breaking: Gerry Adams Arrested in connection to McConville - MOD WARNING First Post

Tramps Like Us

Really looking like the executive is going to collapse over this.

Sad to say that severe damage has been done to the confidence people have in the PSNI over these blatant dirty tricks.

It was sickening to hear the Alliance leader on the radio this morning saying that the RUC did not need reform and those who were made redundant were done so as a "reword for their good work" and not because there was a need to get rid of one sided policing and create an impartial police force. The fact that many of these people were immediately rehired demonstrates the power of the inner circle of continuity RUC in the PSNI and shows that while there has been great success the reform is not complete

Busted Flat.

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

The army where there to keep the peace not fight a civil war...

Keep the peace, they caused mayhem with their murderous and terrorist activity. They shot Joan Connolly a mother of eight in the face from the confines of their barracks in Ballymurphy. She was one of the eleven that was murdered by the Para's. Soldiers a joke.

end of the road

theKillerBite wrote: »

Firstly 22 is not a teenager. Secondly they were in the IRA, returning weapons to a arms dump.

no, SAS shot them because they were irish, remember maggie had a shoot to kill policy in NI which was strictly for irish people only

theKillerBite wrote: »

Thirdly the family was given money.

the vermin who shot their children being locked up along with money would have been better

Busted Flat.

wazky wrote: »

The British Army, world renowned for its peace keeping abilities....

Renowned for the havoc they caused.

Sunnyisland

RandomName2 wrote: »

Different countries, half a century apart, wherein the fighting was considerably different, with a vastly different political backdrop. Political (and military) events prior to both unfolding were significantly different. The aims, and compositions of the respective sides in both conflicts. The length of the conflicts, the social setting, the political ramifications, and the respective international response. Also the conclusions to both: both immediate and longer term, including other conflicts that broke out due to their termination (like the Civil War).

So yeah...

Different countries ???? Stopped reading after that.

wazky

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Yeah the French were throwing stones in America..

Not to mention the Russians in Crimea and the Chinese in Canton.

I wouldn't mention Africa though.

Banjo String

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

You're drawing a conclusion based on your initial assumption that they were soldiers.

I'm drawing my conclusion based on the fact that Republican prisoners were always classed as political prisoners/POWs until the British withdrew this status in 76.

They regained the status shortly after the 1981 hunger strike campaign (unofficially).

The GFA restored in full the right to political status.

Ignorant etc.

British Military Thesaurus

Peacekeeper (countable noun):
Nativeshooter; Protester killer; Crown-sponsored terrorist.

end of the road

Gatling wrote: »

Was jean mcconville working for a terrorist group

some say she was an informant for the BA who in my view are terrorists

RandomName2

Banjo String wrote: »

Er yes they were.

That is a strong argument sir!

Well let's look at the standard criteria:


Army | IRA/PIRA
Composed of members trained and armed for combat: | Sort of. Trained? Hmm
Representing a government: | Nope
Chain of command: | Yes
Clear and open organisational structure: | Nope
Full time occupation: | Nope
Uniformed: | Nope
Adheres to international military conventions: | Nope
Members barred from public office: | Nope!
Fights battles: | ... do ambushes count?
Does not supplant civil administration: | Nope

RandomName2

realies wrote: »

Different countries ???? Stopped reading after that.

Ah, you must be a staunch unionist to consider the country of Northern Ireland (created in 1921) to be the same country as the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland (created n 1801)

Banjo String

RandomName2 wrote: »

That is a strong argument sir!

Well let's look at the standard criteria:


Army | IRA/PIRA
Composed of members trained and armed for combat: | Sort of. Trained? Hmm
Representing a government: | Nope
Chain of command: | Yes
Clear and open organisational structure: | Nope
Full time occupation: | Nope
Uniformed: | Nope
Adheres to international military conventions: | Nope
Members barred from public office: | Nope!
Fights battles: | ... do ambushes count?
Does not supplant civil administration: | Nope

See my post above. The British have always recognised republican prisoners as POWs/having political status, bar a short period of time between 76 and late 81/early 82.

The GFA set in stone their status restored in full.

I I say my argument holds more sway than your wee chart.

boatbuilder

I don't see what all the fuss is about this.
Surely if you are involved in a murder you should be held to account when the evidence emerges no matter who you are.
The thing that disturbs me most about it all is the arrogance of SF thinking that they are untouchable... they're sounding like mafia bosses these days. If they ever get a stronghold in government in the south, I would seriously consider emigrating.

tomwaterford

boatbuilder wrote: »

I don't see what all the fuss is about this.
Surely if you are involved in a murder you should be held to account when the evidence emerges no matter who you are.
The thing that disturbs me most about it all is the arrogance of SF thinking that they are untouchable... they're sounding like mafia bosses these days. If they ever get a stronghold in government in the south, I would seriously consider emigrating.

agh yes...the age old problem with democracy:pac::pac: ...its grand as long as everyone agrees with who you want to be voted in

would you not consider running for election against them if you were that opposed to there policies in the unlikely event of them getting into power

Tail Docker

boatbuilder wrote: »

I don't see what all the fuss is about this.
Surely if you are involved in a murder you should be held to account when the evidence emerges no matter who you are.
The thing that disturbs me most about it all is the arrogance of SF thinking that they are untouchable... they're sounding like mafia bosses these days. If they ever get a stronghold in government in the south, I would seriously consider emigrating.

Is that you again Ray D'arcy?

boatbuilder

tomwaterford wrote: »

would you not consider running for election against them if you were that opposed to there policies in the unlikely event of them getting into power

Naa I'd be too afraid of getting wacked lol

RandomName2

Banjo String wrote: »

See my post above. The British have always recognised republican prisoners as POWs/having political status, bar a short period of time between 76 and late 81/early 82.

The GFA set in stone their status restored in full.

A political prisoner is not the same thing as a soldier. A political prisoner is typically a civilian for one thing! (A civilian is the opposite of a soldier for what it's worth).

Banjo String wrote: »

I I say my argument holds more sway than your wee chart.

You are using British Army definitions in an attempt to bolster your argument when it suits you?

Happyman42

boatbuilder wrote: »

I don't see what all the fuss is about this.
Surely if you are involved in a murder you should be held to account when the evidence emerges no matter who you are.
The thing that disturbs me most about it all is the arrogance of SF thinking that they are untouchable... they're sounding like mafia bosses these days. If they ever get a stronghold in government in the south, I would seriously consider emigrating.

Where have Sinn Fein said that they are 'untouchable'. A source please not your biased assessment.

As usual people are not listening to what has been said, exactly the same people who didn't listen about the RUC and political policing. The same RUC that had to be disbanded in disgrace.

LuckyLloyd

martinedwards wrote: »

so just to clarify....

any pre GFA actions are now dead and gone and shouldn't be investigated or prosecuted.

thats ALL pre GFA events, regardless of who was involved ON EITHER SIDE.

including Bloody Sunday and the McConville Murder.

just to be clear, I'm asking for clarification........

That should be the case imo.

RandomName2

martinedwards wrote: »

so just to clarify....

any pre GFA actions are now dead and gone and shouldn't be investigated or prosecuted.

thats ALL pre GFA events, regardless of who was involved ON EITHER SIDE.

including Bloody Sunday and the McConville Murder.

just to be clear, I'm asking for clarification........

I think that it's the case that if someone was convicted of a Troubles crime prior to the GFA they were released, but if not, they are technically fair game (with the caveat that prosecutions are difficult and likely to open cans of worms). Also I'm not sure if the BA soldiers have any additional immunity due to being part of the army...

Ignorant etc.

Does Gerry Adams deserve to serve time if he was responsible? Yes, of course.

Do I believe he's guilty? No, I don't.

Do I believe the British Establishment is capable of fabricating evidence to suit its own agenda? From the same establishment that termed Nelson Mandela a terrorist and supported their friends in South Africa in enforcing apartheid? Absolutely.

Do I believe those who carried out and ordered Bloody Sunday, Ballymurphy, the Pat Finucane murder, the Dublin and Monaghan bombings and Castleisland should face prosecution? Absolutely.

Do I believe they ever will? No, that would disturb the British Establishment.

Putting it simply, in the face of irrefutable evidence I would condemn Adams, but the law says innocent until proven guilty. I have empathy for Irish Republicans but do not support burying a woman where her family have no idea where she is. There are reasons for guerilla conflict, it doesn't come from nowhere, but what happened regarding McConville's burial was abhorrent. There are those who will attack me for some of what I say. I put the question to them, do they equally condemn Mandela and the ANC or is guerilla conflict ok as long as its not in Ireland?

Even then, it can't be denied that the British Establishment has proven in the past that it is capable of murky dealings. I hope though, that this doesn't backfire spectacularly because all communities in Ireland, nationalist, republican, loyalist, unionist, indifferent and immigrant deserve the opportunity to pursue a peaceful existance.

Ignorant etc.

Oh and to the person who responded to my original comment with "lol". Its a proven fact that McConville was killed in Louth. Whilst British law may extend to terrorism conducted elsewhere in the world, as far as I know, and you must feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, the Irish legal system also takes a very dim view of acts of unlawful killing.

sillyoulfool

wazky wrote: »

Well as it was said here multiple times it was a war and they were soldiers?, so what type of prisoner were they?

Criminals, same as any other murderer.

end of the road

bumper234 wrote: »

You mean the armed members of the IRA who were returning arms to an arms dump?

no, that was made up, they were shot because they were irish, as part of thatchers shoot to kill policy for irish people

bumper234 wrote: »

Oh and fyi their families have already been paid by the MOD

the people who murdered their children should have been locked up

Banjo String

sillyoulfool wrote: »

Criminals, same as any other murderer.

But they weren't.

(the British Govt even acknowledged this fact)

But I bet the British /Irish Govts are wrong and you're right.

end of the road

Jawgap wrote: »

They were armed, returning weapons to an arms dump

the SAS made that up

Jawgap wrote: »

they were shot - why would anyone deserve jail time for that?

because they were shot for being irish

Jawgap wrote: »

Especially as the IRA use the word 'war' so often in their rhetoric

well when you have an army backed by the state in bed with a paramilitary group murdering people left right and centre, covering for each other, giving weapons, and refusing to protect both sides like they were supposed to, then its not surprising the IRA said it was "war"

Sunnyisland

sillyoulfool wrote: »

Criminals, same as any other murderer.

That's not what your beloved brittish army thought it describes the IRA as "a professional, dedicated, highly skilled and resilient force", while loyalist paramilitaries and other republican groups are described as "little more than a collection of gangsters".The admission is contained in a discussion document released by the Ministry of Defence after a request under the Freedom of Information Act
The 100 page document analyses in detail the army's role over 37 years.

It also says that he did not defeat the IRA

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/6276416.stm

MonsterCookie

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

He was involved in ordering / planning / facilitating the deaths of hundreds of people probably as a senior IRA figure. If you really want to know exactly which deaths (as far as it can be remembered) you need to create a process based on immunity that involved all parties and lay it on the table once then consign it to history.

By voting for the GFA, there is an implication that you were willing to move on from the conflict and accept the right of political parties linked to paramilitary groups on both sides to fully engage in the democratic process.

You want your cake and eat it too. You want an ala carte peace where you can still apply the law to parties you don't like. Such a nonsense position to be frank.

Don't have a problem with your first two paragraphs above. But you went off the rails a little then.

You're saying that I want to apply the law to one party and not the other...show me where I said that. If any political leader on either side was suspected of playing a role in such a dreadful murder then I would want to know the facts before I decide to vote for them or not...now what is so nonsensical about that?

bumper234

Banjo String wrote: »

Sources of what information?


I know where Belfast is, I was born and reared just over twenty miles from it until I was 27. Lived in it when I was a student for four years also. What relevance has a Wikipedia article on the place as a source for anything? Ditto ministry of defence. Why a Wikipedia article about it?

Sometimes you lot circle the wagons very unnecessarily.

I'm sorry, i didn't know you lacked the ability to scroll down a little bit and read the relevant section, i'll help you out and post it for you shall i?

23 February 1985 - Michael Devine (22), David Devine (17) and Charles Breslin (20), all Catholicmembers of the Irish Republican Army, were shot dead by undercover British Army members (Special Air Service), while returning arms to a dump, in a field, off Plumbridge Road, Strabane. Their families believed these shootings were part of a wider British government "shoot-to-kill" policy, where Irish republican paramilitaries were summarily executed without any attempt at arrest. Damages were awarded to the families by the Ministry of Defence on 7 May 2002, as part of a Belfast High Court settlement.

Does that help? :rolleyes:

sillyoulfool

realies wrote: »

That's not what your beloved brittish army thought it describes the IRA as "a professional, dedicated, highly skilled and resilient force", while loyalist paramilitaries and other republican groups are described as "little more than a collection of gangsters".The admission is contained in a discussion document released by the Ministry of Defence after a request under the Freedom of Information Act
The 100 page document analyses in detail the army's role over 37 years.

It also says that he did not defeat the IRA

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/6276416.stm

My beloved B.A.? cheap,sad and pathetic. D- must try harder.

A discussion document is not any admission of official policy.
The IRA/UVF/INLA/UDA were all quite rightly considered to be criminals and treated as such. They were charged under criminal law, convicted in the criminal courts, and sentenced to imprisonment as criminals, that is a fact.