Republican prisoners

Stabshauptmann

Republican Sinn Fein held a protest outside Portlaoise Prison this weekend over plans to stop the segregation of republican prisoners.
http://rsf-kildare.blogspot.com/2010/01/portlaoise-prison-protest-saturday-23rd.html

This just got me thinking:
A)Whos still left in Portloaise Prison. Even Dessie O Hare has been released (arguably the most crazed and dangerous paramilitary of the troubles)

B)Do / did republicans have "political status" in the Irish and British prison systems?

Victor

Most are RIRA/CIRA members.

seanybiker

shouldnt have been segregated in the first place.

Stabshauptmann

Victor wrote: »

Most are RIRA/CIRA members.

I figured they were dissidents, I was wondering how many approx and whether there were any notable inmates.

Im still trying to find out whether or not republican prisoners have (or had) political / special category status.
I had thought that the 5 demands of the 1981 hunger strike were eventually given, but cant find anything to support that on the net. Was I wrong?

At any rate thats NI. What is / was the case in RoI?

nesf

Anything better than 23 hours of solitary a day is too good for them.

Stabshauptmann

nesf wrote: »

Anything better than 23 hours of solitary a day is too good for them.

Would you grow up:rolleyes:

If you dont know who these prisoners are, making a statent like that makes you look like a twat. Do you know their names, and what they are individually imprisoned for?

FlutterinBantam

Stabshauptmann wrote: »

Would you grow up:rolleyes:

If you dont know who these prisoners are, making a statent like that makes you look like a twat. Do you know their names, and what they are individually imprisoned for?

No I don't, and you know something? I don't care either.

I pay the agencies of the State through my taxes to take care of these things,and I trust their judgment.

What ordinary individual ,unless he/she is a fellow traveller, knows or cares who the prisoners in Portlaoise are?

Making statements like that make you seem naive in the extreme sir

nesf

Stabshauptmann wrote: »

Would you grow up:rolleyes:

If you dont know who these prisoners are, making a statent like that makes you look like a twat. Do you know their names, and what they are individually imprisoned for?

Oh please, any convicted member of the RIRA or CIRA deserves very nasty sentences for willingly associating themselves with murderers, the same as any other criminal associate.

junder

political status in northern ireland was effectivley lost when the GFA was signed and the prisoners were released

Liam Byrne

Well that's a joke!

People put in prison for giving the law of the land two fingers expect to have a say in where they're imprisoned, and how ?

Oh wait....I forgot, this is Ireland.

gandalf

These people should be in with the general prison population with no special threatment given. They are just another bunch of petty criminals at this stage.

FTA69

Dessie O'Hare was actually in Castelrea before he was released.

Portlaoise contains a number of Republican prisoners, people from the CIRA, RIRA, a number of prisoners who split off from the Real IRA and are associated with Michael McKevitt, a couple of Provos and a swollen group of INLA prisoners, many of whom are there as a result of Declan Duffy's antics in Dublin.

Generally these prisoners have de facto segregation and political status within a number of landings in Portlaoise; both because of their nature as political prisoners and the practical implications of such a policy, i.e it is highly doubtful political prisoners will be prepared to share landings with criminals.

They'd be better off maintaining the status quo within the prison to be honest.

Sleepy

[pedant] They're not 'prisoners'. They're 'convicts'.[/pedant]

Don't dishonour the memory of real soldiers with poor use of grammar.

FTA69

Sleepy wrote: »

[pedant] They're not 'prisoners'. They're 'convicts'.[/pedant]

Don't dishonour the memory of real soldiers with poor use of grammar.

Balls. A prisoner is someone who's held in a prison.

Grammar my arse.

Liam Byrne

FTA69 wrote: »

it is highly doubtful political prisoners will be prepared to share landings with criminals.

Firstly, there's little difference. I don't know of any true political prisoner in Ireland (i.e. someone who's in prison solely because of their beliefs); most are in prison because they robbed or killed, or did something illegal.

And if they wanted to have a say in terms of who they share with, then they shouldn't have committed those crimes.

Having criminals dictate their conditions is sickening.

FTA69

What you're alluding to is a prisoner of conscience.

As far as I'm concerned a political prisoner is someone who is in jail as a result of political actions. By your logic Nelson Mandela wasn't a political prisoner at all, rather a criminal who was in jail simply because he committed an illegal act. Likewise with Terence MacSwiney and others.

Whether you agree with those particular actions is immaterial, it doesn't change the fact they are in jail as a result of their participation in political organisations and as such could be considered political prisoners.

Sleepy

By your definiton of that term any prisoner in Ireland could claim to be a political prisoner by claiming a belief in anarchism.

FTA69

Sleepy wrote: »

By your definiton of that term any prisoner in Ireland could claim to be a political prisoner by claiming a belief in anarchism.

No, you're talking sh*t again. Anarchism is an ideology basically concerned with libertarian-communism, and I doubt junkies, rapists and handbag snatchers could say they identify with that particular philosophy.

gent9662

FTA69 wrote: »

What you're alluding to is a prisoner of conscience.

As far as I'm concerned a political prisoner is someone who is in jail as a result of political actions. By your logic Nelson Mandela wasn't a political prisoner at all, rather a criminal who was in jail simply because he committed an illegal act. Likewise with Terence MacSwiney and others.

Whether you agree with those particular actions is immaterial, it doesn't change the fact they are in jail as a result of their participation in political organisations and as such could be considered political prisoners.

So I take it you would agree that Al Qaeda should be classed as political and be given status as such?

Sleepy

Junkie could claim the libertarian "political belief" that he's entitled to injest anything he chooses.

Rapist could claim the Fundamentalist Islamic political belief that a woman "indecently dressed" in public is putting a man under temptation he can't be expected to resist.

Handbag snatcher could claim the political belief that he didn't recognise the right to private property.

I'm being facetious here but I honestly see no difference to those arguments than I do to a murderer claiming they killed out of their political belief in a united ireland.

Poccington

FTA69 wrote: »

Generally these prisoners have de facto segregation and political status within a number of landings in Portlaoise; both because of their nature as political prisoners and the practical implications of such a policy, i.e it is highly doubtful political prisoners will be prepared to share landings with criminals.

I agree with FTA.

The Republican prisoners in Portlaoise won't share landings with the "normal" prisoners.

FTA69

So I take it you would agree that Al Qaeda should be classed as political and be given status as such?

I'd say they are political prisoners, that term doesn't necessarily sanitise or justify any particular action in my opinion though. For instance I'd also argue that Loyalists who were in jail during the conflict here were political prisoners, despite me disagreeing vehemently with them and their actions.

I'm being facetious here but I honestly see no difference to those arguments than I do to a murderer claiming they killed out of their political belief in a united ireland.

Listen, you're talking rubbish lad. First of all you start going on about how it's wrong to call someone in prison a "prisoner" and now you're going on about how petty criminals are actually practising Anarchism or Sharia Law or whatever. It's a nonsense argument.

By virtue of the fact that these people are involved in political organisations pursuing political conflict then they can be termed political prisoners. Whether they get segregated or not, or the treatment they get etc is a different argument.

As I said above, they're segregated out of practicality as much as anything else.

Liam Byrne

FTA69 wrote: »

Whether you agree with those particular actions is immaterial, it doesn't change the fact they are in jail as a result of their participation in political organisations and as such could be considered political prisoners.

But it's not "immaterial" by any stretch of the imagination.

Killing someone is a crime.

If you're in jail for killing someone, then you're in jail for killing someone; if you're in jail for robbing a bank or money transit, then you're in jail for robbing the bank or money transit.......you are not in jail because you "believed in something" in particular or "participated in a political organisation".

I mean, if I believed that the only way to stop FF wrecking this country further was to kill Brian Cowen and a few more, that would be a "political belief"; but it wouldn't mean that I wasn't committing a crime if I followed through and did it.

And I would - rightly - do time for the crime; not for "believing they were wrecking the country".

If I were to be jailed for simply believing it, I would have been jailed about 7 years ago, in which case I would have been a "political prisoner".

FTA69

Poccington wrote: »

I agree with FTA.

The Republican prisoners in Portlaoise won't share landings with the "normal" prisoners.

After the 1981 Hunger Strike the Brits tried to desegregate the H Blocks. In wings where Republicans were the majoirty (most wings were) Loyalists were told to remove themselves, most of them time they wrecked their cells and were transferred to a different block. In wings where they were more evenly matched Republicans seized control of the workshops and wings by invading areas en-masse and battering the Loyalists until they were moved. By 1982 Long Kesh was effectively segregated.

If you start moving criminals onto a Real IRA landing it won't be long until they are removed.

OS119

dclane wrote: »

So I take it you would agree that Al Qaeda should be classed as political and be given status as such?

AQ members/fellow travellers carry out actions because of, and to further, political causes - in exactly the same way as CIRA/RIRA/INLA et al members do - personally i don't see the issue with recognising that they are 'political prisoners' in the same way we recognise that some prisoners commit crime because they are have mental health problems, or are sex-offenders, or are sadistic nutcases, or just anti-social filth. recognising that a prisoner commits crime for a particular reason doesn't automatically mean that you give them any greater privilage than any other prisoner deemed to commit crime for any other reason.

i don't think that any prisoner should get any better - or worse - incarceration than any other prisoner, and i certainly don't think that in principle that prisoners should get to choose which other prisoners they do or do not serve their time with, however i do understand that objective reality means that the likelyhood of escape attempts by 'organised' prisoners means they have to be kept in the most secure prisons - hence the 'terrorist wings' almost become self-selecting given the relatively small number of prison facilities able to secure those inmates.

Liam Byrne

Poccington wrote: »

I agree with FTA.

The Republican prisoners in Portlaoise won't share landings with the "normal" prisoners.

What gives them the right to dictate ?

Criminals should take what they get; they had a choice not to be criminals.

FTA69 wrote: »

If you start moving criminals onto a Real IRA landing it won't be long until they are removed.

Did you leave out the word "more" ?

gent9662

FTA69 wrote: »

After the 1981 Hunger Strike the Brits tried to desegregate the H Blocks. In wings where Republicans were the majoirty (most wings were) Loyalists were told to remove themselves, most of them time they wrecked their cells and were transferred to a different block. In wings where they were more evenly matched Republicans seized control of the workshops and wings by invading areas en-masse and battering the Loyalists until they were moved. By 1982 Long Kesh was effectively segregated.

If you start moving criminals onto a Real IRA landing it won't be long until they are removed.

I my opinion the vast majority of the republican movement have voted and opted for peaceful means in order to obtain a united Ireland. Given this democratic mandate, I am of the opinion that any group opposed to this should not be given any political status in the republic especially. The Real and Continuity IRA targeted both Catholics and Protestants when they planted the Omagh bomb.

If you look at other countries such as the USA, do right wing extremists have political status? Timothy McVeigh was given the death penalty. I would argue that the real and continuity IRA are committing treason and as such should not be given any extra political status. It would be more suitable for these members to be put in solitary confinement until such time as they are willing to enter the general population of prison society.

OS119

Liam Byrne wrote: »

What gives them the right to dictate ?

Criminals should take what they get; they had a choice not to be criminals.

nothing nice gives them the right to dictate, they shouldn't have the right to dictate - ideally they should be dispersed throughout the prison system acording to their security risk and be identical to the rapists, muggers and heroin dealers - however, in a society where everyone knows everyone else, where prison officers are unarmed, and, not far to the north, 'dissident' groups have in the last month put a bomb under the car of an armed PSNI officer and nearly killed him, and then driven up to one of the most heavily-armed/militarised police stations outside of Afghanistan and sprayed it with rifle fire before making a clean getaway, the niceties of how far the prison authorities push the concept of the Rule of Law get a bit blurred...

FTA69

Liam Byrne wrote: »

What gives them the right to dictate ?

Criminals should take what they get; they had a choice not to be criminals.

You're ignoring the point at hand, segregation remains in place in Portlaoise because there's no other way in dealing with Republican prisoners. They will refuse to share their landings with criminals, and they're well able to engineer a situation where criminals will be expelled from those landings.

Because of this you'll have a case where criminals will refuse to enter a Republican landing and such. Because of this segregation suits the prison authorities as much as it does Republican prisoners.

What is it to you who shares a landing with who anyway? They're still in bloody jail at the end of the day.

Poccington

Liam Byrne wrote: »

What gives them the right to dictate ?

Criminals should take what they get; they had a choice not to be criminals.

It's quite simple.

If they suddenly decided to move "normal" prisoners onto the Republican landing, it's not going to end well. The Republican prisoners will become a lot more difficult to deal with or else the "normal" prisoners will simply be forced off the landing. As it is, the Republican prisoners keep to themselves in there and don't cause any major hassle for the PO's.

Having spoken to Prison Officers that work in there, it's much better that way. At the end of the day, they're still in prison aren't they?

junder

you would proberly find that it would be the republican prisoners who would be at risk from the ODC's rather then the other way round, which is more likely the reason that republican prisoners are sepprated.