IRA and the Nothern Bank Robbery

sceptre

AmenToThat wrote:

Iv read all the pages on this thread and Iv yet to see anyone who believes that the provos are guilty explain how this can resolved.

If the IRA consider themselves a legitimate army I'm sure they've, erm, well-established procedures to deal with those who break rank and disobey direct orders to do nothing and take actions for their own personal gain.

Well in terms that could actually work in the real world anyways.

Ah, oops, no fair.

FTA69

FTA69 wrote:

It's a fair question though earthman, one which you have failed to answer. You have stated that the onus is on the Republican Movement to deliver "an ultimatum to the RIRA", again, what can we do about them?

Quite frankly thats laughable,there were no such reservations as to what to do with people during the IRA campaign and very little reservations with punishment beatings.
Turn them into the Gardaí, shop them perhaps?
If as you say theres such indignation between the two
Can you give a cast iron guarantee that despite infighting as to how to procede theres no communication whatsoever between RIRA PIRA and CIRA?
You are asking us to believe that guys can walk away with weapons at any time from the IRA and thats that - no more said-bye bye lads?

As for my knowledge of Republicanism and my inteligence,It strikes me that questioning someones inteligence because they apply a little lateral thinking is indicative of a bereavement of debating skills.

true

mad_martian wrote:

what makes you qualified to post then TRUE? If FTA69 has to submit a cv where is yours? From where I am sitting FTA69 has put his views across with a degree of maturity............

I was not looking for a c.v., was I ? What prompted it was FTA69's very unusual remarks. For example, he does not expect that Earthman or somebody, as he "has no experience with Republicanism", could draw "an intelligent conclusion" about Republicanism.

I will accept that considering he is a teenager, he has put his views accross with a degree of maturity. However, I think it is clear they are fairly extemist views. About a page ago, he implied he was in the IRA , but maybe this was typing mistake or something.

It is sad it appears he wishes to ignore the tons of experience of moderate people from both communities in N. Ireland, from since before he was born. FTA69 is of course entitled to his opinions, but I wonder if he had seen some of the carnage and bloodshed , would he still think like he does? If he had a more balanced education ? If he had travelled abroad more to see other cultures and people ? As someone who was living, eating , sleeping and drinking with Northeners in N. I. from both sides of the divide when FTA69 was not even thought of, I think it is sad to see a young person with so much hatred in their heart.

mad_martian

I agree with your sentiment TRUE but as far as I see you don't have to have served your time before being allowed to express an opinion - however extremist, - this is not therapy by message board........having said that I would definitely recommend eating sleeping and drinking with Northerners though not necessarily in that order!

true

I did say he was entitled to an opinion, but I do wonder on what basis that opinion is founded. His opinions are such that I cannot help but wonder if he had ever met many "ordinary" Northeners or travelled much outside Ireland , or had an open minded education.

I saw a programme on the Hitler youth on telly a few weeks ago. And I thought they were badly brainwashed !

AmenToThat

sceptre wrote:

If the IRA consider themselves a legitimate army I'm sure they've, erm, well-established procedures to deal with those who break rank and disobey direct orders to do nothing and take actions for their own personal gain.

Ah, oops, no fair.

Thats all well and good but as I just pointed out above how do they deal with these individuals?
You (like everyone else on this thread) have made no attempt to explain how it can be resolved internally.

AmenToThat

Earthman wrote:

Quite frankly thats laughable,there were no such reservations as to what to do with people during the IRA campaign and very little reservations with punishment beatings.

Yes and they were condemned for it..............now in this case its suddenly acceptable for them to start performing punishment beatings?
Will it end at this discipling or start an infight that will unravel the whole peace process?


QUOTE=Earthman] Can you give a cast iron guarantee that despite infighting as to how to procede theres no communication whatsoever between RIRA PIRA and CIRA?
You are asking us to believe that guys can walk away with weapons at any time from the IRA and thats that - no more said-bye bye lads?

[/QUOTE]

From my own limited knowledge of Republicans (lads I grew up with, not necassarily provos just from within SF) the RIRA guys and the PIRA guys tend to hate each other with a passion............ not just on idialogical grounds but often just on conflicts of interests and character. To the best of my knowledge there is no connection between them and certainly no working relationship whatsoever.
Have you any information to suggest they do co-operate because it will be the first such claims I have ever heard!

sceptre

AmenToThat wrote:

You (like everyone else on this thread) have made no attempt to explain how it can be resolved internally.

I haven't (anywhere) expressed an opinion on the guilt of the ri-ra which was the pointed qualifier and delimiter on your question.

However, if the IRA is an organised organisation with a command structure that exists to be followed (and we're told implicitly that it is by the declaring of temporary ceasefires over the years as well as a current declared ceasefire) then they need to use the procedures they have (whatever they currently are) to enforce that command structure. If they can't enforce that command structure then they're nowhere above a gang of very common thugs with a convenient cause somewhere in the background, like the Merrie Men without the green tights. I tend to think that if they have to resport to knee-capping to enforce that command structure than they fall into the same boat but that's just me. The issue is less how they do it (even if that's an attempt to get someone here to recommend illegal activities or brutality to enforce that structure (poor form if that's what you're doing by the way, I'd expect better from someone who can obviously communicate a point in a logical fashion)) and more whether they even can. Because if they can't and they've got poor control over both their volunteers and their guns then there isn't much point in treating the Army Council as any supreme form of central control over the gunmen with the genuine ability to negotiate as under those circumstances they're neither central nor controlling (more like circus ringmasters - they can book acts, announce them and take credit for their performances but the real question in this specific case is whether they can control the guy outside the tent wearing one of their clown suits and red noses who's robbing sweets and shoes from the kids on their way into the tent) . It's one or the other - they can either control their men in a lawful fashion and restrict their activities and those of their volunteers to lawful activities or they can't.

Now that's a general point and not dependent on any possible involvement in this specific robbery but the discussion can proceed on the assumption that they were if you like.

Villain

Earthman wrote:

As for my knowledge of Republicanism and my inteligence,It strikes me that questioning someones inteligence because they apply a little lateral thinking is indicative of a bereavement of debating skills.

Hold on I never questioned your inteligence, I simply said you needed to educate yourself on the Organisations of the North.

I'm sorry if that doesn't sit well with you, but anyone that knows anything about the Organisations would know that the RIRA and the PIRA are totally opposed to each other.

irish1

irish1 wrote:

Hold on I never questioned your inteligence, I simply said you needed to educate yourself on the Organisations of the North.

I'm sorry if that doesn't sit well with you, but anyone that knows anything about the Organisations would know that the RIRA and the PIRA are totally opposed to each other.

Hmmmm,

Go back and look again,I was replying to FTA in the quote that you took, not to yourself,I'd replied to you earlier.

Now can you give me a categoric assurance that PIRA,CIRA,and RIRA dont share some members? I'll bet you cant(maybe you can in the same way as you state that Adams and McGuinness are not on the IRA army council.... but...)

Thats what I'm on about here right through, its the point I'm trying to drive home to you and theres no sense in SF supporters trying to sweep it under the carpet!!
It's all about perception and Republicans have no God given right (no matter what group they give their loyalty to) to practicise criminality.
Those that follow the peace road know who's not towing the line and to be frank with you... for as long as they dont deal with those that aren't they are going to be a mill stone around SF's neck.

Villain

Earthman wrote:

Now can you give me a categoric assurance that PIRA,CIRA,and RIRA dont share some members? I'll bet you cant(maybe you can in the same way as you state that Adams and McGuinness are not on the IRA army council.... but...)

Your really not taking it in are you.

If an PIRA member was found to be a member of either the CIRA or the RIRA they would be excluded very quickly. Try and understand this, the PIRA completely destest the other organisations, simalar to the way the Loyalist groups hate each, fortunately the republican haven't reverted to shooting each other in the same way the Loyalist have. But then again they were fighting over control of drug areas, because their in that business as where the IRA thankfully aren't.

mad_martian

Get them while they are hot!

Cork

mad_martian wrote:

Get them while they are hot!

Hillarious. not.

The implications that the continued criminality of the IRA has on the Peace Process are serious.

Trust that was built up over years is now gone - thanks to this bank raid.

The SDLP website has some very good analysis:

“ The many people who voted for the peace process did not vote for turning a blind eye to criminal activity which is not acceptable in any country which aspires to democracy.

Nationalists expect all paramilitaries to go quietly into retirement - not to carry out massive raids to fund their luxury lifestyles.


“ And they are angry that the IRA’s activities have played into the hands of the DUP and made it even harder to get all of the Agreement implemented.”

Why cannot SF make statements like this???

oscarBravo

irish1 wrote:

... anyone that knows anything about the Organisations would know that the RIRA and the PIRA are totally opposed to each other.

Missed my last post, did you? Mind you, you're not alone: the righteous indignation at baseless allegations seems to have exhausted itself at Hugh Orde's door.

Interesting that the van was driven across the border, no?

A Dub in Glasgo

oscarBravo wrote:

Mind you, you're not alone: the righteous indignation at baseless allegations seems to have exhausted itself at Hugh Orde's door

I would imagine the reason for that is the fact that the article I copied from is a Scottish newspaper. It is hardly in a position to change the outcome of the peace process. Orde is the head of the Police in NI and he is very much in a position to change the outcome of the peace process. If you have more clout to effect a change, you should have something more than gut instinct to guide you.

oscarBravo

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

Orde is the head of the Police in NI and he is very much in a position to change the outcome of the peace process. If you have more clout to effect a change, you should have something more than gut instinct to guide you.

Once again you assume he has no evidence, just because he hasn't published any. I mean, what sort of crazy-ass copper refuses to publish all the evidence in a major ongoing investigation? Sheesh...

In fact, your point actually serves to reinforce the idea that he must have evidence to support his assertion.

A Dub in Glasgo

I hope it was not the IRA as that would mean the peace process might survive.

If it was was the IRA, I hope Orde has evidence and can convict people with that evidence otherwise it is only speculation and gut feelings. Actions from the police speak much louder than words. So far we have only had the words.

mad_martian

I think that if it was the IRA, either sanctioned by leadership or not (and my feeling is that they were involved in some shape or form), then they have to some extent played into the hands of the anti-agreement Unionists - the DUP basically, but have you noticed how the DUP are now saying "we should continue process without SF" rather than "we should stop process".

My problem with that is that the peace process is nothin without those who can control the "army" that caused most, if not all of the really loud noises that woke me up when I was a kid........... and SF know it.

However, the trust issue mentioned by numerous posters is relatively moot at this stage -

people who trust the word of SF and the IRA (inc John Hume it would seem) will continue to do so unless (and probably even if!) PSNI come up with major smoking gun proof.

people who would never trust SF and the IRA will still never trust them even if Hugh Order was to walk down Falls Rd wearing a lephrechaun suit singing "it wasnt the IRA boyos who robbed it"

I think most of the SF voters, in the North certainly, might not condone unlawful actions on the part of the IRA but they can set aside these actions and rationalise their support by looking at the bigger picture of the good friday agreement - which was negotiated pretty well by SF (and others) and still offers the best way forward.

In a nutshell - this will delay but not derail the process and as long as IRA don't start another aggresive military campaign I think the GFA will recover.

mad_martian

Cork wrote:

Why cannot SF make statements like this???

Because their grass root supporters would throw their toys out of the pram if SF are seen to be in any way apologists for the IRA and Mr Adams would be looking for a new job (and the back of his head).

Get real!

mad_martian

Martin McGuinness SF on Primetime RTE "the robbery was wrong and the IRA were categorically not involved!".

If the security forces have any evidence - it would be a good opportunity to shoot him down in flames...........

smiaras

This post has been deleted.

true

OK, Smiaras, I believe you, I will not even bother looking at your link. Its just that this story of an ex SAS man - or was there a few - being involved in a protest at the house of commons is of no great relevance to anything, I think. They were acting in a personal capacity, they were not armed, they did not terrorise anyone, and they did not destroy or steal anything. Anyway, probably 99.999 per cent of people in the UK who protest for or against fox hunting are not ex-members of the SAS. I would see nothing wrong if a current member of the SAS infiltrated the extreme edge of some of the groups which have actually harmed people, in order to prevent these groups commiting offences in the future ( eg posting bombs to people in labs that are involved in animal testing etc ). What the ex-SAS man did in the house of commons was relatively peaceful and presumably he was in his home country.

It was interesting to see the Taoiseach over the last few days condemning Sinn Fein / IRA for the robbery, and he said the Garda had evidence, not just the PSNI. I do not expect him to show us the evidence. I trust the leader of the PSNI and I trust the Taoiseach. Also of interest on the news an hour ago was the fact that the white van used in the robbery was driven north through the border a few hours beforehand.

Villain

oscarBravo wrote:

One British intelligence source said that The Striker was “non-aligned” to any terrorist organisation, but that his skills were sought after by both the Provos and the Reals.

So much for the PIRA and RIRA having nothing in common. If there's that much hatred and mistrust between the two organisations, how come one is prepared to hire a mercenary that also works for the other?.

LOL, Read the text you posted again,going by what its says the man worked for neither group??

Villain

Cork wrote:

The SDLP website has some very good analysis:

Yes John Hume made a speech yesterday asking to see the evidence that the PSNI had to tie the IRA to the robbery.

As Martin McGuinness said on Prime Time last night, why can't the Taoiseach and Tony Blair bring McGuinness and Adams into a room and show them the evidence???

Nuttzz

irish1 wrote:

As Martin McGuinness said on Prime Time last night, why can't the Taoiseach and Tony Blair bring McGuinness and Adams into a room and show them the evidence???

One reason maybe that because the evidence might contains some informant(s) name(s), I wonder what would happen to him/her/it if the polite face of the ira got to saw that?

Villain

Nuttzz wrote:

One reason maybe that because the evidence might contains some informant(s) name(s), I wonder what would happen to him/her/it if the polite face of the ira got to saw that?

Come on, they could show the evidence without revealing the source, IMHO the PSNI are working off a hunch.

oscarBravo

irish1 wrote:

LOL, Read the text you posted again,going by what its says the man worked for neither group??

"...been connected with arms deals for the Real IRA..."

"...a long-standing association with the Provisional IRA..."

"...current connections to the Real IRA..."

"...his skills were sought after by both the Provos and the Reals..."

"...Provos have called him in from time to time for ‘specialist jobs’..."

"...identified as one of the Real IRA’s key arms fixers..."

Worked for neither group?

Villain

oscarBravo wrote:

"...been connected with arms deals for the Real IRA..."

"...a long-standing association with the Provisional IRA..."

"...current connections to the Real IRA..."

"...his skills were sought after by both the Provos and the Reals..."

"...Provos have called him in from time to time for ‘specialist jobs’..."

"...identified as one of the Real IRA’s key arms fixers..."

Worked for neither group?

Well you didn't post all that earlier you simply said

his skills were sought after by both the Provos and the Reals

Can I see a link for this??

Even if he did work for both that hardly means there closely connected.

oscarBravo

irish1 wrote:

Well you didn't post all that earlier you simply said

his skills were sought after by both the Provos and the Reals

Can I see a link for this??

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=2264400&postcount=138

irish1 wrote:

Even if he did work for both that hardly means there closely connected.

I didn't suggest they were.

Villain

Apologies, I never got time to read that article. The article also says

The involvement of a Real IRA sympathiser would throw into doubt the involvement of the Provisionals. The Real IRA broke away from the Provisionals in 1997, refusing to be involved with the peace process or the republican ceasefire.