Wednesday, February 27, 2008
“I cannot prove that, but that is my conviction..”
If you had thought that Sinn Féin disapproved of anyone making allegations without producing solid evidence.. Well, apparently it depends on who’s doing the alleging and, perhaps, what those allegations are. At the launch of his party’s 20th Anniversary Gibraltar/Milltown events porgramme [sic], SF leader Gerry Adams made some allegations of his own.
Mr Adams said today: “It is my strong view that the killings in Gibraltar were authorised by Margaret Thatcher, and it is my strong view that the Irish government of the day passed information to the authorities about the movements of those killed. I cannot prove that, but that is my conviction.”
There are a couple of points to make about this.
Firstly, what is Adams alleging?
That a democratically elected government passed on information about the movements of known terrorists, or even persons of interest, to another democratically elected government which prevented the completion of planned terrorist acts?
That’s what democratically elected governments do, Gerry.
And they’re trying to do it better all the time.
If the Irish government had information on the movements of known terrorists and, by not passing it on, had allowed the murder of others in another country there would be serious consequences.
But there’s a much more obvious way that such information would have been passed to the British government or, rather, to MI5. And it is my strong view that informers within the Provisional IRA passed on that information in this case. I can’t prove that, of course..
Pete Baker @ 05:27 PM
If the Irish government had information on the movements of known terrorists and, by not passing it on, had allowed the murder of others in another country there would be serious consequences.
Yeah, like the Dublin/Monaghan bombings, Pete. Really serious consequences for the British there. How do you keep a straight face when you come out with this drivel?
Posted by on Feb 28, 2008 @ 08:20 AMYaaaaawn
Posted by on Feb 28, 2008 @ 08:28 AMthose cold blooded murdered in gibraltar were unarmed, they could have been easely arrested!
Posted by on Feb 28, 2008 @ 09:09 AMSurely Mr Adams and those in SF have no problem with passing on information to the British government or the police. Havent they called for anyone with information about republican paramilitaries to go to the police. So whats the problem.
Posted by on Feb 28, 2008 @ 10:47 AM>>#Was there enough time between stopping the terrorists and shooting them for the SAS guys to get on the hotline to Maggie and ask permission to fire?
Posted by willowfield on Feb 27, 2008 @ 11:58 PM<<This is silly Willow. They had their orders all along, all it takes is a code word over the radio to enact an execution on those volunteers in Gibraltar.
Why is anyone surprised at Pete’s cack handedness here about attacking SF, he always comes across as someone straining at the leash. However lack of opportunity and the utmost in sobriety as a characteristic seems to get in the way.
>>anyone making allegations without producing solid evidence.<<
Is this not something that the blogger usually get’s pulled up for?
>>And it is my strong view that informers within the Provisional IRA passed on that information in this case. I can’t prove that, of course..<<
If true then it is my strong view that these informers should rot in hell, If they aren’t already!
Posted by on Feb 28, 2008 @ 10:50 AMGerry and team seem to have been very busy this past week trying to pretend they didn’t sell out republicans. Something to do with Ard fheis this weekend or something else afoot?
Posted by on Feb 28, 2008 @ 11:48 AMIf true then it is my strong view that these informers should rot in hell, If they aren’t already!
Why?
Surely they should be rewarded for passing on information which ultimately saved many lives?
Posted by on Feb 28, 2008 @ 11:52 AMAs my posts have been removed twice now, can we have a commitment that Sinn Fein PIRA posts making specific allegations against Unionist politicians and Unionist campaigners for victims will be removed immediately?
My posts only stated what is known by the dogs in the street.
Otherwise Slugger will just be another blog for Pan-Nationalist propaganda.
Posted by on Feb 28, 2008 @ 11:54 AMSevere case of paranoia there.
Posted by on Feb 28, 2008 @ 12:04 PMTo joeCanuck - is equality now called paranoia if Unionists ask for it? I have read many many allegations on Slugger over the years against specific Unionists. None of them were removed. So Slugger needs to decide if it’s a forum for everyone or a Pan-Nationalist blog that lets a few “well behaved” Unionists contribute.
Posted by on Feb 28, 2008 @ 12:09 PMP&J;,
Do you not find it odd that we also have Nationalist/Republican posters here claiming that Mick is totally biassed towards Unionists?Posted by on Feb 28, 2008 @ 12:29 PMWillow
I’m sure they were rewarded somehow. Although a life on the run might not be a great reward. I’m sure you do realise that many of these informers were picked on at vulnerable moments, or may well have been blackmailed, perhaps rewarded with drugs even. I hope the truth will out soon. Only then will their reward be judged.
Posted by on Feb 28, 2008 @ 12:32 PMPeaceandJustice,
I do not know what you have said. You know in general I have supported your comments on this site. You must remember that Mick does need to be careful regarding legal action and if he errs on the side of caution I think that is his right.As to this being a blog for Pan-Nationalist propagana: come on, in all honesty that is not correct. I do not think my blogging is exactly pro nationalist. I would agree that I suspect there are more nationalist comments than unionist ones in the comments section. That means that you and I need to make more comments and fight these people verbally. I would be delighted if the likes of Crimuh cam back but we must do our best.
Do not, however, blame Mick. He is scrupulously fair.
Posted by on Feb 28, 2008 @ 12:33 PMI’m sure they were rewarded somehow. Although a life on the run might not be a great reward.
Why do you want them to “rot in hell”?
I’m sure you do realise that many of these informers were picked on at vulnerable moments, or may well have been blackmailed, perhaps rewarded with drugs even. I hope the truth will out soon. Only then will their reward be judged.
You need to look at the bigger picture: if lives were saved by “picking on” a criminal at a “vulnerable moment”, then that is a good thing.
Posted by on Feb 28, 2008 @ 01:20 PMLet me phrase my original posts in a different way.
Martin McGuinness admits he has had fantasies about carrying out mass murder. Unionists believe that it was no fantasy.
Unionists believe that Sinn Fein PIRA robbed the Northern Bank - and we know as a fact they robbed many others.
Many people believe that Sinn Fein PIRA have been involved over the years in illegal activities including property deals and control of drug dealers.
There have been some high profile agents of the state in Sinn Fein PIRA. Most people believe that we haven’t heard all the facts.
On Bloody Friday, Sinn Fein PIRA murdered nine people and injured 130 others (men, women and children). Most people believe that Gerry Adams had a position of responsibility in the terrorist wing of Sinn Fein PIRA during that period.Bloody Friday
Robert Gibson 45 yrs married with 5 children Ulsterbus driver, Protestant and a Civilian
William Kenneth Crothers 15 yrs of age single Ulsterbus employee, Protestant and a Civilian
William Irvine 18 yrs single Ulsterbus employee, Protestant and a Civilian
Thomas Killops 39 yrs married Ulsterbus employee, Protestant and a Civilian
Stephen Cooper 32 yrs Soldier with the Royal Corps of Transport, 32 Squadron
Philip J. Price 27 yrs Soldier Welsh Guards
Margaret O’Hare 37 yrs mother of seven children, Catholic and Civilian
Stephen Parker 14 yrs old school boy, the youngest, Protestant and Civilian
Brigid Murray 65 yrs, Catholic and CivilianIf Gerry can have strong views on one particular incident in Gibraltar, many people can have strong views on his actions.
Posted by on Feb 28, 2008 @ 01:22 PMI am sorry if this has already been covered, but I felt obliged to reply at once
Whay a f>>?ing hypocite
If there was leaks to the british/irish/spanish look na bit closer to home
Posted by on Feb 28, 2008 @ 01:32 PMIf the British government felt so justified in shooting dead the volunteers in Gibraltar why did they then feel the necessity to cover up the manner of the executions and why in particular did it use the Sunday Times under it’s pliant editor, Andrew Neill, in a libellous attempt to blacken and besmirch the reputation and credibility of the woman who was witness to the shootings?
Whatever one thinks of the intent of the IRA unit there can be little doubt that the actions of the SAS unit were not justified and as in the aftermath of Bloody Sunday and many British army murders before and since, the first reaction of the British was to lie and then to continue to lie.
Posted by on Feb 28, 2008 @ 01:39 PMTo Rory - What’s your opinion of Bloody Friday? Should Sinn Fein PIRA be held accountable? Or is it OK to lie and then continue to lie?
Posted by on Feb 28, 2008 @ 01:43 PMWhats Sinn Fein PIRA? I have never heard of them? New dissident group?
And if you have the evidence please provide it immediately
Posted by on Feb 28, 2008 @ 02:54 PMTo Steve, please read again what the Great Bearded One said: “It is my strong view that the killings in Gibraltar were authorised by Margaret Thatcher, and it is my strong view that the Irish government of the day passed information to the authorities about the movements of those killed. I cannot prove that, but that is my conviction.”
Where is the evidence?
Posted by on Feb 28, 2008 @ 03:10 PM“I cannot prove that, but that is my conviction.”
Thought for a minute there that Brass Eye had been brought back for a one-off special.
Remember Neil (Dr) Fox doing the piece on ‘cake’
“Its fact, of course there’s no scientific proof - but it is fact”.He really should go back to hugging trees - at least you could laugh properly at him when he was doing that.
Posted by on Feb 28, 2008 @ 03:11 PMJust checked - it wasn’t the “cake” episode - it was the other slightly more infamous one and his quote was:
“Now that is scientific fact - there’s no real evidence for it - but it is scientific fact”.
Posted by on Feb 28, 2008 @ 03:15 PMPeace & Justice,
In law the IRA cannot be held responsible for Bloody Friday, only named individuals may be charged. That may include those who carried out the bombings and any who may have been involved in assisting them or conspiring with them to do so.
In any case the legality or otherwise of the action hardly concerned the IRA since they did not recognise the legality of the regime wherein the action was perpetrated.A different standard applies to agents of the British authorities charged with upholding the rule law in any given set of circumstances. Do you not understand the import of this? If you argue that the actions of IRA volunteers are wrong in (British) law, which I accept they are, then you must also hold any agents of British rule accountable to the same law.
The killing of the IRA volunteers in Gibraltar was clearly murder in British law. For the IRA it was accepted as simply the loss of volunteers in action. They don’t expect anything from British law. But if you do you ought to be concerned about the killings. If they can do it to them with impunity they can do it to you and yours.
Posted by on Feb 28, 2008 @ 03:47 PMA different standard applies to agents of the British authorities charged with upholding the rule law in any given set of circumstances.
It doesn’t: ALL citizens are equal under the law - the standard applies to any citizen, regardless of whether he is employed by the state.
The killing of the IRA volunteers in Gibraltar was clearly murder in British law.
Not sure that it was: the European Court of Human Rights ruled the killings as “unlawful” - I’m not sure if that is the same as murder. Perhaps a lawyer could advise?
For the IRA it was accepted as simply the loss of volunteers in action. They don’t expect anything from British law.
So how come their advocates took a case, or at least supported a case, to the European Court of Human Rights?
Posted by on Feb 28, 2008 @ 03:56 PMP&J;, if you want to refer ‘Bloody Friday’ there are 3 possible scenarios
1) Provos didn’t care about civilian casualties
2) It was an accident that civilians died
3) Civilians were targetted for a purpose
Which do you believe?Posted by on Feb 28, 2008 @ 04:15 PM
