O’Loan calls Stormont House Agreement ” an insult” as Labour promises a Pat Finucane inquiry

Amnesty International are not alone in finding the resources allocated in the Stormont house Agreement inadequate for dealing with the past. At a meeting of RightsWatch  in Westminster last night,  the first Police Ombudsman  Baroness Nuala O’Loan  was scathing, describing the allocation of £150 million over 5 years to deal with all the issues of the past, as “a joke and an insult to the people of Northern Ireland.” The Historical Investigations Unit was “totally inadequate”.  She also said Attorney General  John Larkin  had got it “ profoundly wrong” to believe that  little evidence  remained and that  police investigations should cease in favour of a de facto amnesty. “I believe that many cases would have been solved if the will had been there.”

She took the broad view of collusion, meaning not only direct involvement but turning a blind eye, encouraging illegal acts and conducting sham investigations.  The argument was: “We needed to infiltrate organisations to get informants and then protect the informants.  Informants who confessed were not prosecuted. Suspects had one long sham interview and then released.  Interviewers did not complete records.  Collusion between paramilitaries and the State operated through all paramilitary organisations.”

I asked the Sinn Fein MP Pat Doherty if it would help if former IRA members came forward to give evidence of collusion. He welcomed the idea if appropriate arrangements could be made for the security forces to come forward.  Lady O’Loan retorted  that it was safe to say that knowing it wouldn’t happen” Mr Doherty replied : “If the former IRA were given immunity they would not be found wanting”.  And so we go round in circles.

The meeting was called to review latest moves in the long campaign for a public inquiry into the murder of solicitor Pat Finucane in 1989. It was attended  by his widow  Geraldine  and son John who was 8 years old when his father was murdered.   MI5 are believed to be a major obstacle to holding a public inquiry.  Mark Durkan MP told how when he asked Tony Blair at Weston Park why the delay in holding a PI the PM grimaced and rolled his eyes –  twice.  Jane Winter the former director of Rights Watch attended the  Downing St  meeting with Mrs Finucane  when  David Cameron told them he was  setting up the de Silva  review not a PI. She repeated the account she gave to the Detail   When challenged Mr Cameron  said, “ Look, the last administration couldn’t deliver an inquiry in your husband’s case  and neither can we. Because there are people all around this place, [10 Downing Street], who won’t let it happen.” Ms Winter said that as the Prime Minister made the admission he raised a finger and made a circular motion in the air”

A judicial review of the decision not to hold a PI is due in May.

Rights Watch said that earlier in the day the Labour shadow secretary of state Ivan Lewis  had given “ a cast iron guarantee”  that Labour in government would set up a PI. This was greeted with some scepticism by the SDLP MPs and the Sinn Fein MP present. Baroness Helena Kennedy ( a Labour peer) said Labour  was often beguiled by the secret world and authoritarian when in government.  Lawyers present said that a PI into Finucane wouldn’t be anything like as lengthy of the Bloody Sunday inquiry. The issues had been scoped by de Silva and an inquiry would not run on endlessly.

 

, , , , , , ,

  • Tacapall

    ” Because there are people all around this place, [10 Downing Street], who won’t let it happen”

    So there really is a shadow government pulling the strings of the governments that are elected to Westminster.

    Seeing as the weapon that was used to murder Patrick Finucane was one of a number of weapons handed back to the UDA after being in police custody, the other from the same batch being used in the murder of seven people, why was those other 7 innocent victims not given the same access to the highest levels of government, why no public inquiry for them and why no charges against police officers who can be said were directly responsible for the murders of 8 people.

  • Newton Emerson
  • Joe_Hoggs

    Some victims of the troubles are told that a line will have to be drawn under the past and they will have to move on from it. This is to aid the peace process and due to the lack of financial resources there are available to conduct proper investigations into the past that are likely to secure meaningful convictions and prison sentences. However, on the other hand there are calls for special enquiries into the Pat Finucane case and there was the millions spent investigating Bloody Sunday which was very profitable for all lawyers concerned.

    If a line is to be drawn under the past then it has to be the same for all victims and if there are to be special investigations then it has to be done across the board.

  • Joe_Hoggs

    Thanks Newton, is it simply being withdrawn as it was only hearsay?

  • Newton Emerson

    I don’t know.

  • chrisjones2

    …or made up?

  • Sergiogiorgio

    Financial realities, political realities and lastly security realities. We may not like it, but we need to take a decision and move on.

  • Joe_Hoggs

    Many people on the Unionist side would also feel that investigations into their loved one’s deaths were also whitewashes such as Kingsmill, Enniskillen and La Mon, not to mention innumerable border killings.

    Your last point is valid, however there are people in power in NI today with very serious questions to answer who will not face any penalties and as I mentioned above the perpetrators of those atrocities have also faced no penalties.

  • Brian Walker

    .
    Newton, Thank you for your economical contribution! Because the Cameron quote was withdrawn doesn’t necessarily imply it wasn’t made, only that it wasn’t being pursued as part of the action. At any rate it was repeated
    last night by the original source of the quote Jan Winter the former director of RightsWatch who was present in No 10 with Mrs Finucane.

    Also at the meeting last night Rights Watch director Yasmine Ahmed referred to the disclosure at the same JR hearing that the cabinet secretary Sir Jeremy
    Heywood asked in an email in correspondence already disclosed to the parties:”Does the prime minister seriously think that it’s right to renege on a
    previous government’s clear commitment to hold a full judicial inquiry?

    “This was a dark moment in the country’s history – far
    worse than anything that was alleged in Iraq/Afghanistan. “I cannot really think of any argument to defend not having a public inquiry. What am I missing?”

    A reply email from Simon King a private secretary to the PM stated that the prime minister “shares
    the view this is an awful case, and as bad as it gets, and far worse than any post 9/11 allegation”, .

    All this seems entIrely credible to me.

  • MainlandUlsterman

    I agree – but could we have that reassurance without the need for a massive, long public inquiry? If we do it for Finucane, to be fair we’ll have to do it for other victims, of whom there are 3,500 or so. It’s just not practicable. Also, Da Silva has already provided a lot of detail on the Finucane murder.

    Obviously all murders are wrong and I think we have to ask why only murders with a question of state actor involvement are worthy of public inquiries, given SF’s role in the government of Northern Ireland (and possibly in the Republic). I think there is a strong public interest in examining the operations of the Republican Movement during the Troubles (including those of supporters and consiglieri). We have a lot of unanswered questions and these involve many, many, many more Troubles murders than the PFC seems to be interested in. A public inquiry could go into:
    – the IRA decision to launch its “armed struggle” – who was involved, who knew, what their objectives were, how were bombings and murders sanctioned
    – how did the IRA draw up its murder target lists, who helped, who knew about these
    – connections between the IRA and SF – trace in detail the relationship and operation of the two organisations as a ‘movement’, to what extent were they co-ordinating political and paramilitary offensives, who was involved, who in SF was privy to detail of terrorist hitlists
    – torture by the Republican Movement – who was involved, what did SF know, who else worked with Danny Morrison on interrogations, beatings etc
    – trace the history of SF and IRA involvement in punishment beatings, who gave the orders, who knew, who helped
    – investigate political assassinations of Republican opponents, who gave the orders, who knew, who helped
    – investigate Republican murders of prison officers – how was the policy devised, who was involved, who know
    – helping known terrorists evade justice – who was involved in hiding them, where, for how long, who knew etc
    – connections between the Republican Movement and the elements of the Irish government
    – connections between the Republican Movement and rogue Garda officers
    – the Republican Movement’s involvement in threatening trial witnesses, perverting the course of justice
    We could go on …
    There is no shortage of material to explore on the history of this “political party” which is now holding public office and trying to look respectable. Imagine if this were the Labour Party and someone was found to have been involved in even one piece of terrorism – the level of scandal and inquiry there would be from all sides. Yet a party openly kills 2,000 people …

    That’s going to be a whole lot of inquiries, or one immense one.

    To be honest, while we want answers on all this and more, I’m not sure public inquiries are the practical way. But if the PFC are pressing for this approach as they seem to be, let’s hear them out, unless they want inquiries only into murders of Republicans or those with a state angle. That would obviously be unfair and I assume they aren’t asking for that kind of partisan approach, it would be obviously wrong. It would be like having a massive inquiry into the death of a Mafia consiglieri while not bothering to investigate the Mafia.

  • chrisjones2

    Because the Cameron quote was withdrawn doesn’t necessarily imply it wasn’t made, only that it wasn’t being pursued as part of the action. At any rate it was repeated
    last night by the original source of the quote Jan Winter the former director of RightsWatch who was present in No 10 with Mrs Finucane.

    So why not peruse it then?

  • MainlandUlsterman

    Exactly. We need to do this fairly and not privilege certain victims.

    The Republican Movement is obviously keen to do this piecemeal as a kind of smokescreen for their own appalling Troubles atrocities. They know how the news and current affairs agenda works – it loves individual examples and it’s not so great at big patterns. By making as much as they can of the relatively small number of murders with allegations state involvement at some level, they can create the impression these incidents were somehow typical of the Troubles. But even at the outskirts of their wildest numbers on collusion-murders, we’d be looking at a phenomenon accounting for around a tenth of the numbers killed by the Republican Movement itself.

    If we follow their lead and humour them on this, they have won – because this isn’t really about justice for Republicans, it’s about the news agenda, heart and minds. Don’t let the main perpetrators of Troubles death call the tune on this. They use mainstream journalists’ and commentators’ good nature and genuine interest in justice to do their work for them. Be aware when you’re being played.

    I’m not saying to drop interest in the Finucane murder, but to treat it on a level with other Troubles murders. There is an extra public interest in murders where state actors went rogue as this needs to be fully corrected for the future. But there is also a strong public interest in investigating the links of political parties to serious organised crime and terrorism. I’m not seeing the PFC or some of the commentators getting hot under the collar here standing up for the public interest quite so much there. Partisan pursuit of justice is no justice at all.

  • chrisjones2

    A mere £150m …what an insult. That wont keep the legal profession in mojitos for 5 years. What a shame then the SDLP (her husband’s party) endorsed it.

    Dame Nuala “took the broad view of collusion, meaning not only direct involvement but turning a blind eye, encouraging illegal acts and conducting sham investigations”

    and

    “.Collusion between paramilitaries and the State operated through all paramilitary organisations.”

    I agree with that but can she tell us with such clear evidence as Police Ombudsman what she did about it, how many cops she had prosecuted and how many of the cases she dealt with involved the management of republican touts rather than Prods?

    Speaking personally I would like to see all those who committed crimes appear before the courts but that will never happen as so many have OTR letters, pardons, under the counter promises and political positions to protect.

    And then Mr Doherty replied : “If the former IRA were given immunity they would not be found wanting”. Anyone told Gerry?

  • Tacapall

    “how many serving or retired police officers faced a court”

    Thats the point the families of those 8 victims want to know, like who were these police officers who supplied the weapons that were later used to murder 8 innocent people, surely the public should be entitled to know their names as im sure their conduct would have a bearing on other cases they were involved in, were they reprimanded, did they receive Royal Pardons. The law is clear, those who supply weapons to others to use are just as guilty as those who pull the triggers.

  • Tacapall

    Anyone told Gerry what ?

  • MainlandUlsterman

    Yes, McGuinness at the Saville Inquiry should stand as a monument to what the Republican Movement means when it says it will co-operate with a truth-finding process. A total joke. As ever, one rule for the “made men” of the Republican Movement and another for everyone else.

  • MainlandUlsterman

    what about everyone else?

  • Tacapall

    Obviously that one rule for one and another rule for another would also include all those RUC officers who refused to co-operate with Mrs O Loan and indeed the various other independent inquiries into numerous murders where evidence has emerged of RUC special branch involvement.

  • MainlandUlsterman

    yes that’s right, they should co-operate in a full and fair truth recovery process. But not if it’s just limited to the cops, that would be bizarre, wouldn’t it?

  • Tacapall

    Why would it be bizarre ? Were they not handsomely paid for their service of supposedly upholding the law ?

  • MainlandUlsterman

    you misunderstand, I’m saying they *should* co-operate – and so should everyone else involved in Troubles murders. You agree surely?

  • Joe_Hoggs

    I don’t think any reasonable person would disagree with your assertion Morph. My issue is this, we’re told there is a limited monetary package to deal with all unsolved murders (troubles related) of the past from which the Finucance case would only be entitled to nominal amount as would all others. Do we stick with this nominal amount across the board or should there be “special cases” which is being proposed in this article where there is again unlimited budget and resources being sought? I loathe equating a human life and their memory to money, however this is the cold reality we’re being granted by the powers that be.

    I also believe that Sinn Fein when being questioned on their own sordid past have said on innumerable occasions that as a society we should be looking and moving forward rather than raking up the hurts of the past – so which is it to be?

  • Dec

    ‘who else worked with Danny Morrison on interrogations’

    Forgetting something, aren’t we?

    http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/danny-morrisons-conviction-quashed-28451529.html

  • MainlandUlsterman

    that he and his henchman will have to tell us all about what they did. I don’t think he wants to do that.

  • Tacapall

    “what about everyone else?”

    Yeah okay, everyone in Ireland England Wales, Scotland and I suppose around the world would also I would imagine want to know why police officers who supplied guns to terrorists that were later used in 8 murders have not been charged with any offense.

  • Tacapall

    Totally agree.

  • Joe_Hoggs

    A a Unionist I would like to know what Maguinness, the deputy leader of my country (or co-equal however one looks at it) did as the second in command of the IRA in Londonderry, what were his order, how many attacks did he carry out and who is now dead due to his actions both direct and as the result of his orders?

  • Dec

    And has there ever been a single thread on this site about Pat Finucane where you haven’t turned up to smear him?

  • MainlandUlsterman

    haha! Yes, I’m sure the former IRA man never took part in or witnessed so much as the harming of a wasp 😉

  • Joe_Hoggs

    Hearsay was never going to be effective, if the Prime Minister had in fact said this then I’m certain it would have been pursued.

  • Tacapall

    Everybody or just the British government because I have a wee hunch the British already know his past activities it was after all Adams who helped shoehorn Freddie Scap into his role as agent provocateur within the IRA.

  • MainlandUlsterman

    Funny 🙂 I meant everyone who was murdered in the Troubles. Given that you’re only talking about 8 victims, or 0.2 per cent of them. So what about everyone else?

  • MainlandUlsterman

    Adams is an informer / double agent, is that your theory? I hope so, that would be class.

  • Tacapall

    MU your starting to insult again. What about those 120 victims from the RUC/UDR/UVFGlenanne gang or the almost 2 dozen of the Mount Vernon RUC/UVF are they nothing to do with the RUC ?

  • Tacapall

    Maguinness as in Ken Maguinness or McGuinness as in Martin McGuinness ?

  • Tacapall

    It would be class !!! If the person who you have vilified for so long and accused of being, well a mass murder, just happened to be an RUC agent, that would be class for you ? And would all those murders committed under his direction would they all just be reduced to misdemeanours in your eyes.

  • Joe_Hoggs

    The one that’s the current DFM, do you feel these are relevant questions that McGuinness should have to answer or does this not keep in line with the narrative?

  • Joe_Hoggs

    Adams is many things but an informer he is not.

  • Tacapall

    Oh for a start Joe you need to be exactly sure who you are talking about and why just the Deputy First Minister, could we not also include the First Minister who was the founding member of the Third Force, a group who along with the UDA and UVF imported hundreds of weapons into this country, the only group among the three who still have their share of those hundreds of weapons and some of those weapons were used to murder innocent people.

  • Brian Walker

    chrisjones
    I can’t know why they didn’t pursue ( sic) it but I’d guess because it isn’t deemed to be crucial to the action – and too confrontational perhaps? However I don’t see why Jane Winter should lie about what was said.and I don’t think for a moment that she did. It does add to the anecdotal evidence of MI5 obstruction. The key argument to the court seems to be that the government reneged on repeated promises to hold a PI and haven’t satisfactorily explained why.

  • Tacapall

    “I’m at a lose to understand how you can have evidence that police offices were involved in a criminal conspiracy to supply weapons in a murder case yet you are unable to say who these people are”

    http://www.thedetail.tv/issues/60/sean-grahams-bookmakers/now-betting-shop-atrocity-failings-come-to-light

    “In 2003 the Irish News revealed how one of the weapons used in the murder had been in the possession of RUC Special Branch three years before the attack but that police had handed the gun back to the UDA.

    Police procedures meant the weapon should have been bugged and a plan put in place to prevent it being used in further attacks.This was never done.The Browning pistol was subsequently used in a gun attack on the Devenish Bar in west Belfast in December 1991 in which Catholic civil servant Aidan Wallace was shot dead dead and an eight year-old boy was blinded in one eye after he was shot in the face by gunmen.Six weeks later the weapon was used in the Ormeau Road attack.

    Special Branch later claimed it had deactivated the weapon before handing it back to UDA Quartermaster Billy Stobie in November 1989”

    It was in fact three weapons given back to William Stobie, one of the others was later used to murder Patrick Finucane all detailed in the De Silva report if you bothered to read.

  • Joe_Hoggs

    Happy for Robinson to be included, no issues at all.

  • Dec

    You probably want to be careful about throwing around specific and unfounded allegations on the internet.

  • chrisjones2

    …………….that the IRA wont be found wanting in admitting membership and what they did

    …….oh look …..its a trampolining dog again

  • MainlandUlsterman

    Well as someone who qualified as a lawyer, I am careful 🙂
    So you’re convinced former IRA Army Council member Danny Morrison was never involved in an interrogation of anyone, in all his years with the organisation? That would be pretty odd, wouldn’t it?

  • chrisjones2

    Naw…looks like only SF supporters got pardons but then the NIO lost the files

  • chrisjones2

    So its up to 120 ? As inflation goes down Glenanne inflation goes up

  • MainlandUlsterman

    I don’t ‘turn up’ I’m a regular contributor to Slugger; and I haven’t smeared him, that would suggest I had said something that was untrue. What exactly have I said about him that was untrue?

  • MainlandUlsterman

    you may misunderstand what an RUC agent is – that would be someone working for the RUC within the IRA, to bring about an end to the IRA campaign. If that’s what happened, class, because it would mean the IRA really did get finished by the police, which would be great, if it were true. Unfortunately it probably isn’t.

    And still with the misdemeanours. Do you want to read my earlier post again, perhaps? You seem to have ignored what I said and stuck with the misinterpretation I corrected.

  • Tacapall

    “Edward Barnard’s 13-year brother Patrick was one of an estimated 120 people killed by the UVF’s Glenanne Gang in the 1970s”

    http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/brother-of-boy-killed-by-uvfs-glenanne-gang-to-launch-legal-challenge-30955313.html

    Even an idiot could just Google the number

  • Tacapall

    And you know this because you seen the files before they were lost ?

  • Tacapall

    I understand exactly what an agent is especially an agent provocateur who was allowed to carry out over 60 murders just like those Mount Vernon agent provocateurs over 20 odd murders thats before we get to the many Sean Browns and Loughinislands. That misinterpretation, its a bit like your interpretation of collusion, its ambiguous and nothing more than a carefully constructed formulation of positive connotations to explain the negative aspects of a moral wrong. What puzzles me MU about your good self – In your eyes were there any good IRA men or can you without a second thought label them all as people who joined the IRA simply to kill ?

  • Tacapall

    Like McDonald and Mick your so last week.

  • MainlandUlsterman

    I don’t really believe in good and bad people, but there are good and bad actions, and good and bad moral positions to take. Being in the IRA – or supporting it – isn’t much of a moral grey area, it’s surely straightforwardly bad. I can’t think of any scenario in which joining an ultra-nationalist death squad would be ‘good’ or even on the outskirts of good … perhaps you can enlighten me.

    But people can have bad episodes in their lives but change. I wouldn’t write off anyone’s chances of living a better life, preferably behind bars. Even some Nazi camp guards managed to move on and lead later lives in which they did no further damage to other people; and they may have had blameless previous lives. But if you ask me what I think of their time as a camp guard, I don’t think there’s any need to spare their blushes. And if in their later lives they tried to say the Jews and Slavs were asking for it, or ‘Befehl its Befehl’ or whatever, I would treat that with contempt; and I would not regard them as just leading a quiet, blameless life. There is a duty, I think, on people who have done such things not just to stop, but to *try* to make atonement for it. They will never make things right, but if they don’t try, I think a big part of those wrongs they committed remains attached to them.

    Of course, even while working in the death camp, they might also have been a good husband and father. People are complex things and can compartmentalise love and cruelty remarkably well. But in taking a view on someone’s moral worth, I think most of us would say this person worked happily in a death camp, at the end of the day. There is a limit to how much of a ‘nice guy’ you really are if your day job involves murdering people. Breaking Bad’s Walter White, anyone? Even Mike Ermintraut had a soft side; but he was a hit-man. Hard to write that off as insignificant.

  • chrisjones2

    …so is the dog ….its purpose has passed

    Can you imagine Gerry’s Dog down the pound talking to the other dogs who have been rounded up.

    “Gerry who? Naw…not me…I was never in the Adams family “

  • chrisjones2

    GIven the recent case where the trial of police officers was abandoned because – to put it kindly – they seemed to have been fitted up why would they co-operate? ……

  • chrisjones2

    and you did it very well …but that doesn’t make it true

  • chrisjones2

    Well I have never heard it alleged that a Loyalist got one but I am open to being shown otherwise. As they were being negotiated by the Two Gerry’s I would suspect who got them

    On the other hand as Gerry K never knew who the letters were for or what they were about perhaps he inadvertently passed them to Finucane’s killers, for example.

    Then of course there were the Agents working inside PIRA who may have got them for services rendered to the British State

    Then what about the Irish state. No-one here ever seems to mention them in all this. What about all their touts and their links into crimes in de Nurth

  • tmitch57

    Actually its Ken Maginnis.

  • Tacapall

    “Being in the IRA – or supporting it – isn’t much of a moral grey area, it’s surely straightforwardly bad. I can’t think of any scenario in which joining an ultra-nationalist death squad would be ‘good’ or even on the outskirts of good …”

    Freddie Scap was a British agent in the IRA so obviously you are now changing your opinion on the “ends justifying the means position” so were all those British agents who were executed by the British agent above not even worthy of any kind of recognition by their masters for all the saving of lives they supposedly achieved while carrying out the orders for their British masters.

    By the way how low can you get have you nothing else to emotionally blackmail people into understanding your position ffs bringing Jews and death camps into a discussion about Britains role in covering up its murderous activities in Ireland why didn’t you add in the wide scale rape and murder of German women by the Allies when they entered Berlin.

    The uncovering of the truth about the British role in wide scale murder will never come to an end –

    http://www.u.tv/News/2015/02/25/IRA-victims-father-calls-for-Scappaticci-probe-32422

  • Tacapall

    No harm Chris but I would take with a pinch of salt anything you post on this site.

  • Tacapall

    Oh right and thats not a guitar yer man is holding in your avatar.

  • Tacapall

    The British government know who the police officers were and how those two police officers took into police custody a number of weapons that they later handed back to terrorists a matter that will be brought to the courts or is in the process at this very time I would imagine. You might like to trivialise the murder of 8 innocent people and skate around the boundaries of whats morally right and wrong but you cannot get away from the fact that the RUC took possession of weapons from terrorists and handed them back to terrorists, that is supplying, and they were not deactivated nor were they bugged and the same British agent handed those same non deactivate non bugged weapons to other British agents who in turn used them to murder Patrick Finucane and seven other people.

  • chrisjones2

    Again you repeat the 120 with no EVIDENCE

    Keep making it up then.

    I can understand that as a Republican supporting those who murdered 2500 people you need to find justification but please stick within the limits of credibility.

    So lets look at the Glenanne Gang – it was all a huge RUC / Army / British State Conspiracy was it? Well there were undoubtedly a number of RUC and Army personnel involved involved. Wikipedia names 40 alleged members of the gang

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenanne_gang

    and round 20 of those were members of the RUC or the Army.

    All 20 of those and most of the rest of the 40 were ruthlessly hunted down, prosecuted and convicted by ……….. the RUC.

    Whoops. Hang on. That must be some mistake surely. It this was a huge RUC / Army / State conspiracy what were the police doing hunting down the killers and their associates and breaking up the gang that was such a key tool for them.

    I assume this was some further layer of cover on the story to create the impression that they were doing something while behind the scenes others were being encouraged to kill yet again. The problem is that your argument is all nonsense. It relies on the evidence of some ex cops and soldiers who when they were convicted ‘named’ lists of people whom they said had misled them into what they did, led them astray, given them guns, encouraged them. Strangely some of those named were actually people who had been involved in organizing the investigations into their activities and sending them to prison. My there is a surprise

    Still don’t let that spoil a good conspiracy theory eh. You need something to cling to

  • chrisjones2

    See below. Double ouch

    Bel Tel aint a newspaper of record

  • submariner

    Again you repeat the 120 with no EVIDENCE

    Keep making it up then.

    I can understand that as a Republican supporting those who murdered 2500 people you need to find justification but please stick within the limits of credibility.

    Chris How many people do you reckon the Glenanne gang murdered? The figure of 120 seems to come from the book Lethal Allies and may or may not have bigged up the figures but its no more fanciful than your claim that republicans killed 2500 people did you just make that figure up?

  • chrisjones2

    I believe that comes from CAIN figures but I am not totally sure

  • chrisjones2

    Are you alleging that the irish state had no Agents?

    Have you seen / heard the evidence in Breen and Buchanan?

    What Loyalists do you allege got RPMs when so far as we can tell they were granted after the blessed Tonys negotiations with the Shinners.

  • chrisjones2

    Yes…and part of the evidence in that is the allegation from a terrified young boy that he knew one of the killers was a cop as the boots the killer wore looked like the boots policemen wore……..

  • submariner

    You are only 500 out but never mind

  • MainlandUlsterman

    It’s a discussion of the morality of the murderer, so bringing in a few other examples from other situations can be helpful. You raise some good points about the grey areas of the double agent there, which I probably dismissed a bit too easily. However, Freddie Scap was basically an IRA man that got turned, so definitely at the morally black end of the scale. At the other end of the scale is the ‘Harry’s Game’ kind of agent, who infiltrates the organisation in order to save lives – brave, admirable and quite different. There’s a lot in the middle. But broadly a mafioso that’s been turned – say Henry Hill at the end of Goodfellas – is still a pretty morally black character. The grey area is perhaps the guy who has started in an organisation, not got deeply involved and has worked from an early stage for the police, while still having to carry out crimes to keep his cover and lead the police to evidence against the ring leaders. But it’s clear the good side of what they are doing is their working for the police; and the bad side is working for the criminal gang.

    So while individuals flit between good and bad actions, it’s clear working for an organisation like the IRA is wholly bad, unless you are doing so only to destroy it and save lives. So that’s about the limit of your “good IRA man” I think.

    As I said, people can I’m sure show apparent goodness in other aspects of their lives while compartmentalising their serial killing, rape or whatever – men in particular can manage this weird balancing act – but it’s also fine for others to see their decision to murder people as scuppering any claims they might have to be, overall, a “good person”.

  • Catcher in the Rye

    Chap with republican credentials comes out of nowhere takes over the IRA, causes it to disarm and hand over all weapons, drop its political objectives and enter democratic government.

    If a couple of mandarins sitting in an office in Whitehall somewhere in the early 1970s sketched out an idea of how they’d like things to be solved, this is pretty much what it would look like.

  • MainlandUlsterman

    you left out “runs 30 year terror campaign killing 1,800 people”, with huge financial and personal cost to thousands – maybe not in the Whitehall mandarin plan, unless he’s a lunatic.

  • Tacapall

    “people can I’m sure show apparent goodness in other aspects of their lives while compartmentalising their serial killing, rape or whatever – men in particular can manage this weird balancing act – but it’s also fine for others to see their decision to murder people as scuppering any claims they might have to be, overall, a “good person”.

    The very point I was making in relation to your defending of the RUC, I have no doubt in my mind there were people who joined the RUC to uphold the law and who carried out their duties professionally and without bias, but from my experience, and im sure many many other nationalists, I have met very few RUC officers who could be called professional and unbiased. The mountains of evidence out there that is being discovered almost daily with the access of previously withheld information and the release of government files prove beyond any doubt that RUC officers acted far beyond the boundaries of what would be deemed as within the law. No police force in the world can or could defend using terrorism against one community in order to supposedly stop terrorism, where is the line that cannot be crossed and its not as if accusations of the above nature have not been directed at the British before, in every former colony there have been similar accusations, it took 50 years before the British admitted its barbaric actions in Kenya just like it took 50 years to discover their links to murder and terrorism in Syria –

    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2003/sep/27/uk.syria1?cat=politics&type=article

    Not much has changed in those 50 years even today we can see for ourselves the same game plan is still being used in the Middle East by the same parties who have used violence and terrorism in order to promote regime change or gain access to markets previously not open to the bankers and investors in the City, the same people who have used the good people of Britain and Ireland as cannon fodder for centuries in their quest for power and wealth.

  • MainlandUlsterman

    Fine, as long as you have reasonable expectations of what a provincial police force faced with large scale terrorism can deliver. I worry that some less sympathetic to the situation the police were in, yet willing to show empathy for the terrorists (“the good IRA man), are the same people who will settle for nothing less than perfect restraint from all police staff at all times during 30 years of close contact with thousands of determined, brutal terrorists. I’m not making excuses for those that went rogue, but it’s worth noting they seem to have been relatively few in number.

    Of course if there was any collusion it was completely disgraceful and wrong, but it does seem it was a case of off-duty officers acting completely ultra vires. I’m not seeing any evidence from anywhere that this was some kind of official policy, sanctioned from on high, or even known about or tolerated by police leadership. So in short it wasn’t the “police” doing these things – unless we see some evidence to the contrary.

    I think we have to be very careful about tarring the whole police force as somehow in on the crimes of a few, when there is no evidence to suggest that whatsoever.

  • MainlandUlsterman

    I might add, the much lauded Bloody Sunday Inquiry Report found a lack of high level conspiracy even in that dreadful case. As Eamonn McCann said “there was no clear evidence of a high-level plan for a lethal assault on Bloody Sunday”. He had previously thought Bloody Sunday was planned as a way to support the Unionist government at Stormont: “But I was wrong. No convincing evidence emerged at the hearings to sustain my view.”

    The Tony Benn approach to explaining human events as if those in power or authority are omnipotent, make all the decisions and are the repository of everything bad in the world, has its consolations – but it is also total pants.

  • Tacapall

    Yeah whats new, a British court of inquiry finds no evidence of a high level conspiracy to murder 14 people. But then your forgetting about all those years of the victims being labelled as terrorists, the manufacturing and planting of evidence on the victims, the lack of proper investigation, that in my mind and I guess most other rational people would point to a high level conspiracy to cover up and mislead the general public into believing those innocent people weren’t really innocent, a position many unionists still believe today.

    ” I’m not making excuses for those that went rogue, but it’s worth noting they seem to have been relatively few in number.Ofcourse if there was any collusion it was completely disgraceful and wrong, but it does seem it was a case of off-duty officers acting completely ultra vires”

    Seems to me you are making excuses, how do you know there was relatively few in number when the full truth has not yet emerged and does it really matter if they were off duty, does that somehow mean they weren’t police officers.

    If there was any collusion ! Are you deliberately sticking your head in the sand ? – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-22282484

    Here’s the new spokesperson for loyalist paramilitaries do you know this woman ?

    http://www.u.tv/News/2015/02/26/UDA-and-UVF-committed-to-ceasefire-Villiers-32470

  • MainlandUlsterman

    So you’re saying the Bloody Sunday Inquiry wasn’t thorough enough? Some sort of slapdash affair? Interesting take on it …

    You’re being facetious about the collusion stuff, where I’ve been very clear in my condemnation of it. You say “how do you know there was relatively few in number when the full truth has not yet emerged” – for that matter, how do you know they will be large in number? You seem to have already convinced yourself of a grand conspiracy in the absence of any evidence.

    And while I’ve consistently condemned extra-legal killing from any source, including the police, I notice you haven’t been rushing forward to reciprocate, even by doing something as minor as condemning even Republican attacks on the police.

  • chrisjones2

    Yeah but you are biased and continually spew out nonsense and propaganda

  • chrisjones2

    So they only murdered 2000 …that is alright then

  • Tacapall

    I didn’t say the Bloody Sunday inquiry wasn’t thorough enough I said whats new in the outcome, the British establishment was exonerated while the cannon fodder was thrown to the wolves yet still evade being brought before the courts to answer for their crimes. What other outcome could there have been for the British.

    http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/jun/15/bloody-sunday-saville-report-widgery

    Its true that I dont know how many bad apples are in the barrels when it comes to the RUC but the fact is those bad apples were not confined to just one barrel there were many cases spread throughout the six counties, collusion was not just confined to Belfast and while you would call that a grand conspiracy I would call it a logical conclusion that if there are some bad apples in some barrels then its logical to conclude that there is bad apples in all barrels.

    Im a pacifist, I support no person nor any group who would use violence against another human being nothing is worth the taking of a human life and I have no problems condemning anyone including republicans who would resort to causing the death or physical harm on anyone in the name of Ireland. Using violence against my fellow Irishmen and women does nothing to further the legitimate cause of true republicanism.

  • Tacapall

    Propaganda for who ?

  • chrisjones2

    “while you would call that a grand conspiracy I would call it a logical conclusion that if there are some bad apples in some barrels then its logical to conclude that there is bad apples in all barrels.”

    Tautological bo**ocks

  • chrisjones2

    ..because there is no evidence of any crime?

    You spew allegations as facts

  • chrisjones2

    120 again …still no evidence

  • chrisjones2

    Read the transcripts in Breen and Buchanan

  • chrisjones2

    Evidence again?

    Just repeating an allegation don’t make it so

  • submariner

    Thats not what i said or implied.I just find it highly amusing that you are berating Tacapall about exaggerating the numbers killed by the Glenanne gang in one sentence whilst in the next you introduce your own wildly inaccurate figures that you seemed to have pulled out of your arse.

  • Reader

    Your remarks rang a few bells, so I put “loyalist gun jammed” into Google. Wow.
    It happened a lot, didn’t it?

  • MainlandUlsterman

    sounds like you have information about the guilt of more senior army officers … did you make this available to the inquiry? Or is this a case of trying to supplant the results of the most thorough public inquiry in British history with your, um, opinion on what *really* happened?

    That’s the thing with conspiracy theories, there is no disproving them, no matter how much reasoned argument and evidence you produce. Some people will always be convinced Hitler is on Mars with Elvis. All inquiries can do I suppose is make sure those kind of views are left looking as empty as they are. But I know no amount of evidence will ever stop the Republican hardcore telling the story they want to tell. Let them. And let fair-minded, sensible, non-partisan people ignore them.