[Article] Coroner to re-examine 1976 murder

jman0

jman0 wrote:

Please try to keep it ontopic daveirl.

Leave the moderating to the moderators thanks

What's does the differnence in priorty southerners and northers feel towards a unitied ireland have to do with RoI and HMG's lack of respect for RoI's rights as a sovereign nation?

It's a matter of fact, the 26 counties are for the most part devoid of the sectarian voting patterns as evidenced in NI, it's usually not near the top of their list at the door steps, if its mentioned at all, which it usually isnt.
Ergo politicians here high lighting issues in relation to SF end up planting or fertilising a seed already present in the minds of non SF voters.
The seed would be intollerance of whatever issue, they might be high lighting at the time.

Your second sentence entirely off topic.
But maybe that's your objective?

Again, leave the moderating to the moderators thanks

jman0

ishmael whale wrote:

You seem to be building an awful lot on top of one incident.

Do you believe there is just one incident of such trespasses?
In case you fail to understand the issues: a healthy, normal self-respecting nation, would generally consider it a violaton of soveriegnty and perhaps call it an act of war.

BuffyBot

a healthy, normal self-respecting nation, would generally consider it a violaton of soveriegnty and perhaps call it an act of war

They might consider it a violation of soveriegnty, but to call it an act of war would be over reacting. I'd imagine they were aware of the incident, and it was dealt with out of the public eye, but a "healthy, normal self-respecting nation" might not stay that way if they took offence about the matter through non-diplomatic channels. Incidents like that will generally be dealt with via diplomatic channels by any sane government, particularily one who is interested in avoiding an escalating conflict with it's nearest neighbour.

ishmael whale

jman0 wrote:

Do you believe there is just one incident of such trespasses?
In case you fail to understand the issues: a healthy, normal self-respecting nation, would generally consider it a violaton of soveriegnty and perhaps call it an act of war.

Fine, but for their part the UK Government might raise the small matter of the Irish Government buying guns for Northern nationalists living on their turf. A justifiable act in the context of the time, just as undoubtedly the UK would justify the need to protect the cover of intelligence operatives in situations where they were engaged in crimes. And neither is really relevant to the present day.

Let’s reason with the worst. Say evidence is uncovered proving beyond any doubt that in 1976 Liam Cosgrave instructed the Gardai to drop their investigations, following pressure from the UK. What’s the outcome of that? Should Bertie fall on his sword in sympathy? Should we withdraw from the GFA on grounds that the UK are untrustworthy partners? Or should we just shrug nonchalantly and get on with the business in hand.

On the other hand if evidence is uncovered proving beyond any doubt that the leadership of SF and IRA are one and the same, and that Gerry had personal knowledge of the Northern Bank raid, it sort of has an immediate relevance, doesn’t it?

http://archives.tcm.ie/businesspost/2003/07/20/story977651736.asp
“….The truth is Lynch allowed chaos to reign at cabinet on Northern policy. A decision on the part of Haughey, then Minister for Finance, in September 1969 to permit the use of funds, voted for the relief of distress in the North, to be used for the purchase of guns for the defence of nationalist communities, was not then at variance with cabinet policy….”

jman0

BuffyBot wrote:

Incidents like that will generally be dealt with via diplomatic channels by any sane government, particularily one who is interested in avoiding an escalating conflict with it's nearest neighbour.

Tell me about these diplomatic channels BuffyBot.
Is this how this incident was dealt with?
What about transparency?
Seems the relatives of the victim don't feel particularly confident about it.
Do you?

jman0

jman0 wrote:

What about transparency?

It would seem to be about as transparent as the investigation of the Dublin and monaghan bombings.
The latter being a somewhat larger incident, it is getting a lot of press lately and investigation.
I'd be hoping that the smaller incident that this thread is about may also get some more digging done on it, on the coat tails of the Dublin and monaghan investigation.
If I was involved in a pressure group regarding the 1976 murder I'd certainly be co-ordinating with those agitating for a resolution on the 1974 bombings.

By the way, jman0 the Gardaí and the Irish army(thats the army that the Dáil control) have entered NI by accident several times aswell and theres been no war declared on us.

jman0

ishmael whale wrote:

Fine, but for their part the UK Government might raise the small matter of the Irish Government buying guns for Northern nationalists living on their turf.

A cyclic argument Ishmael whale, because the RoI can simply remind them of the Brian Nelson affair, HMG "intelligence" officers gun running for Loyalists. Not to mention their tactic approval and support for the B-Specials and state sponsored murder thru the Troubles.

ishmael whale wrote:

And neither is really relevant to the present day.

I think you mean: it's not relevant today because the media aren't currently running with the story. Clearly the shadowy meetings and decisions HMG engages is a matter of serious concern at least for their own citizens, witness all the fuss over Attorney Generals legal advice to Blair via Iraq War. In fact this is very much in the present-tense : http://feeds.bignewsnetwork.com/?sid=ce51393d0458f443
So i dont agree with you attempt to gloss-over such matters.

ishmael whale wrote:

Say evidence is uncovered proving beyond any doubt that in 1976 Liam Cosgrave instructed the Gardai to drop their investigations, following pressure from the UK. What’s the outcome of that? Should Bertie fall on his sword in sympathy? Should we withdraw from the GFA on grounds that the UK are untrustworthy partners? Or should we just shrug nonchalantly and get on with the business in hand..

sarcasm : of course we should just shrug it off and fob off the victims relatives /sarcasm

ishmael whale wrote:

On the other hand if evidence is uncovered proving beyond any doubt that the leadership of SF and IRA are one and the same, and that Gerry had personal knowledge of the Northern Bank raid, it sort of has an immediate relevance, doesn’t it?..

Why? Gerry's been at the helm of SF for what 25 years?
That bank raid thing is rubbish, all the monies confiscated yet not a single note linked to that bank. It was an inside job, face it.
Some people are trying to use black propaganda like this against SF in order to politically disenfranchise the majority of Nationalists in NI, obviously i'd advise against supporting such tripe.

Mighty_Mouse

what happens then is that if/when they do come across something that is true like robert mccartney etc people of a republican mindset dismiss it as more anti republican propaganda

I dont know any genuine republicans who dismiss the robert mccartney murder in any way. In fact most I know are more upset about such incidents than the majority of FF,FG,PD,Labour would pretend to be.

The reason the media attempt to criminalise the whole movement because of it.

Mighty_Mouse

Mighty_Mouse wrote:

The reason the media attempt to criminalise the whole movement because of it.

Well in fairness,offering to kill the killers wasnt the best IRA public relations move in the world either...

jman0

Earthman wrote:

Well in fairness,offering to kill the killers wasnt the best IRA public relations move in the world either...

That's because it wasn't a public relations move.
But in fact you might be mistaken Earthman because SF gained in the recent elections... and as the saying goes... "SF and the IRA are inextricably linked"; therefore the IRA too, gained in the recent elections.

jman0

jman0 wrote:

That's because it wasn't a public relations move.

All moves that are public have a relationship with the public

But in fact you might be mistaken Earthman because SF gained in the recent elections...

oh?
I thought they lost a seat in the pottinger ward...

and as the saying goes... "SF and the IRA are inextricably linked"; therefore the IRA too, gained in the recent elections.

I see so in your view a vote for SF is a vote for the IRA? I'd always thought that actually whether implicit or explicit.
Implicit being where the voter votes SF on matters unconnected to the IRA, but decides to ignore the inextricable links as its the local rep they are voting for and the job done, policies agreed with etc .
Explicit being where the Vote is cast with the IRA being the main factor considered.

That said, and as I've said several times before, the voter mindset in the 26 counties is largely very removed from the sectarian split in the north.
Ergo its safe to say IRA support here is tiny.

cdebru

Mighty_Mouse wrote:

I dont know any genuine republicans who dismiss the robert mccartney murder in any way. In fact most I know are more upset about such incidents than the majority of FF,FG,PD,Labour would pretend to be.

The reason the media attempt to criminalise the whole movement because of it.

i was refering to allegations in for example the indo in relation to the murder of robert mccartney
rather than the murder itself

because papers like the indo lie constantly about republicans when they are reporting on a real issue like this it is hard to tell where the truth stops and the anti republican spin begins
so there is a tendency to dismiss it all as lies

the northern bank robbery is another example because republicans are so used to hearing lies about the IRA it is hard for non republicans to understand why we dont believe everyone when they say the IRA did it


sorry back on topic

earthman

By the way, jman0 the Gardaí and the Irish army(thats the army that the Dáil control) have entered NI by accident several times aswell and theres been no war declared on us.

there is a huge difference between a garda taking a wrong turn and ending up on the far side of the border
and a man being abducted by soldiers of the british army and murdered

to the best of my knowledge the gardai did not abduct and kill anyone on their adventures north of the border

ishmael whale

jman0 wrote:

A cyclic argument Ishmael whale,

That’s sort of my point.

jman0 wrote:

I think you mean: it's not relevant today because the media aren't currently running with the story.

No, I’m suggesting one reason why the media aren’t paying too much attention to the story is because its not that relevant.

jman0 wrote:

Clearly the shadowy meetings and decisions HMG engages is a matter of serious concern at least for their own citizens, witness all the fuss over Attorney Generals legal advice to Blair via Iraq War.

You need to take a step back from the discussion and consider how confused your point is. The Iraqi war is a matter of current concern. Their troops are there even as we speak. Matters like the Arms Trial are no longer of current interest, as the generation responsible have largely passed on. Mixing up the two doesn’t hold water.

jman0 wrote:

of course we should just shrug it off and fob off the victims relatives

I’ve very clearly stated in this thread that the only substantive point arising in cases such as Jean McConville and Seamus Ludlow is their relatives’ need for an acknowledgement of injustice. You seem to be making an emotional appeal to avoid dealing with the concrete point that present day IRA activities are a cause for present concern, and are in no way counterbalanced by past events that occurred in a different context.

jman0 wrote:

Why? Gerry's been at the helm of SF for what 25 years?
That bank raid thing is rubbish, all the monies confiscated yet not a single note linked to that bank. It was an inside job, face it….

I’d direct you back to my comment, which I feel you have not addressed. As I understand it the point at issue in this thread is not the validity of the allegations made about SF/IRA. Its simply to explore why SF/IRA related allegations get more attention than, for example, a case where it is alleged that Gardai colluded in the cover up of a murder to protect a British intelligence operative in 1976.

I’ve given you a reasoning that you have not addressed. If the SF/IRA allegations are true, it has immediate political relevance because it relates to the current leadership and things they are doing today. If the allegations relating to 1976 are true they have very limited relevance as the people involved have by and large left public life, so it has no material impact on the present situation.

This is not to say that any allegations relating to current or past events is true – that has been well gone over in other threads. It’s just to point out that the subject matter of the SF/IRA allegations, be they true or not, are of more current interest.

cdebru

BuffyBot wrote:

They might consider it a violation of soveriegnty, but to call it an act of war would be over reacting. I'd imagine they were aware of the incident, and it was dealt with out of the public eye, but a "healthy, normal self-respecting nation" might not stay that way if they took offence about the matter through non-diplomatic channels. Incidents like that will generally be dealt with via diplomatic channels by any sane government, particularily one who is interested in avoiding an escalating conflict with it's nearest neighbour.

does that mean it is ok
that the family do not deserve public justice that the mccartney family deserve
that it should be a nod and a wink say no more about it

a man was murdered this is not for diplomatic channels it should be a matter for a court of law

and any country worth it salt should take great offence at its citizens being abducted and murdered by anyone let alone foreign soldiers

ishmael whale

cdebru wrote:

does that mean it is ok
that the family do not deserve public justice that the mccartney family deserve that it should be a nod and a wink say no more about it

The need for justice is the same. But the present day significance of each case is different.

cdebru wrote:

and any country worth it salt should take great offence at its citizens being abducted and murdered by anyone let alone foreign soldiers

Indeed, and any country could take exception to another state supplying arms to its citizens and pursuing paramilitaries living across its borders with less vigour then they would themselves. Its a circular argument and its not worth making.

cdebru

cdebru wrote:

does that mean it is ok
that the family do not deserve public justice that the mccartney family deserve
that it should be a nod and a wink say no more about it

I'd have to say of course it does not make it ok.
But 1976 was a very different time,there was less media and it was at the height of a terror campaign,in which bombs went off killing people right left and centre in England and the north.
I'd imagine relationships between the two governments and peoples were very very strained back then.It certainly wasnt easy to be Irish and living in Britain.
Fast foward to today-very different improved circumstances with very different reactions and expectations.

a man was murdered this is not for diplomatic channels it should be a matter for a court of law

yup.
But probably not as easy to organise in 1976 as in 2005.
Fast foward to 2005 and the evidence covered up or obliterated in those different times 30 years ago is a billion times more useless.

A Dub in Glasgo

How about fast forward nearly 30 years and maybe we can have the truth?

Although, looking at this, I am not convinced that either government wants the people (not even the families of those murdered) to know the truth.

A Dub in Glasgo

A Dub in Glasgo wrote:

How about fast forward nearly 30 years and maybe we can have the truth?

Not easy if all and sundry poisoned by events in a different time destroyed the truth in such a way as to make it impossible to get at.

Although, looking at this, I am not convinced that either government wants the people (not even the families of those murdered) to know the truth.

I'd heard him talking about that.
I'd have my doubts if anyone in a position to do so would leave anything that they wanted to hide recoverable.
To bring in a more local and current example iirc, didnt a whole file go missing in relation to the charges issue for OAP's in homes when it was being investigated.

The search for the truth in any long past crime is unfortunately never easy if bordering on the impossible at times.
And yes that is a bad reflection on those involved whilst no help to the victims.

jman0

Earthman wrote:

All moves that are public have a relationship with the public

iirc this was a private discussion between the IRA and the McCartney relatives, the sisters (or uncle?) then made it public in an interview with the press.

uberwolf

jman0 wrote:

iirc this was a private discussion between the IRA and the McCartney relatives, the sisters (or uncle?) then made it public in an interview with the press.

you don't recall correctly. The IRA made a statement to the effect that they had offered to shoot those involved

http://breaking.tcm.ie/text/story.asp?j=101182200&p=yxyy8z7z5&n=101182802&x=

mycroft

jman0 wrote:

iirc this was a private discussion between the IRA and the McCartney relatives, the sisters (or uncle?) then made it public in an interview with the press.

Incorrect, the IRA issued a public statement about the murder.

From here

The IRA statement was branded as appalling by the Ulster Unionist Party which said it showed the Provisionals had learned nothing over the recent weeks.

I've heard nothing to suggest the IRA issued the statement after the sisters made an announcement, this was a public relations exercise gone badly wrong.

jman0

mycroft wrote:

I've heard nothing to suggest the IRA issued the statement after the sisters made an announcement, this was a public relations exercise gone badly wrong.

Little it matters.
How badly wrong did it go?
Hasn't exactly cost Republican votes in NI.

ishmael whale

jman0 wrote:

Little it matters.

Would it be impertinent to remind you that you are they one who raised this point? You suggested the McCartney sisters had broken a confidence in releasing details of a private meeting with the IRA.

In fact, as we have seen, the IRA issued a public statement where they, inter alia, said they had offered to shoot the alleged wrongdoers, so I take it you are withdrawing your statement that there was a breech of confidence by the McCartney family.

jman0 wrote:

How badly wrong did it go?
Hasn't exactly cost Republican votes in NI.

It is also clear that SF’s support has not been significantly effected either by the McCartney case, or by any of the other concerns raised about IRA activities. I interpret this to mean that SF voters really don’t care about these issues, which is worrying for the rest of us.

What do you do when a significant portion of the electorate part company with the core beliefs necessary to run a functioning democracy? I don’t have a ready answer for that.

I've split the latest off topic part of this into a new thread on whether the IRA or republicans should return to violence.
Edit: reopened and split thread is here

And please keep it on topic thanks