“questions must be asked about what these people were led to believe.”

Courtesy of Newshound. In Thursday’s Irish News Newton Emerson asked how Davy Hyland and Geraldine Dougan could have remained as Sinn Féin party members, nevermind MLAs, for so long if they believed that, “If you accept policing you are really accepting the statelet” and “if a special ard fheis mandates Sinn Féin to support policing and the judiciary while still under British control in any shape or form, membership of that party would be untenable [] as an Irish republican.” It’s a line of questioning that has echoes of the Irish Times’ Frank Millar’s previously made point.From Newton’s article

Given the number of prominent party members who apparently felt that they would never have to endorse internal policing arrangements, questions must be asked about what these people were led to believe.

Sinn Féin has never made any secret of the fact that it views the agreement as a means to an end but the means it has actually deployed suggest considerable cynicism.

The Ulster Unionists and the SDLP took huge risks to back the new police service and nationalist representatives continue to face violent harassment while delivering progress through the agreed accountability structures.

Sinn Féin, by contrast, has taken almost a decade just to concede the most fundamental implication of an agreement that it claims to support. During that decade it undermined everyone who sought to work the institutions, with stunts ranging in ridiculousness from Ogra Sinn Féin invasions of the Policing Board to paramilitary-linked ‘restorative justice’ schemes that threatened every principle of natural justice.

However, even at its most obstructionist, Sinn Féin never openly claimed that it wanted the new policing arrangements to fail. It simply said that the arrangements had to be perfect before republicans could have anything to do with them. There was certainly no public suggestion that this perfect state required an end to the imperfect statelet “in any shape or form”.

Two weeks ago, in a joint letter to this newspaper, John Kelly and Hunger Strike leader Brendan Hughes wrote: “It is the possibility of republicans fed up with Sinn Féin lies and deceit deciding to mount an electoral challenge that sends shudders of anxiety through the leadership circles.”

Perhaps. But it is not leadership lies as such which have angered the rejectionist republicans.

What really upsets them is that the leadership lied when it told them it was only lying to everyone else.

, , ,

  • oo

    here’s the answer to emerson’s question: http://lark.phoblacht.net/TL020107.html

  • Rory

    Regardless of all this faffle, upon weighing the arguments I find that I am absolutely behind Sinn Fein playing its part on the policing board and encouraging support for a non-sectarian civil police service. I believe that the Ard Fheis will endorse this stance and that it will be overwhelmingly supported by the nationalist community.

    What I would be interested to know is how our bold commentators stand on this issue. Does Newton Emerson, does Pete Baker for that matter look forward to non=sectarian accountible policing that is capable of winning the support of the whole community or would they prefer a divided strife-ridden community as of old.

    I think we should be told.

  • ingram

    Rory,

    That is not the issue at hand.

    If you want ask that point email in to slugger asking for that topic to be covered.

    This topic is about the serial liars?

    Regards.

    Ingram

  • Nevin

    “I believe that the Ard Fheis will endorse this stance and that it will be overwhelmingly supported by the nationalist community.”

    If the answer is YES do you expect Gerry and co to join the Policing Board and to assist the PSNI in carrying out its duties prior to an Assembly election?

  • heck

    Ingram

    serial liars?

    don’t unionists want to be ruled by Honest Tony’s gang of serial liars?

  • elvis Parker

    Newtown hits the mark again!
    Thank God those at the Andytown news forced him out of his job and into journalism!

  • aquifer

    Democratic Centralism, revolutionary gangsterism, republican socialism, ethnic military avant-gardism, in the regional context it was all a fatally flawed political pyramid selling scheme.

    Try to think of democracy and guaranteed inclusion in government as getting your original stake back.

    Its not so bad.

  • Quaysider

    There’s some dodging of the question here by Heck and Rory. It’s pretty obvious from this article that Newton Emerson does support accountable policing as envisaged under the GFA. The question is how anyone could stay in Sinn Fein for nine years after the Agreement while NOT supporting accountable policing as envisaged under the GFA.
    Hyland, Dougan and Kelly aren’t complaining about implementation of Patten or any other delivery-related issue. They’re just saying “Never, Never, Never”.

  • observer

    Roll on the day when the brit infested SF finally put the final nail into the Republican coffin.

    Support for partition, Support for a british assembly, support for a british police force…. the Unions never been stronger!

  • Mick Fealty

    Actually the question goes further than that Q. What were they being told by the leadership that allowed them believe that the PSNI would never be acceptable to the party?

  • parcifal

    well Mick,
    aside from the anti-SF agenda of the thread,
    I don’t see there’s much in the pot to stir.
    GFA was always about Patten re policing and a new beginning, now is the time.

    I’d suggest they weren’t being told anything by the leadership, and this is a straw man arguement.

    Nice try from the anti-SF blogging comittee but no cigar!

  • Davy is not saying “Never, Never, Never”, he is simply using the policing issue as a cover for his failure to secure selection.

    Below is a letter published in this weeks APRN from Newry Comhairle Ceantair.

    Davy Hyland resignation — the facts

    http://www.anphoblacht.com/letters/2007-01-18

  • Reader

    parcifal: I’d suggest they weren’t being told anything by the leadership, and this is a straw man arguement.
    But the MLAs that left seemed to think it would never reach this point. Were those MLAs thick? deluded? dissident sleepers? out of the loop and deceived? or are they lying themselves?
    There is a mystery to be solved here – and Shinners should be the most keen to solve it.

  • parcifal

    Reader
    or simply using the policing issue as a cover for his failure to secure selection.
    as chris above suggests?

  • Quaysider

    That doesn’t explain Geraldine Dougan.
    She resigned of her own accord.

    BTW, “the anti-SF agenda of this thread”????
    Christ.

  • parcifal

    Quaysider
    I would suggest any thread feeding the line that SF are liars, a word used 4 times in the last 3 paragraphs to be a tad obvious wouldn’t you?

    Don’t get me wrong I couldn’t care less, as the arguement is false and is being ripped apart.
    Ball not man

  • noel adams

    Hecks line on Tony deserves an answer when NIO handed over health to the assembly the waiting list was 47000 when the assembly fell apart and health came back to NIO the nunber had reached almost 60000 on the verge of hopefully reverting to assembly the app figure is 40000 and by march on one should wait over 26 weeks. Not lies or spin just booring old progress.

  • Henry94

    I think that anyone who did not think the day would come needs to ask questions about their own analytical skills.

    Policing had to be addressed and it was a decision that had to be made at some stage.

    If and when the DUP opt for power-sharing that too may surprise some of the slow-learners on their side. But to frame the issue in terms of lies is in my view to show a similar level of political obtuseness.

    Indeed when Pat “I’ll never go into coalition with FF” Rabbitte goes into coalition with FF we may see some similar shock.

    If the shock is put on for the effect it’s one thing but anyone who is genuinely shocked is still in political short-trousers.

  • grimesy

    SF accepting the police by default means that they accept the NI state.

    Just a shame 3000+ people had to die for this to occur.

    “Sunningdale for Slow Learners” indeed.

  • Quaysider

    The argument hasn’t even been addressed, let alone ‘ripped apart’.
    Why did MLAs opposed to any form of internal policing settlement remain in Sinn Fein after the agreement? What led them to believe the moment of policing recognition would never come?

  • grimesy

    Taken from http://www.breakingnews.com

    Best line:-
    “Did the British defeat us in the last 30 years? No they did not.”

    …Nearly fell outta the chair laughing when I read that 😀

    Support for PSNI won’t cement partition – Adama
    20/01/2007 – 19:22:46

    The Sinn Féin support for the police in the North will not cement the partition of the Island, Gerry Adams insisted tonight.

    At the first in a series of public meetings organised by his party ahead of a crucial decision on policing, the Sinn Féin leader told republicans in Toome that the time was now right for them to get involved in policing because it would advance the cause of a united Ireland.

    During a two hour debate the West Belfast MP told republicans opposed to his party’s strategy for achieving a united Ireland to spell out clearly what they would do to get rid of British rule.

    “You have said we are going to copperfasten partition by doing this,” he noted.

    “That may be your view and that is a valid view but we do not believe we are going to copperfasten partition.

    “Unionists do not believe we are going to copperfasten partition. I do not see unionists lining up to welcome us on this issue of policing.

    “But say for a moment you are right. I am prepared to surrender the microphone here. You tell me how you are going to get a united Ireland, how you are going to end British rule, how you are going to make peace between Orange Green and create a 32 county socialist republic.

    “Sinn Féin has a strategy and are building a political party which with the democratic will of the people will take power in a united Ireland and bring about the type of socialist republic that we all here want to see.”

    The Toome meeting was the first in a series of public debates across the North ahead of Sinn Féin’s January 28 conference in Dublin on policing.

    Concerns were expressed by some members of the audience that if Sinn Féin got involved in policing structures it would become part of the state administering British rule.

    Others expressed concern that the Sinn Féin leadership did not appear to have a clear strategy.

    However Mr Adams, who again repeated his call for direct meetings with dissident republican terror groups to persuade them to abandon the gun, warned opponents that they would advance their cause by remaining hurlers on the pitch.

    “Hurlers on ditches do not win games,” the Sinn Féin leader said.

    “Think big. Have some bloody confidence in yourself.

    “Did the British defeat us in the last 30 years? No they did not.

    “Did the British put us down over the past 30 years? No they did not.

    “I stood with others, including people here at this meeting, on the front lines in some of the most repressive conditions but they did not beat us.

    “Remember that. Have confidence in yourselves – not in the British Government, the Irish Government or the unionists. Have confidence in yourself at this time and in the Irish people.”

    Taoiseach Bertie Ahern and British Prime Minister Tony Blair have identified Sinn Féin support for policing as being critical if there is to be any hope of power sharing this march.

    The reverent Ian Paisley’s democratic unionists had said they will not share power in a devolved government at Stormont without Sinn Féin signing up to support for the police, the courts and the rule of law.

    Some republicans, however, view any move by Gerry Adams’ party to endorse the Police Service of Northern Ireland as a betrayal of their ideals.

    Veteran republican Laurence O’Neill did not take part in today’s meeting but claimed outside the venue that Mr Adams had organised a staged managed event.

    Mr O’Neill said:” What is going on in here today is a shear farce.

    “It is a stage managed farce. All the dirty deals have already been done. All the decisions have been already taken. So what’s the point of this fooling and deceiving and lying to the republican people?

    “As far as I am concerned what is happening here is a group of people seeking power, and that power they have gained through the death of volunteers that fought and were assassinated, and they’re dancing over the graves of the hunger strikers.”

    Mr Adams was holding a second debate tonight in Galbally, Co Tyrone.

  • Mick Fealty

    Briefly. Anti or pro SF or any other party is irrelevant. I’m not sure where you got the idea that has anything to do with anything Parci. The argument in either case is there to be challenged.

    The idea either stands up, or it falls down. By all means demolish it, if that is your inclination. But cannot do that by adopting an ad hominem approach.

    On Slugger (if not elsewhere) the bias or otherwise, of the writer is secondary to the quality of their content.

    PS,

    For my own part, I know people inside the party who understood two years ago that this was an inevitable outworking of the Belfast Agreement. It was partly a matter of using it as a bargining chip and partly a case of how long you can stand the demand of your own consituents. Since the decommissioning of the IRA, people living in hardline Republican areas have been steadily been besieged by all manner of high and low level anti social behaviour.

    But that certainly does not invalidate the question, nor answers being sought!

  • heck

    does anyone see any similarity in this with dev’s entry into irish politics and his taking the oath ?

    After that Ireland became a republic but not THE republic. It moved ireland forward but in the end Dev hung his former comrades?

  • parcifal

    apologies Mick,

    does anyone have a comment on the letter
    Davy Hyland resignation — the facts
    posted above by Chris Gaskin,

    an explanation to answers sought perhaps?

  • grimesy

    Heck,

    Excellent analogy.

    However, the difference is that Dev’s genesis occured during the founding years of the State.

    Sunningdale was signed in 1973 & we’re pretty much faced with the same scenario now i.e. Nationalists & Unionists sharing power.

    Parcifal,

    Again, another solid analogy from Chris. Looking in from the outside, it looks like Davy is playing the “poor me” card.

    I just wish to Chris (other like Pat McLarnon) would display such cogent analysis when trying to defend (the indefensible) Sinn Féin from lucid points by Ingram (i.e. someone who knows more about SF’s skeletons than anyone on Slugger)

  • I just wish to Chris (other like Pat McLarnon) would display such cogent analysis when trying to defend (the indefensible) Sinn Féin from lucid points by Ingram (i.e. someone who knows more about SF’s skeletons than anyone on Slugger)

    Ingram knows little about a lot. For a man that has such a vast knowledge of Sinn Fein he didn’t even know that Gerry Adams can’t put motions to the Ard Fheis or that the Ard Chomhairle have lost quite a few Ard Fheis motions in the last 20 years.

    [play the ball – edited moderator]

  • grimesy

    Chris,

    I’m not going to engage in petty sniping & point scoring with you on this. However, I’ll point out a few things to you about Ingram:-

    He was right about Scap!

    He’d alluded to it in national newspaper interviews before 2003. Now, unless the chap has a crystal ball (which I doubt because your betting tips are rubbish Martin!!), how else could he have known that the man who vetted EVERY SINGLE PROVO VOLUNTEER was a paid spy?…Unless, of course, he was involved in his handling.

    Chris, with the greatest respect, you seem like a bright lad. But you, me (& an innocent lad I was in school with down South who has been brain washed by SF), we’re only pups in our 20s. Haven’t a fucking care in the world – good parents, good upbringing, ideal.

    Ingram, on the other hand, handled battle-hardened sectarian murderers.

    Not exactly a day-out in the Dundonald Ice Bowl…He doesn’t tell you how to study for your exams…So don’t lecture him on his past career – it smacks of naiviéte, at best.

    So, yeah, I do believe Ingram. He was right about Scap…& he’ll be proved right (eventually) on J119.

    No matter how much you convince yerself otherwise.

    I’m signing off on that note for this evening.

  • Pete Baker

    A quick point before we get side-tracked further.

    Any argument over the reasons for Davy Hyland’s deselection are not directly relevant to his statement in relation to policing and the recognition of the state.

    Neither does it touch on Geraldine Dougan’s comments.

    Nor does it impinge on the actual argument Newton has put forward.

  • Pat Mc Larnon

    grimesy,

    you mentioned me by name so i feel obliged to reply. You accept Ingram and his allegations and stories at face value and that is where we part ways.
    If one was to even acknowledge he had any part in this conflict then it was (even by his own admission) 20 years ago.

    He has no knowledge of what is happening on the ground at the moment, other from what he can glean from media outlets, mostly trash providers, ie Sunday World , Sindo, ST etc. An out of sorts type of character who tries desperately to remain relevant, convincing non but the fool.

  • grimsey

    Age is not a barrier that stops you recognising bullshit, remember that.

  • Ulick

    the man who vetted EVERY SINGLE PROVO VOLUNTEER was a paid spy?…Unless, of course, he was involved in his handling.

    Did really Ingram say that about Scappaticci? LOL

    Sorry mustn’t laugh in case I’m accused of being naïve… LOL

  • heck

    grimesy

    if you agree with the Dev analogy do you think this move by adams will lead to SF replacing FF and the SDLP?

    Do you think Adams and the PSNI will go after fellow republicans in the way dev did?

    What changes do you see if SF get real power in government? after all Dev did set the republic in a different direction than the treatyites would had done.

  • parcifal

    peteb
    I think you could have presented the thread as:

    more umbrage from Sinn Fein MLA’s
    questions must be asked about what these people thought the GFA was all about.

    Perfectly reasonable! don’t you agree?

    Then the thread would have gone into, why are these MLA’s telling porkies.

    Instead its become why are SF telling porkies.

    Do you see the difference?

    So what influenced you to present it the other way round?

  • Rory

    Mr O’Neill said:” What is going on in here today is a shear farce

    A “shear farce”, Grimesy? Isn’t that a sex romp of a menage a trois, including a sheep. set in the Australian outback after the manner of Moliere and Feydeau?

  • Pete Baker

    “I think you could have presented the thread as:”

    parci

    If I ever present someone else’s argument as the exact opposite of what they have actually said – as you’re suggesting..

    Then at that point, and not before, you will legitimately be able to claim that I have displayed bias.

    Until then.. and this goes for everyone else too.. kindly keep to the actual topic.

  • grimesy

    Right, was going to keep my head below the parapet, but…

    In no particular order:-

    Rory,

    Noticed the typo myself, thought it sounded like a Tim Burton Ealing-comedy!

    I paste-ed the article straight from breakingnews’ site. Something for Thomas Crosbie Holdings (the Irish Examiners’ parent company) to consider in future, perhaps. There was also a mistake in the title of the piece in any event.(Gerry “Adama”??)

    Interesting turn of phrase to describe the “shear farce”…Davy Hyland & Feydeau mentioned in the same thread…only on Slugger!!

    Heck,

    Again, I like the interesting analogy.

    However, think back to Free State civil war politics. The 26 counties were engaged in a civil war that split family, friends, etc from 1920-1922 – there was no further desire for bloodshed in the country & everybody (even Dev’s faction – although it took him a few years to get around to it – realised that).

    I say that as someone who’s grandfather was burned out of his Co. Cork home by the B&T’s as a child, who hated his anti-Treaty former comrades (& them him), who took up arms against them…having serve time with some of the same guys in Crumlin Road ‘goal’ & Wormwood Scrubs as an IRA prisoner in 1917. He’d had enough by 1922 – he was 22 yo.

    With Adams, it’s different. He expects us to believe that he was never in the IRA! Dev never hid his IRA history – but he ultimately turned his back on the gun when the mood in the FS changed towards a return to constitutional politics (i.e. he took his seat in the Dáil).

    For many Southerner’s, GA epitomises a 30-year violent, sectarian campaign that 95% of voters can’t stomach in a polling booth. People don’t trust him – period.

    Don’t get me wrong, there’s alot of Nationalist (not Republican) empathy in the South – but it’s an ideal to these people, not a reality – and explains why FF (the largest FS party) can style itself as the “Republican Party”.

    Your “Do you think Adams and the PSNI will go after fellow republicans in the way dev did? ” is spot-on. i.e.

    Adams now supports the police => defacto NI state recognition (regardless of what he says!)

    Dissidents don’t recognise the State => if he has info & they poise a threat…I believe that “on the QT”, the PSNI will get wind of it (leaving aside the fact that they’re tout-riddled.)

    SF’s economic policies are a joke (they want to raise corporation tax for starters..) and will not be stomached by “Middle Ireland”. Leaving aside the smoulder of cordite, your typical “MI” voter will disregard their “voodoo economics”.

    Which leads me to…

    Ulick,

    No, Ingram didn’t use that exact phrase to describe Scap’s role. I did => do some research (amazing what you can find on the internet these days!) on what the roles/responsibilities of being head of IRA Internal Security entails. Who knows, maybe even an Ed Moloney publication may cure you of your ills?….

    Hint:- Which department do you think DID vet new recruits so if it wasn’t IS? Engineering? QM?…

    Then come back to me when you’ve been enlightened…”LOL” !

    Pat,

    I think you’re under-estimating Ingram. Scap did that & now look, Ingram’s book is on it’s 4th print.

    You’re a student of RM politics, so I don’t need to preach to you how important the 1986 Ard Fheis in building foundtions to the GFA (Ulick, here’s something else for you to research/ponder…)

    HMG wanted to prosecute Martin under the OSA – something that they also tried with Jonty Brown, who incidently is about to be vindicated next Monday (Ulick, that was an “Into the Dark” reference..)

    He’s never been sued for libel, Pat. As I said to Chris, we’re nice middle-class lads – Ingram fought in the “Dirty War”.

    Finally, the slate the Sindo is foolish – 1.1M Southerners read the paper every week. Not all agree with it’s very vocal anti-IRA stance…but most do, it’s why SF only hold 5 seats out of 166.

    I’ll finish this question with a question for you:- I honestly believe he saved lives during the Troubles.

    Do you?

    Chris,

    I wasn’t saying mine/your youth was the problem.
    He’s been around the block more times than we have…Also, neither of us have changed identity/have people wishing to kill us.

    Why do you think that is?

  • we’re nice middle-class lads

    Speak for yourself, working class and proud of it!

    neither of us have changed identity/have people wishing to kill us.

    Why do you think that is?

    Not a member of FRU and not spooks

    That could have something to do with it, don’t you think?

  • grimesy

    Chris,

    Hadn’t initially thought of that – too busy trying to forget Ciaran Damery threatening Martin on this site before Mick barred him.

    The only acronym in NI with more spies than MI5 is the IRA.

    Or the Sinn Féin “Chief Negogiator” as the most famous one is better known as.

  • starbuck

    grimesy

    “do some research (amazing what you can find on the internet these days!) on what the roles/responsibilities of being head of IRA Internal Security entails.”

    Then come back to me when you’ve been enlightened…”LOL” !

    this is Bullshit grimesy and you don’t know it.

    don’t believe everything that’s “on the internet”

    you are more gullible than you’re school pal “down South” lol

  • starbuck

    “you’re school pal” should have read “your school pal”

    and with that finally off to the leaba !

  • grimesy

    Starbuck,

    Thank you for that insightful contribution.

    Perhaps some concrete proof detailing why I’m wrong, rather than lablling me a spoofer, would’ve been more helpful.

    Quick question for you then, as you’re obviously more “in than know” than this Mexican:-

    If it wasn’t Freddy Scap, who was/(is?) responsible for vetting new recruits?

    It’s the same question I asked Ulick.

    Prove to me I’m wrong & I’ll shut my mouth.

  • starbuck

    Firstly grimesy there’ll be no one named here but it wasn’t as centralised as you are led to believe.

    I’m sure even you can understand that local units had to have a high degree of autonomy in all aspects

    hopefully someone in the future will write a decent book which stands out amongst all the dross that is currently in print

  • aquifer

    “questions must be asked about what these people where led to believe”

    The beliefs that are needed to sustain a campaign of violence will be quite different to those needed for democratic success.

    Republicans talk of socialism, but in the context of an armed campaign with support coming from a minority within one religious camp, it is only a unifying creed for disparate warriors, code for brotherhood in arms rather than a reasoned or politically mature choice. They talk of justice, but as systematic murderers they needed to obstruct the law and finally sue for leniency and exception, which they have achieved. They talk of human rights, but ignore their own gross violations of these. Even their cultural norms were developed in a 26 county sectarian fraction of an island dependent on others for its defense. In a globalised, environmentally challenged, and enthnicly diverse world ‘national’ sovreignty has less value.

    They talk of equality but balk at democracy and the rule of law. Acceptance of policing would mean them finally giving up the violent coercion that priviledged their political beliefs with currency beyond their relevance to modern ireland. But when extreme terror is the sign for an islamic rather than gaelic state, violence looks even more like a dead end.

    Now they must argue their case like everyone else. Most people having given up the political arena for the shopping mall it should not be difficult to secure more seats than expected.

  • grimesy

    Starbuck,

    I’m well aware that individual units/ASUs/cells had some degree of individual automony i.e. in terms of recruitment, planning operations, etc.

    However, my earlier post relates to the vetting of new recruits & existing members – as the name “Internal Security” implies.

    However, I didn’t mean for you to name the actual person. Apologioes for the confusion caused.

    So, I’ll rephrase my question :-

    Which Unit/Department assumed overall responsibility for vetting recruits?

    The buck had to stop with someone/some section of the organisation. You haven’t convinced me that it’s not IS.

    On the literature subject, if guys like Ed Moloney, Tobey Hardinen, Martin Dillon (& Ingram!), etc are so far have the mark, then at the very least, why haven’t they been sued for libel?

    Why didn’t McGuinness sue the Sunday World last May when it “outed” him as a spy?

    Why did “Slab” lose his legal action against the ST?

  • starbuck

    grimesy, who would you like to see suing – unamed members suing Ingram & Co because they haven’t been named or given credit ?

    anyone named in any of those books who had a conviction in the British Courts wouldn’t have much chance suing in Court.

    In relation to McG

    a)how would anyone be able to prove in a British Court that they weren’t a Spy ?

    b) you can’t win in court becuase a court believes that providing information to the authorities is the right thing to do

    what has the “Slab” case to do with anything you mentioned previously ? he probably realises that it was a mistake to take the case

    “Ingram, on the other hand, handled battle-hardened sectarian murderers.”

    who have you in mind when you are talking about who Ingram handled ?

  • grimesy

    Adams, MMcG, Doherty are all mentioned by name in “The Secret History..”

    NI has legislation banning the director of terrorism.

    Why didn’t they sue?

    On the subject of MMcG cf Sunday World:-

    Why didn;t he issue a writ when they said he was J119, an FRU agent? People were murdered for less – Frank Hegarty, being one.

    “Ingram, on the other hand, handled battle-hardened sectarian murderers.”

    Scap springs to mind…

    “By 1980 Scappaticci is said to have been a lead member in the PIRA’s Internal Security Unit (ISU) for the PIRA’s Northern Command. The ISU being a unit tasked with counter intelligence and the investigation of leaks within the PIRA along with the exposure of moles/informers (also known as “touts”). Via the ISU, Scappaticci was said to have played a key role in investigated suspected informers, conducting inquiries into operations suspected of being compromised, debriefing of PIRA volunteers released from police and British Army questioning, and vetting of potential PIRA recruits. The ISU has also been referred to as the “Nutting Squad”. Various killings as a result of ISU activities have been attributed to the role of Scappaticci.”

  • starbuck

    “Scap springs to mind…”

    do you even know what a sectarian murderer is ?

    what is your big fascination for suing ?

    Let me get this straight – you won’t be voting for SF down on Suirside because they aren’t hardcore enough for you but think “legislation banning the director of terrorism” sic is something you want to bash some SF leaders with ?

  • grimesy

    Starbuck,

    It’s accepted that the post 1975-ceasefire IRA pursued a sectarian campaign.

    Scap was a high level member of that organisation, so yes I tar him with that brush.

    Suing is what civilised people do when they believe that the media wrongly misrepresents them.

    The “director of…” sic is fair enough. I’m in work at the moment so I can’t thoroughly peer review each post.

    On the contrary, instead of believing that they’re not hardcore enough, I despise them – I wouldn’t vote for them in a one-party society.

    And yes, I also believe that branding leading Provos/SFers as “directors of terrorism” is fair.

    Do you?

  • Ingram

    Comical Pat,

    I left the FRU in Aug 91 that makes it 15 YEARS AGO.That makes you wrong BY 25%.

    As you know I remain in contact with most of my long term agents within the IRA.My finger is bang on the pulse.The BEST SELLING book Stakeknife was released in 2004 and today is still selling really well especially in the states.

    In relation to getting it right.

    I was right about Pat Finucane and the RUC involvement.

    I was right about Seagate( BURNING STEVENS OFFICES).

    I was right about Notorantonio

    I was right about Freddy Scap

    and now I am right about policing.

    That is not a bad record at getting it right! in contrast Sinn Fein/IRA have thirty years of getting it so wrong.

    Star buck.

    Each local unit had responsibility for its own security to a point.They did the donkey work and then called in the team. Just Like Eamon Collins explained. He was one of those local lads. The GHQ unit set up by Adams and McGuinness and manned exclusively by touts in the early eighties was never changed and retained its role across the WHOLE of the 32 counties.

    That was nice! Thanks lads. That won many a medal in the FRU.LOL

    Any major inquiry had to involve the FRU oops sorry IRA security department and all compromises had to notified!to both Lisburn and the IRA.

    In relation to litigation, LOL Adams and McGuinness are many things but daft is not one of them.

    Grimesy,

    Sinn Fein/IRA and its members are embarrassed by the long term exploitation of their organisation.Time will make that pain heal but it wont change the facts.

    They are and remain corrupted from the very top.

    Regards.

    Ingram

  • starbuck

    grimesy,

    where is it accepted that post 75 a sectarian campaign was persued ? nonsense

    On another thread you allude to having an insight into what way people are going to vote and seem to bemoan the fact that there won’t be credible “dissident” candidates on the ballot paper ?

    whilst you are down on Suirside claiming to speak for true Republicans but hoping that the Republican movement up North splits ?

    why would a one party society need your vote? lol

    folks we.have.a.live.one

  • grimesy

    Ingram,

    Thanks for that reply.

    For Chris & Pat’s benefit, I’ll come back to my earlier point – you’ve been around the block more times that we have.

    They’re party activists (known as “draft dodgers” in MMcL’s day!!), hardly in their teens when the 1994 ceasefire occurred.

    How they can profess to know more than someone with a proven track record of being right when it matters is baffling.

    Until then, keep up the good work exposing SF for the charletans that they are – and never mind yahoos like Damery…he just proves that nothing good ever comes from Cork!

  • starbuck

    “Each local unit had responsibility for its own security to a point.They did the donkey work and then called in the team. ”

    So this would go against the line that you and others were pushing that those found down country lanes were innocent ?

  • grimesy

    Starbuck,

    For an apologist, I find it baffling that your historical knowledge is so sparse.

    Your homework for this evening:-

    “The two years of inactivity from 75-77 nearly brought the organisation to its knees. The “Young Turks” released in 1977 used this argument & the descent into criminality & sectarianism (from which the organisation never truly recovered from) as the basis to seize power. Discuss”

  • starbuck

    [Play the ball – edited moderator]

  • Grimsey

    For Chris & Pat’s benefit, I’ll come back to my earlier point – you’ve been around the block more times that we have.

    They’re party activists (known as “draft dodgers” in MMcL’s day!!), hardly in their teens when the 1994 ceasefire occurred.

    How can I be a “draft dodger” when I wasn’t old enough for the draft?

    I don’t get to decide when I am born, did you?

    Your arguments are getting more pathetic by the post!

  • grimesy

    Starbuck,

    Not a sockpuppet buddy, well capable of forming my own views, thank you very much.

    [edited moderator]

    You’ll note from an earlier post that I come from a republican background. Must take a fairly dangerous organisation to make me turn my back on that now, wouldn’t it?…

  • grimesy

    Chris,

    Yes Chris, of course I am.

    The difference being I’m not paid to post on this site.

  • Starbuck

    “You’ll note from an earlier post that I come from a republican background.”

    nope didn’t see that – which thread ? looks like we have a male version of Eilis O’Hanlon in our midst lol

    it looks like you know FA performing cut’n paste sessions from dross publications and “research” on the internet

  • Henry94

    The difference being I’m not paid to post on this site.

    Who is? How much? Where do I apply?

  • grimesy

    Starbuck,

    Post 11, previous page.

    Following on from him, there were 8 in my mothers’ family…..and “the apple didn’t fall far from the tree” as the saying goes. Some of the people paying respects at family funerals was always a lively talking point (after they’d left, obviously)…And as you can appreciate, that’s all I’m willing to say on that little matter!

    Also, the male Eilis O’Hanlon tag is fine with me.

    Don’t really see how anyone can be comfortable with a party responsible for 2000+ murders, but hey “different strokes”!

    H94,

    The “Daily Ireland” classifieds’ section, beside recruitment section for bank security staff..

  • starbuck

    “Don’t really see how anyone can be comfortable with a party responsible for 2000+ murders, but hey “different strokes”! ”

    Grimsey,
    you claim to be a true Republican and it could be deduced from your previous statement that you agreed with IRA actions up until post ’75

    Is this a correct deducment ?

    btw there were approx 1800 people killed ’69 -75

  • Virgil

    Timeo Danaos et donae ferentes

  • starbuck

    ehgo

  • Ulick

    grimesy

    Not for the first time I’ve noticed that you don’t have much of a grasp of reality. In response to your post about Scappaticci vetting all IRA recruits:

    No, Ingram didn’t use that exact phrase to describe Scap’s role. I did => do some research (amazing what you can find on the internet these days!) on what the roles/responsibilities of being head of IRA Internal Security entails. Who knows, maybe even an Ed Moloney publication may cure you of your ills?….

    Regardless of Scappaticci’s department, he did not vet IRA recruits. I would assume the IRA would vet their recruits by checking them out through people who knew the prospective recruit, not bring someone down from Belfast who knows next to nothing about the recruit or the area. But sure if it suits you to delude yourself with the words of Moloney and Ingram… LOL

  • grimesy

    Starbuck,

    I said I come from a Republican family. I also told you that I hate SF. I never mentioned anything about being a true Republican. An easy assumption to draw, granted, but incorrect.

    I support the rule of law & the state on both sides of the border, so I can’t be a defacto true Republican, as I believe both states to be legitimate.

    I mentioned 1975 because you asked me to explain why I believed that the IRA pursued a sectarian strategy. Again, I made no mention of supporting the IRA. Given that I’ve labelled SF as “dangerous”, do you really think that I’ve supported the Provos actions at any stage during their history? They are one and the same!

    Ulick,

    Thank you for taking the time to consider my mental state…And as for the use of bold font to highlight my comments, inspired!

    Actually if you re-read the thread, I was accused of quoting Ingram “rebatium” when I said that Scap vetted all volunteers.

    Instead, here’s how I came to that conclusion:-

    Think about it – when you apply for that first office job after school/uni & you’ve passed the interview stage, you’re checked out before you get your offer letter. Nothing major – HR might just google your name to see if you have anything incriminating on your Bebo/myspace account, no big deal. But they still do a check, all be it a minor one.

    Now consider the IRA – a secretive, para-military organisation who believe that their Army Council is the island’s ruling mechanism…They’re not exactly going advertise vacancies buddy, are they?
    Of course they do their homework, just in case, you know…So when they do admit someone, who do you think gave/gives them an independent check?

    Now pal, nothing downloaded from the internet in that analysis. No running towards the nearest “Provo-bashing” author to elicit his sources’ views.

    Of course, when I drew my own conclusions, I want in source of sources. Independent ones. Like Moloney (who has no axe to grind, regardless of what you may think); And yes, like Ingram. The fact that you, Pat, Chris, Henry94, Gerry & the Peacemakers and all the other propagandists jump down on anyone that even suggests a deviation from the partyline….Seems like someone has aot to hide.

    You say with certainty that he didn’t vet anyone & begin your next sentence with “I assume..”

    Ulick, the janus of Slugger!..

    I’ll ask you final question:-

    Ingram has been proved right on Finucane, Nelson, Scap, etc as he mentioned above & on other threads.

    Why do you persist in dismissing him?

  • Ulick

    Ingram is a spook who works to his own agenda and I wouldn’t take anything he says at face value. Anyone with any sort of insight into the republican movement in would be able to tell you that IRA volunteers were not vetted by a central department or person. To do so would be an unacceptable risk to their internal security.

  • grimesy

    Ulick,

    “To do so would be an unacceptable risk to their internal security.”

    If I’m wrong, then why do you think FRU wanted spies at the top of IS so badly then?

    Why do you persist in dismissing him?

    He’s been right too many times to be accused of spoofing. Do you not accept that????

    He’s also been retired for 15 years, so can’t curently be a “spook”. He does though, work to his own agenda – highlighting SF hypocrisy & lies – and for that, I’m grateful.

  • starbuck

    the ‘Ra Milkround – hilarious grimsey !

    your’re the best craic on here in a while lol

  • grimesy

    Starbuck (any relation to Adama?..),

    The ‘Ra milkround, eh?…hhhmmm, must remember that one next Tuesday night in the Empire!

    Now maybe you might finally answer a question..

    What made you become a SF supporter? Was it:-

    – the lure of Donegal holiday homes?

    – the smell of Northern Bank sterling?

    – the cushy Stormont pensions?

  • Ulick

    grimesy,

    I did not say that having a spy in the IRA internal security department would be a major aim of the FRU – it was a very important body, but not one that vetted IRA recruits.

    What I am saying is that there was no central body or person that vetted all IRA recruits. If Ingram has said there was, then he is a liar and working to some agenda I’m not privy too.

  • grimesy

    Ulick,

    I’ve already commented on why I drew this conclusion.

    We all know Ingram’s agenda – exposing the real SF. As I’ve said, I support him.

    You’re making him sound like some cold war spy using Checkpoint Charlie. As he said earlier, he left FRU in the early 90s, but he keeps a close eye on things. No hidden agenda, just the pursuit of SF.

    I never said Ingram give me a strict set of “Nutting Squad:- Do’s & Dont’s!!”

    You’re supposed to be having a pot me, not him!…

    ..Think I preferred you in your role as Lurgan’s #1 Health & Safety Officer on the other thread..

  • Henry94

    grimsey

    The fact that you, Pat, Chris, Henry94, Gerry & the Peacemakers and all the other propagandists jump down on anyone that even suggests a deviation from the partyline…Seems like someone has aot to hide.

    Would you care to explain what you mean by that? Are you saying the posters you name have something to hide? Of so, what?

    I’d like to know what it is I’m supposed to be hiding by coming on here to express my opinion.

  • Ulick

    By all means continue as one of Ingram’s acolytes but you should expect to be challenged especially when you regurgitate spin which even those with a rudimentary knowledge of the situation can see through.

  • starbuck

    grimesy,

    not into answering bitter rhetorical questions ta very much

    you’ve let a lot build up inside you these last 2 years lurking lol

  • grimesy

    Henry94,

    A fair enough question. That comment was really a summary of the general thrust of my stance on this (and one other) thread over the weekend.

    To summarise:-

    Ingram has been proved right too many times to be a spoofer.

    Yet pro-SF posters continually come onto Slugger & denounce him as a “spook”, whose “out of touch” & “working to his own agenda”.

    Bullshit!

    If he was a proven liar, I’d denounce him with the rest, but he’s got his track record on uncovering Troubles’ secrets which speaks for itself.

    It defies all the logic that they reject his thoeries…but then Ingram is anti-SF, of course.

    If you feel that I’ve tarred you with the wrong brush, I apologise. In hindsight, possibly Gerry too.

    Pat & Chris are fair game though. As are Starbuck & Ulick.

  • grimesy

    Ulick,

    Your “rudimentory knowledge of the situation”

    Please elaborate. Where did I get something wrong.

    Moreover, prove you’re right

    Starbuck,

    2 years well spent!

    Have fun looking for “lifeofgrime” on bebo, pal?

    I didn’t think so! “lol”….

    I’ll pick the latest installment of “Bitterman’s Friend” with yis tomorrow night.

  • Henry94

    grimesy

    I only bring it up because you are the third person to make the accusation in the past week. Ingram was the first and then yourself and Mary neither of whom I have ever encountered before.

    That and the fact that you share with Ingram a very high opinion of Ingram could make one wonder.

    But I find it best to treat posts on their merits. Pat and Chris have been posting here for a long time and are subjected to constant personal attack despite always concentrating on the issues themselves.

    They are not fair game in fact. Like us al their arguments are and their politics are fair game if you feel up to it. But constant personal attacks add nothing to the discussion.

  • BeardyBoy

    I cannot understand why any nationalist signed up to the GFA, it was clearly a vote for the status quo

    I believe that the SDLP backed it because they wanted a piece of history and a seat in Stormont was just dandy, the wages were okay too.

    Sinn Fein wanted it as they wanted to play the power games and if it meant doing a Vercingetorix then the priority was not being carted of to Rome(London) to be made fun of and killed.

    So they all pulled of a blinder saying lets all support the border, set up a govt in Belfast and if we are nice the unionists will be nice back eventually, but it will look good.

    That is why the things that are trotted out for nationalists as great gains tend to be wooly or aspirational or depend on someone granting it after a time. Unionists got what they wanted defined and delivered in a time frame.

    Newton is right – what did the people think they were signing up to? it was clearly a recognition and justification of the border and all the institutions that derive from it and thus not only criminalised all insurrection against it but by extrapulation all historical insurrection against the English presence in Ireland.

    What sort of nationalist would agree to it?
    A defeated one maybe?

    FF wanted it because we are all a wee bit embarrassing up here and it interferes with the way foreigners look at us – bloody embarrassing and besides keeps us remembering how we pulled up the ladder.

  • beggar

    Ulick you claim to not be a Provo supporter, to not even be a Sinn Fein supporter (just interested, see), yet you go to their meetings and make this sort of claim:
    What I am saying is that there was no central body or person that vetted all IRA recruits. If Ingram has said there was, then he is a liar and working to some agenda I’m not privy too.

    Given your disavowal of the Provos, How Would You Know?

    Exhibit A: Not Sinn Fein, Not a Provo Supporter, just an interested bystander

    Exhibit B: Former handler of the double agent who was the head of IRA internal security

    Exhibit C: Longtime journalist and author of definitive book on the IRA

    Yeh, I believe you, Ulick.