Comments on: “‘Discourage’ is a lovely word..”

By: Pete Baker

Pete Baker — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 02:46:59 +0000

Ken

Unlike you, as a Sinn Féin TD Arthur Morgan does speak on behalf of the party – especially in the Dáil since there aren’t that many of them.

And, once again, if he didn’t want to be quoted, he shouldn’t have said it on the record.. in the Dáil.

By: kensei

kensei — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 06:49:49 +0000

We might have an indication of how Sinn Féin think on that.

Fuck Pete, it’s like you’ve got a new toy. No doubt this will appear on every thread for the next three months. In any case a short story with I hope some relevance to the point you are making.

There are three men on a train. One of them is an economist and one of them is a logician and one of them is a mathematician. And they have just crossed the border into Scotland (I don’t know why they are going to Scotland) and they see a brown cow standing in a field from the window of the train (and the cow is standing parallel to the train).

And the economist says, “Look, the cows in Scotland are brown.”

And the logician says, “No. there are cows in Scotland of which one at least is brown.”

And the mathematician says, “No. there is at least one cow in Scotland, of which one side appears to be brown.”

By: Pete Baker

Pete Baker — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 04:49:59 +0000

On the question of whose authority such a body might assume themselves to be acting upon..

Which, despite the distractions, is a relevant point.

We might have an indication of how Sinn Féin think on that.

By: joeCanuck

joeCanuck — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 04:32:29 +0000

You make good points, Rory.

I wonder if the real problem with the Army Council is that they are the current holders of the Mandate from the surviving members of the first Dail (although others will dispute that – was it a written mandate and who holds the paper?).
If they go away, who then holds the Mandate?

By: DM

DM — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:45:20 +0000

What has the agreement got to do with it? There’s two legitimate armies on this island and neither of them is the IRA. As you say the AC carried through various massive changes, but it’s no longer needed after disarmament and political consensus – time for peace, time to go.

The PSNI can deal with dissident republicans, as is their job.

By: Rory

Rory — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 20:00:09 +0000

It might help to remember that the IRA ceasfire, the standing down of the IRA units, the dumping and final decommissioning of weapons and finally the disbandment of the army itself and the decision to commit to purely political means to work towards Republican goals were all acts carried out on the authority of the Army Council of the IRA. The volunteers did not abide by these decisions because the British government or the Dáil or the Unionist Party, the SDLP or even Sinn Féin itself said they must, they did so because of their loyalty to the Army Council which was ratifying decisions taken at general army conventions. It was therefore quite appropriate that the Army Council itself remain in order to oversee the implementation of these decisions and it is clear, as Ahearn indicates albeit obliquely in his response, that this was recognised by the British and Irish governments at least.

I can understand how this might upset some people – since they were opposed to any agreement they of necessity must be opposed to the process of building upon it and implacably opposed to those such as the Army Council who have worked hardest to make it a success.

By: Gum

Gum — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 18:24:14 +0000

Vigilantes are the last thing I would want DM. So far there have been no claims about private police. I dont know how its working but if its helping at all and as long as they are not adding any extra violence or intimidation then I dont mind them remaining in place for a while.

By: DM

DM — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 17:09:50 +0000

Well the need would come from the basis of law and order in civil society – we can’t endorse vigilantism or private police forces, if in deed this is the case with the PIRA ‘policing’ current or former members.

By: Gum

Gum — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 16:52:04 +0000

Thanks for clarifying your point about his ‘threat’. I see what you mean, and agree to a point. Basically, the reason I reckon the IRA army council continues to sit (and with the quiet blessing of both govts and IMC) is to stem the flow of former IRA members from drifting into the dissident camps. If they ARE preventing violence on a wider scale, and the govts are satisfied they arent doing anything themselves, then I dont see any need to make a crisis out of the fact they still meet.

Unless Fine Gael need to score a few political points of course…

By: DM

DM — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 16:28:42 +0000

Actually GUm my interes is very much in moving on. As suc I’d love to see the end of the Army Council – an anachronism in post-Ttroubles NI. I don’t believe he was threatening the Dail; I believe he was using the threat of dissident violence to shore up the argument for the continued existence of the PIRA structures. But please do tell – how exactly are they keeping these dissidents in line?

By: Gum

Gum — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 16:22:37 +0000

I [i]have[/i] actually stated on Slugger that I cant see how there is any need for republicans to shelter those that would kill in such a way or that smuggle, steal or intimidate. Anyone with info SHOULD work with police – but I am fed up with unhelpful and inaccurate statements that are founded on nothing but a lack of interest in moving on.

By: Gum

Gum — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 16:16:32 +0000

DM, you [i]seriously[/i] think that Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin was threatening Ahern and the Dail? I know I’ll probably be accused of being an IRA cheerleader now but does your hatred of SF reallly go so far that you cant belive that they’d ever say anything that is not a threat of violence?

By: DM

DM — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 16:03:31 +0000

Gum – like what?

What he said amounts to little more than a crude threat – don’t tell us what to do, we keep those nasty boys in check. A roundabout threat of violence by proxy, pathetic. And they wonder why they can’t get elected in the ROI.

By: Gum

Gum — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 14:08:27 +0000

Dont be clever Pete You know it wasn’t your reporting on Dail business that I was describing as cynical. It was obviously your tired sarcasm and refusal to envisage a scenario where republicans could possibly play a constructive role.

By: Pete Baker

Pete Baker — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 04:44:28 +0000

Twinbrook

“another attempt at an anti-SF thread by….”

If Caoimhghín didn’t want to be quoted then he shouldn’t have said it on the record.. in the Dáil.

As ‘Socrates’ said

When did it become cynical to report on proceedings of the Dail?

By: arse

arse — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 01:29:38 +0000

[Keep it civil - edited moderator]

By: Pancho's Horse

Pancho's Horse — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 00:48:09 +0000

…. and the dissolution of the Army Council, the legitimate Government of Ireland, will not be at the behest of any political party – even Sinn Fein!

By: Pancho's Horse

Pancho's Horse — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 00:45:33 +0000

It will be very interesting to see if the vote for Sinn Féin fluctuates in the next election(s) in the 6-cos. If it goes down, all the constant dreeps and whingers on the ditch will say ‘We told you so. The people have finally seen through Adams &co;’ But if it stays solid or even rises, it will draw down opprobrium etc and the voters will have proved themselves to be even stupider and more gullible than the hot shot pundits on here thought they were. You can’t win.

By: Twinbrook

Twinbrook — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 22:48:40 +0000

another attempt at an anti-SF thread by….

the T`internet warrior pete…

I can smell and taste all the bile and hatred here…

get out more.

By: Socrates

Socrates — Thu, 06 Mar 2008 21:17:08 +0000

“Why so cynical Pete?”

When did it become cynical to report on proceedings of the Dail?