. High wages
2. Bad lending practises of banks
3. Global economic slowdown

A good deal of the blame for this can be directed at FF, I suppose, but it was hardly their ambition to kill the Celtic Tiger. Besides which, there was a responsibilitiy on the part of the banks not to hand over risky mortgages on the back of market bouyancy, nor on the public to take out risky mortgages on the back of the same bouyancy (i.e. if it was imperative for a couple to both be working in order to pay their mortgage, any economic downturn at all would seriously jeopardise their long-term capacity to pay it.)

So, to equate this to .... let's say getting a truckdriver to drive a truck-bomb at an army checkpoint, or hanging a joyrider as an example to the community, or kidnapping a civilian family in order to stage a massive bank robbery is perhaps a slight exaggeration.

Hagar

RandomName2 wrote: »

A good deal of the blame for this can be directed at FF, I suppose, but it was hardly their ambition to kill the Celtic Tiger.

No, they just raped it.

RandomName2 wrote: »

Besides which, there was a responsibilitiy on the part of the banks not to hand over risky mortgages on the back of market bouyancy, nor on the public to take out risky mortgages on the back of the same bouyancy (i.e. if it was imperative for a couple to both be working in order to pay their mortgage, any economic downturn at all would seriously jeopardise their long-term capacity to pay it.)

Who exactly were the bankers? Who exactly ran this golden circle?
Sinn Féin? No I don't think so.

RandomName2 wrote: »

So, to equate this to .... let's say getting a truckdriver to drive a truck-bomb at an army checkpoint, or hanging a joyrider as an example to the community, or kidnapping a civilian family in order to stage a massive bank robbery is perhaps a slight exaggeration.

When was the last time anyone hanged a joyrider car thief? Stop making stuff up.
Truck bombs at occupation army checkpoints? Act of war. But that is behind us now just like the bombings in Dublin?
Bank robberies? Look around you my friend, look around you.

MysticalRain

I don't expect to be voting Sinn Fein at any point in my lifetime. Terrorism/criminality/far left economic policies and general thuggishness would put them off limits for me. You can say what you like about FF/Fine Gael etc, but none of them have killed anybody. At least not anytime in the last 80 years or so.

RandomName2

Hagar wrote: »

No, they just raped it.



Who exactly were the bankers? Who exactly ran this golden circle?
Sinn Féin? No I don't think so.


When was the last time anyone hanged a joyrider car thief? Stop making stuff up.
Truck bombs at occupation army checkpoints? Act of war. But that is behind us now just like the bombings in Dublin?
Bank robberies? Look around you my friend, look around you.

What a strange reply.

Last 'car theif' hanging that I know of was in the 80s, but the last kneecapping that I know of was only a few years back.

Truck bombs also kill the civilian truck drivers, of course (although they might have predominently been protestant - I am not sure).

Sinn Fein members certainly were not members of the Golden Circle - but then again, they didn't need to be.

Bombings in dublin - are you talking about Dublin-Monaghan? (Seems a bit unrelated as loyalists haven't had any party organisation in the south since 1920)

anonymous_joe

themont85 wrote: »

Essentially that poster saw that you lived in south Dublin and basically discounted it because of that. Ironic when in your post you mentioned Ringsend and Irishtown, two areas with a considerable amount of working class and shock shock horror is in D4.

Yeah, I noticed.

SF are a party who would be a disaster for Government. Their policies are in dreamland. Their objection to Lisbon was taken in my view just to be different than the other partys, i heard one of them championing the commisioner thing which was ''son'' which is bad for Europe and Ireland. Their candidates talk like robots most of the time and are clearly instructed rigidly. Their spiel on their IRA connections, people saying ''they were a fundamental part of the GF agreement and the ceasefire was ages ago'' are masking it from a party which still has certain election shops with IRA propaganda t-shirts and have robotic answers to any question of IRA murders-ie ''3,000 people died in a conflict, of course their were causalties''. Not good enough.

I'm not a fan of FF, Labour ect but there is something really distasteful about SF.

I do find things like their candidates inability to be politicians annoying. They're always going on about 'fighting' and 'struggles' and so on. It's silly empty emotive stuff.

Hagar wrote: »

Has everyone forgotten that both Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael were also both born out of armed struggle? Both had private armies, both committed atrocities in the name of the people and both are still fighting the civil war. At least Sinn Féin have moved on with the Good Friday Agreement.

A poster above mentioned that SF were good at a local level, given the circumstances they work in and the day to day opposition and obstacles they face I think that is quite an achievement.

People are always dragging out the lives that the IRA, or SF/IRA if you really must, have ruined. Step back and have a good look at the lives FF/FG have buggered up. Look at the number of people struggling to pay off unneccessary debt incurred by the greed of politicians working hand in hand with developers. Those lives are just as blighted by the effects of greed and wholesale corruption as are any lives blighted by violence. The only difference is that the dead are no longer suffering. Can the same be said of the many thousands upon thousands of people who have been ripped off by builders and are now paying off the builders debts while still struggling to pay their own debts?

Fear of Sinn Féin has been artificially engendered in the Irish people to cloud much bigger issues.

Fianna Fáil fcuked up the economy. I don't vote for them.

Sinn Féin have even more cack-handed financial policies. Why would people want to vote for them?

Add to that they're anti-Europe in a very pro-European country. That doesn't really make sense to me. Ireland's not big enough to get away with being Euro sceptic, even if it made sense. But it doesn't.

Scofflaw

Hagar wrote: »

A good deal of the blame for this can be directed at FF, I suppose, but it was hardly their ambition to kill the Celtic Tiger.

No, they just raped it.

Not entirely fair (or a pleasant image) - more a case of blowing the Celtic Tiger up into a Stripey Celtic Bubble, which then burst. However, theirs were hardly the only foot on the footpump.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Hagar

Scofflaw wrote: »

Not entirely fair (or a pleasant image) - more a case of blowing the Celtic Tiger up into a Stripey Celtic Bubble, which then burst. However, theirs were hardly the only foot on the footpump.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Acknowledged, but as the ruling party they had the power to influence the economy far more than the other parties. The did a lot of harm when they had the opportunity to do so much good.

mcronnymc

Tim Robbins wrote: »

That's absolutely absurd. You either a SF voter or you brought the country to economic mess.


I have never heard a SF politician speak intelligently about global economics and I watched several political programs every week.


No. The credit crunch and neo liberal economics which are major issues are anything but local.


A load of them haven't a clue.
However, the difference is in the other parties there's usually a few front bench types who have a bit of clue of complex issues such as geo politics and give the impression they would read a few books other than nationalistic struggles.

SF types give the impression that they are obsessed with nationalism. It underpins everything. They are like extreme religious people who think their God underpins everything. It then clouds their thinking or just shuts off thier thinking on more important issues.

I have to agree with you 100% on the sinn feiners never talking with any knowledge on the real issues that effect ireland. Gerry Adams on primetime springs to mind(before last general election), he was an embarrasment to be honest with his lack of knowledge on anything other than nationalism. I live in North Leitrim which draws in a huge Sinn fein vote, basically from people who sing rebel songs every weekend when they get drunk, and not been stuckup but basically haven't a clue about "real" issues. What is actually happening just after local election is that sinn feiners where voting for candidates that weren't even from there own area which i think really sums it up, any thoughts......

Liam Byrne

Hagar wrote: »

Yeah, very emotive. I'm deeply moved etc.
You forgot the gutless.
Now spend the next twenty years of your life working to hand over the wages from two full days a week of your hard work to a builder that bribed your oh so holy TD. It's robbing you, it's robbing you children and their children.
Good luck with that.

In case you hadn't noticed, FF is a "dirty word" too (even to the point that their candidates don't use it on their letters and make it tiny on their posters).

So we've established that both FF and SF are dirty words.

Just because you've highlighted that FF is/are, doesn't mean SF aren't.

Civilian_Target

Interesting thread, it's nice to see so many people have similar views to me.
Why is Sinn Fein dirty to me?

• Sinn Fein are associated with the IRA. I lived in the North in the 90's and could never vote for that
• Their economic policies don't add up
• Looking at the way the party works, looking from the outside in, it seems facist. We were over that in the 30s, lets not go back
• I don't want a united Ireland. The principle is nice, but I'd be happy to let the Brits live with the mess they created in the North, at least for now

I will confess, I like Sinn Fein's community activism.
I like the fact that they work closely with local people to build new sports facilities, clean town initiatives etc. and wish other Irish political parties would learn from this rather than just printing flyers.

However, in the end not only do I not vote for Sinn Fein, I actively vote against them at every opportunity.

Mexician

i wud never vote for fianna fail, they ruined the country.
i voted for Fine Gael`s Emma Kiernan as she would work hard to resolve your problems.

sein fein dont care about the republic !!

does anyone know where would you get used 50kg fertiliser plastic bags for sale ?

Scofflaw

Mexician wrote: »

i wud never vote for fianna fail, they ruined the country.
i voted for Fine Gael`s Emma Kiernan as she would work hard to resolve your problems.

sein fein dont care about the republic !!

does anyone know where would you get used 50kg fertiliser plastic bags for sale ?

That last bit there? No thanks. We're trying to keep the peace here.

moderately,
Scofflaw

RandomName2

Mexician wrote: »

used 50kg fertiliser plastic bags

In fact, this is quite a neat way not only an answer to the thread topic, but the nature of Irish politics in general:

Fertiliser is used by the farmers of Fine Gael and Fianna Fail (small and large farms)

Fertiliser is used by the IRA for weapons against the state (hence a radical body)

Fertiliser is not used at all by the workers (Ireland is a traditionally agricultural society- hence the permanent minority status of Labour and Socialism in general)

Methods of using fertiliser, but not in an agicultural sense, is the mainstay of the Greens (hence their support by urbanites who idealise anti-industrial policies)

Libertas members probably don't know what fertiliser is (hence lack of impact in Irish politics).

Liam Byrne

You forgot to mention the amount of fertiliser that FF have been spouting for the past 9 - 12 months.....

mcmic

its such a dirty word because right now we are in the middle of a future history book.

FF and FG were born out of necessity and fought British rule to become the republic. There was violence, murder and hundreds lost their lives. Just watch Michael Collins for gods sake!!! Remember leaarning all that in school?:D
Imagine the horror!!!!!!!

The six counties were obviously a bit miffed they were handed to Britain ...... and the beat goes on are yous getting me?
Natives were kicked off their land/out of homes etc and the IRA/SF was born, to fight British rule, and of course that went on for years and yes there was murder violence and horror. The people are now coming to the better side of those times, just as republicans in the south did way back then, but it took a long time in the south in the days of Mixhael Collins/De Valera etc and naturaly enough it is taking a long time in the north today.

England just so happened to be a Protestant country, and Ireland just happened to be a Catholic. That is not what it was about. Yes that is what it turned into, because after a few generations when all English accents were diluted the only difference was religion. Unfortunate.

For the most part, it doesnt matter anymore as catholics in the north who happened to be in Paisleys constituency will tell you that they voted for him and that he was an asset in political terms to their community and and Protestants in the south (and i mean Donegal because the Dail does nothing for us) will quite happily tell you in a hushed voice of course that SF is your man for the people. Remember both side incited hatred though.

phew so SF is a dirty word because the atrocoties (committed by both sides) are still in living memory. There are still men and women that can tell you first hand some awful stories, there are still families both protestant and catholic who are grieving etc.

Give it a few more chapters in the history book:p




Also Id like to see the Irish to start resisting party politics odnt vote for ff/fg/sf/gp/lp or whatever just coz thats what your parents always did or thats what your mate says is best etc! We have got to start voting geographically so we have representative from our own area who actually do the best job and work hard for the people regardless of what party they belong to!

JayeL

Sorry for length here, people - I've probably got too much to say but it's too late now!

Many, many problems with Sinn Féin but I'll keep it to the main ones. Firstly, it's the name; "ourselves alone". I don't subscribe to that viewpoint whatsoever and it sums up so much of what Sinn Féin are about. "We" = Irish. "We" = Irish-speaking. "We" = exclusively-republican, with only one view of history. Mind you, "Soldiers of Destiny" (FF) or "Family of the Irish" (FG) aren't too hot either, so maybe I'll let them away with it.

Secondly, it's their history. I know that apart from the Green Party and Labour, every other political party in the Dáil is derived from an armed movement. But FF and FG put their guns down before my parents were born and don't have any connection with any murders committed in recent memory. Time is a healer and maybe my children could vote for SF with a clear conscience, but I can't. They murdered innocent people in my name.

Thirdly, it's their current stance on some unfinished business. They still think the IRA were right to launch an armed campaign against innocent civilians. They still think that by not eating to gain concessions from their opponents and subsequently dying from the effects, a man and the movement behind him can blame his death on those opponents. They refuse to accept political realities and represent their constituents in the UK parliament because they don't recognise its authority and yet they can recognise all that lovely cash with the Queen's head on it when it suits them.

And they still don't think that shooting a member of the Garda Siochana during the course of a bank robbery is a crime worth condemning.

Which brings me to my fourth point; they're awfully-hard to pin down. They were rabidly-socialist until power got close and now that they're in government in the North, they've toned down the rhetoric. Equally in the Republic, they've shown time and time again that "these are our principles and if you don't like them, we have others". They can barely stick to the script.

Fifthly (if that's even a word), SF is, to me (28yr old male, born and raised Catholic in the Republic with no blood links to anywhere but Mayo) a rather foreign entity. Sure, they have an Irish name and feature tricolours and the island of Ireland in a lot of their literature - but that's a bit, y'know, un-Irish, isn't it? Since when did a political party in the Republic feel they had to put quite so much green, white and orange on their posters? Whatever about the past, SF right now is an organisation that almost has to keep re-iterating its Irishness because, as decided by all the people of the island of Ireland in the Good Friday Agreement, they are primarily-based in the part of Ireland that's in the UK. Whereas every other party in the Republic, and I think everyone from here too, simply IS Irish - there's no ambiguity, so we can get on with other things. SF often feels like some bunch of Irish-Americans wearing green, white and orange wigs on "St. Patty's Day". There's also the insinuation that by being "so Irish", everyone else is less Irish. There's another party that likes to do a lot of flag-waving, again insinuating that in doing so, they're more patriotic than others.

But how could I compare SF to the BNP? One is a rather nasty group of narrow-minded, mono-cultural windbags with a history of violence - and the other is the BNP.

Yet another reason; I cannot stand the republican movement's general double-standards - so many to pick from but here's one. In 1988, 3 IRA operatives were shot dead in Gibraltar by the SAS. Ok, in hindsight, the SAS were wrong to shoot 3 unarmed people in a public place. But the outcry from republicans was pathetic. They referred to the Troubles as "the war", and yet when 3 of their "soldiers" get shot by the enemy, they start throwing their toys out of the pram and demanding enquiries and compensation, as if these 3 people were on holidays and were on their way for an ice-cream when these nasty Brits went and shot them down for no reason. If it's a "war" they were involved in, why complain? They'd have done the same thing if they had the chance to kill an SAS man in west Belfast - and they did soon afterwards.
It's this victim mentality, almost as infuriating as the unionist siege mentality, that gets me; this feeling that they're constantly-downtrodden and now that they're not, SF are a bit lost. Because now they're at once part of the establishment in the North (so they can't blame anyone else up there) and the fringe loony left in the Republic, where they're becoming increasingly irrelevant.

Finally, I don't want a united Ireland. Ireland itself i.e. 26 counties needs to re-examine where it's going in light of recent events. Firstly, the boom and bust of the past few years is no way to run a country. We had our first chance at sustained gradual prosperity and we blew it by giving too much wage increases, not spreading the wealth enough and not cooling down the economy. We lost the run of ourselves; and if we can't handle ourselves with money, then we certainly couldn't handle ourselves without money. Secondly, Ireland still has this attachment to the rotting limb that is the Catholic Church and no-one wants to take a hacksaw to it. I wouldn't agree with unionists on a lot of things, but their mantra of "home rule = Rome rule" came true, didn't it?

A united Ireland would be an unmitigated disaster, even if a majority of unionists consented to it. The North is unviable as a separate entity to the UK; it's heavily dependent on the public service, it has an institutionally-sectarian government (fine for conflict resolution but this is the real world, lads) and there still exists the kind of sectarian attitudes that started the whole mess in the first place.

SF still believe in that and it's one of their core values. And they're welcome to it - but for this and everything else, count me out.

conchubhar1

sinn féin is a republican party :rolleyes:
to not have ''so much'' green white and orange would be like labour not using red and also fianna fáil had the tricolor as big as they had the party name

your other points are so biased and untrue i feel not need to counteract them - you simply cant compare sinn féin and the bnp

democratic ulster party?
traditional unionist voice?

surely to god they dont alienate people by their names?
just the irish parties

one of the hunger strikers was an elected mp
also they wanted to be treated as political prisioners - not terrorist which is what they were

the six counties wouldnt be viable but ireland as a whole would be viable - in 20 or so years down the line when the north prospers as it wasnt that long ago that they hadnt given votes to all its citezens or alowed a peacful civil rights march either - it will be prosperous for ireland as a whole in the future

PrivateEye

I never got why Labour isn't a dirty word to be honest.

Frank Ross M.E.P was interned no? And did his time in the Officials?
And Gilmore....well there's a sticky issue.

It's pure media hype to be honest, amazing what people will actually buy. The 'mad nationalist' labelling is the strangest part of it all, not so much today but in the 70s and 80s Sinn Féin were at the front of a progressive movement for socialism in the North, and clearly anti-fascist and left-wing. If you think of nationalism in terms of rosary beads and 'wrap the green flag around me' sh/te, then FF are the worst offenders without doubt. They've basically got elected on nationalist "made to measure history" in every election since their foundation.

I don't vote or support any political party, but there is a reason Sinn Féin are hated in particular areas and not others. They did the groundwork in ordinary parts of Dublin (My Da's a fireman and remembers run ins with them when they were involved in anti-drugs stuff late at night, and also the provos running a group of kids who were chucking rocks at the fireengines) but the media image of Sinn Féin is the one that most people bought.

Since when did a political party in the Republic feel they had to put quite so much green, white and orange on their posters

Fianna Fail. Look at their website, look at their posters.

Feck, they even have yearly commemerations at Arbour Hill for the leaders of 1916, and around the country for basically every republican figurehead. Tom Barry, Liam Mellows, Liam Lynch off the top of my head. They trade in nationalist feeling and without it would be fuc/ed.

does anyone know where would you get used 50kg fertiliser plastic bags for sale ?

Proinseas might.

Liam Byrne

PrivateEye wrote: »

Ithe media image of Sinn Féin is the one that most people bought.

There's no question of "buying" one image or another.

Ferris was asked a straight question and refused to answer it in a way that was acceptable to voters.

If she had, she'd be a LOT more acceptable.

The "media image" didn't dictate how she should answer.

goldenbrown

one example of a few:

from wiki

Jean McConville was a Belfast-born mother of 10 who was abducted from her home and killed by the Provisional Irish Republican Army (IRA) on or around Christmas of 1972.
Contents
[hide]

* 1 Biography
* 2 Secret burial
* 3 Aftermath
* 4 Result of Police Ombudsman investigation
* 5 Result of Provisional IRA investigation
* 6 References

[edit] Biography

Jean McConville (born 1934) was born a Protestant in East Belfast but converted to Catholicism after marrying Arthur McConville, a Catholic man by whom she had ten children. He was a former British Army soldier.[1] After being intimidated out of a Protestant district, the McConville family moved to West Belfast's Divis Flats in the Lower Falls Road.[2] Arthur died in 1971. Jean McConville was abducted from her home in December 1972 by an IRA gang comprising both men and women, alleging that she was an informer.

[edit] Secret burial

McConville's body was buried secretly on a beach in County Louth, approximately 50 miles from her home. The IRA did not admit their involvement until over 20 years later, when they passed information on the whereabouts of the body.[3]

After a prolonged search, co-ordinated by the Garda Síochána - during which the search area and time involved was expanded by the Gardaí - the search was abandoned, as no body could be located in the area specified by the IRA.

In August 2003, her body was accidentally found by members of the public while they were walking on Shelling Hill beach.

Jean McConville was buried beside her husband Arthur in Holy Trinity graveyard, Lisburn, County Antrim.[4][5]

[edit] Aftermath

McConville's family contend that she was killed as a punishment for aiding a dying British soldier outside her home at Divis Flats following a fierce gun battle with the IRA, but the IRA claimed that they had discovered she was passing information on local republicans to the security forces via a secret radio transmitter.[3]

McConville's children reject this claim and have called on the IRA to clear her name. In January 2005, Sinn Féin party chairman, Mitchel McLaughlin, claimed that the killing of Jean McConville was not a criminal act.[6]

In response to McLaughlin's statement, Social Democratic and Labour Party Justice Spokesperson Alban Maginness suggested that the IRA were culpable for war crimes as Jean McConville was "killed ‘without previous judgement pronounced by a regularly constituted court affording all judicial guarantees which are generally recognised as indispensable’, and that constitutes a war crime in the definition of the International Criminal Court". A second war crime occurred by the IRA’s ‘refusal to acknowledge deprivation of [her] freedom or to give information on [her] fate or whereabouts’".[7]

[edit] Result of Police Ombudsman investigation

In July 2006, Police Ombudsman Nuala O'Loan stated after an investigation by her office that there is no evidence that Jean McConville ever passed information to the security forces. Mrs O'Loan said she would give the family more details of the findings of her investigation in the near future and would make those details public.

Mrs O'Loan said it was not her normal role to confirm or deny the identity of people working as agents for the security services. "However, this situation is unique. Jean McConville left an orphaned family, the youngest of whom were six-year-old boys. The family have suffered extensively over the years, as we all know, and that suffering has only been made worse by allegations that their mother was an informant. As part of our investigation we have looked very extensively at all the intelligence available at the time. There is no evidence that Mrs McConville gave information to the police, the military or the security service".[8]

In August 2006, Northern Ireland's chief constable Sir Hugh Orde said he is not hopeful anyone will be brought to account over the murder. Sir Hugh said: "Any case of that age, it is highly unlikely that a successful prosecution could be mounted."[9]

[edit] Result of Provisional IRA investigation

"Statement on the Abduction and Killing of Mrs Jean McConville in December 1972", (dated 8 July 2006) by P O’Neill, Irish Republican Publicity Bureau, Dublin

[edit] References

1. ^ Guardian.co.uk
2. ^ David McKittrick The London Independent 25 September 2003
3. ^ a b No evidence for McConville agent claim: O'Loan
4. ^ Jean McConville laid to rest after 31 years
5. ^ Adams 'at heart' of IRA's most shameful killing campaign
6. ^ Resignation call rejected"
7. ^ MAGINNESS: KILLING OF JEAN MCCONVILLE A WAR CRIMESDLP website, 20 January 2005
8. ^ Disappeared victim 'not informer' BBC website, 7 July 2006
9. ^ IRA murder prosecution 'unlikely' BBC website, 14 August 2006

JayeL

conchubhar1 wrote: »

sinn féin is a republican party :rolleyes:
to not have ''so much'' green white and orange would be like labour not using red and also fianna fáil had the tricolor as big as they had the party name

What exactly does "republican" mean when the country is a republic? It's one thing if you live in a monarchy and you're advocating a republican system. But in the Irish context, republican seems to mean "more Irish". And I reject that - incidentally, I have no time for Fianna Fáil's republican crap either, even though I think Arbour Hill, Bodenstown etc. is mostly lip-service at this stage.

conchubhar1 wrote: »

your other points are so biased and untrue i feel not need to counteract them - you simply cant compare sinn féin and the bnp

Biased? Of course, it's called "an opinion"! It's inherently-biased. Unfortunately you don't outline what untrue things I've said, you've simply dismissed them. Because republicanism is such a bleedin obvious way to be that anyone that needs to be convinced of it is obviously an idiot, right?

conchubhar1 wrote: »

democratic ulster party?
traditional unionist voice?

surely to god they dont alienate people by their names?
just the irish parties

Typical next move by a republican; he disagrees with me, he must have unionist sympathies, what about "your" side? Well I have no unionist sympathies; unionism is irrelevant in the Republic of Ireland. But as for my opinion on the DUP; I think they're snakes-in-the-grass. I think they waited, bided their time, waited for David Trimble to take the big, dangerous steps, basically sacrificing himself and his party and then cruise on through, with childish reluctance, towards sharing power with republicans/nationalists. I think that power-sharing is still a big problem for some unionists, who feel it's their "wee country", their homeland and why should they have to share it - "sure it'd be a bog without us". The TUV, if they're even a party to begin with (they have one MEP and that's it), is basically the part of the DUP that are confused and scared of the idea of sharing power with people for whom the Union isn't the be all and end all. Luckily, it's pretty small or else nothing would get done up there.

So basically, I've got my own issues with unionist parties; they could do with being a lot less tribal and a lot more confident. I think that the Union is secure for a long time yet and they should feel confident in standing for Amhrán na bhFiann at a GAA match in the North because it's only cultural expression - they seem to think it's treason. But then I'm not being asked for my vote by them, am I?

conchubhar1 wrote: »

one of the hunger strikers was an elected mp
also they wanted to be treated as political prisioners - not terrorist which is what they were

Precisely; he was elected an MP (again, not sure if you can call yourself a member of a place you won't sit in) but he was still a terrorist. And he committed the kind of childish emotional blackmail that should have been ignored by all concerned. Having the right to, amongst other things, wear jeans in jail is not worth dying for and political prisoner status would only become a real issue if the possibility of their release as part of a final settlement came up. And as it happened, it did and they were released under the Agreement.

conchubhar1 wrote: »

the six counties wouldnt be viable but ireland as a whole would be viable - in 20 or so years down the line when the north prospers as it wasnt that long ago that they hadnt given votes to all its citezens or alowed a peacful civil rights march either - it will be prosperous for ireland as a whole in the future

The logic of joining two nearby places into one political unit isn't necessarily valid. Here's a quick analogy:

Imagine if everyone in Britain, like the vast, vast majority of people in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, wanted the Republic of Ireland to re-join the UK. Imagine if their rhetoric was always "they need to come back to the family of the British Isles" (incidentally, this is a BNP policy; they think we're errant children of the Empire or something). And there was a small but growing unionist minority in Ireland who also wanted this, who wanted to "re-join the motherland". After all, we all speak English, go to dark little pubs and drink beer, eat fried breakfasts and cheer on English football teams - we're practically the same already.

Then the Irish government decided "ok, we'll have a referendum so - vote no and nothing changes (until the next referendum), vote yes and we'll start painting the postboxes red on Monday".

But since this will affect everyone in Britain and Ireland, everyone will have to vote. So that's 60m possible "yes" votes and a maximum of 4m "no" votes. So even if every single person in the Republic said no, democracy would prevail and before we know it, we're driving Vauxhalls.

Republicanism is based on a similar philosophy; it's all about what "all the people" want - providing it's their definition of "the people". It's convincing yourself and others that a certain piece of land is "the country" and borders are only a point of view. It took a long time for SF to be convinced that it's not about what the island wants, it's about what Northern Ireland wants. And I still don't think they're convinced; they certainly haven't accepted realities, they won't even refer to "Northern Ireland" yet, despite being in the "Northern Ireland Assembly" and supporting the "Police Service of Northern Ireland". They continue to aspire to a "united Ireland", conveniently forgetting that the only thing that united Ireland was British rule - beyond that, unionists have little to find common cause with us in (bar the rugby team, who SF shunned when they met Queen Elizabeth in Belfast - it would have been an amazing sight for Martin McGuinness to actually do the introducing there and a huge confidence-building measure but there you go).

The type of republicanism that SF espouse is all about coercing everyone - in the past with guns, today with words and deeds - into a "united Ireland" without once stopping to acknowledge, respect or even take part in any other philosophy on this island. FF might be republicans, but their nominee for president attends Remembrance Day services and has built more goodwill amongst loyalists in the North than anyone from the Falls has. The Irish government gives grants to Orange halls (quietly) and presides over the biggest Orange parade of them all (Rossnowlagh, Co. Donegal), they've protected Protestant schools for years (very good move in hindsight) and they've preserved the Battle of the Boyne site and built an interpretive centre there. They've also encouraged cultural exchanges and just last month allowed unionists from Derry to get Irish passports with their birthplace as "Londonderry".

I'm no fan of FF, but it's a much more tolerant, open and laudable form of republicanism than anything SF have ever offered.

junder

JayeL wrote: »

What exactly does "republican" mean when the country is a republic? It's one thing if you live in a monarchy and you're advocating a republican system. But in the Irish context, republican seems to mean "more Irish". And I reject that - incidentally, I have no time for Fianna Fáil's republican crap either, even though I think Arbour Hill, Bodenstown etc. is mostly lip-service at this stage.



Biased? Of course, it's called "an opinion"! It's inherently-biased. Unfortunately you don't outline what untrue things I've said, you've simply dismissed them. Because republicanism is such a bleedin obvious way to be that anyone that needs to be convinced of it is obviously an idiot, right?



Typical next move by a republican; he disagrees with me, he must have unionist sympathies, what about "your" side? Well I have no unionist sympathies; unionism is irrelevant in the Republic of Ireland. But as for my opinion on the DUP; I think they're snakes-in-the-grass. I think they waited, bided their time, waited for David Trimble to take the big, dangerous steps, basically sacrificing himself and his party and then cruise on through, with childish reluctance, towards sharing power with republicans/nationalists. I think that power-sharing is still a big problem for some unionists, who feel it's their "wee country", their homeland and why should they have to share it - "sure it'd be a bog without us". The TUV, if they're even a party to begin with (they have one MEP and that's it), is basically the part of the DUP that are confused and scared of the idea of sharing power with people for whom the Union isn't the be all and end all. Luckily, it's pretty small or else nothing would get done up there.

So basically, I've got my own issues with unionist parties; they could do with being a lot less tribal and a lot more confident. I think that the Union is secure for a long time yet and they should feel confident in standing for Amhrán na bhFiann at a GAA match in the North because it's only cultural expression - they seem to think it's treason. But then I'm not being asked for my vote by them, am I?



Precisely; he was elected an MP (again, not sure if you can call yourself a member of a place you won't sit in) but he was still a terrorist. And he committed the kind of childish emotional blackmail that should have been ignored by all concerned. Having the right to, amongst other things, wear jeans in jail is not worth dying for and political prisoner status would only become a real issue if the possibility of their release as part of a final settlement came up. And as it happened, it did and they were released under the Agreement.



The logic of joining two nearby places into one political unit isn't necessarily valid. Here's a quick analogy:

Imagine if everyone in Britain, like the vast, vast majority of people in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, wanted the Republic of Ireland to re-join the UK. Imagine if their rhetoric was always "they need to come back to the family of the British Isles" (incidentally, this is a BNP policy; they think we're errant children of the Empire or something). And there was a small but growing unionist minority in Ireland who also wanted this, who wanted to "re-join the motherland". After all, we all speak English, go to dark little pubs and drink beer, eat fried breakfasts and cheer on English football teams - we're practically the same already.

Then the Irish government decided "ok, we'll have a referendum so - vote no and nothing changes (until the next referendum), vote yes and we'll start painting the postboxes red on Monday".

But since this will affect everyone in Britain and Ireland, everyone will have to vote. So that's 60m possible "yes" votes and a maximum of 4m "no" votes. So even if every single person in the Republic said no, democracy would prevail and before we know it, we're driving Vauxhalls.

Republicanism is based on a similar philosophy; it's all about what "all the people" want - providing it's their definition of "the people". It's convincing yourself and others that a certain piece of land is "the country" and borders are only a point of view. It took a long time for SF to be convinced that it's not about what the island wants, it's about what Northern Ireland wants. And I still don't think they're convinced; they certainly haven't accepted realities, they won't even refer to "Northern Ireland" yet, despite being in the "Northern Ireland Assembly" and supporting the "Police Service of Northern Ireland". They continue to aspire to a "united Ireland", conveniently forgetting that the only thing that united Ireland was British rule - beyond that, unionists have little to find common cause with us in (bar the rugby team, who SF shunned when they met Queen Elizabeth in Belfast - it would have been an amazing sight for Martin McGuinness to actually do the introducing there and a huge confidence-building measure but there you go).

The type of republicanism that SF espouse is all about coercing everyone - in the past with guns, today with words and deeds - into a "united Ireland" without once stopping to acknowledge, respect or even take part in any other philosophy on this island. FF might be republicans, but their nominee for president attends Remembrance Day services and has built more goodwill amongst loyalists in the North than anyone from the Falls has. The Irish government gives grants to Orange halls (quietly) and presides over the biggest Orange parade of them all (Rossnowlagh, Co. Donegal), they've protected Protestant schools for years (very good move in hindsight) and they've preserved the Battle of the Boyne site and built an interpretive centre there. They've also encouraged cultural exchanges and just last month allowed unionists from Derry to get Irish passports with their birthplace as "Londonderry".

I'm no fan of FF, but it's a much more tolerant, open and laudable form of republicanism than anything SF have ever offered.

Brilliant post, the words nail, hammer and head spring to mind

Straighttalker

Eh hello... They support murderers... enough said

Can'tseeme

JayeL wrote: »

What exactly does "republican" mean when the country is a republic? It's one thing if you live in a monarchy and you're advocating a republican system. But in the Irish context, republican seems to mean "more Irish". And I reject that - incidentally, I have no time for Fianna Fáil's republican crap either, even though I think Arbour Hill, Bodenstown etc. is mostly lip-service at this stage.

What Sinn Fein is looking for is a '32 county republic'. Which is why they highlight being republican. I don't agree with your term "more Irish", I think it's a case that they've spent alot of their time defending the "Irishness" in the north. Which Unionists have tried to airbrush out of the north.

JayeL wrote: »

The logic of joining two nearby places into one political unit isn't necessarily valid.

As it could necessarily be valid and make more sense. A small island with a small population but yet geared in two diferent ways only hampers economic growth. You could use the analogy that Britian makes more sense working together as an island instead of Scotland breaking off.

JayeL wrote: »

The type of republicanism that SF espouse is all about coercing everyone - in the past with guns, today with words and deeds - into a "united Ireland" without once stopping to acknowledge, respect or even take part in any other philosophy on this island.

The past conflict was born out of fustration, resentment and oppression from living under a Protestant state which therefore led to the struggle to free the six counties from the oppressor. From that came a peace process and compromise into what we have now. Today Sinn Fein have political ideals of a new Ireland of respect, equality and independence for everyone on the Island. If we do get a consitituational referendum, and the vote is yes from the people of Ireland, I think if you check, Sinn Fein want to open up this idea on how it could appeal to people from a unionist background. What compromises would need to be made from Ireland, what kind of partnership we want with Britian in the future.