“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..

, , , , , ,

  • Garibaldy

    Pete – you didn’t just openly express an opinion did you? I’m shocked.

    As for this comment by Adams, laughable.

  • jake

    [See commenting policy – edited moderator]. i cannot prove that, but that is my conviction.

  • steve

    Brilliant Gerry

    Turn their own tactics against them and if they mount a legal action they will have to open the archives and thus Pandora’s box

  • Pete Baker

    Garibaldy

    Mostly facts. But a little licence seemed appropriate.

  • jake

    you’re a bloody hypocrite fealty and this site is up adams’ ass!!!

  • Garibaldy

    I agree entirely Pete.

  • IRIA

    Didn’t they have one of the Gibraltar fella’s steps traced the moment he showed up at the pub with his hair dyed?

  • Mick Fealty

    Wasn’t me jake, but I stand by the decision.

    Adams has said in the past that ‘people like him’ cannot resort to law. But you could make your perfectly valid point without such specific reference to a particularly tragic case.

    If you want to take responsibility for doing such, I suggest you do it on your own blog.

  • According to provisional republican doctrine, was the ‘Irish government of the day’ not in fact the Army Council of the Provisional IRA? In which case, is Adams alleging that the Army Council passed information to the British about the movements of those shot at Gibraltar? After all, to suggest that any other body other than the Army Council represents the ‘Irish government’ would be a direct rejection of Irish republican legitimatism.

  • Mayoman

    Where did that P&J;comment go?

  • Mayoman

    Oh I See! Fair enough! Good move!

  • PeaceandJustice

    Mick Fealty – [to jake] “you could make your perfectly valid point without such specific reference to a particularly tragic case.”

    Sinn Fein PIRA bloggers make many allegations on Slugger about specific cases and people – all the time. Chris Donnelly springs to mind. Other allegations are made about specific Unionist politicians and Unionist campaigners for victims. Such comments are never removed.

    So it appears that the rules are: Sinn Fein PIRA terrorists can keep making specific allegations on here. But Unionists are not allowed to even state their opinion on specific people and/or events.

  • willowfield

    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?

  • Ignited

    I find it reassuring that at a time of hightened tensions in Northern Ireland that the British and Irish governments could come together on matters of international security.

    Good post Pete. I’d agree with you as well that the system of informers played a more pivotal role in information passing.

    Poor provies.

  • joeCanuck

    There are none so blind as those that don’t want to see and their whingeing MOPERY here gets a bit wearying eventually.

  • Suchard

    Gerry always has to feed the carnivores at the zoo with red meat Margaret Thatcher won three general elections on the trot. She had balls. Gerry is a political pygmie in comparison.

  • Belfast Gonzo

    Adams was a lot more definitive in Sinn Fein’s news letter yesterday:

    “We know that Margaret Thatcher authorised the executions. At the very highest level within the British cabinet, the British Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher, authorised the execution of these three volunteers.”

    So for the wider audience, it is Adams’ ‘strong view’, but when addressing the home team, he ‘knows’. Quite a difference.

  • Don Quixote

    Gerry’s statements have to be seen as a distraction and nothing more; there’s much he needs to distract from:

    The IRA’s refusal to play on a level field in discovering the past,
    Paul Quinn – the name is enough to be associated with brutality, kangaroo SF “jjustice” and remind others of McCartney. No prosecutions = SF, like it or not, wrong or right; when in looks like a duck, has feathers and quacks – it’s a duck to most. Legal arguments are fine – but – that relies on evidence being presented. At the moment – Gerry should be concerned about the knowledge of the dogs in the street.
    A completely incompetent Minister for Education who can’t sell a justifiable policy to those who’d benefit from it.

    Yes – Gerry and Ms McCann need to distract their supporters and re-invent the past. He’ll rely on unionist objection to blatant lies while knowing the Chuckle Bro’s have an arrangement.

    Unionist objection to blatant lies is what Gerry relies on to demonstrate his commitment to the republican cause. He’s on a winner – those who were happy to ignore or excuse murder aren’t likely to care much about being duped now – when they were duped long ago.

    So – according to Adams the Southern Government ‘informed’ and thwarted a plan to murder innocent civilians. I wish I could believe it – but Adams has lied too often.

    Let’s say Gerry is being honest this time – could some journalist ask him why preventing the killing of innocent civilians – that he “regrets” – is a matter for blaming the Southern Government? Perhaps he’s congratulating the Southern Government?

    Farrell, Savage and McCann were attempting to set off a bomb explosion that would have killed indiscriminately. They were stopped.

  • censorship

    censorship

  • Steve

    Don
    unionists have NEVER objected to blatant lies

    they only object to what they percieve as blatant republican lies

  • McGrath

    Posted by censorship on Feb 28, 2008 @ 02:19 AM

    I was wondering how long it would take before P&J;’s constant tit-tat became tiresome.

  • McGrath

    Naturally Gerry feels obliged to fluff his chest feathers and strut about for the sake of the amoebas who voted for him. Its just dressage, the deal has been done, the farm sold.

  • Brass Neck!

    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.

    Nothing to do with the touts in your security department, Gerry, or are they ones who told you this?

  • 0b101010

    Truism

  • RepublicanStones

    it seems many on here can’t tell the diff between allegations and someones firmly held opinion. back to school methinks !

  • Dec

    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?

  • circles

    Yaaaaawn

  • Francesco

    those cold blooded murdered in gibraltar were unarmed, they could have been easely arrested!

  • Tom Kitt

    Surely 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.

  • Prince Eoghan

    >>#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< >anyone making allegations without producing solid evidence.< >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..<

  • get real

    Gerry 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?

  • willowfield

    If 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?

  • PeaceandJustice

    As 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.

  • joeCanuck

    Severe case of paranoia there.

  • PeaceandJustice

    To 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.

  • joeCanuck

    P&J;,
    Do you not find it odd that we also have Nationalist/Republican posters here claiming that Mick is totally biassed towards Unionists?

  • Prince Eoghan

    Willow

    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.

  • Turgon

    PeaceandJustice,
    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.

  • willowfield

    I’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.

  • PeaceandJustice

    Let 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 Civilian

    If Gerry can have strong views on one particular incident in Gibraltar, many people can have strong views on his actions.

  • astonished (mildly)

    I 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

  • Rory

    If 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.

  • PeaceandJustice

    To 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?

  • steve

    Whats Sinn Fein PIRA? I have never heard of them? New dissident group?

    And if you have the evidence please provide it immediately

  • PeaceandJustice

    To 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?

  • interested

    “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.

  • interested

    Just 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”.

  • Rory

    Peace & 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.

  • willowfield

    A 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?

  • Pancho’s Horse

    P&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?

  • willowfield

    Both 1 and 3, probably.

  • Ingram

    Who’s laughing now. Adams is probably right since the Evening Standard late edition has just reported that Thatcher’s chauffeur was a PIRA agent.

  • steve

    P&J;That was just Gerry’s answer to Parliamentary priviledge….. except it took a lot more balls than Lord Lard ever had. He has opened himself up to legal action except it would require that the government open its archives if a suit was brought. Briliant really, as we all know those archives hide many more government secrets than they will ever admit to

  • steve

    Gees ingram you ding aling have you switched sides now that they closed down your section in MI5

  • Ingram
  • Pancho’s Horse

    willowfield, if you think that civilians were purposely targetted, was this to spread terror and if so why not a bigger death toll?

  • Reader

    Pancho’s Horse: willowfield, if you think that civilians were purposely targetted, was this to spread terror and if so why not a bigger death toll?
    It was a balancing act. Too much blood on the streets and their own support was compromised, too little and they had no reason to exist. The IRA fell off the bike occasionally, but their local supporters seem to be pretty forgiving over dead Prods (Was MMcG as angry over Kingsmills as he was over Bloody Sunday? He hasn’t said so!). Enniskillen was a moment when the IRA spilled off, and 9/11 was when they realised that the wheels had come off.

  • willowfield

    What Reader said.

    PS, Pancho, the correct spelling is “targeted” .

  • Pancho’s Horse

    If they were full of blood lust and their supporters were as bad, then surely the more Prods that were wiped out the better. But this was not the case.The collateral killing of civilians was the exception not the rule.If the DFM has not condemned every incident, that doesn’t mean he supports it.And why pick Kingsmills – that was not an IRA operation, was it? THe Unionist/British community chose to see it as a sectarian campaign. If an RUC man was killed, they said that a Protestant had been killed by the ‘Roman Catholic’ IRA, whereas from an IRA point of view it was the killing of a member of the British Crown Forces. The fact that they despised RC RUC/UDR men even more proved that religion didn’t enter into it.

  • Pancho’s Horse

    Willowfield, dial …. dialled, finish in a consonant then double it before ‘ed’ But if you can show otherwise, I,ulike you, am open to correction.

  • Pancho’s Horse

    …… and I meant ‘unlike you’ and I know jump …. jumpped?

  • Turgon

    Pancho’s Horse,
    Do not worry willowfield has corrected my use of colons and semicolons before now. He has an annoying tendency to be correct as well, both grammatically and politically in my view; though I accept that you and I may disagree regarding the latter.

  • Pancho’s Horse

    Ah Turgon, rising time again! Could it be that the US English is different from English English for I have seen ‘targetted’ in US literature? And if he was correct politically, it certainly would annoy me as well.

  • Turgon

    Pancho’s Horse,
    Actually my spelling is pretty poor but Firefox has a handy English English spell checker.

  • Harry Flashman

    [b]Pancho’s Horse[/b]

    *why pick Kingsmills – that was not an IRA operation,*

    That’s a little joke right? I mean you don’t actually believe a completely new organisation called the South Armagh Resistance Army (or whatever it was called) just suddenly emerged in January 1976, carried out one operation and then disappeared again, never to be heard from again?

    Or do you?

    Kool-Aid anyone?

    [b]Rory[/b]

    *In any case the legality or otherwise of [Bloody Friday] hardly concerned the IRA since they did not recognise the legality of the regime wherein the action was perpetrated.*

    On the contrary whether the IRA recognised British rule over the Six Counties or not does not detract from the fact that the IRA believed themselves to be the legitimate army of Ireland and by bombing an Irish city and slaughtering Irish civilians they committed, on their own terms, an abominable war crime.

    You rightly point out that Irish Republicans accept that being killed on active service on British soil by British soldiers is simply a legitimate consequence of war, so why does Adams, an Irish Republican, bang on about Gibraltar and not demand instead a full inquiry into atrocities committed against Irish civilians which were carried out by the forces of the Irish Republic?

  • RepublicanStones

    ‘That’s a little joke right? I mean you don’t actually believe a completely new organisation called the South Armagh Resistance Army (or whatever it was called) just suddenly emerged in January 1976, carried out one operation and then disappeared again, never to be heard from again?’

    Nobody can be sure….it is interesting however that one survivor of the Kingsmill atrocity reported that the leader of the gang spoke with an English accent, and coincidently, so did the leader of the miami showband atrocity. But these obviously are not linked, as anything that can be blamed on republicans was obviously republicans. Whats your mans name…..oh yeah, Brig General Frank Kitson, what a guy !!!!

  • willowfield

    Pancho

    If they were full of blood lust and their supporters were as bad, then surely the more Prods that were wiped out the better. But this was not the case.The collateral killing of civilians was the exception not the rule.If the DFM has not condemned every incident, that doesn’t mean he supports it.

    Didn’t you read what Reader said?

  • Prince Eoghan

    Harry

    >>so why does Adams, an Irish Republican, bang on about Gibraltar< >demand instead a full inquiry into atrocities committed against Irish civilians which were carried out by the forces of the Irish Republic?<

  • Democratic

    “3 highly motivated professional volunteers were executed in cold blood”

    You make them sound like f*cking sales reps or something – even though professional volunteers is an obvious oxymoron…those people were ice-cool assasins – no other term is suitable – perhaps it was bitter irony that they met their end from people cut from the same cloth…

    Really the level of provo-fanboyism is reaching new heights on this board over the last couple of weeks – Is it a new generation or just some folk showing their true colours I wonder…..

  • Prince Eoghan

    Willow

    Most of the seriously pedantic, and to be honest boring constitutional arguments you trot out at least have some smidgeon of merit.

    However, how do you or reader, or any other with a ‘gift’ manage to come to the conclusion that the IRA were just drip feeding the deaths of Prods. This is something that we used to get trotted out along with claims of genocide and ethnic cleansing. As someone whose intentions are to be taken as a serious commentator, why do you persist with such obvious utter bullshit?

    Again the hypocrisy over the supposed silence or lack of condemnation from Republican leaders over certain atrocities. Could you please provide a general analysis of Unionist opinion, never mind the leaders that still persists today, of say the events on bloody sunday? In my view they are disgraceful, and symptomatic of denial or worse a case of schadenfreude. Of course we are used to unionist leaders condemning atrocities from Unionist death squads in general aren’t we? Frig me they don’t even condemn when they are caught in full regalia, armed in a ‘show of strength’ A la Robinson in North belfast last year.

    Sorry Harry! All is forgiven, your hypocrisy pales into insignificance compared to these guys.

  • Prince Eoghan

    >>professional volunteers is an obvious oxymoron< >Is it a new generation or just some folk showing their true colours I wonder…..<

  • Democratic

    Being a professional means making a living from an activity Prince – i.e getting paid for your trouble – why don’t you look up volunteer in your online dictionary.
    Yeah Price my personal thoughts on IRA “Highly motivated Professional Volunteers” – or cold blooded murderers as they are known where I’m from are simple – The British Army or any one else simply couldn’t slot enough of the b@stards…as for your feeling on my motives – as a self confessed IRA groupie I couldn’t give a proverbial airbourne copulation – and theres something else you can look up…

  • Prince Eoghan

    their profession I believe was fighting against British imperialism, of which I believe they were very good at it. Hence me citing their professionalism in that context, would it help if I mentioned that these volunteers, for again that is what they were, were allocated an allowance. What a one dimensional world you must live in.

    Apart from that right back at ye!

    Perhaps a wee taste of ‘British justice’ is needed to come a bit closer to home before the intellectual pygmies realise the seriousness of state murder. It isn’t only fenians/Taigs they kill you know!

  • Steve niave

    I presume the British PM knowing of a general policy, without needing to know the individual details of each opperation is not any different to the situation faced by someone on the army council of the IRA. This “distance” makes both denials and appologies easier.

    The only difference I can see however, is that no one has denied being the British PM, whilst some have difficulty accepting membership of the “army” let alone its council.

  • Democratic

    One dimensional world eh Prince – your ilk are always could for laugh – I’m sure you actually typed that without any hint of irony.
    As for the Provies and their pocket money – well thanks for that – I must say I didn’t know – I wonder did it come directly from big Gerry’s account….

  • Prince Eoghan

    Apart from bitching democratic, have you anything to offer? Not even a comment on your own country acting outside the law on many and varied occasions. C’mon some of this must strike a chord. Or are you and your ilk always to be kept happy with the blood of a few Taigs? Fuck accountability!

  • Democratic

    Certainly Prince perhaps my irritation was getting the better of me then – further conversation on that level would have been fruitless,
    I am happy for any British Soldier, political figure or plain citizen to face justice for spilling the blood of any innocent Catholic – Bloody Sunday being an example you favour which I would have absolutely no problem with seeing jail sentences handed down. In the case of summary justice on those engaged in terrorist activity against my community – to be honest I find it extremely hard to sympathise…and that’s putting it mildly – even though deep down I do realise that such actions are illegal.

  • willowfield

    Prince

    Fuck sake harry, 3 highly motivated professional volunteers were executed in cold blood. As good a reason as any to be sore.

    But Provos regularly murdered people in cold blood, so is it not hypocritical of Adams to be “sore” when they get a taste of their own medicine?

    However, how do you or reader, or any other with a ‘gift’ manage to come to the conclusion that the IRA were just drip feeding the deaths of Prods. This is something that we used to get trotted out along with claims of genocide and ethnic cleansing. As someone whose intentions are to be taken as a serious commentator, why do you persist with such obvious utter bullshit?

    I was asked an opinion about Bloody Friday, and gave it. It seems clear to me that, by leaving bombs in various public places, such as bus stations and shopping streets, the Provos were seeking to murder civilians. More generally, there are many other occasions when civilians were murdered by the Provos – and not as “collateral”, but deliberately. I don’t, therefore, see it as “utter bullshit” that the Provos deliberately targeted civilians: quite the opposite, in fact.

    Again the hypocrisy over the supposed silence or lack of condemnation from Republican leaders over certain atrocities. Could you please provide a general analysis of Unionist opinion, never mind the leaders that still persists today, of say the events on bloody sunday?

    I’d say most unionists acknowledge that the killings on Bloody Sunday were unjustified. I would take issue with anyone – unionist or otherwise – who thought otherwise, just as I take issue with people such as you who glorify and champion murders by PIRA and other terrorist death squads, who consider those who engaged in such murderous activities as “fine men”, and who consider that those who sought to prevent such outrages should “rot in hell”. Shame on you.

    their profession I believe was fighting against British imperialism, of which I believe they were very good at it.

    In what way were they fighting against “British imperialism”? You sound like one of those SWP guys with the black donkey jacket that used to waste their lives hanging around university campuses.

  • “always to be kept happy with the blood of a few Taigs?”

    No need to make this sectarian. I’ll shed no tears over the blood of a few murderers either way.

    And were these people paid and therefore professional killers, or volunteer killers? They can’t be both.

  • Prince Eoghan

    That is the beauty of this medium democratic, we can talk without ripping each others throats out.

    >>n the case of summary justice on those engaged in terrorist activity against my community< >to be honest I find it extremely hard to sympathise…and that’s putting it mildly – even though deep down I do realise that such actions are illegal.<

  • Harry Flashman

    Leave out the “loyal Britisher” claptrap Eoghan and we can have a civilised debate.

    I accept there may well have been a degree of illegality in the shootings in Gibraltar but Gerry Adams as a true Irish Republican certainly wouldn’t see it that way. He believes they were soldiers of the Irish Republic who were taking the war to the British on their own turf so it ill behoves him now to claim that the killings were unjustified, in his own terms they weren’t, they were simply an act of war. His terms not mine.

    If British people want some form of inquiry into what happened then that is their right, Irish Republicans on the other hand as Rory rightly points out should simply accept it as an act of war, fair and square.

    Bloody Friday however was not an act of war, not even in the terms of Irish Republicans, heck especially not in Irish Republican terms. Soldiers of the Irish Republic blew up bombs in an Irish town and killed Irish civilians, now that to an Irish Republican should be an offence that shrieks to the very heavens for justice yet curiously Adams and other Irish Republicans aren’t that fazed by it and instead concentrate on events which by their own admission were simply legitimate acts of war by the British.

    It’s as if the RAF bombed Manchester on the orders of Churchill during the Second World War but after the war the Tories demanded an inquiry into the Germans shooting down British planes over Germany but giving a shrug and a hey ho about their own bombing of their own city (such is the length of absurdity I have to go to to draw an analogy with Adams’ position).

  • Prince Eoghan

    Willow

    >>I don’t, therefore, see it as “utter bullshit” that the Provos deliberately targeted civilians: quite the opposite, in fact.< >I’d say most unionists acknowledge that the killings on Bloody Sunday were unjustified.< >No need to make this sectarian. I’ll shed no tears over the blood of a few murderers either way.< >And were these people paid and therefore professional killers, or volunteer killers? They can’t be both.<

  • Prince Eoghan

    Harry

    >>Leave out the “loyal Britisher” claptrap Eoghan and we can have a civilised debate.< >I accept there may well have been a degree of illegality in the shootings in Gibraltar<

  • willowfield

    Prince

    The message from Reader that you agreed with, was that the IRA had some kind of strategy of drip-feeding prod deaths. I note your subtle but highly important change of emphasis above. Of course there were occasions that the IRA targeted civilians, that aside Is Readers contention, that you agreed with not utter bullshit?

    I’m not sure that I read Reader’s post as you did. I inferred from it that he was saying that PIRA was quite content to target civilians, but did so in the knowledge that such murders could not be the raison d’etre of the campaign if a degree of support were to be maintained among its ethnic base. I don’t see such an assessment as “bullshit”: the PIRA targeted civilians throughout its campaign – moreso in the earlier period, which backs up Reader’s contentions that they learned from the reaction to these outrages to keep them to a minimum, and to seek where possible to target those civilians for whom they could concoct some sort of tortured “justification” (e.g. cleaners in police stations, prison officers, retired policemen, alleged drug dealers, people who had had “dissed” senior Provos, etc.). Of course, PIRA openly targeted policemen and women, who were civilians, even though they classified them otherwise.

    I note you chose not to respond to my point about Adams’ hypocrisy in feeling “sore” about the Army killing “in cold blood”, while supporting the murder of thousands of others in cold blood by the Provos.

  • Prince Eoghan

    Willow

    Adams feeling sore is my take, an opinion. As such I cannot defend any apparent hypocrisy, as Adams didn’t say it.

    Readers contention regarding Prods, which you cited twice seemed pretty clear. However in mitigation these may well have been used in response to pancho, and not intending to make the whole of his comments the sum of your argument. No need to get into one of those long boring drawn out pedantic episodes.

  • willowfield

    Adams feeling sore is my take, an opinion. As such I cannot defend any apparent hypocrisy, as Adams didn’t say it.

    But your “take” on Adams is that he is a hypocrite: yes?

  • Prince Eoghan

    Willow

    Adams is giving his opinion on the Gib 3 executions. As far as I know he has given opinions on a wide range of murders, atrocities, and issues. until I know what he has commented on/not commented on, who can say regarding your central theme.

    >>But your “take” on Adams is that he is a hypocrite: yes?<

  • Harry Flashman

    *Why should Republicans constantly be forced to play by your rules*

    As I thought I made rather obvious from my posts I am not forcing Republicans to play by my rules, on the contrary I am quoting their own rules.

    They believed themselves to be the sole legitimate government and army of Ireland, therefore by their own rules what they did on Bloody Friday was an atrocity against their own people, what occurred in Gib was a legitimate act of war. You don’t seriously equate the morality of what happened on Bloody Friday with what happened in Gibraltar do you? I for one have never had any hesitation in calling what happened on Bloody Sunday cold blooded murder but I accept that what happened to the Paras at Warrenpoint whilst technically murder was nowhere near the same morally as what happened in Derry.

    This discussion is not about my opinions but about those of Gerry Adams, it is therefore perfectly apposite to point out his absolute hypocrisy in whining about killings carried out by foreign soldiers in a foreign country whilst not calling for some form of redress for the grievance committed by his own forces against his own people in an event about which he certainly had more than a slight prior knowledge.

    Surely that’s not to difficult for you to understand.

  • Prince Eoghan

    Harry

    I understand what you are saying perfectly well, perhaps you are too caught up in your own point to see what I was pointing out. Why should Republicans always be the ones to confront and answer difficult questions, which undoubtedly bloody Friday would be. When someone like you only see’s a ‘degree of illegality’ whilst anyone else sees cold blooded murder, execution style. Retreating to comparisons is really not the issue.

    >>to point out his absolute hypocrisy in whining about killings carried out by foreign soldiers in a foreign country< >whilst not calling for some form of redress for the grievance committed by his own forces against his own people in an event about which he certainly had more than a slight prior knowledge.<

  • Harry Flashman

    *Are you seriously saying that Gerry Adams was involved here? Please elaborate.*

    You’re taking the piss here aren’t you? Gerry Adams was in command of Ballymurphy IRA in July 1972, he was, I think, 2IC for the whole of Belfast, you don’t think he might have had just a smidgen of prior knowledge about the biggest bombing operation carried out by the IRA in Belfast at that time, when 26 bombs were made, sent out and detonated throughout Belfast in one afternoon.

    D’ya think he never got the memo?

    *Why should Republicans always be the ones to confront and answer difficult questions*

    They shouldn’t be, but it seems that Republicans are inherently incapable of self examination. Whereas the British operation in Gibraltar (which was not cold blooded murder, Eoghan, any more than the ambush at Warrenpoint was, the Provies were on active service and got whacked, get over it) has been subject to countless examinations by British politicians, lawyers, journalists, human rights activists, tv documentaries and policemen.

    It would be nice to see the same level of self investigation by Irish Republicans of their own nasty underside.

  • Prince Eoghan

    Harry

    >>has been subject to countless examinations by British politicians, lawyers, journalists, human rights activists, tv documentaries and policemen.< >the British operation in Gibraltar (which was not cold blooded murder, Eoghan, any more than the ambush at Warrenpoint was, the Provies were on active service and got whacked, get over it)< >PE – *Why should Republicans always be the ones to confront and answer difficult questions*

    Harry – They shouldn’t be, but it seems that Republicans are inherently incapable of self examination.<

  • Harry Flashman

    *I am surprised a loyal British subject like yourself*

    I’m sorry to see you’ve gone back to your old ways, let’s stop debating each other, eh? You seem incapable of laying off the snide personal digs at me. It’s a pity, I used to enjoy having a knockabout with you.

  • Prince Eoghan

    Apologies for upsetting you harry, I did promise that I would only think it. I’m afraid that your attempts at whitewashing the brits(by no means the first time) made me forget my promise.

    *shrugs*

    I really am not meaning to get on your wick, believe it or not.