The two way problem with collusion…

One of the most impressive aspects of the Sinn Fein political project has been their determination to resolutely fight on ground set by their own terms of reference, and not their enemies and certainly not the medias.

The most potent line to have survive from war to peace has been the call for British Government forces to brought to book at the highest level for what it alleges has been systematic collusion with ruthless gangs of Loyalist paramilitaries.

However, on Hearts and Minds last Thursday Newton Emerson pointed to a new problem facing Sinn Fein: others are beginning to adopt their terms of reference and run it over the record of the IRA.

,

  • ingrammartin

    Mick,

    A very important year is approaching for all sides because let us not forget that for every victim of this activity “Collusion” then there is a Handler whether he may be Irish/British who is equally at fault along with the Agent.That said let me be clear, genuine productive Intelligence operations that do not feature illegal activity should be defended and applauded. It is that very small percentage that strayed over the normal boundaries that are both moral and acceptable.

    At some stage we have to examine the roll and motivations of those who charted this illegal path. I am all for digging the Ra in the ribs at every opportunity about their stupidity but you have to be fair on this one.The subject of collusion is not just a Loyalist or Republican problem it is everybodys problem .

    Martin

  • Busty Brenda

    ‘Collusion is not just a Loyalist or Republican problem, its every bodys problem.’

    In particular it is the British governments problem.

    Mick the link to cain lays 1706 at the hands of IRA, but theres no telling how many of those were down to ‘collusion'(or their particular form of collusion known as informing).

    Perhaps as the collusion debate opens up these figures will emerge. How many of the 17 hundred odd were IRA members killed by the IRA thru this particular form of collusion (informing). It would be interesting to know. Will their families ever get justice?

  • alfredo

    what a load of crap from fealty! if sinn fein really was serious about collusion then they would have made a proper inquiry into the pat finucane affair a precondition for decommissioning – but they didn’t. why not? because an inquiry into finucane would bring hugely embarrassing issues into the public domain, like why did the fru allow finucane to be killed but save adams’ life? what the provos do is make noise about issues like these but they never press it home. the sdlp has a better record that they do but the noise is sufficiently loud to convince people like fealty what their eyes would contradict if only they looked hard enough!

  • Busty Brenda

    Martin Ingram,
    do you have any figures about how many of these victims are down to the FRU-fixer?

  • Busty Brenda

    SF squealed loud enough inthe beginning about the Finucane killing, but tried to sell the family out at the end. If the SF deal had gone down at Weston Park SF would have had no qualms about selling put all the families of collusion.

    According to martin ingram on wbai last week out of the nine people involved in the solicitors murder seven were agents. Thats astounding!!

    SF do not want an inquiry into collusion, simply because a lot of the people they murdered as informers were innocent of it. Their families should have their names cleared. Since the person killing informers was the biggest informer of the lot. Scap must have something on theese guys when they (ra) didn’t touch him. It stinks to high heaven.

    alfredo, whats your beef with Mick? He’s highlighting the issue isn’t he?

  • heck

    It does’nt matter if the Provos are embarrased by an inquiry into collusion. There still has to be one.

    No police force will be acceptable if there is even a hint that its members were involved in sectarian murders.

    If the SDLP have b***s they will withdraw from the police boards and refuse to return until there is an international inquiry into the issue of collusion. One with no constraints or strings and conducted in an open and transparent manner.

    This is an issue with which the SDLP could recapture some of the votes SF have taken from them. All it takes is b***s.

  • ingrammartin

    Busty,

    Quote”do you have any figures about how many of these victims are down to the FRU-fixer?

    Not a firm one but it is high . Let us not forget that Freddy and Nelson are not the only culprits in this game. I believe by the end of this year people will see this subject in a clearer light.

    The tribunal in the South will also help people to understand the relationships between all parties.

    Quote”In particular it is the British governments problem.

    I have to agree with you on this one Brenda. Todate they have played the long game on this issue and if they and Sinn Fein had suceeded in getting the NI offences bill on the statute , then this issue would be over, game set and match.

    This issue remains HMGs achilles heel.

    Martin

  • pol

    Sinn Fein have been at the forefront in highlighting the dirty role played by the so called security forces.
    At one stage republicans were accused of making the whole thing up.
    But they have always held the line and supported the families in there fight for the truth.
    If it wasn’t for that resolve, the story like the victims would also have been buried.

  • Busty Brenda

    Pol I don’t see how you work that one out. They cannot point the finger at the security forces and not examine their own role in collusiion. Freddi killed volunteers, both innocent and guilty as informers. That is republican collusion. How many volunteers were condemned to death on the flimsiest of evidence?

    According to Mick’s link ‘the IRA managed to kill MORE of its own volunteers than anyone else albeit through a particular form of collusion that Sinn Fein prefers to call informing’.

    It’s time for the IRA to come clean not just about ‘collusion’ but also about the whole sorry murderous saga of the last thirty odd years.

  • SlugFest

    Busty Brenda,

    “That is republican collusion.”

    No, that is British infiltration of the republican movement. Ergo, that is blood on British hands.

    Mind you, i completely agree that if Sinn Fein insist on the British government telling the full truth, then the IRA has to do the same.

  • Busty Brenda

    Slugfest NO, it is both, this is republican collusion. Freddi scap served two masters the same as donaldson. He scap knew what he was doing, he was a republican from a republican area.

    Also on wbai last week, the discussion touched on Kitson and his policy of tackling terrorism by ‘counter gangs’. The british governments needs to come clean about the issue of counter gangs of sas and did they murder civilians in northern ireland.

  • Shore Road Resident

    It needs to be pointed out here that not everyone Scap’s Nutting Squad murdered was a republican. If I was putting money on one murder in particular that will really (and deservedly) come back to haunt Sinn Fein, it would be that of Falls Road mother Caroline Moreland – abducted six weeks before the first IRA ceasefire, tortured for ten days, and her body dumped in Fermanagh.
    Her ‘crime’? She’d been asked to by Special Branch to observe republicans from her Beechmount Grove home, but refused.

  • pol

    A lot of claims and counter claims.

    Any of you wise folk got evidence to back it up.

    Or are you just head hunting republicans.

  • And the subject of collusion is particularly ‘Martin Ingram’s problem because he rejoined the FRU in 1987 to cover up the assassinations by Captain Simon Hayward aka Captain James Rennie, the Ops Officer of the 14 Intelligence Company, who directed the Shoot-to-Kill murders during the emergency in South Armagh in the fall of 1982, killed Francis Bradley in February 1986 to help establish an alibi for apparently killing the Swedish Prime Minister Olof Palme ten days later, etc.

    Collusion means to act together on a secret understanding, and ‘Martin Ingram’ has been doing this for the FRU for nearly a generation. Little wonder that it is so willing to inflate what the PIRA has done in this regard.

  • briso

    The British colluded with loyalist paramilitaries in a common enterprise.

    The British attempted to subvert the IRA (see definition 2 of the three offered). They succeeded to a degree currently in dispute.

    —-

    col·lude ( P )

    Pronunciation Key (k-ld)
    intr.v. col·lud·ed, col·lud·ing, col·ludes

    To act together secretly to achieve a fraudulent, illegal, or deceitful purpose; conspire.

    [Latin colldere : com-, com- + ldere, to play; see leid- in Indo-European Roots.]

    —-

    sub·vert ( P )

    Pronunciation Key (sb-vûrt)
    tr.v. sub·vert·ed, sub·vert·ing, sub·verts

    1 – To destroy completely; ruin: “schemes to subvert the liberties of a great community” (Alexander Hamilton).
    2 – To undermine the character, morals, or allegiance of; corrupt.
    3 – To overthrow completely: “Economic assistance… must subvert the existing… feudal or tribal order” (Henry A. Kissinger). See Synonyms at overthrow.

    [Middle English subverten, from Old French subvertir, from Latin subvertere : sub-, sub- + vertere, to turn; see wer-2 in Indo-European Roots.]

  • ingrammartin

    Trow,

    Quote”and ‘Martin Ingram’ has been doing this for the FRU for nearly a generation

    And! Martin Ingram has said that more than once.This thread is not about me please do not Hi Jack.

  • Reader

    briso: The British colluded with loyalist paramilitaries in a common enterprise.
    There’s no point just hammering the dictionary – you need to convince us that, by infiltrating both loyalist and republican gangs, the British Government weren’t just trying to keep the lid on the place. Cosying up with loyalist killers doesn’t look like a good idea.
    And where was the ‘common enterprise’ during Sunningdale, or the Anglo Irish agreement?

  • andy

    Briso and slugfest are right. Infiltration of the IRA was not collusion.

    No offence but its absolutely ridiculous to say so. If Scap undermined anti-informer activity in the IRA, killed non-informing volunteers and allowed other true informers to go free – was he actually doing so because that helped both the IRA and the British Government?
    Or was he actually doing so because it helped the British government?

    Outside of very particular actions to keep cover, I can’t recall any information or material being given to republicans by the security forces that would help them in their cause. Unlike, say, Brian Nelson who was regularly given information dossiers.

    (appreciate the business about Fulton and the infa-red triggers but this seemed to be fairly directly linked to preserving his cover)

  • andy

    i should have added that I also agree with slugfest its no good the provos asking for full disclosure, enquiries etc if they’re not prepared to undergo the same themselves.

  • Shore Road Resident

    Surely this brings the difference between collusion and informing down to a highly technical distinction, at least in contrast to the effect i.e. murder.
    It’s also debatable whether the agenda of the intelligence services has over-lapped more with republicanism than loyalism in recent years – or perhaps even decades.
    Republicans can’t demand inquiries into deaths due to collusion while also demanding that we ignore deaths due to informing. There is no consistent moral reason to view one set of deaths as ‘worse’ than another.

  • IJP

    One of the most impressive aspects of the Sinn Fein political project has been their determination to resolutely fight on ground set by their own terms of reference, and not their enemies and certainly not the medias.

    A really good general point, by the way.

  • elfinto

    Collusion should be an issue not just for Sinn Fein but for anyone who believes in democracy.

    To equate British subversion of the republican movement through the use of agents with British direction and manipulation of death squads with the aim of subverting the republican movement is to miss the point entirely.

    It’s sad to see some people who claim to be republicans fudging the distinction between the two very different activities for blatantly political reasons.

  • Occasional Commentator

    Mick,
    surely the recent fuss over the OTR legislation shows that SF haven’t been consistent on the need for collusion inquiries. They were fighting for the Army to get a ‘Get of of jail free card’ while it was the SDLP who criticised this.

  • ID Lottery

    Ultonian Scottis American writes,

    I have to agree that IRA members secretly working for the UK doesn’t really add up to collusion, unless the highest levels of leadership were agreed to it, and that it dovetailed with what was preached to the frontline membership.

    That being said, is/was “The Troubles” merely a problem for the criminal justice system, or something more approaching a “war”? If a war, then what’s the problem with the State out-sourcing work, which in a war includes killing members of the other side? Obviously, just randomly targeting individuals seems immoral, as well as counter productive.

    On the other hand, the State declared it a criminal justice matter, so it would seem that it tied its owns hands. I don’t even know if UK law allows for a recognition of a civil war that permits for a policy legally outside the criminal justice system, where the Laws of War predominate.

    The IRA was equally ambiguous in this regards.

    It reminds me of a situation in the US. During the 1960s, the FBI was criticised for infiltrating and otherwise spying upon the Civil Rights and Anti-Vietnam War movements.

    Where did the FBI learn these methodologies? When they did the same things in order to break the KKK, including agents provocateur. No outcry of violations of the KKK members’ rights.

  • ingrammartin

    Hi

    Quote”I have to agree that IRA members secretly working for the UK doesn’t really add up to collusion, unless the highest levels of leadership were agreed to it, and that it dovetailed with what was preached to the frontline membership

    This is the point, I have contended since 1999 that this is so. Before the end of this year you will see this matter in a more complete and clearer picture.

    Martin.

  • ID Lottery – Has this been fixed yet?

    Ultonian Scottis American writes,

    ingrammatin,

    So, you are saying that Gerry Adams et al told his followers, including IRA active service units, that the IRA would bring about a UI by cooperating with the UK gov’t, and kill other IRA members innocent of treachery, and randomly selected people from both communities?

    Or are you agreeing that the infiltration etc of the IRA by the UK gov’t isn’t “collusion”?

    One could, I suppose, make an argument that the UK gov’t giving advanced weaponry and secret info to the IRA would amount to collusion on the part of the UK gov’t.

  • ingrammartin

    ID,

    I make no such allegation about Mr Adams other than either he is a complete fool or a very naive individual.

    Mr Adams is not the only hand at the till.

    The war prior to 84 was going the IRA way or at least caused massive problems for the UK govt.Once Adams and Martin took control the game was on.

    As a Handler if I supplied information to Brian Nelson and had say Pat Finucane ” Removed” you would say correctly that this activity was wrong AGREED?

    As a Handler if I supplied information to say Freddy Scap and instructed him to kill a leading IRA volunteer you would AGREE that this activity is wrong?.

    Both actions have one common factor . A handler and an illegal act committed by a person in the Paid employment of the British STATE. AGREED?

    Martin.

  • briso

    OK Martin, explain it to me. I’m genuinely interested. What exactly happened and what is your problem with it? I see it in the following way.

    Oh, before I start, I think killing people is the gravest sin anyone can commit. Those who have carried this act out in Northern Ireland or who have facilitated it or covered it up will have at least to answer to their consciences, possibly to the law and I believe eventually before God.

    The IRA killed many people, according to the link pasted above, 1706. Some (most?) of these are people killed as a result of what the IRA called the ‘war’. They were people considered (by the IRA, not by me) to be legitimate targets, people killed by accident as a result of attacks on so-called legitimate targets, people killed through pure lack of concern for ‘collateral damage’ when attacking the so-called legitimate targets. These are not really subject to the debate on ‘collusion’/’subversion’. People know where they stand on these. Some republicans consider these deaths to be entirely justified or regrettable accidents. Most people consider them to be appalling. The debate about this of course goes on in the context of all the other killing and dying going on at the time.

    Regarding collusion/subversion:

    1 – There are the deaths of so-called informers. The allegation is that these killings were largely carried out by the FRU agents within the IRA. In effect, the whole internal discipline apparatus of the IRA was a tool of British Intelligence. Lets assume, for the sake of argument, that this is entirely true.

    2 – Furthermore, the allegation is that the leadership of the IRA and Sinn Fein was working towards the same goal as the British Government, namely the end of the so-called armed struggle and the instigation of a process of inclusive negotiations leading to a comprehensive settlement of the conflict allowing the status of Northern Ireland and the aim of re-unification of Ireland to be an entirely political and peaceful question. Under the definition I gave above, this would support the proposition that there was collusion between Britain and the IRA, or at least that there was a complete subversion of the IRA (they were ‘turned’) followed by longstanding collusion.

    So, what exactly is the issue I, as someone who wanted the end of the violence, should be upset about? Even stranger, what is it the Unionist community has to be upset about in this scenario?And if the republican leadership were in on it, does this mean I should think better or worse of them?

  • Ultonian Scottis American

    Ultonian Scottis American writes,

    ingrammartin:

    “As a Handler if I supplied information to Brian Nelson and had say Pat Finucane “ Removed” you would say correctly that this activity was wrong AGREED?”

    And as the Loyalist group he was working in would like the result, even the rank and file, this is properly termed “collusion”.

    “Wrong” would be irrelevant, the question being “illegal”, unless killing an “innocent” man is the evidence of wrongness.

    “As a Handler if I supplied information to say Freddy Scap and instructed him to kill a leading IRA volunteer you would AGREE that this activity is wrong?.”

    Unless the IRA rank and file, and the totality of leadership, thought this outcome was good, I wouldn’t call it IRA collusion.

    Again, was it illegal? Was it wrong for the UK to equip and deliver the Czech assassins of Heinrich Heydrich? Or illegal? What if they killed the wrong man?

    I don’t know enough of the facts to say whether either incident you wrote of was illegal or legal. I guess it depends on which laws are operant.

    I have read some of your other stuff. You seem to be alluding to a policy by the UK to not really want a decisive victory by either side. This does seem a bit amoral, if not plain Machiavellian.

    If the IRA leadership were in on this policy, one could read it as that they knew that they couldn’t win, but they didn’t want to be seen as having lost. Just as at the conclusion of the Irish Civil War.

    Too bad, it seems, that dishonesty by both the IRA and the UK govt led to further loss of innocent lives in both communities at the hands of their own community as well as the other. I suppose the UK govt rationalised this policy as fewer dead than if they didn’t.

    Perhaps in the end, both will be seen as being illegal, but the right thing to have done.

  • ingrammartin

    Briso,

    Quote”Oh, before I start, I think killing people is the gravest sin anyone can commit. Those who have carried this act out in Northern Ireland or who have facilitated it or covered it up will have at least to answer to their consciences, possibly to the law and I believe eventually before God.

    You more or less sum up my beliefs.

    Quote”So, what exactly is the issue I, as someone who wanted the end of the violence, should be upset about? Even stranger, what is it the Unionist community has to be upset about in this scenario?And if the republican leadership were in on it, does this mean I should think better or worse of them?

    Briso, the DUP are playing politics. I am aware the DUP are in possession of certain documents which they intend to use some time later this year which they believe will help their cause.

    Your view of a political party is your own view I can not pass comment upon that but what I can do is offer a reasonable position and where possible suport with my experiances.

    Ultonian Scottis American writes,

    “Wrong” would be irrelevant, the question being “illegal”, unless killing an “innocent” man is the evidence of wrongness.

    Sir John Stevens, has admitted the act of collusion is indeed a criminal act and if you cast your mind back to 1991 he recommended PROSECUTION of three FRU Handlers for that ACT BUT the authorities ruled that this prosecution would not be in the publics interest.

    To be clear. If I, as a Handler supply photograph to a Agent for targetting purposes and that target is subsequently attacked then that is a conspiracy to murder. If the target dies that is a conspiracy to murder. You suggest this is wrong I SAY IT IS ILLEGAL.

    Quote”Perhaps in the end, both will be seen as being illegal, but the right thing to have done.

    Well you have just answered these points by admitting it is illegal. I do not want to have my kids grow up in state of Anarchy were the state kills almost at will it`s own citizens. That is a SOUTH AMERICAN state, maybe you are content to allow this activity BUTmay I remind you that if you or your children were to be victims of this illegal acts then your tune would change and very quickly.

    Slan.

    Martin

  • If this thread is not about you, ‘Martin Ingram’ – what you posted earlier in response to my message – why do you keep justifying your own conduct, and making predicting about what the rest of us will know by the end of the year?

    You obviously are in contact with the securocrats in London and Dublin when it comes to their collusion in assassitions, and what is in the pipeline when it comes to their cover ups.

  • Ultonian Scottis American

    Ultonian Scottis American writes,

    ingrammartin:

    “I do not want to have my kids grow up in state of Anarchy were the state kills almost at will it`s own citizens.”

    From your own admission, weren’t you one of those responsible for the anarchy in NI?

    But I’m not here to bash you.

    What, in your opinion, should have been the policy of the UK govt in dealing with the threat to the State presented by the IRA?