Ahern does McCabe Killers U-Turn

gandalf

FTA69 wrote:

Regards 1916 and the War of Independence, so you are now denying people were harmed at close quarters are you? What about the women collaboraters who had their buttocks branded with pig irons for "walking out" with the RIC/ Black and Tans/ British Army? You made a point about the Volunteers in those days who "fought like men" thus implying the IRA of today are cowards, make no mistake, being an IRA Volunteer is no easy task and they faced death, harrasment and imprisonment. Also, were the men who starved themselves to death in Long Kesh cowards or any less "manly"?

Buttocks branded him alot different that getting your brains put out by a bullet.

Yes I believe the majority of todays IRA are cowards. Putting a bomb under someones car, in a bin or parking a van bomb is the actions of a coward.

The men in Long Kesh were mis-guided.

As a citizen of the Free State you are indeed entitled to your opinion, but the majority of citizens in that state elected a government that enshrined political status as well as passing a referendum that enshrined the early release of prisoners.

As a citizen of the REPUBLIC OF IRELAND (go on try and say it it doesn't bite!) I would not have thought that the GFA would have been used to let a criminal gang who were involved in a grubby bank heist that killed a Garda to get out early.

Regards hypocrisy, the IRA did not fight in 1916 and 1920 to establish a 26 County state that executed Republican and facilitates partition, remember, the majority of the Army rejected the Treaty in 1922. They fought for a united Irish Republic and that is what Republicans are fighting for today.

Well actually you are wrong The Dail voted in favour of the Treaty ergo a majority of the people accepted the Treaty and the then Sinn Fein Splitters went against the will of the majority of people. I would hazard a guess that the majority are still against violence as a remedy to the issues involved wouldn't you.

Remember at the time just before the truce and then treaty the IRA were close to defeat, Collins was a pragmatist and DeValera let his ideals cloud common sense.

Also, the IRA are not in the slightest bit hypocritical in breaking the laws of the Free State as they do not pretend to adhere to them. You however, are being enormously hypocritical in supporting the IRA of the 20s although they committed punishment activity while denigrating people who do the same today.

Not at all I am wondering why we are letting Sinn Fein into the political process in this country when you admit they do not respect the laws of it. They are the only hypocrites I see if this is the prevailing attitude in that organisation.

Regards policing, to reiterate myself, Patten cannot be implemented "from the inside", the only way it can be is through a comprehensive reform package and only the British Government can initiate that. To join it now simply gives a bad force credence and enables the brits to weasel their way out of progressing real reform.

Yeah yeah thats how you get them to change. You surrender and then we will join the police. You really do not have an understanding of how the British mind works. You have to change them bit by bit not try and get them to conceed to everything at once :rolleyes:

marco murphy

I reckon car bombs are very effective,if used rite

FTA69

gandalf wrote:

Buttocks branded him alot different that getting your brains put out by a bullet.

Yes I believe the majority of todays IRA are cowards. Putting a bomb under someones car, in a bin or parking a van bomb is the actions of a coward.

The men in Long Kesh were mis-guided.

As a citizen of the REPUBLIC OF IRELAND (go on try and say it it doesn't bite!) I would not have thought that the GFA would have been used to let a criminal gang who were involved in a grubby bank heist that killed a Garda to get out early.



Well actually you are wrong The Dail voted in favour of the Treaty ergo a majority of the people accepted the Treaty and the then Sinn Fein Splitters went against the will of the majority of people. I would hazard a guess that the majority are still against violence as a remedy to the issues involved wouldn't you.

Remember at the time just before the truce and then treaty the IRA were close to defeat, Collins was a pragmatist and DeValera let his ideals cloud common sense.



Not at all I am wondering why we are letting Sinn Fein into the political process in this country when you admit they do not respect the laws of it. They are the only hypocrites I see if this is the prevailing attitude in that organisation.


Yeah yeah thats how you get them to change. You surrender and then we will join the police. You really do not have an understanding of how the British mind works. You have to change them bit by bit not try and get them to conceed to everything at once :rolleyes:

The men of Long Kesh were politically-dedicated revolutionaries gandalf, and they resisted for 5 years the attempts of the British government to portray them as akin to handbag-snatchers and rapists, they finally gave their all in the struggle for political status, winning 3 parliament seats in the process (what were you saying about no mandates earlier?) and also winning their 5 demands. The fact you would portray them as little more than impressionable fools disturbs me to say the least.

Regards prisoner release, you can think what you like but the Agreement stipulation on prisoner release is crystal clear, also, numerous POWs convicted of armed robbery as well as the killing of guards (eg Frank Hand) have also been released, I don't know how you thought the Castlereagh 4 would have been exempt.

Regards 1916-1922, I never said the Dáil did not pass the Treaty, I said the Army did not agree to the Treaty, you claimed the IRA's goal was that of a creation of a partitionist state, I am telling you they voted against the Treaty. To further discuss that particular army, you fail to admit that many actions undertaken by the IRA in 1920 were similar to that of the IRA in the 70s, ie walking up to someone dressed in plain clothes and blasting their brains out with a revolver. Because that is what war entails gandalf, it is a dirty business but if you recognise the need for it back then at least be consistent and recognise the need for it in the 60s.

Regards the IRA and the Free State, I said the IRA does not adhere to the laws of either partitionist state, that is understandable considering they are a guerilla army. Sinn Féin however is a political party and as such acts accordingly.

Finally, there is no way that Republicans are going to compromise on basic human rights and entitlements within this process. I don't care how the "British mind works", it doesn't change the fact that patten should be implemented without delay, as outlined in the Agreement.

marco murphy

gandalf wrote:

Buttocks branded him alot different that getting your brains put out by a bullet.

Yes I believe the majority of todays IRA are cowards. Putting a bomb under someones car, in a bin or parking a van bomb is the actions of a coward.















QUOTE]


Majority are cowards,what about the rest?

nlgbbbblth

Poblachtach wrote:

Republicans sont hate all english...thats very ignorant.
When you see the british flag being burnt...thats the message to the admistration,government.

come off it

Republicans despise the British establishment and English people
If they didn't hate them so much then you would see them cheering on Tim Henman every year

so why did they plant bombs in England then?

where there was a chance that English people would be killed

Mad Cyril

Republicans despise the British establishment and English people

False. I would describe myself as a Republican and I most certainly do not despise anyone becasue of their nationality.

If they didn't hate them so much then you would see them cheering on Tim Henman every year

That is completely rediculous.

so why did they plant bombs in England then?

In a strategic effort to achieve their goals, quite obviously.

where there was a chance that English people would be killed

Yes there was, similarly republican organisations planted bombs in areas where Irish people could, and sometimes were, killed. By your logic this would indicate a hatred of Irish people.

FTA69

nlgbbbblth wrote:

come off it

Republicans despise the British establishment and English people
If they didn't hate them so much then you would see them cheering on Tim Henman every year

so why did they plant bombs in England then?

where there was a chance that English people would be killed

I do indeed despise the British establishment and make no secret of that. However I make a clear distinction between ordinary English people and their government. Republicans fully supported the British miners' strike in the 80s, in fact Republicans recently invited Arthur Scargill to speak at the Féile na Pobail in West Belfast over the summer. Your comment about Tim Henmen is entirely devoid of logic, I don't support Mike Tyson in the boxing, does that mean I hate black people?

As Cyril said, bombs were planted as part of a war effort, it had little to do with nationality. Inform yourself of the facts before you denigrate people as xenophobes.

gandalf

FTA69 wrote:

The fact you would portray them as little more than impressionable fools disturbs me to say the least.

Well not as much as your disregard for the laws of the country and the fact you appear to be above them. (I am assuming that you are connected with the PIRA here, put me right if that is incorrect!)

Regards prisoner release, you can think what you like but the Agreement stipulation on prisoner release is crystal clear, also, numerous POWs convicted of armed robbery as well as the killing of guards (eg Frank Hand) have also been released, I don't know how you thought the Castlereagh 4 would have been exempt.

Quite easily my belief was that the IRA did not sanction it and therefore it was IRA volunteers carrying out a "private enterprise". Obviously its a Musketeer attitude they have "one for all and all for one" no matter what you do.

Regards 1916-1922, I never said the Dáil did not pass the Treaty, I said the Army did not agree to the Treaty, you claimed the IRA's goal was that of a creation of a partitionist state, I am telling you they voted against the Treaty.

No I claimed that Collins realised that a 32 county state was unattanable at that time and was pragmatic. I believe a majority of the army (circa 60%) sided with Collins as well.

To further discuss that particular army, you fail to admit that many actions undertaken by the IRA in 1920 were similar to that of the IRA in the 70s, ie walking up to someone dressed in plain clothes and blasting their brains out with a revolver. Because that is what war entails gandalf, it is a dirty business but if you recognise the need for it back then at least be consistent and recognise the need for it in the 60s.

Never said war wasn't dirty. I believe a vast majority of the targets were military or military related. But didn't the PIRA actually killed more Catholics than the British Army did in the 30 years of the troubles.

Regards the IRA and the Free State, I said the IRA does not adhere to the laws of either partitionist state, that is understandable considering they are a guerilla army. Sinn Féin however is a political party and as such acts accordingly.

But as many members of Sinn Fein also have membership of the IRA what is the situation. During the day they are law abiding and then they go into Chuckie mode at night they can flaunt the laws of the country they are supposed to be serving.

Finally, there is no way that Republicans are going to compromise on basic human rights and entitlements within this process. I don't care how the "British mind works", it doesn't change the fact that patten should be implemented without delay, as outlined in the Agreement.

Well if thats the attitude then there will be no agreement in NI at all. Paisley and his bigots on one side and the Republicans not willing to move on the other.

Poblachtach wrote:

Majority are cowards,what about the rest?

Mis-guided easily led fools.

FTA69

I'm off to bed now, I'll address your post tomorrow gandalf.

gandalf

FTA69 wrote:

I'm off to bed now, I'll address your post tomorrow gandalf.

Off to my leaba myself

Will be back on tomorrow evening.

billy the squid

Personally I think that neither the unionists nor the so-called nationalists wat an end to what is going on in the north. maybe the people who started the IRA were driven to the point where they needed to kill a few unionists back in the 1970s, but now, in 2004 the IRA and UVF amongst other organisations are a nice lcash cow for these people with their bank robberies, protection rackets, and whatever sinn fein are getting paid for to service an assembly that doesn't involve a hell of a lot of work being suspended and all.

With reference to your comments about the treaty, not that it has any relevence to the bank robbery that occoured in Adare 72 years later, but wasn't michael Collins the head of the army at the time of the War of Independence. and in fairness he got more than De Valera would ever have gotten. that is why De Valera sent him over there.

And when the treaty was put before the Dail it was ratified and accepted.

oh and whats with all the free state crap. Ireland left the commonwealth in 1949.

FTA69

gandalf wrote:

Quite easily my belief was that the IRA did not sanction it and therefore it was IRA volunteers carrying out a "private enterprise". Obviously its a Musketeer attitude they have "one for all and all for one" no matter what you do.

No I claimed that Collins realised that a 32 county state was unattanable at that time and was pragmatic. I believe a majority of the army (circa 60%) sided with Collins as well.

Never said war wasn't dirty. I believe a vast majority of the targets were military or military related. But didn't the PIRA actually killed more Catholics than the British Army did in the 30 years of the troubles.

But as many members of Sinn Fein also have membership of the IRA what is the situation. During the day they are law abiding and then they go into Chuckie mode at night they can flaunt the laws of the country they are supposed to be serving.

Well if thats the attitude then there will be no agreement in NI at all. Paisley and his bigots on one side and the Republicans not willing to move on the other.


Mis-guided easily led fools.

You say that because the Adare robbery was not sanctioned by IRA command that that automatically equates with the robbery being for personal gain, I pointed out to you earlier that operations are often conducted at a local level owing to possible time or equipment constraints. Local units often shot up a passing British Army patrol without seeking sanction from above, does that make it less of an IRA operation? No it doesn't in my view.

Regards the Treaty, I for one would have believed that temporary acceptance of a Treaty would have been the pragmatic choice at the time. However, Collins's reason for signing it was eventually proved wrong, because of his party (Cumann na nGaedhal and later Fine Gael) and De Valera's Fianna Fáil we now have a partitioned Ireland which was not what the Volunteers of 1916 or the War of Independence fought for. Also, Óglaigh na hÉireann rejected the Treaty by a majority vote so I believe.

Nearly all IRA operations were orientated with attacking the military, economic and infrastructural fabric of the 6 County state as well as the British establishment. Circumstances and technological developments had changed between 1920 and 1969, what did not change though, was the right of people to resist British occupation.

Regards Sinn Féin's relationship with the IRA, they are both part of the Republican Movement and while the organisations are mutually supportive they are completely different entities. One is a political party aiming to pursue a social agenda through local and parliamentary politics, the other is a guerilla army. While they may share members it is inconsequential, both organisations have made their positions clear on a variety of topics.

Regards policing, you make a point about DUP intransigence, policing has little to do with them as I pointed out multiple times, policing reform is something that only the brits can implement, this issue bypasses the SDLP, DUP or whoever.

BolBill

Shouldn't the thread be re-named "Ahern does what he's told" ????

ArthurDent

FTA69 wrote:

I do indeed despise the British establishment and make no secret of that. However I make a clear distinction between ordinary English people and their government. .

Its just a damn shame that the IRA don't make this distinction -don't ya think?

FTA69

The Republican Movement did and continues to make that distinction a chara, as I said, Republicans fully supported the British miners strike, if we were all xenophobes who lumped people in with their government how could that position be reconciled with the above? Or why was Arthur Scargill invited to speak in Belfast?

I'll say to you what I said to that other fella, read up on what Republicanism is about before you comment on it.

Sleepy

How about a compromise. McCabe's killers are released to a RA Kangaroo court where they can be tried for breaking the rules regarding attacking southern forces, "illegal use of hardware" etc.

A bullet in the back of their heads would bring tears to very few.

ArthurDent

FTA69 wrote:

The Republican Movement did and continues to make that distinction a chara, as I said, Republicans fully supported the British miners strike, if we were all xenophobes who lumped people in with their government how could that position be reconciled with the above? Or why was Arthur Scargill invited to speak in Belfast?

I'll say to you what I said to that other fella, read up on what Republicanism is about before you comment on it.

It's not xenophobia I think the IRA is guilty of - targetting city centres such as Warrington, Birmingham and Manchester was more what came to mind. How are these attacks differentiating between "legitimate targets" (not my words) and civilians?

gandalf

FTA69 wrote:

You say that because the Adare robbery was not sanctioned by IRA command that that automatically equates with the robbery being for personal gain, I pointed out to you earlier that operations are often conducted at a local level owing to possible time or equipment constraints. Local units often shot up a passing British Army patrol without seeking sanction from above, does that make it less of an IRA operation? No it doesn't in my view.

Ah Li'l Zé you returned

Well then maybe the IRA should clear this up. Was holding up a Bank in the republic and riddling a Garda and citizen of it a sanctioned operation or not.

Regards the Treaty, I for one would have believed that temporary acceptance of a Treaty would have been the pragmatic choice at the time. However, Collins's reason for signing it was eventually proved wrong, because of his party (Cumann na nGaedhal and later Fine Gael) and De Valera's Fianna Fáil we now have a partitioned Ireland which was not what the Volunteers of 1916 or the War of Independence fought for. Also, Óglaigh na hÉireann rejected the Treaty by a majority vote so I believe.

Well we have a partitioned Ireland, maybe if people did not have hissy fits and were pragmatic about things back in the 20's we might not have wasted so many lives of people who could have delivered the 32 counties back then. Again from my reading I beg to differ on the majority voting against it but maybe your reading different books.

Nearly all IRA operations were orientated with attacking the military, economic and infrastructural fabric of the 6 County state as well as the British establishment. Circumstances and technological developments had changed between 1920 and 1969, what did not change though, was the right of people to resist British occupation.

And shooting dead Gardai!

Regards Sinn Féin's relationship with the IRA, they are both part of the Republican Movement and while the organisations are mutually supportive they are completely different entities. One is a political party aiming to pursue a social agenda through local and parliamentary politics, the other is a guerilla army. While they may share members it is inconsequential, both organisations have made their positions clear on a variety of topics.

Yes but as you yourself have admitted the IRA do not see themselves bound by the laws of this state, therefore if someone is a member of both Sinn Fein and the IRA they will not see themselves bound by the laws of this state therefore how can Irish Citizens like me trust them.

FTA69

gandalf wrote:

Ah Li'l Zé you returned

Well then maybe the IRA should clear this up. Was holding up a Bank in the republic and riddling a Garda and citizen of it a sanctioned operation or not.

Well we have a partitioned Ireland, maybe if people did not have hissy fits and were pragmatic about things back in the 20's we might not have wasted so many lives of people who could have delivered the 32 counties back then. Again from my reading I beg to differ on the majority voting against it but maybe your reading different books.


And shooting dead Gardai!

Yes but as you yourself have admitted the IRA do not see themselves bound by the laws of this state, therefore if someone is a member of both Sinn Fein and the IRA they will not see themselves bound by the laws of this state therefore how can Irish Citizens like me trust them.

Li'l Zé? You caught me changing into my alter-ego in the phone box then?!

Maybe the IRA should clear up the circumstances of the robbery, but owing to the nature of that organisation they do not make public statements unless it's absolutely necessary. As I said above several times, whether it was a sanctioned IRA operation or an unsanctioned IRA operation is inconsequential, the fact was it was an IRA operation. Every action undertaken by Volunteers is not necessarily approved by the command structure, it often takes place on the spur of the moment (relatively) owing to a variety of constraints ie time or equipment, but it doesn't make it less of an IRA operation in my opinion.

Regards partition, 26 County regimes since 1922 have only been too happy to maintain the status quo of partition, from De Velera's executing of Republicans in 1944 to Liam Cosgrave introducing internment during the Border Campaign to Sunningdale to the Anglo-Irish agreement. The Treaty, those who brought it into place and those people's political descendants have strived to maintain partition. I don't think anybody on the Free State side during the Civil War would have been responsible for the re-unification of Ireland

Regards the deaths of police, that was a regrettable occurence every so often throughout the course of the war but it was not like the IRA ever made targets of the guards, only a few died in 25 years and I don't personally think that that undermines the right of Irish people to resist repression.

You are correct in saying that there may be contradictions involved in the subject of dual membership but the organisations as bodies have different constitutions and short-term goals and as such are seperate entities, to be honest, what Sinn Féin members do outside of Sinn Féin time so to speak, is not the concern of that particular party.

FTA69

ArthurDent wrote:

It's not xenophobia I think the IRA is guilty of - targetting city centres such as Warrington, Birmingham and Manchester was more what came to mind. How are these attacks differentiating between "legitimate targets" (not my words) and civilians?

Birmingham was aimed at British soldiers that frequented that particular pub. While having that said, I am simply clarifying the intent behind the operation, I am not attempting to justify it. It was bungled and held too high a risk to civilians to begin with, it was a mistake.

Warrington and Manchester were bombs aimed at causing economic damage to the British state, warnings were given to ensure there was no civilian casualties but sadly this did not have the desired result in Warrington.

gandalf

FTA69 wrote:

Li'l Zé? You caught me changing into my alter-ego in the phone box then?!

No just amused at the rantings of some of your mates on the interweb

Maybe the IRA should clear up the circumstances of the robbery, but owing to the nature of that organisation they do not make public statements unless it's absolutely necessary. As I said above several times, whether it was a sanctioned IRA operation or an unsanctioned IRA operation is inconsequential, the fact was it was an IRA operation. Every action undertaken by Volunteers is not necessarily approved by the command structure, it often takes place on the spur of the moment (relatively) owing to a variety of constraints ie time or equipment, but it doesn't make it less of an IRA operation in my opinion.

I see the reason the IRA would not be willing to talk but considering the confrontations and problems that this is causing politically and emotionally if they are pressing for these people to be released they should come clean on whether this was a sanctioned operation. On the other hand these killers have 2 years left of their sentences wouldn't it be more prudent to let them serve out their sentences and allow the majority of people in the this country be at rest in seeing some justice has been done (personally I think they should have been convicted of murder but I believe there was intimidation of witnesses which made that impossible).

Again from your description the IRA sound like a wild west gang and not the disciplined military organisation we have been led to believe they are. Jerry McCabe didn't even have time to take off his seatbelt in the car before the "Heroes of Adare" cut him to shreds.

Regards partition, 26 County regimes since 1922 have only been too happy to maintain the status quo of partition, from De Velera's executing of Republicans in 1944 to Liam Cosgrave introducing internment during the Border Campaign to Sunningdale to the Anglo-Irish agreement. The Treaty, those who brought it into place and those people's political descendants have strived to maintain partition. I don't think anybody on the Free State side during the Civil War would have been responsible for the re-unification of Ireland

Then again you would have to be pragmatic if you were around then. What would your plan have been, fight on when you were on the verge of defeat. They got the best solution they had available.

Regards the deaths of police, that was a regrettable occurence every so often throughout the course of the war but it was not like the IRA ever made targets of the guards, only a few died in 25 years and I don't personally think that that undermines the right of Irish people to resist repression.

But given the fact that even your like minded friends on the other forum admit that you are in the vast minority (direct quote) then aren't you deluded and arrogant to say that what you do is the wish of the people of ireland.

The fact that the killing of Jerry McCabe is quite clearly in contravention of the IRA's own rules of engagement also says that they should face some form of punishment. They are being punished and tbh I do not accept your view that this was a sanctioned IRA operation at all. If anything it was and is an extreme embarrassment to the Republican movement.

You are correct in saying that there may be contradictions involved in the subject of dual membership but the organisations as bodies have different constitutions and short-term goals and as such are seperate entities, to be honest, what Sinn Féin members do outside of Sinn Féin time so to speak, is not the concern of that particular party.

Well unfortunately it is the concern of me a citizen of the Republic of Ireland and many like me if they want to take up representation in our Dail. How can we expect these people to serve us properly if secretly they belong to an organisation that doesn't believe the house of representation should actually exist. I am sure you can see where I am coming from here.

FTA69

gandalf wrote:

I see the reason the IRA would not be willing to talk but considering the confrontations and problems that this is causing politically and emotionally if they are pressing for these people to be released they should come clean on whether this was a sanctioned operation. On the other hand these killers have 2 years left of their sentences wouldn't it be more prudent to let them serve out their sentences and allow the majority of people in the this country be at rest in seeing some justice has been done (personally I think they should have been convicted of murder but I believe there was intimidation of witnesses which made that impossible).

Again from your description the IRA sound like a wild west gang and not the disciplined military organisation we have been led to believe they are. Jerry McCabe didn't even have time to take off his seatbelt in the car before the "Heroes of Adare" cut him to shreds.


Then again you would have to be pragmatic if you were around then. What would your plan have been, fight on when you were on the verge of defeat. They got the best solution they had available.


But given the fact that even your like minded friends on the other forum admit that you are in the vast minority (direct quote) then aren't you deluded and arrogant to say that what you do is the wish of the people of ireland.

The fact that the killing of Jerry McCabe is quite clearly in contravention of the IRA's own rules of engagement also says that they should face some form of punishment. They are being punished and tbh I do not accept your view that this was a sanctioned IRA operation at all. If anything it was and is an extreme embarrassment to the Republican movement.


Well unfortunately it is the concern of m a citizen of the Republic of Ireland and many like me if they want to take up representation in our Dail. How can we expect these people to serve us properly if secretly they belong to an organisation that doesn't believe the house of representation should actually exist. I am sure you can see where I ame coming from here.

The length of time these men have left to serve is irrelevant, the fact is that as qualifying prisoners under the Agreement they should have been released 5 years ago. We had to sit back and watch British soldiers with 37 years left on their sentences walk out after 2 years to a party and subsequent promotion in the British Army, if the remaining time of incarceration is so insignificant what is the major qualm in releasing them early?

Out of curiosity, considering you regard the IRA as absolutely illegal why are you so concerned on the subject of their internal governance? Surely the rules governing an "illegal" group are inconsequential to you? And I would also have assumed the internationally-binding GFA that states these men should be set free would be of more concern to you than the rules of a "wild west gang"?

The killing was indeed an embarrasment to the Republican Movement, but so was a variety of other operations. The fact remains that mistakes happen in war and the Movement will not leave behind those Volunteers who made the mistakes.

Regards the Treaty, I said earlier I would have supported the temporary acceptance of the Treaty, I do not however, support the repression of Republicans and the lethal force employed by the Free State to maintain partition.

I can see your point regarding Sinn Féin but what I did say is that Sinn Féin is not involved in any of the activities outlined by yourself, their democratic mandate gives them as much a right as any othe representative to sit in Leinster House.

gandalf

FTA69 wrote:

The length of time these men have left to serve is irrelevant, the fact is that as qualifying prisoners under the Agreement they should have been released 5 years ago. We had to sit back and watch British soldiers with 37 years left on their sentences walk out after 2 years to a party and subsequent promotion in the British Army, if the remaining time of incarceration is so insignificant what is the major qualm in releasing them early?

Because given the general consensus that the majority of people in the country have come to, is that it was a "bandit operation" in the absense of any clarification from the provos, and the fact that the Gardai involved were clearly gunned down in cold blood, why shouldn't I expect them to serve their full sentences especially when our Government gave assurances that they would do so. Again if you ask anyone outside your "vast minority" circles you will find the majority of them feel they should serve the full term of their sentences.

The feeling is that these individuals have been tagged onto the GFA as an afterthough a bit like an unwanted afterbirth.

Out of curiosity, considering you regard the IRA as absolutely illegal why are you so concerned on the subject of their internal governance? Surely the rules governing an "illegal" group are inconsequential to you? And I would also have assumed the internationally-binding GFA that states these men should be set free would be of more concern to you than the rules of a "wild west gang"?

Well you seem you hold them in some regard and eventhough I disagree with alot of your views I do conceed that you are inteligent and articulate and I am geniunely interested in your feelings and views on this if anything to gain a better understanding of where you are coming from.

Again I have underlined my reasoning for why they shouldn't be part of the GFA above which I already know you disagree with.

The killing was indeed an embarrasment to the Republican Movement, but so was a variety of other operations. The fact remains that mistakes happen in war and the Movement will not leave behind those Volunteers who made the mistakes.

Well I would classify a mistake as a stray round hitting someone not ripping someone apart at close range in a targeted attack. What would the normal punishment be I wonder for breech of the Green Book with the Provos or is it there just for lip service to cover "mistakes".

Regards the Treaty, I said earlier I would have supported the temporary acceptance of the Treaty, I do not however, support the repression of Republicans and the lethal force employed by the Free State to maintain partition.

Whats temporary though. You cannot change bigoted minds on boths side like a flick of a switch. Even if things are agreed now it will probably take 30 - 50 years to see the re-unification of Ireland. Will people in the Republican movement be happy with that or will they pick up their "toys" again? Of course if it happens too quickly we have the lovely prospect of that other pack of humanitarians coming south the Jaffa killers !!

If you are talking about the right of the forces of the Republic of Ireland to defend themselves, its citizens and sovereignty from a private army then I do support them in their actions especially if the "Stagecoach" operation in Adare is anything to go by.

I can see your point regarding Sinn Féin but what I did say is that Sinn Féin is not involved in any of the activities outlined by yourself, their democratic mandate gives them as much a right as any othe representative to sit in Leinster House.

No matter what democratic mandate they have if behind the facade they present to the public they are working to undermine the country then they do deserve to take any seat in Leinster House.

FTA69

gandalf wrote:

Because given the general consensus that the majority of people in the country have come to, is that it was a "bandit operation" in the absense of any clarification from the provos, and the fact that the Gardai involved were clearly gunned down in cold blood, why shouldn't I expect them to serve their full sentences especially when our Government gave assurances that they would do so. Again if you ask anyone outside your "vast minority" circles you will find the majority of them feel they should serve the full term of their sentences.

The feeling is that these individuals have been tagged onto the GFA as an afterthough a bit like an unwanted afterbirth.

Well you seem you hold them in some regard and eventhough I disagree with alot of your views I do conceed that you are inteligent and articulate and I am geniunely interested in your feelings and views on this if anything to gain a better understanding of where you are coming from.

Again I have underlined my reasoning for why they shouldn't be part of the GFA above which I already know you disagree with.

Well I would classify a mistake as a stray round hitting someone not ripping someone apart at close range in a targeted attack. What would the normal punishment be I wonder for breech of the Green Book with the Provos or is it there just for lip service to cover "mistakes".

Whats temporary though. You cannot change bigoted minds on boths side like a flick of a switch. Even if things are agreed now it will probably take 30 - 50 years to see the re-unification of Ireland. Will people in the Republican movement be happy with that or will they pick up their "toys" again? Of course if it happens too quickly we have the lovely prospect of that other pack of humanitarians coming south the Jaffa killers !!

If you are talking about the right of the forces of the Republic of Ireland to defend themselves, its citizens and sovereignty from a private army then I do support them in their actions especially if the "Stagecoach" operation in Adare is anything to go by.

No matter what democratic mandate they have if behind the facade they present to the public they are working to undermine the country then they do deserve to take any seat in Leinster House.

Nobody is disputing that the majority of the Irish people are against early release for the Castlereagh 4 but they were against the release of Johnny Adair as well as the rest of the IRA prisoners held in Portlaoise. Should these then not have occured? The fact is that prisoner release is hard to swallow for every section of the Irish population, as well many families in England. People's distate however, cannot be allowed to undermine the new process in Ireland. A political process based on peace and reconciliation cannot survive in a vindictive environment and that is why all prisoners on all sides should be released immediately. I do indeed disagree with the GFA but the new political landscape is not necessarily embodied by the GFA, also that agreement does not stipulate that those eligible for release have to suscribe to the GFA, it simply mentions groups on ceasefire. Hence the release of INLA prisoners.


Regards mistakes, someone can intentionally commit a deed and then regret it as a "mistake". Besides, our talk on the matter is simply speculation, one Volunteer during that incident was shot in the foot so I doubt personally that the operation included a premeditated opinion to kill McCabe. Handcuffs were also carried by the Active Service Unit indicating killing may not have been their intention. Who knows? However, it does not change the fact the men are eligible for release.

Regards Sinn Féin and Leinster House, the Republican ideal aims to see a new, all Ireland state created which would inevitably replace both the 6 and 26 County states. Is the seeking of a United Ireland by that logic then "subversive", in the context of either state probably, but people have a right to seek it nonetheless and their representatives have a right to sit in parliament.

Again gandalf, I will bid you good night!

billy the squid

FTA69 wrote:

You say that because the Adare robbery was not sanctioned by IRA command that that automatically equates with the robbery being for personal gain,

Firstly it is nice to see you admit that it was a robbery. If the IRA feel that they have a good cause then why don't they hold collections and let people choose whether or not they deserve their money.

As for whether or not the men who did this bank job did it for their own personal gain, it was either for personal gain or else it was an ego trip.

FTA69 wrote:

I pointed out to you earlier that operations are often conducted at a local level owing to possible time or equipment constraints. Local units often shot up a passing British Army patrol without seeking sanction from above, does that make it less of an IRA operation? No it doesn't in my view.

The IRA's own rule book states that under no circumstances are their members to attack members of the Garda Siocana. maybe that had more to do with why their maverick bank job wasn't sanctioned until it became convenient for the IRA.

FTA69 wrote:

Regards the Treaty, I for one would have believed that temporary acceptance of a Treaty would have been the pragmatic choice at the time. However, Collins's reason for signing it was eventually proved wrong, because of his party (Cumann na nGaedhal and later Fine Gael) and De Valera's Fianna Fáil we now have a partitioned Ireland which was not what the Volunteers of 1916 or the War of Independence fought for. Also, Óglaigh na hÉireann rejected the Treaty by a majority vote so I believe.

The treaty was put to a vote in the Dail and was ratified by a majority of its elected members. full stop, although this has nothing to do with the bank robbery that took place in Adare.

FTA69 wrote:

Nearly all IRA operations were orientated with attacking the military, economic and infrastructural fabric of the 6 County state as well as the British establishment. Circumstances and technological developments had changed between 1920 and 1969, what did not change though, was the right of people to resist British occupation.

Limerick is neither in the six counties of Northern Ireland, nor is it on the UK mainland. Adare is in the same place as it was in 1920, so what circumstances changed to justify these men to rob a bank for the IRA.

FTA69 wrote:

Maybe the IRA should clear up the circumstances of the robbery, but owing to the nature of that organisation they do not make public statements unless it's absolutely necessary. As I said above several times, whether it was a sanctioned IRA operation or an unsanctioned IRA operation is inconsequential, the fact was it was an IRA operation.

I'm confused here, if the IRA don't sanction a bank heist then why would they want to claim it as an operation. that is like claiming credit for other people's work isn't it. The fact of the matter is that the IRA didn't claim credit for the robbery in adare until they felt that they had something to gain by it, which they don't. proof in the pudding is that not a single sinn fein person caim to my door canvasing during the last election, why, because it will be a cold day in hell before they get a seat in Limerick east while there is a chance that these murderers will get released.

FTA69 wrote:

Regards partition, 26 County regimes since 1922 have only been too happy to maintain the status quo of partition, from De Velera's executing of Republicans in 1944

just an observation here (and you keep wandering from the topic of this thread) the assassinations of the 1920s accomplished saorstat Eireann, the Irish free state, which was still a member of the Brittish Commonwealth.

It was through diplomacy and altering the rules of the structure of the brittish commonwealth which made the republic of Ireland independent of the United Kingdom in 1949.

just an example of how diplomacy accomplishes more than violence.

It is typical however that whenever someone of your ilk encounters a situation that they cannot wriggle out their way out of they have to go back to 1916 and the injustices of almost a hundred years ago. newsflash, everyone involved in that is dead they cannot be punnished now.

FTA69 wrote:

Regards the deaths of police, that was a regrettable occurence

If it is all that regretable then why do you have a problem with these men doing their time.

FTA69 wrote:

The killing was indeed an embarrasment to the Republican Movement, but so was a variety of other operations. The fact remains that mistakes happen in war and the Movement will not leave behind those Volunteers who made the mistakes.

actually the IRA are an embarrasement to the republican movement. I would love to see a united ireland, but only when the majority of the people in the north would be happy to do so, I cannot see it happening in my lifetime and it will only happen if it is accomplished through diplomacy.

FTA69 wrote:

Out of curiosity, considering you regard the IRA as absolutely illegal why are you so concerned on the subject of their internal governance?

the fact that they cannot stick to their own rules proves that they are dishonorable.

Metrobest

I just can't get over the utter hypocrasy. Why is okay that hundreds of IRA men who killed soldiers and RUC Officers were released in the North; but because our garda man was in the South his killers should be kept in?

Be it a gaurd or and RUC officer, the IRA's motivation was the same. It wanted to create fear and terror so that the governments would accede to its demands.

North or South, the IRA had the same philosophy: fulfilling its vulgar aims through murder. We in the South have a lot to answer for : we funded the IRA, stored its weapons, supplied it with manpower and political ambivilance.

The release of McCabe's killers is a bitter pill. Let's swallow it. If the people of the North - who've suffered violence far more horriffic - can forgive and move on, so can we here in Dublin.

billy the squid

Metrobest wrote:

I just can't get over the utter hypocrasy. Why is okay that hundreds of IRA men who killed soldiers and RUC Officers were released in the North; but because our garda man was in the South his killers should be kept in

[*]They were robbing a bank in the republic and were not sanctioned by the iIRA to do so until it was convenient to do so

[*]Section 8 of the IRA's little green book deals with the attacking of gardai

[*]We don't elect the government of britain, therefore how they deal with the men who kill members of their police force is their business not ours, we elect our government so how our government deals with those that murder our gardai is our business.

is that good enough for you

Be it a gaurd or and RUC officer, the IRA's motivation was the same. It wanted to create fear and terror so that the governments would accede to its demands.

WRONG!!! They were running low of cash and knew that they werent going to get much if they were to hold a rally and collect from their supporters, because they havent got that many supporters. so they took a trip to adare and robbed a bank, and shot a guard.

The release of McCabe's killers is a bitter pill. Let's swallow it. If the people of the North - who've suffered violence far more horriffic - can forgive and move on, so can we here in Dublin.

your missing the point. the bank job that took place in adare was a criminal offence, not some paramilitary operation.

Metrobest

billy the squid wrote:

[*]your missing the point. the bank job that took place in adare was a criminal offence, not some paramilitary operation.

All the IRA's deeds were offences. You're missing the point!

Sleepy

But the murder of British Forces within their borders were out of our jurisdiction to punish. Murder of our police forces, within our borders is.

billy the squid

Metrobest wrote:

All the IRA's deeds were offences. You're missing the point!

whether or not that is the case is not what is being debated here though, some of what the IRA did whether it be offensive to some people is dealt with in the Good Friday Agreement.

The debate here is whether or not the bank robbery in adare should be covered by the good friday agreement.which I personally think it should not be. for the reasons stated above.