SF candidate fails to make statement to Police Ombudsman

mycroft

lomb wrote:

yep theyre all guilty of perverting the course of justice, conspiracy, accessories to murder.

New to this are we?

For starts rounding up a huge chunk of witnesses and arresting them sends out the wrong message to a community that has suffered internment, and political shifts the shirt ripping "are we not wronged!" back to SF.

Secondly you'll have to proof they are guilty, with no evidence and a wall of silence, and the risk of charging people who really didn't see anything.

Finally if you'll recall there was organised rioting when the PSNI went in the short strand to pick up one IRA man.

Can you imagine if they started lifting 70 odd people? The vibe would scream 70s internment, and destory years of goodwill the PSNI have struggled to earn.

SF IRA would then use this as an excuse to continue their non complaince with the police board, and would switch the story from the Mc Carthys search for justice to the SF search for Justice for the crowd arrested.

oscarBravo

AmenToThat wrote:

The problem is that many republicans dont see the the PSNI/RUC as the proper investigative authority.

Whom do they see as the proper investigative authority?

Jimboo_Jones

irish1 wrote:

This young woman saw nothing so she has no information to help the investigation, I'd be more interested in getting those who saw the incident to come forward.

I for one can say that I have been in a bar when a serious assualt took place but saw nothing, I don't like to get involved in such incidents. I'm sure many more people can say the same.

So how about you stop bashing SF because a member was in a bar when the incident happened but saw nothing.

At this rate we should re-name the politics forum to "Sinn Fein's Politics"

You should ask yourself, is this really the type of person who you want to represent you in power. If she really did not see anything happening in the pub that night, she must have either drunk a litre of wiskey or be the most unobservant person in the world, which is hardly a good trait for a politician.

From what the media is reporting the person who was killed was a supporter of SF, one of the very people she is hoping to represent in office.

Lemming

Lemming wrote:

AmenToThat wrote:

The problem is that many republicans dont see the the PSNI/RUC as the proper investigative authority.
If your going to post on a topic my I respectfully suggest you at least make the effort to understand the topic your commenting on.

So .... how would SF/IRA propose that the killers are "brought to justice"? I'm curious to hear the answer to this

I'm still waiting for an answer to the above question.

Any SF/IRA apologists care to step up to the plate?

BuffyBot

I'm still waiting for an answer to the above question.

Well, we already know the IRA's answer to the problem..

ionapaul

The IRA answered you a few days ago...they offered to shoot the ones responsible. That may not be brought to justice, but it certainly is "brought to justice", right?

bonkey

MT wrote:

So much for the calls by Gerry and the Peacemakers urging those in the bar to give statements to the Police Ombudsman. Is there one rule for the people and another for party members?

I think you need to either reconsider your use of the word "urging", or the word "rule" in the above.

Urging people to do something is not a rule for anynoe. It still leaves the choice to the individual. Or are you saying that you'd like SF and/or the IRA to force anyone they believe knows something to report it?

I think this whole affair is becoming a microcosm of the 'peace' process itself.

It most certainly is. SF are treated as the omniscient powers who know everything about everyone who was involved, and as events come to light that may have previously unknown, SF get blamed for not doing something with the information sooner.

From what I can see though, this is based on nothing but an assumption arising from the usual contempt and the "if SF are involved, its guilty till proven innocent' mindset that their critics seem to often take.

I wonder how many more weeks will pass before Cora Groogan decides to properly aid the search for 'truth and justice' her party blathers on about?

At a guess, it will be no longer or shorter then the amount of time major poltiical figures in the more commonly-accepted major Irish parties decided to wait before aiding the search for 'truth and justice' in the various tribunals we've had, despite their respective parties making the same "of course we will help in any way we can and urge anyone involved etc. etc." statements.

Or was Gerry Adam's call for those with information to contact the ombudsman merely a stunt?

I think you're confusing Gerry Adam's leadership of Sinn Fein with some godlike powers that the other party leaders in other parties don't have.

In my view, the party's hypocrisy and cynicism throughout has been as breathtaking as it’s been revolting.

I find it no different to the hypocrisy and cynicism demonstrated time and time again by pretty-much every major political party in Irish history. They talk the talk, and deliver something entirely different.

And, as with the other major political parties, we will see that come election day, such hypocrisy has far, far less effect than we believe it should.

gandalf

Ok the following are banned for a week thanks to their "contributions" to this thread.

OfflerCrocGod
lomb
FX Meister

Next time if you do not have anything that adds to the discussion except for a smart a$$ remark don't bother posting!!

Lemming

bonkey wrote:

From what I can see though, this is based on nothing but an assumption arising from the usual contempt and the "if SF are involved, its guilty till proven innocent' mindset that their critics seem to often take.

And why has such a mindset developed bonkey? Could it be to do with the absolute unaccountability? Whilst other parties are also quite quite guilty of said unaccountability, other parties are not involved with terrorism and all manner of criminal activity.

I gave SF/IRA the benefit of the doubt since the start of the GFA. I've yet to see them give anything to that agreement other than the usual platitudes of "we most all work together and be inclusive drone blah blah drone drone fart bullsh*t drone drone" that we hear from them.

I've, quite frankly (as if I hadn't already), had enough. They are taking the piss and have been from the start.

At a guess, it will be no longer or shorter then the amount of time major poltiical figures in the more commonly-accepted major Irish parties decided to wait before aiding the search for 'truth and justice' in the various tribunals we've had, despite their respective parties making the same "of course we will help in any way we can and urge anyone involved etc. etc." statements.

Again, can I point to the bit on terrorism & all manner of criminal activity not being the mantra of the other political parties? Granted some of their members are involved in white-collar crime, and the parties should (and do) get a bollocking for their inaction, but SF/IRA are taking the piss as I've said before.

I find it no different to the hypocrisy and cynicism demonstrated time and time again by pretty-much every major political party in Irish history. They talk the talk, and deliver something entirely different.

Failing to live up to an election promise on something like tax isn't quite the same as failing to live up to an agreed cease-fire or not engaging in serious criminal activity. THere is no such thing as a pick a'mix cease-fire or criminal law.

Incidentally ... I'm still waiting for an answer to my prior question. I want one of the apologists to answer please.

MT

I think you need to either reconsider your use of the word "urging", or the word "rule" in the above.

Urging people to do something is not a rule for anynoe. It still leaves the choice to the individual. Or are you saying that you'd like SF and/or the IRA to force anyone they believe knows something to report it?

Merely reflecting the contradictory use of language employed by SF. In their warped double speak language has taken on a new meaning. In my view, the following terms when employed by a party spokesperson, apologist etc. require a translation:

urge = instruct
search for justice = search for victimhood excluding all victims of the IRA
IRA investigation = violent interrogation involving torture
dissappeared = murdered and dumped in a bog
the reality is = our version of events
moving forward = lets shine the spotlight on someone else
human rights violations = violations by the PSNI, Gardai, British army but not the IRA
campaign of anti-republican vengeance = campaign for justice by the McCartneys
not crimes = crimes
crimes = wrongdoing on the part on anyone but Sinn Féin and the IRA
a punished informer = murdered mother of ten, Jean McConville
be careful now = enough of this justice for Robert McCartney stuff or we'll start a whispering campaign against you, ie. you're traitors to the cause of Republicanism
I saw nothing = saw everything but daren't say as I value my knee caps too much
an Ireland of equals = that is provided you're a party member.
the truth = the first victim of the 'peace process'

You see, I believe that Sinn Féin does lay down rules for what you can and can't do in the areas they control. For example it's verboten to join the police or provide them with information when the IRA has been involved in criminality. Of course, to admit such totalitarianism would be tantamount to political suicide. The self-styled campaigners for freedom and an end to oppression would be exposed as complete hypocrites. Hence, the value of double speak. When Gerry Adams 'urges' his community to act, I'm convinced he's really instructing them. It seems that SF very much do lay down rules of behaviour in their areas which are then enforced by the purveyors of community policing and justice - the IRA.

jman0

Lemming wrote:

So .... how would SF/IRA propose that the killers are "brought to justice"? I'm curious to hear the answer to this?

This is a silly question. You already know about the justice the IRA does. They courtmartialed the members involved and were prepared to shoot them. It's not really a question of what kind of justice the IRA wants, it's a question of what the McCartney's want. And apparently they told the IRA they didn't want the perpetrators shot.
As for SF, I suspect SF's answer would be that if it is a breakdown of discipline within the IRA than it is a matter for the IRA to address. Since SF doesn't recognize the police as a legitimate force they are politically incapable of recommending the RUC http://www.ruc.police.uk/ for justice.

Lemming

jman0 wrote:

This is a silly question. You already know about the justice the IRA does. They courtmartialed the members involved and were prepared to shoot them. It's not really a question of what kind of justice the IRA wants, it's a question of what the McCartney's want. And apparently they told the IRA they didn't want the perpetrators shot.
As for SF, I suspect SF's answer would be that if it is a breakdown of discipline within the IRA than it is a matter for the IRA to address. Since SF doesn't recognize the police as a legitimate force they are politically incapable of recommending the RUC http://www.ruc.police.uk/ for justice.

An IRA court-martial/kangaroo court is not transparent nor accountable. More importantly it is not recognised as a legitimate legal body (ohhhhhhh the irony) by anybody other than their deluded selves. So to claim that the IRA does "justice" is utterly and completely f*cking absurd. I expect more from a three year old child than such suggestions.

Has it registered with you [SF/IRA + apologists] that the reason teh McCartney family declined the IRA's "offer" was that they
a) wanted the people involved to face "proper" justice
b) didn't want to descend to SF/IRA's level
c) didn't want to sweep Robert's death away and demean it by pandering to SF/IRA and legitimising their "court-martial"
d) want to see the other 10 or so people involved brought to justice too and not just the scape-goats
e) have had enough of SF/IRA's methods of "community policing"


So once again I ask how they suggest that the perpetrators are brought to justice?

It's not a silly question. It's a rather straight-forward and rather sadly all-too-relevant question.

jman0

Lemming wrote:

So once again I ask how they suggest that the perpetrators are brought to justice?

It's not a silly question. It's a rather straight-forward and rather sadly all-too-relevant question.

And you've been given your answer. Sounds like you just don't like my opinion of their positions. But that's ok.

Lemming

jman0 wrote:

And you've been given your answer. Sounds like you just don't like my opinion of their positions. But that's ok.

That's because their position is unacceptable and is not "justice". It's criminal behaviour. So once again I'll ask. I want an answer that takes into account accountability, legitimate recognised law enforcement bodies and cease-fires.

Not some party-mantra. Just because somethign gets repeated ad nauseum does not make it true. You are aware of that little point right?

Seth Brundle

@jman0 - you were able to recently quote from the IRA's green book so I suspect that they are not just your "opinion of their positions"!

MT

Bonkey wrote:

It most certainly is. SF are treated as the omniscient powers who know everything about everyone who was involved, and as events come to light that may have previously unknown, SF get blamed for not doing something with the information sooner.

From what I can see though, this is based on nothing but an assumption arising from the usual contempt and the "if SF are involved, its guilty till proven innocent' mindset that their critics seem to often take.

Throughout the entire process Sinn Féin gave scant leeway to anyone else involved. The British, the Irish government and Unionists received nothing other than denunciations or condemnation for their efforts. Having taken such a one-sided, self-righteous line with everyone else the party shouldn’t be surprised when an equally hard-ball and unforgiving stance is adopted by the other protagonists.

With an armed and willing military wing to enforce their pronouncements SF do a pretty good impression of an omniscient power in the areas where they’ve gained political dominance.

When you establish yourself as an areas sole political representative, policing body, intelligence service, judicial authority, never mind the exclusive guarantors of the inhabitant’s human rights then there’s only one place where the buck stops when something goes catastrophically wrong. There is simply no one else in those areas to hold to account for policing, justice etc. Their guiding priciple in much of West Belfast may as well be l’etat c’est moi. If proper justice does not prevail in this case – not more murder or some other IRA equivalent – Sinn Féin must bare full responsibility.

Bonkey wrote:

At a guess, it will be no longer or shorter then the amount of time major poltiical figures in the more commonly-accepted major Irish parties decided to wait before aiding the search for 'truth and justice' in the various tribunals we've had, despite their respective parties making the same "of course we will help in any way we can and urge anyone involved etc. etc." statements.

Such comments smack of the moral equivalence that allows SF apologists to claim that at worst the party’s no worse than any other. But no mainstream Irish party has an active and armed military wing. None have assumed the exclusive capacity to interpret what are and are not crimes. All believe in universal human rights rather than making exceptions when the victims happen to have been brutalised by close associates. No Irish party is perfect but none are on a par with the undemocratic levels stooped to by Sinn Féin.

Bonkey wrote:

I think you're confusing Gerry Adam's leadership of Sinn Fein with some godlike powers that the other party leaders in other parties don't have.

As he and his party, not to mention the IRA, have acquired virtually every power attainable over the areas they control, godlike seems a pretty good description. Furthermore, the unquestioning fervour exhibited by supporters of Adam’s personality cult has begun in recent weeks to resemble something along the lines of religious fanaticism. It trully seems at times as if the bearded one has assumed the infallibility of a deity.

Bonkey wrote:

I find it no different to the hypocrisy and cynicism demonstrated time and time again by pretty-much every major political party in Irish history. They talk the talk, and deliver something entirely different.

I do. Regarding hypocrites elsewhere in the Irish political world the ‘something entirely different’ they deliver is usually the comparatively anodyne failings of spending cut backs, slower than expected economic growth or lengthening waiting lists. Unwelcome, yes, but nothing nearly as breathtakingly hypocritical as claiming the unrivalled position as the nation’s leading human rights campaigners while at the same time giving tacit support to an organisation that equates justice with bullets through knee caps - an organisation that thinks nothing of using murder to further it’s own political ends.

I'm afraid I’ve no time for moral equivalence where SF and the IRA’s concerned. The brutality dished out while claiming to champion the oppressed surpasses any of the electoral spin the democratic parties have indulged in over the years. I’ll take obfuscation over stealth taxes any day in place of spiel over ‘truth and justice’ while protecting killers in the community.

Bonkey wrote:

And, as with the other major political parties, we will see that come election day, such hypocrisy has far, far less effect than we believe it should.

Made all the less effective when several volleys of moral equivalence have been sprayed around the place to cloud the issue. I’ll expect plenty of sentiments along the lines of ‘sure, those cute whores in Fianna Fail's no better’ as all the rationalisation some will need to vote for Sinn Féin come the next election.

monument

jman0 wrote:

I wonder why the PSNI don't start arresting people that were inside the pub for conspiracy. Seems that would be a way to break the ice...

Or the PSNI/RUC could at least question everyone they've been told about - watching the BBC this evening they said that the PSNI/RUC will be questioning one person they know of 'soon' or when they think it's appropriate – seams a bit strange.

Cork

monument wrote:

Or the PSNI/RUC could at least question everyone they've been told about - watching the BBC this evening they said that the PSNI/RUC will be questioning one person they know of 'soon' or when they think it's appropriate – seams a bit strange.

It is very strange that

PSNI/RUC

be questionnning anybody.

The RUC are no more unlike the criminal IRA.

monument

If I want, I'll call the north's police the 'PSNI/RUC/RIC'. If you want to start a thread under the topic ‘Why do people refer to the PSNI as ‘PSNI/RUC’?’ you can, I may even reply to such a thread. However, I won’t be dragged so far off-topic here.

Cork

monument wrote:

If I want, I'll call the north's police the 'PSNI/RUC/RIC'. .

There is freedom of speech in this country. But there is no organisation called 'PSNI/RUC/RIC'

I am just pointing this out to people who are reading this thread.

It is a pity that the thugs in the IRA have not regard for the laws north or south of the boarder.

A Dub in Glasgo

Cork wrote:

There is freedom of speech in this country. But there is no organisation called 'PSNI/RUC/RIC'

Correct but that description gives the historical lineage. So, in that repsect, it is an accurate description.

Correct me if I am wrong but there is no organisation called 'SF/IRA' either

monument

Cork wrote:

There is freedom of speech in this country.

Correction there is not freedom of speech in this country, or at least it is not a right protected by the law, or the constitution. I’m just pointing this out to people who are reading this thread.

Now, can we stay on topic?

(I may be wrong; maybe there is freedom of speech in the Republic of Cork? - do not reply to this, it is just a bad attempt at a joke)

ressem

Correct me if I am wrong but there is no organisation called 'SF/IRA' either

Nope but there are Provisional Sinn Fein and Provisional IRA, and it just is a coincidence that a split in one coincides in a split in the other?
OSF/OIRA, PSF/PIRA, RSF/RIRA?
And that PSF are unwilling to face off against members of PIRA who kill and maim their community. Especially given their disavowal of the PSNI, an independent Sinn Fein should be first in line calling for community boycott and protests against the perpetrators.

Why do you not give internal PIRA "investigations" and summary "justice" the same contempt as internal british army tribunals where the victims are the NI community.

And as for

I suspect SF's answer would be that if it is a breakdown of discipline within the IRA than it is a matter for the IRA to address.

Substitute IRA with British Army and you might see why "west brits" like me think that answer is flawed.

jman0

ressem wrote:

Why do you not give internal PIRA "investigations" and summary "justice" the same contempt as internal british army tribunals where the victims are the NI community

Because the IRA's summary justice is so definitive, conversely the British Army's proceedings usually end with exoneration.
And if HMG does prosecute one of their own, they sometimes get fully pardoned by people like Sir Patrick Mayhew.

ressem wrote:

And as for
"I suspect SF's answer would be that if it is a breakdown of discipline within the IRA than it is a matter for the IRA to address."
Substitute IRA with British Army and you might see why "west brits" like me think that answer is flawed.

Lets see:
I suspect SF's answer would be that if it is a breakdown of discipline within the British Army than it is a matter for the British Army to address.
What's wrong with that?
Now obviously that's being a bit cheeky, but i think your point is that some body other than the IRA should handle breakdowns of IRA disipline. Maybe you feel SF should be the arbitrators of justice, but i don't thnk they want that role. Maybe you feel the RUC should, but you can't deny the very long history of mutual animosity that exists between them and Republicans, so it's not bloodly likely to happen.
Did you see the recent news about the plight residents of west belfast endure from joyriders? In broad daylight the news team on the street was actually verbally confronted by some of these kids. Do you feel this is the responsibilty of the RUC/PSNI to put a stop to joyriding?
If so, they have failed terribly.
Those residents know where they can and cannot get justice, they will ask the IRA to sort it out.

jman0

jman0 wrote:

Because the IRA's summary justice is so definitive

It's also even more condemned than the Iraq war which even if you are an avowed IRA supporter should give you some idea of its validity.

I suspect SF's answer would be that if it is a breakdown of discipline within the British Army than it is a matter for the British Army to address.
What's wrong with that?

What would amnesty international say do you think about the IRA's summary justice when comparing and contrasting it with internal trials within the British Army?
I'll give you a strong clue, they would universally condemn it as being an injustice.

Those residents know where they can and cannot get justice, they will ask the IRA to sort it out.

Thats a view that is changing ask the McCartney sisters.

jman0

Earthman wrote:

Thats a view that is changing ask the McCartney sisters.

Yeah, the PSNI have certainly got them justice, huh?

WhiteWashMan

please hold.
the IRA spin doctors will be with you shortly.

your call is important to us.

Seth Brundle

jman0 wrote:

Yeah, the PSNI have certainly got them justice, huh?

how can they when your mates in SF won't make statements to the police and all the others on the pub are being intimidated by both the offenders and the IRA?

jman0

kbannon wrote:

how can they when your mates in SF won't make statements to the police and all the others on the pub are being intimidated by both the offenders and the IRA?

Well that's an interesting question kbannon, I wonder how other police agencies around the world handle instances when they are greeted with a wall of silence. In fact, that's something worth checking out. I'll bet the FBI has had some experience in this, how about the Italian police force and justice system in relation to organised crime...

Of course the intimidation allegation doesnt seem to be holding water these days, the IRA made a statement on that, and SF have repeatedly made statements to counter such rubbish.
I offered a remedy: why don't the PSNI start arresting people alledgedly inside the pub at the time and charge them with conspiracy.
Whether or not those charges can stick may be beside the point. With a pool of 70 persons they stand a good chance of finding a weak link in the wall of silence, put the right person under the pressue (being charged with a crime, seperated from family, job, children etc) and they may get the information /testimony they want.
But they won't do this for political reasons, and what that boils down to, is that the PSNI believes politics are more important that getting justice for the McCartney's.

uberwolf

jman0 wrote:

Of course the intimidation allegation doesnt seem to be holding water these days, the IRA made a statement on that, and SF have repeatedly made statements to counter such rubbish.
I offered a remedy: why don't the PSNI start arresting people alledgedly inside the pub at the time and charge them with conspiracy.
Whether or not those charges can stick may be beside the point. With a pool of 70 persons they stand a good chance of finding a weak link in the wall of silence, put the right person under the pressue (being charged with a crime, seperated from family, job, children etc) and they may get the information /testimony they want.
But they won't do this for political reasons, and what that boils down to, is that the PSNI believes politics are more important that getting justice for the McCartney's.

sounds something like internship.

Of course that's been tried and rejected in NI's past as a reasonable course of action.

So you're left with trying to gather evidence the normal way. It has been documented at length why this is difficult in this instance.