[article] Adventures of a Sinn Fein "Campiagn Team"

mike65

from online.ie

Five jailed for IRA membership

Five Dublin men were each jailed for four years by the Special Criminal Court today for membership of the Provisional IRA.

The five Dublin men are Thomas Gilson, aged 24, of Bawnlea Avenue, Jobstown, Tallaght; Patrick Brennan, aged 40, of Lindisfarne Avenue, Clondalkin; Sean O' Donnell, aged 32, of Castle Drive, Sandymount; John Troy, aged 22, of Donard Avenue and Stephen Birney, aged 31, of Conquerhill Road, Clontarf.

They had all denied membership of the IRA on October 11, 2002.

Jailing the men, Mr Justice Diarmuid O' Donovan, presiding, told them: "The mind boggles as to what you were up to. Whatever it was we are quite sure that it was up to no good and it was associated with your membership of the IRA."

The court jailed each of the men for four years but suspended the final two months to take into account time they had already spent in custody.

Chief Superintendent Peter Maguire told the court all the men were members of the Provisional IRA and were attached to that organisation's Dublin Brigade and answerable directly to the leadership.

During the 24-day trial the court heard that the five men were arrested after an off duty Special Branch detective noticed suspicious activity around three vehicles.

The court heard gardaí recovered a large quantity of Sinn Féin posters, including election posters, from a car in which they also found a stun gun and CS gas canister after the men's arrest.

Gardaí also found pick-axe handles, balaclavas and a fake garda jacket from a van and four of the men were found seated on the floor of the van, two of them dressed in fake garda uniforms.

Convicting the men today Mr Justice Diarmuid O' Donovan, presiding, said: "Whatever purpose the accused had for being in each other's company on the evening of October 10, 2002, and whatever they intended to do with the items which were found in the van in which they were arrested, and in the Nissan Almera car with which they were also associated on that evening, the court has no doubt but that they were up to no good by which the court means some criminal activity.

"Certainly, notwithstanding that an election poster bearing the name Aengus Ó Snodaigh TD was also found in the Nissan Almera car, the court is satisfied that whatever the accused had in mind on that evening, it was a far cry from electioneering on behalf of Sinn Féin which was the purpose for which the van in which they were arrested had been lent to the Sinn Féin organisation by its owner."

Okay explain how this is not what it looks like...

Mike.

A Dub in Glasgo

Another thread :rolleyes:

And what does it look like?

gurramok

The judge said 'it was a far cry from electioneering'...then why is your thread entitled 'Adventures of a Sinn Fein campaign team', you are contradicting what the judge has said in his summing up !
Also, where does it say they were SF members ?
I believe the judges word that yours imho.

oscarBravo

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

And what does it look like?

What does it look like to you?

A Dub in Glasgo

It looks like 5 men were convicted of IRA membership. They were not convicted of anything else. It looks as if they 'borrowed' the van off someone and that person may have had SF election posters in it.

Is there a point to this thread?


http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=46807

Topics should not be verbatim quotes from some article sans comment. Add a comment before or after the post, offering your opinion on the subject, or at the very least, your reason for adding the topic.

monument

I’m not going to comment on any one case, but were talking about the Special Criminal Court (aka the Special Kangaroo Court), where silence can be seen as a determining factor in convictions, and a senior police officer’s word is more important then real evidence.

sceptre

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

It looks like 5 men were convicted of IRA membership. They were not convicted of anything else. It looks as if they 'borrowed' the van off someone and that person may have had SF election posters in it.

No, not "borrowed", cof cof (assuming that's what you meant though I could be wrong). Borrowed. It's there in the last paragraph ("lent"). Some bloke lent them the van to go campaigning in and they decided to have a pick-axe handle, balaclava and fake garda jacket and uniform party instead. Kinky feckers.

Mike, add your views within 24 hours or I'll have to dump the thread. Or at the very least, your reason for adding the topic.

While the thread is still here, I wonder what the views of the guy who lent the van were after lending his van to guys who said they were going to campaign for a lawful political party only for them to go on a pick-axe handle, balaclava and fake garda jacket and uniform party instead. Was he asked for evidence at any point? What I'm thinking is "does he exist" but it doesn't matter all that much given that the five men had control of the van and had what they wanted in there, an election poster being as movable as a pickaxe handle or five

mike65

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

It looks like 5 men were convicted of IRA membership. They were not convicted of anything else. It looks as if they 'borrowed' the van off someone and that person may have had SF election posters in it.

Is there a point to this thread?

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=46807

[edited for sceptre intervention]

The point to to goad republicans into commenting on the company your friends keep....is it acceptable that an elected member of the Irish Parliment
has such close contacts with the provisonal IRA?

Mike.

A Dub in Glasgo

sceptre wrote:

No, not "borrowed". Borrowed. it's there in the last paragraph. Some bloke lent them the van to go campaigning in and they .

The reason I put 'borrowed' was the fact that there is nothing in that report that indicates that the van was given to those men on the pretext of SF electioneering. How do you come to the conclusion that the guy who lent the van, lent it to these guys for SF electioneering.

The guy could have lent it to someone else for SF electioneering and that was done. These guys then 'borrow' the van from the original guy.

A Dub in Glasgo

mike65 wrote:

The sound you hear is credulity being stretched to breaking point.

Any other reports that indicate that the van was lent to these particular guys for SF electioneering?

Dyr

During the last election saw somebody taking a slash against a lampost that had aengus o snodaighs mush on it. I demand answers from Sinn Fein about this!! :mad:

I wonder if they'd battered the living daylights out of some skinny junkie in the back of that van would they have been done for impersonating gardai?

oscarBravo

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

Any other reports that indicate that the van was lent to these particular guys for SF electioneering?

1. The owner of the van lent it to Sinn Féin for electioneering.
2. ...
3. Five IRA members were arrested in the van, up to what can hardly be dismissed as harmless high jinx.

The question is, what's the missing step in the sequence? If the owner lent it to the IRA members, what for? Was it stolen from the owner by the IRA members? If so, it shouldn't be hard to dig out that information for us.

If you want us to believe that steps 1 and 2 are not directly linked, I suggest it's up to you to offer some evidence of intervening events.

sceptre

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

The reason I put 'borrowed' was the fact that there is nothing in that report that indicates that the van was given to those men on the pretext of SF electioneering. How do you come to the conclusion that the guy who lent the van, lent it to these guys for SF electioneering.

Ah, now you're stretching it to wackydom. Is what you're saying is that Mr Z (the owner of the van) could have lent it to Mr X, member of SF(P) specifically for SF electioneering as mentioned in the report, who then lent it to Mr Y, member of IRA(P) who was caught in the van with his mates having the pickaxe party? Or Mr Y nicked it from Mr X? Or something else equally inventive?

And does this matter given that they found the O'Snodaigh posters in the car (yes, the car, not the van) which doesn't appear to have been lent or borrowed or 'borrowed' or owt else mentioned in the report?

You're not saying it was the PSNI or Paisley's crowd up to drag the good name of SF through the mud are you?

cdebru

apart from that

shock horror IRA members support sinn fein

what ****ing political party did you think they would support

if they were found in a van that they had borrowed from a PD election worker or if enda kennys posters were in the van that would be shocking

RTEs attempts to sensationalise some of the stuff in the van was laughable so they had two miirors in the van
and most shocking of all a baseball cap with the Hblocks written on it

and lets not forget the clincher a poster of o'snodaigh and gerry adams( anti bin charge one)

can someone anyone explain the significance of any of those items


the van belonged to someone who was an election worker for sinn fein and it had sinn fein posters in it and plastic ties for putting the posters up

the only things of relevance to the case are the balaclavas the garda jacket the taser
and the baseball bat etc

posters have nothing to do with it nor do mirrors from castlereagh or baseball caps with hblock written on them

sceptre

cdebru wrote:

the van belonged to someone who was an election worker for sinn fein and it had sinn fein posters in it and plastic ties for putting the posters up

The article mentinos that the posters were in the car. I mentioned this above. Assuming the article to be correct, it isn't that difficult to understand.

Here's where someone can offer the suggestion that they're avid poster collectors who like to party in police uniforms and balaclavas. You'll get to it eventually so we could get it over with I suppose.

gandalf

The thing that interests me is this. What were they up to that night or should I say who were they after that night. Sounds very very sinister indeed that they were impersonating Gardai and the fact they had a stun gun and cs gas. If this is the IRA's idea of community policing then they can keep it.

I know one thing if I was giving my car to anyone as a loan I would have to trust them 100% and I would say this is the same for anyone else even a Sinn Fein member. Therefore it is safe to assume that they had a good idea what their van would be used for.

cdebru

ok imagine your an IRA member

which political party do you think you would be likely to support

now imagine your an IRA member with some time on your hands at election time which parties posters are you likely to be putting up



now does any of this mean that sinn fein or o'snodaigh knew that these men were in the IRA or what they were up to when they were arrested by the Gardai

NO

cdebru

gandalf wrote:

.

I know one thing if I was giving my car to anyone as a loan I would have to trust them 100% and I would say this is the same for anyone else even a Sinn Fein member. Therefore it is safe to assume that they had a good idea what their van would be used for.

no it is not safe to assume
I have had loans of cars from people i hardly knew not that i did anything wrong with them but i did not provide a minute by minute account of what i was going to do with the car all they cared about was to make sure my insurance covered me

now I don't know what they were planning but i think it is unlikely that the guy who owned the van would give it to anyone if he tought a crime was about to be commited in a van that has your numberplates and would be easily traceable back to the owner

true

gandalf wrote:

The thing that interests me is this. What were they up to that night or should I say who were they after that night. Sounds very very sinister indeed that they were impersonating Gardai and the fact they had a stun gun and cs gas. If this is the IRA's idea of community policing then they can keep it.

I know one thing if I was giving my car to anyone as a loan I would have to trust them 100% and I would say this is the same for anyone else even a Sinn Fein member. Therefore it is safe to assume that they had a good idea what their van would be used for.

Good point and well made. It is interesting that some people do not find it sinister that a vehicle full of these people with these particular contents should be associated with a prominent politician in this country. Maybe not all that surprising - the phrase " an armalite in one hand and a ballot box in the other should perhaps be changed for a van full of ~~~~~~~~ in one hand and a ballot box in the other.

oscarBravo

cdebru wrote:

ok imagine your an IRA member

which political party do you think you would be likely to support

You're missing two points, cdebru:

cdebru wrote:

now imagine your an IRA member with some time on your hands at election time which parties posters are you likely to be putting up

Why would you be putting up those posters while wearing fake Garda uniforms and armed with pickaxe handles and a stun gun?

cdebru wrote:

now does any of this mean that sinn fein or o'snodaigh knew that these men were in the IRA or what they were up to when they were arrested by the Gardai

The van was lent to Sinn Féin for a specific purpose. How did the IRA chappies happen to have their hands on it, with what one can only imagine was a different purpose in mind?

cdebru

oscarBravo wrote:

You're missing two points, cdebru: Why would you be putting up those posters while wearing fake Garda uniforms and armed with pickaxe handles and a stun gun? The van was lent to Sinn Féin for a specific purpose. How did the IRA chappies happen to have their hands on it, with what one can only imagine was a different purpose in mind?

I'm not missing any points

obviously the sinn fein posters have absolutely nothing to do with what ever they intended using the stun gun etc for

the vehicles they were using were also being used by people perhaps the same people to put up sinn fein posters

if they found a fourstar pizza box and the guy delivered pizza s would that mean that pizza company had something to do with the other stuff NO


what pisses me off is this feint shock that IRA members could also be supporters of sinn fein

the best way to deal with this is to get the settlement in the north that was nearly done in december then the IRA can be disarmed and disbanded

BuffyBot

It looks as if they 'borrowed' the van off someone and that person may have had SF election posters in it.

Ah now..that's stretching things a little!

Meh

cdebru wrote:

if they found a fourstar pizza box and the guy delivered pizza s would that mean that pizza company had something to do with the other stuff NO

It would if the Four Star pizza company was associated with a paramilitary organization that spent 30 years murdering employees and customers of other pizza restaurants. At the very least, it raises serious questions for Sinn Féin that they can't just brush off.

the best way to deal with this is to get the settlement in the north that was nearly done in december then the IRA can be disarmed and disbanded

And what if we get the settlement and the IRA doesn't disband? What do we do then? More concessions to SF/IRA I guess?

ishmael whale

cdebru wrote:

what pisses me off is this feint shock that IRA members could also be supporters of sinn fein

I’m not shocked that IRA members could also be supporters of Sinn Fein. I’m not shocked that IRA activists might be putting up posters for an SF candidate. I’m not shocked that IRA activists might be involved in smuggling, money laundering and acts of violence. I’m not shocked by suggestions that senior SF figures are on the Army council. I’m not shocked that SF figures would be involved in covering up a murder committed by IRA activists. I’m not shocked at the conviction of a member of an SF TD’s campaign team, or at the conviction of his fellow SF member wife for throwing a bottle at a Garda car following a SF function. I’m not shocked when SF turn out in force at IRA commemorations.

All in all, I’m not shocked at any of these things, or anything else that illustrates that SF and IRA are closely linked. What I do find surprising, however, is the extent to which SF supporters are unwilling to engage in frank debate on the implications of this with the rest of the Irish people and prefer to cling to ludicrous denials that these links exist.

Sand

All in all, I’m not shocked at any of these things, or anything else that illustrates that SF and IRA are closely linked. What I do find surprising, however, is the extent to which SF supporters are unwilling to engage in frank debate on the implications of this with the rest of the Irish people and prefer to cling to ludicrous denials that these links exist.

I dont think "links" goes far enough to describe the nature of SF and the IRA. SF is the front for the political struggle and the IRA runs the militant struggle and (as demonstrated by the way the punishment attacks can be turned on and off like a tap in the run up to talks, or the visit of Bill Clinton) their actions are governed by a unified strategy and command structure and (as demosntrated by O Snodaighs election workers and McCartneys killing by SF election workers) the same personnel in many cases. There are no links, they are one and the same group. I think people who vote SF cant fail to recognise this on some level, they just dont care. As long as they make the trains run on time and all that...

ishmael whale

Sand wrote:

I dont think "links" goes far enough to describe the nature of SF and the IRA....

I have no disagreement with what you are saying, and no difficulty with the idea that IRA and SF are parts of the one organisation. My main point simply relates to the unwillingness of SF supporters to frankly debate the reality of the situation. Which suggests they know their case is unsustainable so belief in the SF leadership's denials is their only refuge.

However, I would have some hope that an amount of SF support will fall away as people are forced to recognise what they voted for.

cdebru

ishmael whale wrote:

I’m not shocked that IRA members could also be supporters of Sinn Fein. I’m not shocked that IRA activists might be putting up posters for an SF candidate. I’m not shocked that IRA activists might be involved in smuggling, money laundering and acts of violence. I’m not shocked by suggestions that senior SF figures are on the Army council. I’m not shocked that SF figures would be involved in covering up a murder committed by IRA activists. I’m not shocked at the conviction of a member of an SF TD’s campaign team, or at the conviction of his fellow SF member wife for throwing a bottle at a Garda car following a SF function. I’m not shocked when SF turn out in force at IRA commemorations.

All in all, I’m not shocked at any of these things, or anything else that illustrates that SF and IRA are closely linked. What I do find surprising, however, is the extent to which SF supporters are unwilling to engage in frank debate on the implications of this with the rest of the Irish people and prefer to cling to ludicrous denials that these links exist.

i dont think anyone could deny there is a link

ie some members of the IRA are also members of sinn fein

however not all members of the IRA are members of sinn fein nor are all members of sinn fein members of the IRA

that does not mean that sinn fein is controlled by the IRA or the IRA is controlled by the Sinn Fein

the IRA is a completely seperate organisation the fact is that both organisation have the same aims and it is unsuprising that the IRA would do things that are politically beneficial to Sinn Fein

it is also true that the leadership of Sinn Fein knows only to well that the IRA has to go away the leadership of the IRA know that the IRA has to go away
At the moment the decommissioning of weapons and the standing down of the IRA give Sinn FEin something to bargain with during political talks they are unlikely to do away with their bargaining chip this side of an agreement if they have a choice

right or wrong and I know that people will say that they should negoiate on the strenght of their mandate not on the strenght of their army but this is the way it is

it also seems likely that if there is to be an agreement that the standing down of the IRA and decommissioning will have to take place a substantial period in advance of power sharing etc as unionists are unlikely to be willing to take a chance on sinn fein given recent events that will be a huge challenge to the leadership of the republican movement to sell decommissioning and disbandment of the IRA so far in advance of getting anything back

ishmael whale

cdebru wrote:

That does not mean that sinn fein is controlled by the IRA or the IRA is controlled by the Sinn Fein

I think the point is that there is a considerable overlap between the SF and IRA leaderships so yes, there is a unified control. Within that, I don’t expect there’s a formal contract defining the relative spheres of influence of SF and IRA, and I expect that the IRA is not as disciplined as a legitimate organisation. But stating that the IRA is a completely seperate organisation that merely shares SF objectives is hardly an accurate description of the situation. It makes SF sound like a British football club saying it can’t help it if a gang of hooligans decides to support them.

cdebru wrote:

it is also true that the leadership of Sinn Fein knows only to well that the IRA has to go away the leadership of the IRA know that the IRA has to go away

Well, from my perspective they’re much the same people.

cdebru wrote:

At the moment the decommissioning of weapons and the standing down of the IRA give Sinn Fein something to bargain with during political talks they are unlikely to do away with their bargaining chip this side of an agreement if they have a choice. Right or wrong and I know that people will say that they should negoiate on the strenght of their mandate not on the strenght of their army but this is the way it is.

At least here you are acknowledging that SF and IRA are linked enough for SF to be able to bargain on the basis of IRA standing down. But, consider that for the rest of us the worry is that the IRA is still a functioning organisation. Take the group recently convicted of being an IRA activists (the O’Snodaigh poster crowd.) Two of the group were aged 22 and 24 respectively. That makes them aged 12 and 14 at the time of the original ceasefire, or 16 and 18 at the time of the GFA. And here they are described as members of the Dublin brigade or somesuch of the IRA. What’s that all about?

Bear in mind I have no problem accepting that joining the IRA was a perfectly rational thing for someone to do in, say, the 1970s. I’d see it as a counterproductive thing to do, but rational and I can accept that my perspective might be different if I was living in Belfast at that time. I have no problem in accepting that, once a reasonable solution like the GFA comes along, we should be willing to release prisoners recognising that the offences they committed happened against the background of a political conflict. But their current activities have no defence..

cdebru

ishmael whale wrote:

I think the point is that there is a considerable overlap between the SF and IRA leaderships so yes, there is a unified control. Within that, I don’t expect there’s a formal contract defining the relative spheres of influence of SF and IRA, and I expect that the IRA is not as disciplined as a legitimate organisation. But stating that the IRA is a completely seperate organisation that merely shares SF objectives is hardly an accurate description of the situation. It makes SF sound like a British football club saying it can’t help it if a gang of hooligans decides to support them...

there may well be overlap in the leadership of each organisation i don't think anybody outside of those two organisations knows for sure.
Considering that the IRA is an illegal organisation in both jurisdictions it is unlikely that anyone is going to openly admit membership let alone army council membership which would attract the charge of directing terrorism.
So asking anyone if they are a member of the IRA never mind the army council seems a pointless exercise since absolutely everyone you ask is going to say no

the fact is that the two organisations are comletely different whilst they may have an overlap in membership perhaps even leadership the vast majority of sinn fein members are not and never have been members of the IRA the general policy and major decisions including the leadership and national executive in sinn fein are made by the membership at the annual ard fheis
policy and major decisions about the IRA are made at an army convention of its members

ishmael whale wrote:

Well, from my perspective they’re much the same people...

you think based on what micheal mcdowell says i presume you have never attended an IRA army council meeting and dont actually know who is on the army council

ishmael whale wrote:

At least here you are acknowledging that SF and IRA are linked enough for SF to be able to bargain on the basis of IRA standing down. But, consider that for the rest of us the worry is that the IRA is still a functioning organisation. Take the group recently convicted of being an IRA activists (the O’Snodaigh poster crowd.) Two of the group were aged 22 and 24 respectively. That makes them aged 12 and 14 at the time of the original ceasefire, or 16 and 18 at the time of the GFA. And here they are described as members of the Dublin brigade or somesuch of the IRA. What’s that all about?..

there has always been a dublin brigade of the IRA as with most southern brigades they were/are involved in "fundraising" and storing weapons etc
as to why they would have people that young well as adams said they didn't go away so of course they have been accepting members

ishmael whale wrote:

Bear in mind I have no problem accepting that joining the IRA was a perfectly rational thing for someone to do in, say, the 1970s. I’d see it as a counterproductive thing to do, but rational and I can accept that my perspective might be different if I was living in Belfast at that time. I have no problem in accepting that, once a reasonable solution like the GFA comes along, we should be willing to release prisoners recognising that the offences they committed happened against the background of a political conflict. But their current activities have no defence..

i agree with most of what you say here and in my opinion the IRA should decommission and stand down although it is probably for different reasons from alot of posters on here
I think that to leave the IRA armed and organised will only lead to situations like we have seen over the last couple of weeks

ishmael whale

cdebru wrote:

you think based on what micheal mcdowell says i presume you have never attended an IRA army council meeting and dont actually know who is on the army council

As we understand it McDowell is basing his view on Garda intelligence. There's also Ed Moloney's book (cited at wikipedia) and various media reports. I'm not suggesting any of this amounts to a legal case, simply that a reasonable person would not have too much difficulty in accepting Moloney's account.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRA_army_council

I can accept that Adams et al have little option but to stonewall, although that's simply acknowledging the reality of the situation they are in, not excusing it. However, the willingness of many SF supporters to subscribe to these denials is strange.

cdebru wrote:

i agree with most of what you say here and in my opinion the IRA should decommission and stand down although it is probably for different reasons from alot of posters on here. I think that to leave the IRA armed and organised will only lead to situations like we have seen over the last couple of weeks

We can certainly agree on that.

cdebru

ishmael whale wrote:

As we understand it McDowell is basing his view on Garda intelligence. There's also Ed Moloney's book (cited at wikipedia) and various media reports. I'm not suggesting any of this amounts to a legal case, simply that a reasonable person would not have too much difficulty in accepting Moloney's account.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRA_army_council

I can accept that Adams et al have little option but to stonewall, although that's simply acknowledging the reality of the situation they are in, not excusing it. However, the willingness of many SF supporters to subscribe to these denials is strange.



We can certainly agree on that.

ok this is the way i see it
ed moloney has never attended an army council meeting either so how did moloney come by these names
either some one on the IRA army council or very close to it suddenly decided it would be a good idea if he/she told a journalist who is on the army council

or and i think this is more likely someone in the gardai or PSNI or someone who has access to that information like a government minister gave it to him
rather than these being seperate reports that back up each other i would think that it is far more likely that they are all based on the one report

anyone can make up a list of leading republicans and pass it off as the IRA army council as has already been discussed none of these people can sue so its pretty much open season