Are SF trying to shoot themselves in the foot.

cdebru

cdebru wrote:

what like the murder of jean mcconville do the people who keep dragging that up look stupid to you

In fairness cdebru, the Jean McConville situation and the "disappeared" is much more current.The families wanted closure and they have had a devil of a hard time campaigning for it.
The only place I've heard the Ted Kennedy and his nanny episode mentioned recently is in the odd documentary hidden away on the Discovery channell.
The search for the "disappeared" is ongoing and iirc has had an international commission working on it.

“Above all, they expressed their grave concern that Sinn Fein was not doing enough to identify the bodies of the disappeared, including Gareth O’Connor who was abducted only last year. Sinn Fein does not hesitate to preach to others about respect for human rights. Yet in cases where the republican movement has violated people’s human rights in the most obvious of ways, and continues to injure human rights by failing to come forward with news of the disappeared, Sinn Fein is silent.

from here

You can start a different thread on that if you like

cdebru

mycroft wrote:

How about dragging up a 35yo incident to get the boot in?.

whats your point

mycroft wrote:

Have you turned on a tv in the past few years? I'm floored by the Pro SF lobby ignorance on this one. Kennedy has been a sitting senator for decades he can take the hit from Irish American lobby.

Do you think Bush will take a chance on a "looking soft on terrorism" for some cheap show boating. He loses nothing in banning SF, and gains bi partisan support for standing up on a scurilous attack on a noted liberal.

naive or what?.

no i honestly could not give a flying **** if sinn fein are barred from america or not it does not bother me in the slightest
if anything it would make me happier if they were kicked out of the US with Adams making statements about Columbia being the States back yard this from a man who claims to be an anti imperialist it is past time they stopped ****ing about with people who they have absolutely nothing in common


but unfortunately I don't see that happening I very much doubt that the americans are going to kick out and brand adams and co as terrorists as long as tony still wants to do a deal with them
so unfortunately they will probably be all back dancing around the shamrock in a year or two when the deal is done

mycroft wrote:

Convient like, cause it does rip your whole argument to, y'know, shreds.

no I will be happy to reply to anything he has to say without the stupid situation thing in it

if you want to rewrite it for him without the situation attempt at humour i will answer you

mycroft

cdebru wrote:

whats your point

The irony of flinging up a woman dead 20 years who's body her family can't bury on a thread about a crime that occured 35 yos

no i honestly could not give a flying **** if sinn fein are barred from america or not it does not bother me in the slightest
if anything it would make me happier if they were kicked out of the US with Adams making statements about Columbia being the States back yard this from a man who claims to be an anti imperialist it is past time they stopped ****ing about with people who they have absolutely nothing in common

But addams won't which is part of my loathing of SF, they claim a load of moral high ground and anti imperalism, but fawn up to bush, and engage in the exact kind political opportuntism they claim to oppose.

but unfortunately I don't see that happening I very much doubt that the americans are going to kick out and brand adams and co as terrorists as long as tony still wants to do a deal with them
so unfortunately they will probably be all back dancing around the shamrock in a year or two when the deal is done

Yeah that condemation rings hollow when looking at the body of your posts.

But you're right everyone will keep the door open to garner the slim Irish American vote.

no I will be happy to reply to anything he has to say without the stupid situation thing in it

if you want to rewrite it for him without the situation attempt at humour i will answer you

And I look forward to whatever attempt of a rebuttal you'll be able to muster.

I think it will be of the implied but not implicite support, yadda yadda yadda we've come to expect.

cdebru

Earthman wrote:

In fairness cdebru, the Jean McConville situation and the "disappeared" is much more current.The families wanted closure and they have had a devil of a hard time campaigning for it.
The only place I've heard the Ted Kennedy and his nanny episode mentioned recently is in the odd documentary hidden away on the Discovery channell.
The search for the "disappeared" is ongoing and iirc has had an international commission working on it. from here

You can start a different thread on that if you like

the murder of jean mcconville is an 30 odd year old incident but it is brought up on boards regularly whilst her body was only discovered recently the murder took place 30 odd years ago

was the murder of jean mcconville a crime ? etc

i used it as an example the dublin and monaghan bombing are over 30 years ago as is the birmingham pub bombing bloody sunday etc etc

these and other issues are raised on a regular basis on this forum i was just wondering if the same logic applied that raising a 30 year old issue makes the writer look stupid

most of those are currently news though cdebru.
Kennedys incident is not.

cdebru

mycroft wrote:

The irony of flinging up a woman dead 20 years who's body her family can't bury on a thread about a crime that occured 35 yos.

actually jean mcconville was murdered in 1972 that will be 33 years this year
and her body has been buried

rock climber said it was silly to bring up an event that took place 30 odd years ago and it made the writer look stupid does the logic not extend to all events that took place 30 odd years ago or just selective ones

mycroft wrote:

But addams won't which is part of my loathing of SF, they claim a load of moral high ground and anti imperalism, but fawn up to bush, and engage in the exact kind political opportuntism they claim to oppose. .

when they are in the US they compromise themselves looking for the dollar signs if they get kicked out then no need to compromise and we can hear what they really think without them worrying what it will do to their donations

mycroft wrote:

Yeah that condemation rings hollow when looking at the body of your posts...

i did not condemn anyone hollow or solid just gave an opinion

mycroft wrote:

But you're right everyone will keep the door open to garner the slim Irish American vote..

so whats your point

mycroft wrote:

And I look forward to whatever attempt of a rebuttal you'll be able to muster.

I think it will be of the implied but not implicite support, yadda yadda yadda we've come to expect.

well of you go and start typing and we will see what i can muster hurry though it is getting late

cdebru

Earthman wrote:

most of those are currently news though cdebru.
Kennedys incident is not.

with respect alot of them are news because people keep dragging them up

this is news now because it has been dragged up

Villain

Earthman wrote:

most of those are currently news though cdebru.
Kennedys incident is not.

Tis now Earthman

Sponge Bob

cdebru wrote:

i have decided not to reply from now on to any post that you put the sit-YEE-ayshun attempt at humour in

Goody

Tactical Use of the Adage Sit-YEE-ayshun is having the desired effect already

cdebru

I have just done a quick google and infact Chappaquiddick has never really not been news in the US it seems that it is regularly brought up by his opponents in the US when he offends them for some reason or other

it was raised by republicans when kennedy compared Iraq to Vietnam in the 2004 presidential election

I had never really looked into the case before TBH i knew roughly what had happened but when you look further into it the full irony of this man condemning people for trying to evade justice and not respecting the rule of law comes home

leaving the scene
letting the youg girl drown in the car
sobering up
making up a false alibi
not reporting the accident for 9 hours
using the kennedy connections to ensure no post mortem of the girl
removing evidence of the party that kennedy had atteneded the night of the accident
having the fact that he did not have a valid licence fixed
having his previous driving convictions erased
only being charged with leaving the scene of an accident
the hearing lasted 7 minutes 2 months suspended sentence

http://www.ytedk.com/

mycroft

cdebru wrote:

actually jean mcconville was murdered in 1972 that will be 33 years this year
and her body has been buried

Are you being a lil bit pedantic to avoid the thrust of the debate

rock climber said it was silly to bring up an event that took place 30 odd years ago and it made the writer look stupid does the logic not extend to all events that took place 30 odd years ago or just selective ones

And the irony of an organisation who have claimed that her death was not a criminal act, who then tried and imply that someone involved in an accident 30yrs meant that means he can't comment of current repubilican activity. Is what?

when they are in the US they compromise themselves looking for the dollar signs if they get kicked out then no need to compromise and we can hear what they really think without them worrying what it will do to their donations

Ah that magical word "compromise" for a party that claims to stand up for idealogical principals, they see to use the word compromise when they need to it. Which, y'know, a compromise.

so whats your point

That your suggestion that bush would f*ck kennedy over this was just idiotic.

well of you go and start typing and we will see what i can muster hurry though it is getting late

If you ignore the spongebob sit-u-ation point I can't think of anything else I'd like you to repute, what about the facts of his post. I'll cut n paste em into a thread by you, if you need some more time to stall.

cdebru

cdebru wrote:

with respect alot of them are news because people keep dragging them up

this is news now because it has been dragged up

Well the Guilford 4 were news recently because they got an apology alright, but I havent heard much of the Birmingham six.
The relatives of the "disappeared" have every right to put their case.The fact that the McConville case was brought up by McDowell made that more prominent yes, but the story of the "disappeared" certainly is recent in the fight for their discovery.
The Dublin and Monaghan bombings were the subject of a recent inquiry.

All of those examples are current in some way or another but the Kennedy thing seems to have been plucked up here for a spurious dig because the writer doesnt approve of Kennedys snub.
Morrisons intention couldnt be anything other than that.
It doesnt share any of the currency of the other examples you give or of McConville.

Do you see what I'm saying?

mycroft

cdebru wrote:

I have just done a quick google and infact Chappaquiddick has never really not been news in the US it seems that it is regularly brought up by his opponents in the US when he offends them for some reason or other

it was raised by republicans when kennedy compared Iraq to Vietnam in the 2004 presidential election

I had never really looked into the case before TBH i knew roughly what had happened but when you look further into it the full irony of this man condemning people for trying to evade justice and not respecting the rule of law comes home

leaving the scene
letting the youg girl drown in the car
sobering up
making up a false alibi
not reporting the accident for 9 hours
using the kennedy connections to ensure no post mortem of the girl
removing evidence of the party that kennedy had atteneded the night of the accident
having the fact that he did not have a valid licence fixed
having his previous driving convictions erased
only being charged with leaving the scene of an accident
the hearing lasted 7 minutes 2 months suspended sentence

http://www.ytedk.com/

Um it finished kennedy as the most plausible US presidental candiate aganist nixon in 72. Fact.

He was the candiate. He would have been the candiate againist Nixon, Fact, the events accured in 69. In combination with his brothers history, his record he would have been the obvious 72 candiate. A cursory check of the net will confirm this.

Please try harder. The man would have been a potential president were it not for this.

Furthermore, Morrison, Mc guiness, a Addams have been courting Kennedy for decades, they've known about this, however only when Kennedy turns on them, is this event portrayed as morally outrageous. Morrison n Addams have courted Kennedy, it's not like they haven't been aware of this, and now suddenly have found out about Kennedy's background and are morally outraged. They've known about this, ignored it, and used Kennedy. trying to cease the moral high ground has given you allitude sickness.

cdebru

mycroft wrote:

Are you being a lil bit pedantic to avoid the thrust of the debate .

no just pointing out the facts dont have a problem with the facts do you

mycroft wrote:

And the irony of an organisation who have claimed that her death was not a criminal act, who then tried and imply that someone involved in an accident 30yrs meant that means he can't comment of current repubilican activity. Is what?.

what organisation have claimed that kennedy cannot comment

mycroft wrote:

Ah that magical word "compromise" for a party that claims to stand up for idealogical principals, they see to use the word compromise when they need to it. Which, y'know, a compromise. .

and that means what exactly and has what to do with my post

mycroft wrote:

That your suggestion that bush would f*ck kennedy over this was just idiotic.
.

do you think so
it was half joking no love lost between bush and kennedy and I doubt that kennedy could persuade bush to ban adams if it did not suit his little helper blair which at the moment it does not
so for example no one is invited to the whitehouse not just SF not invited

mycroft wrote:

If you ignore the spongebob sit-u-ation point I can't think of anything else I'd like you to repute, what about the facts of his post. I'll cut n paste em into a thread by you, if you need some more time to stall.

not stalling just think that stupid situation thing is really annoying
is it haha martin mcguiness has a northern accent
or haha he says situation alot either way neither is very funny or even mildly amusing

but if you want me to ignore your posts now you know what to do

cdebru

Earthman wrote:

Well the Guilford 4 were news recently because they got an apology alright, but I havent heard much of the Birmingham six.
The relatives of the "disappeared" have every right to put their case.The fact that the McConville case was brought up by McDowell made that more prominent yes, but the story of the "disappeared" certainly is recent in the fight for their discovery.
The Dublin and Monaghan bombings were the subject of a recent inquiry.

All of those examples are current in some way or another but the Kennedy thing seems to have been plucked up here for a spurious dig because the writer doesnt approve of Kennedys snub.
Morrisons intention couldnt be anything other than that.
It doesnt share any of the currency of the other examples you give or of McConville.

Do you see what I'm saying?

honestly no

things are brought up all the time at anniversaries or when someone wants to make a point


to suggest that once x ammount of years have passed then it is stupid to raise the issue makes no sense
it is relevant because it show s the contradictions of a man who purposely went about evading justice and the rule of law and used whatever influence he could to evade taking responsibility for his actions
wether it was 35 years ago or last week I don't see how it makes a difference

it is brought up now because it is relevant to the subject ie wether kennedy is in a position to criticise

Sponge Bob

As Danny said in that article

"So, with that example of a cover-up, the destruction of evidence, contempt for the law and failure to fully cooperate with police, I think it ill-behoves Senator Ted Kennedy to be lecturing anyone."

Unlike Danny himself who was soOOOoo upfront about that House party he attended in West Belfast in more recent times and who was so concerned to see justice done (in the abstract sense) . Then the police arrived and broke the jollity up . Did he ever thank them ?

I also wonder if Ted will ever be invited to write a Daily Ireland OpEd on that sit-YEE-ayshun, purely in the interests of balanced editorial coverage of course.

mycroft

cdebru wrote:

no just pointing out the facts dont have a problem with the facts do you

You do tend to display an allergic reaction to the ones you dislike

what organisation have claimed that kennedy cannot comment

When you find time to comment on Spongebob post you'll see that a senior member of the republican movement suggestioned kennedy had no right to comment, and the irony of such a person as a morrison saying such a thing

and that means what exactly and has what to do with my post

cdebru wrote:

when they are in the US they compromise themselves looking for the dollar signs if they get kicked out then no need to compromise and we can hear what they really think without them worrying what it will do to their donations

Basically you're justifying a republican marxist party abusing it's principles to garner money from the rightwing american money, and what that says about how in touch they are with their ethics.

do you think so
it was half joking no love lost between bush and kennedy and I doubt that kennedy could persuade bush to ban adams if it did not suit his little helper blair which at the moment it does not
so for example no one is invited to the whitehouse not just SF not invited

As I said the whitehouse wants to keep the door open, and all it will take is Kennedy to make an issue over this for it to become a news story. And then it becomes a lost cause for bush to try to defend. Please try harder cdebru.

not stalling just think that stupid situation thing is really annoying
is it haha martin mcguiness has a northern accent
or haha he says situation alot either way neither is very funny or even mildly amusing

but if you want me to ignore your posts now you know what to do

Put me on ignore. Spongebob make some brillant and accurate comments you're choosing to ignore over a simple point of sarcasm. Classy. Says to me you're defending an idealogy you claim not to support than to honestly defend the issues.

A Dub in Glasgo

I still think there are certain posters here who would love it if this article was penned by SF. The fact of the matter is ... IT WAS NOT. Go to town on Morrison (even better confront the man himself on his own website) if you feel it will make you feel better.

A thread that has been wrongly portrayed as a SF press release is not really a story IMO. The subject of the piece (the Kennedy incident) would make an interesting discussion though. I would be surprised if people hear did not think that Kennedy was culpable in the death. Is it OK to highlight his previous connivince to home in on his morality?.... in politics, everything goes.

As for the guy who continously tries to copy McGuinness...it reflects more on you than him tbh.

cdebru

mycroft wrote:

You do tend to display an allergic reaction to the ones you dislike.

for example

mycroft wrote:

When you find time to comment on Spongebob post you'll see that a senior member of the republican movement suggestioned kennedy had no right to comment, and the irony of such a person as a morrison saying such a thing.

have you read this thread morrison is not a member of the republican movement

mycroft wrote:

Basically you're justifying a republican marxist party abusing it's principles to garner money from the rightwing american money, and what that says about how in touch they are with their ethics..

I am actually saying they should not be taking that money that it compromises them if you cared to read what i said but don't let the facts get in the way

mycroft wrote:

As I said the whitehouse wants to keep the door open, and all it will take is Kennedy to make an issue over this for it to become a news story. And then it becomes a lost cause for bush to try to defend. Please try harder cdebru..

do you seriously think that bush is going to ban sinn fein from the US because morrison raised kenndeys past republican commentators raise the issue all the time in the US do a google and see

mycroft wrote:

Put me on ignore. Spongebob make some brillant and accurate comments you're choosing to ignore over a simple point of sarcasm. Classy. Says to me you're defending an idealogy you claim not to support than to honestly defend the issues.

no dont trust you to have you on ignore

how is the situation thing sarcastic it is pointless and stupid i could not be arsed replying to threads that repeat an un funny joke everytime it is worse than benny hill

Sponge Bob

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

I still think there are certain posters here who would love it if this article was penned by SF. The fact of the matter is ... IT WAS NOT. Go to town on Morrison (even better confront the man himself on his own website) if you feel it will make you feel better.

He is your problem not mine , you deal with him

I only pointed out that Danny and Ted are equally notorious for their misjudged house party excursions .

As for the guy who continously tries to copy McGuinness...it reflects more on you than him tbh.

Thats is indeed the sit-YEE-ayshun. I use it as about as much as McGuinness does and when he stops then so will I .

It reflects well on me, brings up my smaller holes wonderfully. /me, in fact, is a happy happy sponge.

mycroft

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

A thread that has been wrongly portrayed as a SF press release is not really a story IMO.

And the furory over merc tilts "SDLP organised Mc Carthy trip" was what?

have you read this thread morrison is not a member of the republican movement

And I'm sorry if it looks like a duck....

Everything about Morrison states that he's most clearly a member of the republican movement. He's written books plays articles and editorials, and come up with some of the most defining statement of intent the republican movement.

This is essentially "i am not a crook" school of argument. No one with a honest bone in their body can't refute the statement that Morrison is a member of the republican movement.

Care to provide a quote to support that claim of yours? Cause we've given plenty of evidence to support the allegation that he is.

I am actually saying they should not be taking that money that it compromises them if you cared to read what i said but don't let the facts get in the way

Brillant so they shouldn't take the money, but you're condemnation will be the continued limp wristed tut tut ing. You're not a SFener you'll just continue posting nothing but the defense and counter attack of their pov. And the occasional limp wristed condemnation.

o you seriously think that bush is going to ban sinn fein from the US because morrison raised kenndeys past republican commentators raise the issue all the time in the US do a google and see

Y'know the level of patheticness of your pov is just beginning to weary me. I've already stated it's unlikely that the SF will be banned I just think it's just all dependent on whether Kennedy gets pissed enough by this latest attack. .

Oh and incidently, don't say "just goggle and see" if you're too lazy to provide links to support your pov, don't just wave at google and demand I do the research for your argument. It's sloppy and ignorant.

cdebru

cdebru wrote:

to suggest that once x ammount of years have passed then it is stupid to raise the issue makes no sense

I'm not taking issue with that as such,I'm more interested in pointing out why it was brought up, not whether it should be brought up.

it is relevant because it show s the contradictions of a man who purposely went about evading justice and the rule of law and used whatever influence he could to evade taking responsibility for his actions
wether it was 35 years ago or last week I don't see how it makes a difference

It would be more relevant though if it was part of a pattern with Kennedy rather than one single incident wouldn't it?

it is brought up now because it is relevant to the subject ie wether kennedy is in a position to criticise

Yup but as I say,I think it would carry more weight if it was shown to be part of a pattern of his behaviour rather than dragged up from so long ago in the way that it was.
It's lack of weight is further underscored , I think by the fact that Morrison wouldnt have been writing about it only for the fact that Kennedy this time is saying and doing things that Morrison doesnt like.
I take your point as to the relevancy of it, just not to the same extent as yourself probably, because of what I just said there.

mycroft

mycroft wrote:

Oh and incidently, don't say "just goggle and see" if you're too lazy to provide links to support your pov, don't just wave at google and demand I do the research for your argument. It's sloppy and ignorant.

Take 2 weeks break for that mycroft-you know the rules

cdebru

Earthman wrote:

I'm not taking issue with that as such,I'm more interested in pointing out why it was brought up, not whether it should be brought up.

It would be more relevant though if it was part of a pattern with Kennedy rather than one single incident wouldn't it?


Yup but as I say,I think it would carry more weight if it was shown to be part of a pattern of his behaviour rather than dragged up from so long ago in the way that it was.
It's lack of weight is further underscored , I think by the fact that Morrison wouldnt have been writing about it only for the fact that Kennedy this time is saying and doing things that Morrison doesnt like.
I take your point as to the relevancy of it, just not to the same extent as yourself probably, because of what I just said there.

so he has to drive another girl off a bridge and leave her to die
then it would be more relevant


how about taken in conjunction with the fact that he was expelled from college for cheating
accidently enlisted into the US army fro 4 years had his daddy change it to 2
was sent to serve in europe so he could avoid the war in Korea

He was cited four times for reckless driving (three times in 1958 and once in 1959). These violations included running red lights and driving with his lights off at ninety miles per hour in a suburban area.

that kind of pattern

I think we all know why it was brought up obviously if someone is agreeing with you and being fairly friendly you don't drag up his past
when he turns on you he is fair game that is the way the world works

cdebru

cdebru wrote:

so he has to drive another girl off a bridge and leave her to die
then it would be more relevant

Well I'd like to see a pattern of similar illegal behaviour yes and not one of draft dodging or driving convictions etc

I think we all know why it was brought up obviously if someone is agreeing with you and being fairly friendly you don't drag up his past
when he turns on you he is fair game that is the way the world works

That is oh so true.

Sand

so he has to drive another girl off a bridge and leave her to die
then it would be more relevant

If it is relevant now, then it should have been relevant when Kennedy got Adams his Visa and White House invitation. It wasnt relevant then. Adams was delighted to be able to wine and dine with the US political elites. Whats changed since to make this relevant all of a sudden?

Oh yeah, those US political elites are treating Adams like something they accidentially stepped in. Suddenly Kennedys past history is relevant? Its just a sloppy, crude attack piece by the provos to cover up Adams blushes and fury at being made look like such a political leper. "You didnt dump me!!! I dumped you!!!!"

And it is simply laughable that provo apologists are disavowing Danny Morrison as being a member of the provo movement. Next theyll be disavowing P O Neill as having nothing to do with the provos.

sceptre

cdebru wrote:

have you read this thread morrison is not a member of the republican movement

Rather depends on how one defines "Republican movement". If one defines it specifically as "provisional sinn fein and the provisional IRA" then obviously he's not. Obviously that's a rather narrow definition and hence a bit mean and Ruairi O'Bradaigh and a pile of others might be a little offended. Obviously one crowd of splitters is different from another crowd of splitters but it's rather blinkered to refer to one specific faction as "the republican movement" and declare all others to be pissing outside the tent.

I might go as far to distinguish Morrison as an independent republican commentator these days but that doesn't put him outside "the movement". I don't know the guy, never met him, almost certainly never will but I'll bet he still considers himself to be part of "the movement", at least on a part-time (independent) basis. I've no reason to doubt his assertion that he's no longer a member of Sinn Fein. I don't really care all that much either if the truth be told - I'd much rather he made a success of his plays rather than doing what he was doing in the 70s.

MT

The claim by apologists on this thread that Danny Morrison is not involved in the Republican Movement should be read with their denials of the link between SF and the IRA in mind. Any claims by Morrison of non-involvement in SF are most likely part of a deliberate strategy by the party to provide the leadership with plausible deniability when he sounds off like this. While the wilfully naive will maintain the fiction that Sinn Féin, the IRA and Morrison are all entirely independent of each other, in both action and deed, the rest of the world copped on long ago.

Many will justifiably need no convincing that this article was sanctioned by the leadership.

In light of the McCartney family, and now Sen. Kennedy's, experience, Sinn Féin appear to be developing a new three strand approach. The knife in one hand, the ballot box in the other and smear campaigns conducted by people who have no connection, whatsoever, in any way, wink wink, look there's a pink elephant in the corner, with the party.

A Dub in Glasgo

MT wrote:

The claim by apologists on this thread that Danny Morrison is not involved in the Republican Movement should be read with their denials of the link between SF and the IRA in mind. Any claims by Morrison of non-involvement in SF are most likely part of a deliberate strategy by the party to provide the leadership with plausible deniability when he sounds off like this. While the wilfully naive will maintain the fiction that Sinn Féin, the IRA and Morrison are all entirely independent of each other, in both action and deed, the rest of the world copped on long ago.

Many will justifiably need no convincing that this article was sanctioned by the leadership.

Similarity with the X-files here. Some folk need to believe what they want to believe in order that they can then state that this article was a SF press release.

Villain

MT wrote:

The claim by apologists on this thread that Danny Morrison is not involved in the Republican Movement should be read with their denials of the link between SF and the IRA in mind. Any claims by Morrison of non-involvement in SF are most likely part of a deliberate strategy by the party to provide the leadership with plausible deniability when he sounds off like this. While the wilfully naive will maintain the fiction that Sinn Féin, the IRA and Morrison are all entirely independent of each other, in both action and deed, the rest of the world copped on long ago.

Many will justifiably need no convincing that this article was sanctioned by the leadership.

In light of the McCartney family, and now Sen. Kennedy's, experience, Sinn Féin appear to be developing a new three strand approach. The knife in one hand, the ballot box in the other and smear campaigns conducted by people who have no connection, whatsoever, in any way, wink wink, look there's a pink elephant in the corner, with the party.

MT, have you anything to go on here, or is it just your opinion that Danny Morrison is still involved with Sinn Fein??

If you have I'd be interested in seeing it.