Ahern does McCabe Killers U-Turn

landser

i'm not happy about the idea but in the context of an overall agreement, they should be let out. i agree mrs. mccabe should have been informed about it beforehand, but she wasn't and there's nothing anyone can do to change that.

As for the fact that they are in prison for killing a Garda as opposed to an RUC man, i really don't think anyone in the south would give a damn about their release even, if they had blown up an entire RUC station.

If anyone is being held to ransom here, it's not the state being held to ransom by the IRA, it's Northern Ireland being held to ransom by Mrs. McCabe. I feel for her, but there is a bigger picture here, and a lot more at stake than the punishment of two men

as for Fianna Fail, John O'Donoghue is a muppet, who should never have written that letter to the widow. Bertie, does more u-turns than a lost cabbie

Villain

billy the squid wrote:

and if any pro-IRA poster wants to come forward and type some **** like "move on move on" then I suggest that they go to their fearless leader Gerry Adams first and seek a public apology from him for Anne McCabe.

Well I take it that "move on move on" statment was aimed at me.

I have discussed this topic in teh past and really don't have anything else to say, if you want to read the thread here it is: Old Thread

billy the squid

It part referred to your comments , but it also refered to the members of sinn fein who talk about their token moves towards reconsilliation that are insufficient. I read that whole thread thank you very much but still disagree with you, but that is going off topic. suffice to say I think the IRA need to apologise for every man, woman and child that died at their hands whether they died before or after 1996.

Mrs McCabe is holding no one to ransom. and these men were robbing a bank, a criminal offence, it is just mere coincident that they were members of the IRA. I doubt when the clerks in adare were having guns pointed in their face they were asking whether or not these robbers were in the IRA or not.

And another thing, Our government made a written promise to anne McCabe that these bank robbers would not get out of prison. Like someone said earlier. The IRA were supposed to be on ceasefire at the time of the robbery, therefore even if they were under the orders of the IRA, they were breaking that seasefire and in breach of all agreements. If they were not under the orders of the IRA then they were committing a criminal offence hence the Good friday agreement does not apply.

I think it is a disgrace that Anne McCabe is being made to look by being the one to hold up the peace process. All she wants is justice for her murdered husband..

When the call went out from his garda station, he was being sent to a bank robbery not civil unreast.

Phil_321

I think they should be let out if it brings closure to the Northern Ireland situation.
It's not like they would never have been free again anyway, they're only in for manslaughter and haven't long left in their sentences.
There's already been loads released who commited even worse crimes than these guys, they only problem I can see is the government's promise to Mrs. McCabe that they wouldn't be released.
It is unfortunate that they're going to break it, but looking at the bigger picture, it's probably the right decision.

billy the squid

well if they havent that long to go then Gerry adams and his cronies can wait. Mrs McCabe will be waiting far longer before she sees her husband again.

Villain

billy the squid wrote:

It part referred to your comments , but it also refered to the members of sinn fein who talk about their token moves towards reconsilliation that are insufficient. I read that whole thread thank you very much but still disagree with you, but that is going off topic. suffice to say I think the IRA need to apologise for every man, woman and child that died at their hands whether they died before or after 1996.

Mrs McCabe is holding no one to ransom. and these men were robbing a bank, a criminal offence, it is just mere coincident that they were members of the IRA. I doubt when the clerks in adare were having guns pointed in their face they were asking whether or not these robbers were in the IRA or not.

And another thing, Our government made a written promise to anne McCabe that these bank robbers would not get out of prison. Like someone said earlier. The IRA were supposed to be on ceasefire at the time of the robbery, therefore even if they were under the orders of the IRA, they were breaking that seasefire and in breach of all agreements. If they were not under the orders of the IRA then they were committing a criminal offence hence the Good friday agreement does not apply.

I think it is a disgrace that Anne McCabe is being made to look by being the one to hold up the peace process. All she wants is justice for her murdered husband..

When the call went out from his garda station, he was being sent to a bank robbery not civil unreast.

I thought you said you read the other forum???

THE IRA WERE NOT ON A CEASEFIRE at the time Garda McCabe was killed, now I don't wanna to start going over the same things again thats why I posted the link to the old thread.

I completely condemn the killing of Garda McCabe, but it was carried out by the IRA prior to the GFA when the IRA were not on a cease fire, many many many prisioners have been release early under the GFA that carried out just as awful killings. If the early release of these men can help bring about the end of the IRA I have to say I agree with the release.

billy the squid

The men who shot Gerry McCabe were robbing a bank. their IRA status was coincidental.

They will be out as soon as they serve their time, what is the big deal with getting them out early. and what is the big deal with getting anne McCabe to shut up about how she was promised one thing and then had that promise broken.

Villain

Under the GFA they are entitled to early release, they were IRA men carrying out an IRA task. I'm not saying I agree with that but thats the case, IMO men who have carried crimes just as bad have served hardly any time.

bobbyjoe

they were IRA men carrying out an IRA task.

The IRA green book says that attacks against the Guards are not allowed.
Also the IRA denied it was sanctioned originaly.
Sounds more like they were lining their own pockets.
They didn't make much attempt to rob the money from what I've read, executed the Guards instead.

magpie

If the early release of these men can help bring about the end of the IRA I have to say I agree with the release.

Yes, bring about the end of the IRA by letting them all out of jail early. A clear victory for democracy.

Villain

magpie wrote:

Yes, bring about the end of the IRA by letting them all out of jail early. A clear victory for democracy.

But it has been done on several occasions already under the GFA, it's you happen to talk about this case, please read the old thread, Bobby Joe I have gone over all that in the old thread feel free to read it.

Sleepy

bobbyjoe wrote:

The IRA green book says that attacks against the Guards are not allowed.
Also the IRA denied it was sanctioned originaly.
Sounds more like they were lining their own pockets.
They didn't make much attempt to rob the money from what I've read, executed the Guards instead.

If that bit about the green book is true, I think Mrs McCabe would have a very good case against the government were they to release these criminals.

It's a fúckin' cheek to ask for their early release tbh if even according to the IRA's own rule-book, this was a war-crime.

irish1

irish1 wrote:

Under the GFA they are entitled to early release, they were IRA men carrying out an IRA task. I'm not saying I agree with that but thats the case, IMO men who have carried crimes just as bad have served hardly any time.

This has been discussed before.
As you well know these guys were claimed by the IRA after the fact and not during or before.
They were on a criminal job stealing money. P'O Niell who is the know it all wrt IRA operations couldn't have been so ill informed as to rush out a denial.

The clarification or the claiming probably came after a few rushed phone calls explaining they might rot in jail if they were abandoned by the IRA.

Right through the negotiations, it has been made perfectly clear by the negotiaters on the Irish Government side that these guys did not fall under the early release re-mit.

To be perfectly honest, they'll be out soon anyway and it strikes me as rather disingenous of Sinn Féin to be championing their cause ie no deal on the north if their not released as part of it, given that they were on an un authorised bank robbery , killing a Garda in the process and committing a crime that was outside the six counties and had no impact whatsoever on the IRA's enemy.

billy the squid

probably a naive question but is there a reproduction of this green book online somewhere.

or a summary of it.

bobbyjoe

General Order No 8 of the IRA's Green Book or rules states that "volunteers are strictly forbidden to take any military action against 26-County forces under any circumstances whatsoever."

billy the squid

bobbyjoe wrote:

General Order No 8 of the IRA's Green Book or rules states that "volunteers are strictly forbidden to take any military action against 26-County forces under any circumstances whatsoever."

maybe this should be rammed down gerry adams' throat the next time he dephiles Gerry McCabes name by mentioning it.

Sleepy

Hmm, I used the term "war-crime" quite flippantly in my last post but on reflection it might actually be applicable. If the Green Book can be taken to be the IRA's Rules of Engagement, and these clearly forbid engaging "26-County forces under any circumstances whatsoever", the attack on Garda McCabe was carried out without respect to the Rules of Engagement which would constitute a war-crime.

The only flaw I can see to prevent the bastards being brought to the Hague is that the IRA aren't recognised by the UN as an army. Given, however, that they (in their ignorance) regard themselves as an army rather than as terrorists, shouldn't international laws of war be applicable to them?

Villain

They broke IRA rules that doesn't mean they were acting on behalf of the IRA, members of the Garda break rules, doesn't mean they weren't acting on behalf of the Garda. Interesting that out off all the people who qualify for early release under the terms of the GFA its only these two men that everyone has a problem with have a look at my posts here and see who else was released http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=159627&page=9&pp=20

MarxoGouch

http://www.petitiononline.com/eire2004/petition.html

Phil_321

Yeah, what is the particular problem with these two guys being released....... there have been worse criminals released already who have served less time. O.K., the government made a promise to McCabe's widow, but it's not like this government has a problem breaking promises, and there are bigger things at stake here.
Surely, if it helps to bring peace to the North, it'll be worth it.

Rock Climber

Irish1, so you've shown us some scum in NI that were released.
Lets look at the Morgan example:
Were his killers specifically mentioned as being excluded from early release by anyone during the negotiations?
Were they disowned by their paramilitary organisation after the killing only to be reclaimed by them later?
AFAIK both answers are no.
Therefore theres no comparison.

Vincent Browne points out that the supreme court ignored the likes of the Morgan killers getting early release, despite having been convicted after the GFA was signed.
But Browne ignores the fact that it was explicitly explained to SF that the Adare Garda killers out on a maverick bank robbery were excluded from the terms of the agreement during the negotiations.
He also doesnt mention the two crucial differences I've mentioned above.

Incidently I came across this from the Limerick leader which is interesting for what it has to say regarding the withness intimidation at the time and how exactly these guys got a capital murder charge changed to manslaughter.
Apparently if the IRA had their way entirely, the McCabe killers would have been found innocent and Garda McCabe would have been killed by a magic bullet JFK style :rolleyes:

Following their conviction, Sinn Fein's Martin McGuinness said: "Those people qualify under the Good Friday Agreement and there's no question about that."

This is part of the Republican line of logic, and, therefore, immediately suspect. Let's recall a few incontrovertible facts: First is that the IRA, who had broken their 1994 ceasefire at the time, began by denying involvement. Then they acknowledged that it was their crowd who did it. This is in spite of general order No 8 in the so-called "Green Book" which states that it "is strictly forbidden to take any military action against 26-county forces under any circumstances whatever".

Second, is that the motive for the Adare incident was robbery. Its would-be patriotic value is deeply suspect.

Third, is that the killers faced capital murder charges for killing a garda. That charge carried a mandatory 40-year jail sentence.

But the court heard of widespread witness intimidation. One of the forgotten figures in the trial in February 1999 was an elderly farmer from near Toomevara who thought 18 months in jail for contempt was preferable to standing over an earlier statement to Garda'.

Fourth, is that the trial took a dramatic turn on February 4, 1999, when four of the five charged pleaded guilty to manslaughter.

Clearly, prosecutors feared that due to intimidation they would not be able to make murder charges stick. The following day the fifth man got six years for conspiracy. Three of the others was sentenced to 14 years, the fourth got 11 years.

It is interesting to note, lest anyone should plead passage of time, that the court stipulated that sentences were to run from February 4, 1999.

Villain

Rock Climber we have gone over this time and time again the other thread is something like 13 pages long, you know my opinion.

As you say Morgans killers were convicted after the GFA and they only served 1 year, I don't hear anyone here going mad about that????

Sleepy

You know, I have to say, I think I understand why loyalists took to arms in the north.

Simply the rhetoric and bullsh|t spewed by the republicans is enough to make you want to shoot them.

Sleepy

irish1 wrote:

Rock Climber we have gone over this time and time again the other thread is something like 13 pages long, you know my opinion.

As you say Morgans killers were convicted after the GFA and they only served 1 year, I don't hear anyone here going mad about that????

It wasn't on Irish soil.
It wasn't the murder of a Guard.
It wasn't in the middle of an armed robbery.
It wasn't in a criminal act unrelated to the organisation the men were members of.

Not different enough for you?

irish1

irish1 wrote:

As you say Morgans killers were convicted after the GFA and they only served 1 year, I don't hear anyone here going mad about that????

I dunno Irish1 ...
For a party that want to get on here in the 26 counties, SF seem to be making an awfull fuss over people that most recognise were and are chancing their arm to have what they did covered by the Good Friday agreement.
It's making it look to ordinary decent voters that Garda killing and Bank robbing is condoned by the present day SF.
They would have been better off leaving well enough alone and not persisting with this.
According to Ahern theres going to be no agreement in the North by SF unless these guys perceived as just Garda Killing robbers (taken under IRA wings by their Friends in the IRA) are let out.
It's a new condition for progress apparently which has no bearing from what I can see at all on what happens or is to happen in the north.

The Fact that SF wont comprimise on that and are pushing for an unpopular southern early release despite the facts of the case, looks bad very bad.

marco murphy

billy the squid wrote:

probably a naive question but is there a reproduction of this green book online somewhere.

or a summary of it.

http://www.irishrepublicanarmy.info/GreenBook.html

FTA69

Sleepy wrote:

If they were acting on the orders of the IRA, it was a breach of the cease-fire and therefore not acceptable for release under the good friday agreement.

If they weren't acting under the orders of the army council, they were common criminals and should be treated as such.

Case Closed.

I wouldn't go closing any cases yet Columbo, the Adare incident occured in 1996 while the IRA was not on cessation and before the Good Friday Agreement was signed. Furthermore, the only stipulation the Agreement has regarding prisoner release was that the offense must have taken place prior to 1998 and that the prisoner must belong to an organisation currently on ceasefire. Even the High Court admitted as such, they did however, state that the decision to release them must come from the Minister for Justice. In effect McDowell is breaching the Agreement.

To address the points of a number of other posters, the fact the 5 Volunteers committed a bank robbery or shot a guard is inconsequential. So is the fact this took place in the 26 Counties. Numerous prisoners with convictions for armed robbery as well as the manslaughter of guards have been released from Portlaoise so the above arguments are simply a red herring.

Finally, regarding prisoner release in general, I am dissapointed to see the only parrallel being drawn with the case of the RUC men killed during the war. There were more than cops killed throughout the course of the conflict, look at the family of Peter McBride, an innocent young man shot dead by the British Army for no reason. His killers were convicted of murder and subsequently promoted in that organisation. Sacrifices were made on all sides, Nationalist, Loyalist, Irish, English, Police or Republican. No family's suffering is any more real than anyone elses.

Sand

If the Green Book can be taken to be the IRA's Rules of Engagement, and these clearly forbid engaging "26-County forces under any circumstances whatsoever", the attack on Garda McCabe was carried out without respect to the Rules of Engagement which would constitute a war-crime.

The IRA Green Book is not the Geneva Convention nor the law of the land so what it says is irrelevant. Its a petty little document thats more observed whenever its most convenient and to provide some veneer of respectability. Honour amongst thieves and all that.

The only flaw I can see to prevent the bastards being brought to the Hague is that the IRA aren't recognised by the UN as an army. Given, however, that they (in their ignorance) regard themselves as an army rather than as terrorists, shouldn't international laws of war be applicable to them?

As I recall the Geneva Convention applies to all armed forces, whether regular or guerilla, whether or not they agree that it should. The UN has very little to do with it. As far as I remember the requirement to be recognised as a "legal" armed force is to have some sort of identifying uniform - even if its only an armband. So the IRA fail here - one of the reasons why they cant be considered guerillas. Guerillas operate as an armed force and adhere to the GC. The IRA doesnt.

Even if they were to be recognised as an armed force as their fanboys desire, then theyre clearly war crinimals and should be put on trial for crimes against humanity as their targeting of civillians is in breach of the Geneva Convention. But its pretty clear theyre not an armed force, so the GC wouldnt apply really. Theyre pretty much a gang of crinimals/terrorists, so crinimal law against murder, conspiracy, false imprisonment and so on would apply.

I feel very sorry for Mrs McCabe - the government, SF and co are all putting tremendous pressure on her to do the wrong thing and practically guilt tripping her that if she doesnt agree to it itll be her fault a deal wasnt reached. Shes already said she feels like a hostage.

I hope she sticks to her guns and doesnt allow Bertie a good nights sleep over it. SF/IRA arent going to break the deal over this. They know that if they do all those early prisoner release schemes will come to a sharp end and half their membership will be banged back up in jail. Most of their remaining membership is identified and riddled with informers. Theyre bluffing - a return to war would be a suicide pact for them. Bertie should just ask them if they want to tell their membership theyre going back to jail over a couple of guys who carried out a bank job in Adare, shot a Garda in the back, and just so happen to be IRA men?

Weve got leverage - we shouldnt be afraid to use it.

FTA69

Sand wrote:

As I recall the Geneva Convention applies to all armed forces, whether regular or guerilla, whether or not they agree that it should. The UN has very little to do with it. As far as I remember the requirement to be recognised as a "legal" armed force is to have some sort of identifying uniform - even if its only an armband. So the IRA fail here - one of the reasons why they cant be considered guerillas. Guerillas operate as an armed force and adhere to the GC. The IRA doesnt.

Most of their remaining membership is identified and riddled with informers. Theyre bluffing - a return to war would be a suicide pact for them. Bertie should just ask them if they want to tell their membership theyre going back to jail over a couple of guys who carried out a bank job in Adare, shot a Garda in the back, and just so happen to be IRA men?

Regarding the subject of guerillas, so I assume you also agree that the British Army is not an "armed force" owing to the fact the SAS sat in plain clothes and riddled unarmed people with automatic weapons without warning? Guerilla is simply a word used to denote hit and run warfare tactics, it doesn't necessarily have political connotations. The British Army also does not adhere to the Geneva Convention ie the execution of those taken prisoner eg Loughgall (3 Volunteers aprehended were shot at point blank range while disarmed). If both sides of a conflict fail to adhere to the GC does that make a conflict any less of a war? Not really in my opinion, war is a dirty thing in the first place and no amount of rules or laws can change that. In fact war by its nature is lawlessness.

Regards the IRA, identified and riddled with informers? They have been saying that the IRA is weak and on the verge of collapse for years, it didn't stop them fighting a war for 25 years though did it? Look at organisations such as the CIRA or RIRA for examples of tout-riddling, and in future keep your comments for topics you actually have the slightest clue about.

billy the squid

http://www.limerick-leader.ie/issues/20041204/index.html

Limerick leader site updated with this story.

irish1 wrote:

They broke IRA rules that doesn't mean they were acting on behalf of the IRA, members of the Garda break rules, doesn't mean they weren't acting on behalf of the Garda. Interesting that out off all the people who qualify for early release under the terms of the GFA its only these two men that everyone has a problem with have a look at my posts here and see who else was released

bit of a change from what you posted earlier isn't it

irish1 wrote:

they were IRA men carrying out an IRA tas

There have been cases where gardai, politicians and general members of the public have been brought to book for rule breaking. And yes there have been those that have gotten away with it either through having gool legal teams or simply because they were not caught.

By your logic you are suggesting that because some lucky individuals managed to avoid getting caught or prosecuted, that the ones that did get caught and convicted should be given some sort of amnesty.

lets make Liam Lawler Taoseach while we are at it why don't we.

Phil_321 wrote:

Yeah, what is the particular problem with these two guys being released....... there have been worse criminals released already who have served less time. O.K., the government made a promise to McCabe's widow, but it's not like this government has a problem breaking promises, and there are bigger things at stake here.
Surely, if it helps to bring peace to the North, it'll be worth it.

Your right there are bigger issues involved, like decommissioning, which the IRA are taking their time doing as well. but thats another thread.

The IRA and sinn fein proved their loyalty to these men in the days immediately after the bank robbery. not knowing whether to admit they were member of the IRA and not knowing whether to accept or deny that this was an IRA sanctioned bank robbery.

It became an "operation" when it suited the IRA to do so.

FTA69 wrote:

To address the points of a number of other posters, the fact the 5 Volunteers committed a bank robbery or shot a guard is inconsequential

061 46 19 95 is the telephone number to the local rradio station in Limerick. They might be able to put you in touch with the mans wife so you can say that to her yourself.

FTA69 wrote:

Finally, regarding prisoner release in general, I am dissapointed to see the only parrallel being drawn with the case of the RUC men killed during the war

What war? The IRA doesn't fit into the criteria of an armed force as it does not identify itself before it carries out an operation. To be recognised as an army under the Geneva Convention an armed group has to have some identifying piece of attire.

Killing members of the public also goes against the Geneva Convention. like they did in Warrington, Birmingham, Brighton, Canary Wharf, the list goes on.