gaaboard.com

Starting now on RTE1, with Darragh McIntyre investigating the Disappeared. Same programme on BBC1 tonight at 22.35

The silence...

Harrowing

Just about to watch it now on line.
Here is a link for anyone wanting to watch it. Starts in a few minutes

http://www.filmon.com/tv/bbc-1-north-ireland

All the people left behind, the dead eyes, the worn out faces..........shocking stuff........

My God, that story of Charlie Armstrong is absolutely shocking and so cruel and devestating and unfair...

Exceptionally hard to believe that Marty and Gerry know nothing.

Sadly only some of hundreds of harrowing tales.Remember reading a few months ago about two women,sisters,orphaned by the La Mon firebomb,as primary schoolchildren.Raised by other family members they grew up,got educated in England,married,and both said they live their lives to honour their deceased parents,bear no bitterness as it would only destroy them.The only thing they can't and won't do and that is visit La Mon,the site of their parents death.Would bring tears to a stone.

No if's or buts - doing that to a mother of so many children was totally disgusting and unforgivable. No matter what her perceived 'crime'.

Quote from: Franko on November 04, 2013, 11:28:19 PM
No if's or buts - doing that to a mother of so many children was totally disgusting and unforgivable. No matter what her perceived 'crime'.

Killing the victims for whatever reason, real or perceived, was bad enough but in a supposedly Christian country, to withhold the bodies is truly disgusting.

Hard to believe that this stuff went on.

It's crazy.

We should all hang our heads.

Terrible stuff.

Quote from: orangeman on November 04, 2013, 11:59:36 PM
Hard to believe that this stuff went on.

It's crazy.

We should all hang our heads.

I'm confused why we should all hold our heads, unless you mean out of respect.

The scene with Charlie Armstrong's Widow at the graveside was heart breaking, she is  such a dignified woman

Very moving show, and well documented by Darragh MacIntyre. The dignity the families have shown for years is breathtaking considering what has happened to their loved ones. I can only hope that those still missing are found and given a dignified burial. May they all rest in peace.

Quote from: orangeman on November 04, 2013, 11:59:36 PM
Hard to believe that this stuff went on.

It's crazy.

We should all hang our heads.

I don't understand this. There was far worse than this but that's the nature of the beast we grew up in. People who say they're shocked now, revelled in the notoriety of being from a stronghold or having clubs named after men who carried out such deeds. It was the nature of our war and it doesn't take a fella called McIntyre to come over and tell us that.

Much worse went on on both sides.

Good to see no apologists post yet.

I don't think that many of us of a slightly older generation can express moral outrage in 2013 over what happened from 69-94, esp during the 70s. We all knew all manner of twisted deeds were being carried out but turned a blind eye because, to us, these were cruel casualties of a sometimes dirty war.

I know some republicans today have nightmares over things that they witnessed or carried out as young men. Do we involve The Hague? If so, there'll be a long line on both sides as well as the entire British cabinet,  military and the majority of politicians in Stormont.

We can reflect and hopefully learn from the events of those 30 years but leave the mock outrage to the teenagers.

@93DominicSF Dominic Sherry Adams

The Disappeared on @BBCOne. Yet another excuse for attacking Gerry during a very difficult time. Same old shameless British media....

Knew a couple of people that were taken away and shot for being 'touts' was weird, it was if they never existed and their names were never mentioned.

The dirty war that was going on at that time was ruthless, no thought went into how these people were recruited and the pressure the special branch had placed on these people and their families, someone who was weak or not the full shilling would have cracked under not too much pressure, I doubt they really did it for the money, the threat of life in jail the beatings in the holding cell and other factors would have led them to it.

When entering that life though they knew how it would end if they crossed the line. Some I reckon never crossed that line and were bumped off for lesser things

The families last night are owed an explanation and the remains to put their lives back together again

The cases of these disappeared was a very shameful time in our history and I can only repeat what has been said by Republicans for many years now that for whatever reason this happened to them there is no excuse for it, and anyone who can help in any way to recover the bodies should do so. 

Quote from: glens abu on November 05, 2013, 09:03:23 AM
The cases of these disappeared was a very shameful time in our history and I can only repeat what has been said by Republicans for many years now that for whatever reason this happened to them there is no excuse for it, and anyone who can help in any way to recover the bodies should do so.

Nobody said it at the time though glens abu, I remember the hush in the community when it happened and we all went about with our day to day life, only winching when it came on TV to remind us.

I was lucky enough to have been steered away during my youth or I suppose was never ran around with lads that were involved that much, also with my family only having limited connections the opportunity never arose.

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on November 05, 2013, 09:11:51 AM

Quote from: glens abu on November 05, 2013, 09:03:23 AM
The cases of these disappeared was a very shameful time in our history and I can only repeat what has been said by Republicans for many years now that for whatever reason this happened to them there is no excuse for it, and anyone who can help in any way to recover the bodies should do so.

Nobody said it at the time though glens abu, I remember the hush in the community when it happened and we all went about with our day to day life, only winching when it came on TV to remind us.

I was lucky enough to have been steered away during my youth or I suppose was never ran around with lads that were involved that much, also with my family only having limited connections the opportunity never arose.

Yes agree Milltown  we lived then in different times and things happened that none of us could comprehend happening in normal circumstances,and by saying that I am not trying to excuse what happened.

Quote from: ONeill on November 05, 2013, 01:31:54 AM

Quote from: orangeman on November 04, 2013, 11:59:36 PM
Hard to believe that this stuff went on.

It's crazy.

We should all hang our heads.

I don't understand this. There was far worse than this but that's the nature of the beast we grew up in. People who say they're shocked now, revelled in the notoriety of being from a stronghold or having clubs named after men who carried out such deeds. It was the nature of our war and it doesn't take a fella called McIntyre to come over and tell us that.

Much worse went on on both sides.

I agree with this.  When the suffering of people is brought into our cosy living rooms it would be an odd type of person who did not feel sympathy for the family members and friends of those who died.  You could make 3,000 odd programmes like last night's, each of which would make for difficult viewing.

I am of the generation who could legitimately be asked the question "What were you doing when all this was going on??"  The answer is (sadly) "I was looking at my shoes...like everyone else"

Quote from: AQMP on November 05, 2013, 09:36:45 AM

Quote from: ONeill on November 05, 2013, 01:31:54 AM

Quote from: orangeman on November 04, 2013, 11:59:36 PM
Hard to believe that this stuff went on.

It's crazy.

We should all hang our heads.

I don't understand this. There was far worse than this but that's the nature of the beast we grew up in. People who say they're shocked now, revelled in the notoriety of being from a stronghold or having clubs named after men who carried out such deeds. It was the nature of our war and it doesn't take a fella called McIntyre to come over and tell us that.

Much worse went on on both sides.

I agree with this.  When the suffering of people is brought into our cosy living rooms it would be an odd type of person who did not feel sympathy for the family members and friends of those who died.  You could make 3,000 odd programmes like last night's, each of which would make for difficult viewing.

I am of the generation who could legitimately be asked the question "What were you doing when all this was going on??"  The answer is (sadly) "I was looking at my shoes...like everyone else"

That's all fair enough.


But what barometer of human suffering and pain are we using to compare atrocities ?.

I'm not sure how we can decide on a hierarchy of deeds ?

I think it's only now, in these relatively peaceful times, that those of us who lived through it all, and were not directly affected (I lost a few cousins but no close relatives) that we are starting to understand the pain of the victims' families. There can be no more heart rending scenario to lose a close family member, with no explanation and not being able to give them a proper burial, and having to live with this nightmare for years.

Interesting too, reading at the weekend, Bishop Mc Areavey, back after a lengthy Sabbatical, freely admitting that he until recently, never considered the pain of victims of child abuse in the Church.

@ orangeman...

I don't think I'm saying there is/was a hierarchy of deeds.  All I can say, from my own point of view, is that North Belfast in the early to mid 1970s, looking back on it now, is a much different place to what it was then (if you see what I mean).

Quote from: AQMP on November 05, 2013, 09:49:00 AM
@ orangeman...

I don't think I'm saying there is/was a hierarchy of deeds.  All I can say, from my own point of view, is that North Belfast in the early to mid 1970s, looking back on it now, is a much different place to what it was then (if you see what I mean).

I understand that and agree with that.


I don't understand what is meant by there was much worse things happened in the troubles.

Awful occurrences at an awful time in our history. So easy to condemn now.
They could at least have left the bodies somewhere to be found at the time rather than hiding them and saying nothing.

P S Nallystand on holiday ??

Interesting to see the next opinion polls. This will surely do a great of damage electorally to Sinn Fein in the south. Surely Adams' days as leader are numbered?

Quote from: Rossfan on November 05, 2013, 11:01:30 AM
P S Nallystand on holiday ??

Nally Stand hasn't had a chance to see the programme yet so can't really comment on it. I was the first to comment on the last thread about the disappeared, expressing hopes and sympathy for the families and said that...

Quote from: Nally Stand on June 28, 2011, 11:43:22 PM
I have always been disgusted at the IRA disappearing bodies

And I can only but reiterate that. Disappearing bodies is obscene and inhumane.

So as far as your comment above is concerned, I can only conclude that your only interest in this thread is not so much sympathy for the families, but hoping to score some sort of cheap political point.

Quote from: Nally Stand on November 05, 2013, 11:31:53 AM

Quote from: Rossfan on November 05, 2013, 11:01:30 AM
P S Nallystand on holiday ??

Nally Stand hasn't had a chance to see the programme yet so can't really comment on it. I was the first to comment on the last thread about the disappeared, expressing hopes and sympathy for the families and said that...

Quote from: Nally Stand on June 28, 2011, 11:43:22 PM
I have always been disgusted at the IRA disappearing bodies

And I can only but reiterate that. Disappearing bodies is obscene and inhumane.

So as far as your comment above is concerned, I can only conclude that your only interest in this thread is not so much sympathy for the families, but hoping to score some sort of cheap political point.

Is there a cheap political point to be scored on this subject? I wouldn't have thought so it was horrible.

As has been said I'm from a different generation so can't understand how right minded people would do something like this it just makes no sense to me.

The IRA and its supporters will say "it was war and this is the kind of thing that happens in a war" but I would disagree. The IRA were supposedly an army defending the Nationalist population. OK they found out lads were touts but why the need to kill a 17 year old? Surely there were other means open to them in terms of discipline rather than disappearing a body. In Jean McConville's case it appears there was no reason for disappearing her other than she was a protestant who helped an army man that was injured!!

The cheap political point is that during the troubles no Unionist politician gave a monkeys about these poor people yet now they kick up a stink everyone starts to listen.

Quote from: Nally Stand on November 05, 2013, 11:31:53 AM

Quote from: Rossfan on November 05, 2013, 11:01:30 AM
P S Nallystand on holiday ??

Nally Stand hasn't had a chance to see the programme yet so can't really comment on it. I was the first to comment on the last thread about the disappeared, expressing hopes and sympathy for the families and said that...

Quote from: Nally Stand on June 28, 2011, 11:43:22 PM
I have always been disgusted at the IRA disappearing bodies

And I can only but reiterate that. Disappearing bodies is obscene and inhumane.

So as far as your comment above is concerned, I can only conclude that your only interest in this thread is not so much sympathy for the families, but hoping to score some sort of cheap political point.

The reference to you was just a little ps comment on your absence from the thread as you're usually one of the first in defending SF on most issues.
I didn't know you were a political party  :o

Quote from: T Fearon on November 05, 2013, 11:27:25 AM
Interesting to see the next opinion polls. This will surely do a great of damage electorally to Sinn Fein in the south. Surely Adams' days as leader are numbered?

Pearse Doherty should have taken over 5 years ago. Gerry Adams cant take SF any further, whether he knew about these things or not the allegations will continue to mount.

He would still pull big vote in West Belfast but spearheading the campaign in the Free State is completely different.

Quote from: Jeepers Creepers on November 05, 2013, 12:08:24 PM
The cheap political point is that during the troubles no Unionist politician gave a monkeys about these poor people yet now they kick up a stink everyone starts to listen.

Very true. And not much word on the underhanded tactics of the brits recruiting these people and putting/forcing them into very dangerous positions.

Quote from: screenexile on November 05, 2013, 12:00:35 PM
Is there a cheap political point to be scored on this subject? I wouldn't have thought so it was horrible.

I wouldn't have thought so either, but it's exactly what Ross appeared to be doing. Likewise, after expressing sympathy for the families and condemning the disappearing of remains on another thread on this topic, the usual suspects instantly lined up to take cheap shots at me and accuse me of being insincere, of "exonerating" the IRA, of "being proud" of what happened to Columba McVeigh and other such utter lies.

Quote from: screenexile on November 05, 2013, 12:00:35 PM
The IRA and its supporters will say "it was war and this is the kind of thing that happens in a war" but I would disagree. The IRA were supposedly an army defending the Nationalist population. OK they found out lads were touts but why the need to kill a 17 year old? Surely there were other means open to them in terms of discipline rather than disappearing a body. In Jean McConville's case it appears there was no reason for disappearing her other than she was a protestant who helped an army man that was injured!!

I have many times defended the IRA campaign, and always will defend their campaign, but to say that IRA supporters will say "this kind of thing happens in a war" is not true. It should NOT happen in any war, anywhere. It is grossly inhumane and twisted and I've never once heard anybody defending it as being just "the kind of thing that happens".

Quote from: Nally Stand on November 05, 2013, 12:22:15 PM

Quote from: screenexile on November 05, 2013, 12:00:35 PM
Is there a cheap political point to be scored on this subject? I wouldn't have thought so it was horrible.

I wouldn't have thought so either, but it's exactly what Ross appeared to be doing. Likewise, after expressing sympathy for the families and condemning the disappearing of remains on another thread on this topic, the usual suspects instantly lined up to take cheap shots at me and accuse me of being insincere, of "exonerating" the IRA, of "being proud" of what happened to Columba McVeigh and other such utter lies.

Quote from: screenexile on November 05, 2013, 12:00:35 PM
The IRA and its supporters will say "it was war and this is the kind of thing that happens in a war" but I would disagree. The IRA were supposedly an army defending the Nationalist population. OK they found out lads were touts but why the need to kill a 17 year old? Surely there were other means open to them in terms of discipline rather than disappearing a body. In Jean McConville's case it appears there was no reason for disappearing her other than she was a protestant who helped an army man that was injured!!

I have many times defended the IRA campaign, and always will defend their campaign, but to say that IRA supporters will say "this kind of thing happens in a war" is not true. It should NOT happen in any war, anywhere. It is grossly inhumane and twisted and I've never once heard anybody defending it as being just "the kind of thing that happens".

Have to agree with that,I have supported the IRA since its formation in 1969 and although at times disagreed with certain actions continued to support them but could never excuse disappearing people and have never heard anyone agreeing with these actions.

Quote from: Rossfan on November 05, 2013, 12:09:39 PM

Quote from: Nally Stand on November 05, 2013, 11:31:53 AM

Quote from: Rossfan on November 05, 2013, 11:01:30 AM
P S Nallystand on holiday ??

Nally Stand hasn't had a chance to see the programme yet so can't really comment on it. I was the first to comment on the last thread about the disappeared, expressing hopes and sympathy for the families and said that...

Quote from: Nally Stand on June 28, 2011, 11:43:22 PM
I have always been disgusted at the IRA disappearing bodies

And I can only but reiterate that. Disappearing bodies is obscene and inhumane.

So as far as your comment above is concerned, I can only conclude that your only interest in this thread is not so much sympathy for the families, but hoping to score some sort of cheap political point.

The reference to you was just a little ps comment on your absence from the thread as you're usually one of the first in defending SF on most issues.
I didn't know you were a political party  :o

And I was the first to comment on the last thread about the disappeared, so your comment asking about my whereabouts here seems to be just a petty bit of point scoring.

Quote from: orangeman on November 04, 2013, 11:59:36 PM
Hard to believe that this stuff went on.

It's crazy.

We should all hang our heads.

Unless you were somehow involved or supported it or still support it then there is no need for anyone to hang their heads. Would be so typically Irish to think like whilst ignoring the elephant in the room though. I hope all those families get their loved ones back and get some kind of closure.

Disappearing was, of course, wrong. Just as wrong as killing these people in the first place.

Can anyone here justify to me why the individuals highlighted last night were executed by the kangaroo courts of the IRA?

Or to paraphrase the Louth TD "whoever killed them, I dunno"

Was on past my bedtime - was there anything new?

Truth & reconciliation is always difficult, unless there is a clear winner, e.g. WW2.

The GFA made a decent effort at dealing with the fallout from the conflict but more needs to be done. The first thing that needs to happen is that the politics has to be taken out of it. A process needs to be agreed and bought into by all sides. Such a process would deal with the disappeared and all of the outstanding issues, in confidence. Get a George Mitchell type to chair such a process with a brief of getting answers, maintaining strict confidentially (with the exception of passing info to families), while avoiding either a witch hunt or stoking political divides. That wouldn't be easy but it has been done with decommissioning.

At the end, if there ever is an end, nothing would be published until all was agreed.

Quote from: Ulick on November 05, 2013, 12:43:26 PM
Was on past my bedtime - was there anything new?

Haven't got watching it myself yet but wondered the same...anything new?

Quote from: Nally Stand on November 05, 2013, 12:49:00 PM

Quote from: Ulick on November 05, 2013, 12:43:26 PM
Was on past my bedtime - was there anything new?

Haven't got watching it myself yet but wondered the same...anything new?

Nothing new at all only the families telling their harrowing story,which is heart breaking.

Quote from: glens abu on November 05, 2013, 12:56:35 PM
Nothing new at all only the families telling their harrowing story,which is heart breaking.

(https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/4310467328/h436523E0/)

Quote from: orangeman on November 05, 2013, 09:52:41 AM

Quote from: AQMP on November 05, 2013, 09:49:00 AM
@ orangeman...

I don't think I'm saying there is/was a hierarchy of deeds.  All I can say, from my own point of view, is that North Belfast in the early to mid 1970s, looking back on it now, is a much different place to what it was then (if you see what I mean).

I understand that and agree with that.


I don't understand what is meant by there was much worse things happened in the troubles.

Sorry orangeman, I quoted the wrong post in my original post.  It should have been another post of O'Neill's.

Quote from: Shamrock Shore on November 05, 2013, 12:34:52 PM
Disappearing was, of course, wrong. Just as wrong as killing these people in the first place.

Can anyone here justify to me why the individuals highlighted last night were executed by the kangaroo courts of the IRA?

Or to paraphrase the Louth TD "whoever killed them, I dunno"

SS, do you mean why did the IRA kill them??  I don't think you'll find anyone who'll justify it...not in 2013 anyway.

Quote from: muppet on November 05, 2013, 12:45:51 PM
Truth & reconciliation is always difficult, unless there is a clear winner, e.g. WW2.

The GFA made a decent effort at dealing with the fallout from the conflict but more needs to be done. The first thing that needs to happen is that the politics has to be taken out of it. A process needs to be agreed and bought into by all sides. Such a process would deal with the disappeared and all of the outstanding issues, in confidence. Get a George Mitchell type to chair such a process with a brief of getting answers, maintaining strict confidentially (with the exception of passing info to families), while avoiding either a witch hunt or stoking political divides. That wouldn't be easy but it has been done with decommissioning.

At the end, if there ever is an end, nothing would be published until all was agreed.

Good post muppet.

Quote from: glens abu on November 05, 2013, 12:31:04 PM

Quote from: Nally Stand on November 05, 2013, 12:22:15 PM

Quote from: screenexile on November 05, 2013, 12:00:35 PM
Is there a cheap political point to be scored on this subject? I wouldn't have thought so it was horrible.

I wouldn't have thought so either, but it's exactly what Ross appeared to be doing. Likewise, after expressing sympathy for the families and condemning the disappearing of remains on another thread on this topic, the usual suspects instantly lined up to take cheap shots at me and accuse me of being insincere, of "exonerating" the IRA, of "being proud" of what happened to Columba McVeigh and other such utter lies.

Quote from: screenexile on November 05, 2013, 12:00:35 PM
The IRA and its supporters will say "it was war and this is the kind of thing that happens in a war" but I would disagree. The IRA were supposedly an army defending the Nationalist population. OK they found out lads were touts but why the need to kill a 17 year old? Surely there were other means open to them in terms of discipline rather than disappearing a body. In Jean McConville's case it appears there was no reason for disappearing her other than she was a protestant who helped an army man that was injured!!

I have many times defended the IRA campaign, and always will defend their campaign, but to say that IRA supporters will say "this kind of thing happens in a war" is not true. It should NOT happen in any war, anywhere. It is grossly inhumane and twisted and I've never once heard anybody defending it as being just "the kind of thing that happens".

Have to agree with that,I have supported the IRA since its formation in 1969 and although at times disagreed with certain actions continued to support them but could never excuse disappearing people and have never heard anyone agreeing with these actions.

and to openly disapprove of them could get you added to the list.

not good at all. the fact that the programme was shown on both state broadcasters on the same night is interesting..

hundreds of show like this could be made from 'would be republicans' offing their neighbours in the twenties to get their land to politicians not long dead murdering republican prisoners and blowing about it in pubs. that's the problem with guerrilla warfare individuals carry out atrocities under the guise of a cause when it can be over something like a row in a pub or over a women. either way Gerry is a liability to the sinn fein party more so than ever he needs to step aside as soon as possible. tomorrow would not be soon enough.. i'd say the gimp Kenny and mehole martian were cracking open the champers last night.

It's on again tonight on BBC4.

QuoteSS, do you mean why did the IRA kill them??  I don't think you'll find anyone who'll justify it...not in 2013 anyway.

Sorry - justify does not seem the correct word. 'Why' I think because i spose they were or were suspected of being touts although the case of Jean McConville to me was always shrouded in confusion in that she was either (i) executed cos she helped an injured soldier on the street or (ii) had control of a radio and was sending information to the security forces and had been warned a number of times to cease.

Was the IRA (or sorry Louth TD, the mystery men from mystery land) saying that all the so-called disappeared were all informers?

Were lads 'disappeared' for simply dissing a local commander or not showing 'due respect'?

Freddie Scappaticci  disappeared, but that's an entirely different matter.

Quote from: Shamrock Shore on November 05, 2013, 01:37:17 PM

QuoteSS, do you mean why did the IRA kill them??  I don't think you'll find anyone who'll justify it...not in 2013 anyway.

Sorry - justify does not seem the correct word. 'Why' I think because i suppose they were or were suspected of being touts although the case of Jean McConville to me was always shrouded in confusion in that she was either (i) executed cos she helped an injured soldier on the street or (ii) had control of a radio and was sending information to the security forces and had been warned a number of times to cease.

Was the IRA (or sorry Louth TD, the mystery men from mystery land) saying that all the so-called disappeared were all informers?

Were lads 'disappeared' for simply dissing a local commander or not showing 'due respect'?

revealing why they were killed might point to who killed them. as in the case of mrs mc conville because her body was accidentally found by a member of the public this allows the authority's to investigate whereas if she'd been found during a dig the case would have been closed. if you killed someone  35 years ago you wouldn't want to go to jail now any more than you did at that time. i think a lot of people were killed for reasons unrelated to any political struggle but were labled out of convenience

Quote from: Shamrock Shore on November 05, 2013, 01:37:17 PM

QuoteSS, do you mean why did the IRA kill them??  I don't think you'll find anyone who'll justify it...not in 2013 anyway.

Sorry - justify does not seem the correct word. 'Why' I think because i spose they were or were suspected of being touts although the case of Jean McConville to me was always shrouded in confusion in that she was either (i) executed cos she helped an injured soldier on the street or (ii) had control of a radio and was sending information to the security forces and had been warned a number of times to cease.

Was the IRA (or sorry Louth TD, the mystery men from mystery land) saying that all the so-called disappeared were all informers?

Were lads 'disappeared' for simply dissing a local commander or not showing 'due respect'?

As far as I'm aware (and I was young at the time of the Jean McConville abduction) they were accused of being informers.  I'm not aware of anyone being murdered at that time for dissing local 'RA men (albeit that might be the case recently in South Armagh).  I might be wrong.  With Jean McConville it depends who you believe.  The main evidence against Adams comes from well known IRA man Brendan Hughes, but some of the family reject his claims as he (Hughes) also claims Jean McConville was working for the British Army.  I really don't know.

I wonder how many of the henchmen that actually did the deed and buried these people are now dead themselves and maybe the knowledge of one or two of the burial places are gone for ever.

Quote from: AQMP on November 05, 2013, 01:59:03 PM

Quote from: Shamrock Shore on November 05, 2013, 01:37:17 PM

QuoteSS, do you mean why did the IRA kill them??  I don't think you'll find anyone who'll justify it...not in 2013 anyway.

Sorry - justify does not seem the correct word. 'Why' I think because i spose they were or were suspected of being touts although the case of Jean McConville to me was always shrouded in confusion in that she was either (i) executed cos she helped an injured soldier on the street or (ii) had control of a radio and was sending information to the security forces and had been warned a number of times to cease.

Was the IRA (or sorry Louth TD, the mystery men from mystery land) saying that all the so-called disappeared were all informers?

Were lads 'disappeared' for simply dissing a local commander or not showing 'due respect'?

As far as I'm aware (and I was young at the time of the Jean McConville abduction) they were accused of being informers.  I'm not aware of anyone being murdered at that time for dissing local 'RA men (albeit that might be the case recently in South Armagh).  I might be wrong.  With Jean McConville it depends who you believe.  The main evidence against Adams comes from well known IRA man Brendan Hughes, but some of the family reject his claims as he (Hughes) also claims Jean McConville was working for the British Army.  I really don't know.

I personally Thought that Billy McKee's contribution was more damming for Adams.

Quote from: haveaharp on November 05, 2013, 02:07:06 PM
I wonder how many of the henchmen that actually did the deed and buried these people are now dead themselves and maybe the knowledge of one or two of the burial places are gone for ever.

One group took them away and interrogated them and another group carried out the deed. The likelyhood of these lads all being alive is low I'd say or their memory a lot worse over the ways.

I wouldn't place much weight on the allegations from Brendan Hughes. No honour among thieves and all that.

Billy Mc Kee had no issue with the killings, as long a the corpses were left by the roadside. Did he not say himself he had no problem with killing Jean Mc Conville, but with the "disappearing" of her corpse, or words to that effect.

Quote from: Shamrock Shore on November 05, 2013, 01:37:17 PM

QuoteSS, do you mean why did the IRA kill them??  I don't think you'll find anyone who'll justify it...not in 2013 anyway.

Sorry - justify does not seem the correct word. 'Why' I think because i spose they were or were suspected of being touts although the case of Jean McConville to me was always shrouded in confusion in that she was either (i) executed cos she helped an injured soldier on the street or (ii) had control of a radio and was sending information to the security forces and had been warned a number of times to cease.

Was the IRA (or sorry Louth TD, the mystery men from mystery land) saying that all the so-called disappeared were all informers?

Were lads 'disappeared' for simply dissing a local commander or not showing 'due respect'?

There was no law. They could have been looking at someone sideways or may have spilled someone's pint. Maybe some of them were suspected paedos. Or is that too modern?

Quote from: Rossfan on November 05, 2013, 11:01:30 AM
Awful occurrences at an awful time in our history. So easy to condemn now.

Are you suggesting that nobody condemned them at the time? Or considered them awful occurrences at the time?

Quote from: Nally Stand on November 05, 2013, 11:31:53 AM

Quote from: Nally Stand on June 28, 2011, 11:43:22 PM
I have always been disgusted at the IRA disappearing bodies

And I can only but reiterate that. Disappearing bodies is obscene and inhumane.

So as far as your comment above is concerned, I can only conclude that your only interest in this thread is not so much sympathy for the families, but hoping to score some sort of cheap political point.

So "disappearing bodies is obscene and inhumane"? What elements of the PIRA campaign were 'decent' and 'humane'?

And while you might consider it bad taste that attempts are made to 'score political points', it might be also be considered in bad taste to use that defense to avoid pertinent issues. I don't for a second doubt that anyone on here has anything but massive sympathies with the families. That doesn't mean we have to ignore some 'inconvenient' aspects.

Quote from: haveaharp on November 05, 2013, 02:07:06 PM
I wonder how many of the henchmen that actually did the deed and buried these people are now dead themselves and maybe the knowledge of one or two of the burial places are gone for ever.

I'd imagine that's a major issue, and I suspect some of the bodies will never be recovered.

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 05, 2013, 05:17:08 PM

Quote from: Rossfan on November 05, 2013, 11:01:30 AM
Awful occurrences at an awful time in our history. So easy to condemn now.

Are you suggesting that nobody condemned them at the time? Or considered them awful occurrences at the time?

Just read what I said and take it at face value and don't be coming over all Lawyer cross examining.
If I said "today is Tuesday" - would you counter with " Are you suggesting someone said it wasn't?"  ??? :o

Quote from: Rossfan on November 05, 2013, 05:35:26 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 05, 2013, 05:17:08 PM

Quote from: Rossfan on November 05, 2013, 11:01:30 AM
Awful occurrences at an awful time in our history. So easy to condemn now.

Are you suggesting that nobody condemned them at the time? Or considered them awful occurrences at the time?

Just read what I said and take it at face value and don't be coming over all Lawyer cross examining.
If I said "today is Tuesday" - would you counter with " Are you suggesting someone said it wasn't?"  ??? :o

:D

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 05, 2013, 05:25:04 PM

Quote from: Nally Stand on November 05, 2013, 11:31:53 AM

Quote from: Nally Stand on June 28, 2011, 11:43:22 PM
I have always been disgusted at the IRA disappearing bodies

And I can only but reiterate that. Disappearing bodies is obscene and inhumane.

So as far as your comment above is concerned, I can only conclude that your only interest in this thread is not so much sympathy for the families, but hoping to score some sort of cheap political point.

So "disappearing bodies is obscene and inhumane"? What elements of the PIRA campaign were 'decent' and 'humane'?

And while you might consider it bad taste that attempts are made to 'score political points', it might be also be considered in bad taste to use that defense to avoid pertinent issues. I don't for a second doubt that anyone on here has anything but massive sympathies with the families. That doesn't mean we have to ignore some 'inconvenient' aspects.

Maguire, get over yourself. I've never shied away from condemning what you'd love to believe I find "inconvenient". Believing the IRA has a right to use force doesn't mean I believe that every action they did was justifiable. I'll condemn the disappearing of bodies all day long if need be. No inconvenience to me at all, you'll be disappointed to hear.

Quote from: Nally Stand on November 05, 2013, 05:48:10 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 05, 2013, 05:25:04 PM

Quote from: Nally Stand on November 05, 2013, 11:31:53 AM

Quote from: Nally Stand on June 28, 2011, 11:43:22 PM
I have always been disgusted at the IRA disappearing bodies

And I can only but reiterate that. Disappearing bodies is obscene and inhumane.

So as far as your comment above is concerned, I can only conclude that your only interest in this thread is not so much sympathy for the families, but hoping to score some sort of cheap political point.

So "disappearing bodies is obscene and inhumane"? What elements of the PIRA campaign were 'decent' and 'humane'?

And while you might consider it bad taste that attempts are made to 'score political points', it might be also be considered in bad taste to use that defense to avoid pertinent issues. I don't for a second doubt that anyone on here has anything but massive sympathies with the families. That doesn't mean we have to ignore some 'inconvenient' aspects.

Maguire, get over yourself. I've never shied away from condemning what you'd love to believe I find "inconvenient". Believing the IRA has a right to use force doesn't mean I believe that every action they did was justifiable. I'll condemn the disappearing of bodies all day long if need be. No inconvenience to me at all, you'll be disappointed to hear.

and yet you indulge him every time.. you know what hes like :P

Quote from: Rossfan on November 05, 2013, 05:35:26 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 05, 2013, 05:17:08 PM

Quote from: Rossfan on November 05, 2013, 11:01:30 AM
Awful occurrences at an awful time in our history. So easy to condemn now.

Are you suggesting that nobody condemned them at the time? Or considered them awful occurrences at the time?

Just read what I said and take it at face value and don't be coming over all Lawyer cross examining.
If I said "today is Tuesday" - would you counter with " Are you suggesting someone said it wasn't?"  ??? :o

I thought I did take it at face value - otherwise I don't understand why you specifically said 'now'. The thing is, there are a lot of people who do condemn it now, but couldn't have condemned it then. If you're not one of them, fair enough.

Quote from: Nally Stand on November 05, 2013, 05:48:10 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 05, 2013, 05:25:04 PM

Quote from: Nally Stand on November 05, 2013, 11:31:53 AM

Quote from: Nally Stand on June 28, 2011, 11:43:22 PM
I have always been disgusted at the IRA disappearing bodies

And I can only but reiterate that. Disappearing bodies is obscene and inhumane.

So as far as your comment above is concerned, I can only conclude that your only interest in this thread is not so much sympathy for the families, but hoping to score some sort of cheap political point.

So "disappearing bodies is obscene and inhumane"? What elements of the PIRA campaign were 'decent' and 'humane'?

And while you might consider it bad taste that attempts are made to 'score political points', it might be also be considered in bad taste to use that defense to avoid pertinent issues. I don't for a second doubt that anyone on here has anything but massive sympathies with the families. That doesn't mean we have to ignore some 'inconvenient' aspects.

Maguire, get over yourself. I've never shied away from condemning what you'd love to believe I find "inconvenient". Believing the IRA has a right to use force doesn't mean I believe that every action they did was justifiable. I'll condemn the disappearing of bodies all day long if need be. No inconvenience to me at all, you'll be disappointed to hear.

As the context is 'political point scoring', my reference to 'inconvenient' aspects were the allegations of who was involved. Of course you don't find it inconvenient to condemn the disappearing of bodies - that's now official party policy.

The atttiude of McKee, an old man (with no sense from what i seen) having no problem shooting a woman, but wouldn't be burying says alot about the mentality of the day and even now his attitude seems no different, A relic of the past much in the way gusty spence would be on the uvf side. Its worrying how much weight Gerry kelly carry's in this day and age, along with the pup Billy Hutchinson gaining support to, these ancient relics should  be put out to pasture and let the younger generation with no bitterness in them run the country.

Some terrible things happened  in the troubles, the shootings on bloody sunday, the killing of the girl at uda drinking den cause they though she was a catholic, the killing of the young girl in portadown at the mobile shop,, the worrying thing about J McConville was them coming into the house, chasing the children upstairs, then kidnapping her and taking her to her death. they had no problem leaving chidlren with no parents

What sort of  madmen were running through northern ireland in the 70`s and 80`s, people call it a war (i wouldnt), then if thats the case these surely are war crimes, we look back aghast now, but back then the rest of the world must have looked at us as a bunch of animals, and the modern day equivalent of Somali even though we were supposed to be part of the developed world.

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 05, 2013, 07:03:08 PM

Quote from: Nally Stand on November 05, 2013, 05:48:10 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 05, 2013, 05:25:04 PM

Quote from: Nally Stand on November 05, 2013, 11:31:53 AM

Quote from: Nally Stand on June 28, 2011, 11:43:22 PM
I have always been disgusted at the IRA disappearing bodies

And I can only but reiterate that. Disappearing bodies is obscene and inhumane.

So as far as your comment above is concerned, I can only conclude that your only interest in this thread is not so much sympathy for the families, but hoping to score some sort of cheap political point.

So "disappearing bodies is obscene and inhumane"? What elements of the PIRA campaign were 'decent' and 'humane'?

And while you might consider it bad taste that attempts are made to 'score political points', it might be also be considered in bad taste to use that defense to avoid pertinent issues. I don't for a second doubt that anyone on here has anything but massive sympathies with the families. That doesn't mean we have to ignore some 'inconvenient' aspects.

Maguire, get over yourself. I've never shied away from condemning what you'd love to believe I find "inconvenient". Believing the IRA has a right to use force doesn't mean I believe that every action they did was justifiable. I'll condemn the disappearing of bodies all day long if need be. No inconvenience to me at all, you'll be disappointed to hear.

As the context is 'political point scoring', my reference to 'inconvenient' aspects were the allegations of who was involved. Of course you don't find it inconvenient to condemn the disappearing of bodies - that's now official party policy.

I've always found such acts totally disgusting. Implying I ever thought otherwise, without evidence nor reason, is fairly pathetic. Again, just because you wish something were true to claim about me, doesn't make it so, and again, apologies at how that must disappoint you.

Quote from: deiseach on November 05, 2013, 02:20:26 PM
I wouldn't place much weight on the allegations from Brendan Hughes. No honour among thieves and all that.

aye Brendan Hughes was some thief

Quote from: lawnseed on November 05, 2013, 01:14:37 PM
not good at all. the fact that the programme was shown on both state broadcasters on the same night is interesting..

hundreds of show like this could be made from 'would be republicans' offing their neighbours in the twenties to get their land to politicians not long dead murdering republican prisoners and blowing about it in pubs. that's the problem with guerrilla warfare individuals carry out atrocities under the guise of a cause when it can be over something like a row in a pub or over a women. either way Gerry is a liability to the sinn fein party more so than ever he needs to step aside as soon as possible. tomorrow would not be soon enough.. i'd say the gimp Kenny and mehole martian were cracking open the champers last night.

You are the gimp trying to deflect on Kenny and Martin, the blood is on the hands of your heroes.

What I found interesting was the bitterness of McKee and Hughes both leaders of the IRA at that time.McKee left the movement in 1976 when he was replaced by younger more forward thinking Republicans coming out of the jails.Hughes came outof jail was shocked to see how things had changed since he went in unfortunately became an Alcoholic and ended up being used by others with axes to grind to inform on former comrades.Again what happened to these families was horrendous and can never be excused or repeated but trying to pin it on Gerry Adams for me discredits some who took part and the makers of this program.Was shown on RTE and BBC last night is on again tonight,is been shown again next week and had been discussed on every news and current affairs programme this week.Very little about Lethal Allies wonder why?

Quote from: glens abu on November 05, 2013, 08:48:41 PM
What I found interesting was the bitterness of McKee and Hughes both leaders of the IRA at that time.McKee left the movement in 1976 when he was replaced by younger more forward thinking Republicans coming out of the jails.Hughes came outof jail was shocked to see how things had changed since he went in unfortunately became an Alcoholic and ended up being used by others with axes to grind to inform on former comrades.Again what happened to these families was horrendous and can never be excused or repeated but trying to pin it on Gerry Adams for me discredits some who took part and the makers of this program.Was shown on RTE and BBC last night is on again tonight,is been shown again next week and had been discussed on every news and current affairs programme this week.

Of course, but then you're a loyal SF supporter. I assume you believe Adams when he says he wasn't in the IRA and when he denies the allegations made against him in the programme?

But could they really have made the programme and ignored these allegations?

Quote from: glens abu on November 05, 2013, 08:48:41 PM
Very little about Lethal Allies wonder why?

Maybe there will be in time - there certainly should be. I doubt this programme was made overnight.

Quote from: Nally Stand on November 05, 2013, 07:21:40 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 05, 2013, 07:03:08 PM

Quote from: Nally Stand on November 05, 2013, 05:48:10 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 05, 2013, 05:25:04 PM

Quote from: Nally Stand on November 05, 2013, 11:31:53 AM

Quote from: Nally Stand on June 28, 2011, 11:43:22 PM
I have always been disgusted at the IRA disappearing bodies

And I can only but reiterate that. Disappearing bodies is obscene and inhumane.

So as far as your comment above is concerned, I can only conclude that your only interest in this thread is not so much sympathy for the families, but hoping to score some sort of cheap political point.

So "disappearing bodies is obscene and inhumane"? What elements of the PIRA campaign were 'decent' and 'humane'?

And while you might consider it bad taste that attempts are made to 'score political points', it might be also be considered in bad taste to use that defense to avoid pertinent issues. I don't for a second doubt that anyone on here has anything but massive sympathies with the families. That doesn't mean we have to ignore some 'inconvenient' aspects.

Maguire, get over yourself. I've never shied away from condemning what you'd love to believe I find "inconvenient". Believing the IRA has a right to use force doesn't mean I believe that every action they did was justifiable. I'll condemn the disappearing of bodies all day long if need be. No inconvenience to me at all, you'll be disappointed to hear.

As the context is 'political point scoring', my reference to 'inconvenient' aspects were the allegations of who was involved. Of course you don't find it inconvenient to condemn the disappearing of bodies - that's now official party policy.

I've always found such acts totally disgusting. Implying I ever thought otherwise, without evidence nor reason, is fairly pathetic. Again, just because you wish something were true to claim about me, doesn't make it so, and again, apologies at how that must disappoint you.

I don't get disappointed that easily. Sorry to disappoint you, if you're disappointed that i'm not disappointed.

I take your word for it when you say you've never thought otherwise. I just find it difficult to understand the logic - from someone who "defends" the PIRA campaign - that these acts were obscene and inhumane, in the context of countless other acts which, by definition, would surely be described in the same terms.

Quote from: seafoid on November 05, 2013, 03:13:20 PM

Quote from: Shamrock Shore on November 05, 2013, 01:37:17 PM

QuoteSS, do you mean why did the IRA kill them??  I don't think you'll find anyone who'll justify it...not in 2013 anyway.

Sorry - justify does not seem the correct word. 'Why' I think because i spose they were or were suspected of being touts although the case of Jean McConville to me was always shrouded in confusion in that she was either (i) executed cos she helped an injured soldier on the street or (ii) had control of a radio and was sending information to the security forces and had been warned a number of times to cease.

Was the IRA (or sorry Louth TD, the mystery men from mystery land) saying that all the so-called disappeared were all informers?

Were lads 'disappeared' for simply dissing a local commander or not showing 'due respect'?

There was no law. They could have been looking at someone sideways or may have spilled someone's pint. Maybe some of them were suspected paedos. Or is that too modern?

what suspected paedos ? and why is that suspicion "too modern" ?

Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on November 05, 2013, 08:27:47 PM

Quote from: lawnseed on November 05, 2013, 01:14:37 PM
not good at all. the fact that the programme was shown on both state broadcasters on the same night is interesting..

hundreds of show like this could be made from 'would be republicans' offing their neighbours in the twenties to get their land to politicians not long dead murdering republican prisoners and blowing about it in pubs. that's the problem with guerrilla warfare individuals carry out atrocities under the guise of a cause when it can be over something like a row in a pub or over a women. either way Gerry is a liability to the sinn fein party more so than ever he needs to step aside as soon as possible. tomorrow would not be soon enough.. i'd say the gimp Kenny and mehole martian were cracking open the champers last night.

You are the gimp trying to deflect on Kenny and Martin, the blood is on the hands of your heroes.

excuse me. we are all still waiting on your hero to engage Gerry in a one to one debate or martin on any issue. he must be dreading the next election when his fine gael cronies make him disappear incase some savvy opponent or reporter exposes him for the bollix he is..

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 05, 2013, 09:31:17 PM

Quote from: Nally Stand on November 05, 2013, 07:21:40 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 05, 2013, 07:03:08 PM

Quote from: Nally Stand on November 05, 2013, 05:48:10 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 05, 2013, 05:25:04 PM

Quote from: Nally Stand on November 05, 2013, 11:31:53 AM

Quote from: Nally Stand on June 28, 2011, 11:43:22 PM
I have always been disgusted at the IRA disappearing bodies

And I can only but reiterate that. Disappearing bodies is obscene and inhumane.

So as far as your comment above is concerned, I can only conclude that your only interest in this thread is not so much sympathy for the families, but hoping to score some sort of cheap political point.

So "disappearing bodies is obscene and inhumane"? What elements of the PIRA campaign were 'decent' and 'humane'?

And while you might consider it bad taste that attempts are made to 'score political points', it might be also be considered in bad taste to use that defense to avoid pertinent issues. I don't for a second doubt that anyone on here has anything but massive sympathies with the families. That doesn't mean we have to ignore some 'inconvenient' aspects.

Maguire, get over yourself. I've never shied away from condemning what you'd love to believe I find "inconvenient". Believing the IRA has a right to use force doesn't mean I believe that every action they did was justifiable. I'll condemn the disappearing of bodies all day long if need be. No inconvenience to me at all, you'll be disappointed to hear.

As the context is 'political point scoring', my reference to 'inconvenient' aspects were the allegations of who was involved. Of course you don't find it inconvenient to condemn the disappearing of bodies - that's now official party policy.

I've always found such acts totally disgusting. Implying I ever thought otherwise, without evidence nor reason, is fairly pathetic. Again, just because you wish something were true to claim about me, doesn't make it so, and again, apologies at how that must disappoint you.

I don't get disappointed that easily. Sorry to disappoint you, if you're disappointed that i'm not disappointed.

I take your word for it when you say you've never thought otherwise. I just find it difficult to understand the logic - from someone who "defends" the PIRA campaign - that these acts were obscene and inhumane, in the context of countless other acts which, by definition, would surely be described in the same terms.

Simple concept Maguire. My disgust for certain actions of the IRA does not diminish my belief that the IRA campaign in general was justifiable. You may disagree on whether or not it was justifiable but that's neither here nor there; the simple fact is that any armed campaign anywhere by any army (guerrilla or otherwise), no matter how legitimate it may have been to the world, is always going to have included certain despicable acts. It's possible and acceptable to condemn such acts without condemning the entire campaign and it's legitimacy.

Quote from: lawnseed on November 05, 2013, 10:28:25 PM

Quote from: mayogodhelpus@gmail.com on November 05, 2013, 08:27:47 PM

Quote from: lawnseed on November 05, 2013, 01:14:37 PM
not good at all. the fact that the programme was shown on both state broadcasters on the same night is interesting..

hundreds of show like this could be made from 'would be republicans' offing their neighbours in the twenties to get their land to politicians not long dead murdering republican prisoners and blowing about it in pubs. that's the problem with guerrilla warfare individuals carry out atrocities under the guise of a cause when it can be over something like a row in a pub or over a women. either way Gerry is a liability to the sinn fein party more so than ever he needs to step aside as soon as possible. tomorrow would not be soon enough.. i'd say the gimp Kenny and mehole martian were cracking open the champers last night.

You are the gimp trying to deflect on Kenny and Martin, the blood is on the hands of your heroes.

excuse me. we are all still waiting on your hero to engage Gerry in a one to one debate or martin on any issue. he must be dreading the next election when his fine gael cronies make him disappear incase some savvy opponent or reporter exposes him for the bollix he is..

This thread is about your heroes darkside.

Quote from: Nally Stand on November 05, 2013, 10:43:36 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 05, 2013, 09:31:17 PM

Quote from: Nally Stand on November 05, 2013, 07:21:40 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 05, 2013, 07:03:08 PM

Quote from: Nally Stand on November 05, 2013, 05:48:10 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 05, 2013, 05:25:04 PM

Quote from: Nally Stand on November 05, 2013, 11:31:53 AM

Quote from: Nally Stand on June 28, 2011, 11:43:22 PM
I have always been disgusted at the IRA disappearing bodies

And I can only but reiterate that. Disappearing bodies is obscene and inhumane.

So as far as your comment above is concerned, I can only conclude that your only interest in this thread is not so much sympathy for the families, but hoping to score some sort of cheap political point.

So "disappearing bodies is obscene and inhumane"? What elements of the PIRA campaign were 'decent' and 'humane'?

And while you might consider it bad taste that attempts are made to 'score political points', it might be also be considered in bad taste to use that defense to avoid pertinent issues. I don't for a second doubt that anyone on here has anything but massive sympathies with the families. That doesn't mean we have to ignore some 'inconvenient' aspects.

Maguire, get over yourself. I've never shied away from condemning what you'd love to believe I find "inconvenient". Believing the IRA has a right to use force doesn't mean I believe that every action they did was justifiable. I'll condemn the disappearing of bodies all day long if need be. No inconvenience to me at all, you'll be disappointed to hear.

As the context is 'political point scoring', my reference to 'inconvenient' aspects were the allegations of who was involved. Of course you don't find it inconvenient to condemn the disappearing of bodies - that's now official party policy.

I've always found such acts totally disgusting. Implying I ever thought otherwise, without evidence nor reason, is fairly pathetic. Again, just because you wish something were true to claim about me, doesn't make it so, and again, apologies at how that must disappoint you.

I don't get disappointed that easily. Sorry to disappoint you, if you're disappointed that i'm not disappointed.

I take your word for it when you say you've never thought otherwise. I just find it difficult to understand the logic - from someone who "defends" the PIRA campaign - that these acts were obscene and inhumane, in the context of countless other acts which, by definition, would surely be described in the same terms.

Simple concept Maguire. My disgust for certain actions of the IRA does not diminish my belief that the IRA campaign in general was justifiable. You may disagree on whether or not it was justifiable but that's neither here nor there; the simple fact is that any armed campaign anywhere by any army (guerrilla or otherwise), no matter how legitimate it may have been to the world, is always going to have included certain despicable acts. It's possible and acceptable to condemn such acts without condemning the entire campaign and it's legitimacy.

+1

You are bound to be getting close to fed up repeating this.

Quote from: Nally Stand on November 05, 2013, 10:43:36 PM

Simple concept Maguire. My disgust for certain actions of the IRA does not diminish my belief that the IRA campaign in general was justifiable. You may disagree on whether or not it was justifiable but that's neither here nor there; the simple fact is that any armed campaign anywhere by any army (guerrilla or otherwise), no matter how legitimate it may have been to the world, is always going to have included certain despicable acts. It's possible and acceptable to condemn such acts without condemning the entire campaign and it's legitimacy.

I find it hard to disassociate the two as easily as this and so when it comes to IRA commemorations or other events I just can't swallow the glorification of the armed struggle that is presented to us (largely by Sinn Fein). The rebel songs, the slogans, the emblems, the epitaphs, the wall murals, they all conveniently leave out the times when a young mother was dragged out of her house, murdered and dumped in an unmarked grave.

It's the same as when I meet a member of the British armed forces, no matter how short or insignificant the meeting, should I just meet them in an airport or on the streets of an English city, I feel a reflex of distrust and dislike. I make no apology for that as they are part of an organisation that I know is capable of evil and brutal acts, which they demonstrated during the Troubles.

And that too is the way I view the IRA, as countless times they perpetrated the murder of Irish people in the name of freeing those self-same people.

Quote from: trileacman on November 05, 2013, 11:41:23 PM

Quote from: Nally Stand on November 05, 2013, 10:43:36 PM

Simple concept Maguire. My disgust for certain actions of the IRA does not diminish my belief that the IRA campaign in general was justifiable. You may disagree on whether or not it was justifiable but that's neither here nor there; the simple fact is that any armed campaign anywhere by any army (guerrilla or otherwise), no matter how legitimate it may have been to the world, is always going to have included certain despicable acts. It's possible and acceptable to condemn such acts without condemning the entire campaign and it's legitimacy.

I find it hard to disassociate the two as easily as this and so when it comes to IRA commemorations or other events I just can't swallow the glorification of the armed struggle that is presented to us (largely by Sinn Fein). The rebel songs, the slogans, the emblems, the epitaphs, the wall murals, they all conveniently leave out the times when a young mother was dragged out of her house, murdered and dumped in an unmarked grave.

It's the same as when I meet a member of the British armed forces, no matter how short or insignificant the meeting, should I just meet them in an airport or on the streets of an English city, I feel a reflex of distrust and dislike. I make no apology for that as they are part of an organisation that I know is capable of evil and brutal acts, which they demonstrated during the Troubles.

And that too is the way I view the IRA, as countless times they perpetrated the murder of Irish people in the name of freeing those self-same people.

Again, that's your perspective and that's fair enough. I don't happen to share it and I don't expect you to change your mind. Each to their own. From my own perspective, as I said in my last post, if we use the logic you apply above then no army or armed group anywhere, ever, can be looked at with pride and none should have commemorations for fallen members. While the IRA (as with every army) carried out vile acts I could never condone and actively condemn, I still view their campaign in general as justifiable and unavoidable, and as far as I'm concerned, it was as a result of their campaign that Britain was forced to take seriously nationalist demands for equality and peace. I seen no evidence to suggest that without their campaign, Britain/Unionism would have magically/willingly given us a fraction of the equality we have today without doing so under duress. Anyway, this that is widening the topic a bit far into an area which is debated often enough across countless other threads.

Quote from: T Fearon on November 05, 2013, 02:35:05 PM
Billy Mc Kee had no issue with the killings, as long a the corpses were left by the roadside. Did he not say himself he had no problem with killing Jean Mc Conville, but with the "disappearing" of her corpse, or words to that effect.

Why would he have a problem with it? She was an informer and if not already responsible for the death of volunteers was endangering the lives of others. After being warned she knew the risk she was taking by continuing with her actions. Arguably any officer in a conflict who does not take similar action to neutralising such a threat to those under his command should not be in the position. Disappearing the remains was a cruel and unnecessary act, the death itself, although harsh was probably the only course of action available at the time.

Quote from: Ulick on November 06, 2013, 08:07:29 AM

Quote from: T Fearon on November 05, 2013, 02:35:05 PM
Billy Mc Kee had no issue with the killings, as long a the corpses were left by the roadside. Did he not say himself he had no problem with killing Jean Mc Conville, but with the "disappearing" of her corpse, or words to that effect.

Why would he have a problem with it? She was an informer and if not already responsible for the death of volunteers was endangering the lives of others. After being warned she knew the risk she was taking by continuing with her actions. Arguably any officer in a conflict who does not take similar action to neutralising such a threat to those under his command should not be in the position. Disappearing the remains was a cruel and unnecessary act, the death itself, although harsh was probably the only course of action available at the time.

Was she?

Quote from: Ulick on November 06, 2013, 08:07:29 AM

Quote from: T Fearon on November 05, 2013, 02:35:05 PM
Billy Mc Kee had no issue with the killings, as long a the corpses were left by the roadside. Did he not say himself he had no problem with killing Jean Mc Conville, but with the "disappearing" of her corpse, or words to that effect.

Why would he have a problem with it? She was an informer and if not already responsible for the death of volunteers was endangering the lives of others. After being warned she knew the risk she was taking by continuing with her actions. Arguably any officer in a conflict who does not take similar action to neutralising such a threat to those under his command should not be in the position. Disappearing the remains was a cruel and unnecessary act, the death itself, although harsh was probably the only course of action available at the time.

I didn't think there was official confirmation that the IRA said she was an informer, besides they didn't give her much time to stop her actions as they 'arrested' her the next day and killed her.

I still don't get the logic behind not doing what they normal (fcuk like its normal) did when dealing with informers, i.e shooting them and leaving them in a ditch, you seemed informed enough on the matter maybe you could shed some light as to why they were disappeared?

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on November 06, 2013, 08:50:11 AM

Quote from: Ulick on November 06, 2013, 08:07:29 AM

Quote from: T Fearon on November 05, 2013, 02:35:05 PM
Billy Mc Kee had no issue with the killings, as long a the corpses were left by the roadside. Did he not say himself he had no problem with killing Jean Mc Conville, but with the "disappearing" of her corpse, or words to that effect.

Why would he have a problem with it? She was an informer and if not already responsible for the death of volunteers was endangering the lives of others. After being warned she knew the risk she was taking by continuing with her actions. Arguably any officer in a conflict who does not take similar action to neutralising such a threat to those under his command should not be in the position. Disappearing the remains was a cruel and unnecessary act, the death itself, although harsh was probably the only course of action available at the time.

I didn't think there was official confirmation that the IRA said she was an informer, besides they didn't give her much time to stop her actions as they 'arrested' her the next day and killed her.

I still don't get the logic behind not doing what they normal (fcuk like its normal) did when dealing with informers, i.e shooting them and leaving them in a ditch, you seemed informed enough on the matter maybe you could shed some light as to why they were disappeared?

Hughes (the person who said Adams gave the order) said she was caught with a radio and warned what would happen if she did it again. A number of weeks later she was caught again. She was shot. I have no idea why they were disappeared - my only guess was to save on some short term bad press.

Quote from: Ulick on November 06, 2013, 09:29:15 AM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on November 06, 2013, 08:50:11 AM

Quote from: Ulick on November 06, 2013, 08:07:29 AM

Quote from: T Fearon on November 05, 2013, 02:35:05 PM
Billy Mc Kee had no issue with the killings, as long a the corpses were left by the roadside. Did he not say himself he had no problem with killing Jean Mc Conville, but with the "disappearing" of her corpse, or words to that effect.

Why would he have a problem with it? She was an informer and if not already responsible for the death of volunteers was endangering the lives of others. After being warned she knew the risk she was taking by continuing with her actions. Arguably any officer in a conflict who does not take similar action to neutralising such a threat to those under his command should not be in the position. Disappearing the remains was a cruel and unnecessary act, the death itself, although harsh was probably the only course of action available at the time.

I didn't think there was official confirmation that the IRA said she was an informer, besides they didn't give her much time to stop her actions as they 'arrested' her the next day and killed her.

I still don't get the logic behind not doing what they normal (fcuk like its normal) did when dealing with informers, i.e shooting them and leaving them in a ditch, you seemed informed enough on the matter maybe you could shed some light as to why they were disappeared?

Hughes (the person who said Adams gave the order) said she was caught with a radio and warned what would happen if she did it again. A number of weeks later she was caught again. She was shot. I have no idea why they were disappeared - my only guess was to save on some short term bad press.

Even if the radio allegations are true ( and I'm quite sceptical that anyone would keep using a radio having been told to stop) could they not have ordered her out of the area seeing as she was a mother of a large family?

Quote from: Rossfan on November 06, 2013, 10:37:41 AM

Quote from: Ulick on November 06, 2013, 09:29:15 AM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on November 06, 2013, 08:50:11 AM

Quote from: Ulick on November 06, 2013, 08:07:29 AM

Quote from: T Fearon on November 05, 2013, 02:35:05 PM
Billy Mc Kee had no issue with the killings, as long a the corpses were left by the roadside. Did he not say himself he had no problem with killing Jean Mc Conville, but with the "disappearing" of her corpse, or words to that effect.

Why would he have a problem with it? She was an informer and if not already responsible for the death of volunteers was endangering the lives of others. After being warned she knew the risk she was taking by continuing with her actions. Arguably any officer in a conflict who does not take similar action to neutralising such a threat to those under his command should not be in the position. Disappearing the remains was a cruel and unnecessary act, the death itself, although harsh was probably the only course of action available at the time.

I didn't think there was official confirmation that the IRA said she was an informer, besides they didn't give her much time to stop her actions as they 'arrested' her the next day and killed her.

I still don't get the logic behind not doing what they normal (fcuk like its normal) did when dealing with informers, i.e shooting them and leaving them in a ditch, you seemed informed enough on the matter maybe you could shed some light as to why they were disappeared?

Hughes (the person who said Adams gave the order) said she was caught with a radio and warned what would happen if she did it again. A number of weeks later she was caught again. She was shot. I have no idea why they were disappeared - my only guess was to save on some short term bad press.

Even if the radio allegations are true ( and I'm quite sceptical that anyone would keep using a radio having been told to stop) could they not have ordered her out of the area seeing as she was a mother of a large family?

In hindsight that is what should have been done,but as I said before they were strange times and decisions made on all sorts of things that were wrong and this was def one of them.Informers were shot not only for being informers and endangering the lives of volunteers but also as a deterant to others,I know this sounds very cold and callus but people can be driven to do some terrible things in drastic situations.Again I am not trying to excuse what happened. 

Quote from: glens abu on November 06, 2013, 11:29:14 AM

Quote from: Rossfan on November 06, 2013, 10:37:41 AM

Quote from: Ulick on November 06, 2013, 09:29:15 AM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on November 06, 2013, 08:50:11 AM

Quote from: Ulick on November 06, 2013, 08:07:29 AM

Quote from: T Fearon on November 05, 2013, 02:35:05 PM
Billy Mc Kee had no issue with the killings, as long a the corpses were left by the roadside. Did he not say himself he had no problem with killing Jean Mc Conville, but with the "disappearing" of her corpse, or words to that effect.

Why would he have a problem with it? She was an informer and if not already responsible for the death of volunteers was endangering the lives of others. After being warned she knew the risk she was taking by continuing with her actions. Arguably any officer in a conflict who does not take similar action to neutralising such a threat to those under his command should not be in the position. Disappearing the remains was a cruel and unnecessary act, the death itself, although harsh was probably the only course of action available at the time.

I didn't think there was official confirmation that the IRA said she was an informer, besides they didn't give her much time to stop her actions as they 'arrested' her the next day and killed her.

I still don't get the logic behind not doing what they normal (fcuk like its normal) did when dealing with informers, i.e shooting them and leaving them in a ditch, you seemed informed enough on the matter maybe you could shed some light as to why they were disappeared?

Hughes (the person who said Adams gave the order) said she was caught with a radio and warned what would happen if she did it again. A number of weeks later she was caught again. She was shot. I have no idea why they were disappeared - my only guess was to save on some short term bad press.

Even if the radio allegations are true ( and I'm quite sceptical that anyone would keep using a radio having been told to stop) could they not have ordered her out of the area seeing as she was a mother of a large family?

In hindsight that is what should have been done,but as I said before they were strange times and decisions made on all sorts of things that were wrong and this was def one of them.Informers were shot not only for being informers and endangering the lives of volunteers but also as a deterant to others,I know this sounds very cold and callus but people can be driven to do some terrible things in drastic situations.Again I am not trying to excuse what happened.

From Wikipedia and O'Loan confirmed as much on the documentary.


"In July 2006, Police Ombudsman Nuala O'Loan stated after an investigation by her office that there is no evidence that Jean McConville had ever passed information on to the security forces.[10] O'Loan said she would give the family more details of the findings of her investigation in the near future and would make those details public.

O'Loan said it was not her normal role to confirm or deny the identity of people working as agents for the security services. "However, this situation is unique. Jean McConville left an orphaned family, the youngest of whom were six-year-old boys. The family have suffered extensively over the years, as we all know, and that suffering has only been made worse by allegations that their mother was an informant. As part of our investigation we have looked very extensively at all the intelligence available at the time. There is no evidence that Mrs. McConville gave information to the police, the military or the security service."[16]

Quote from: glens abu on November 06, 2013, 11:29:14 AM
In hindsight that is what should have been done,but as I said before they were strange times and decisions made on all sorts of things that were wrong and this was def one of them.Informers were shot not only for being informers and endangering the lives of volunteers but also as a deterant to others,I know this sounds very cold and callus but people can be driven to do some terrible things in drastic situations.Again I am not trying to excuse what happened.

You saying "I am not trying to excuse what happened" does not mean you are not trying to excuse what happened.

Quote from: hardstation on November 06, 2013, 12:09:22 PM

Quote from: deiseach on November 06, 2013, 11:59:41 AM

Quote from: glens abu on November 06, 2013, 11:29:14 AM
In hindsight that is what should have been done,but as I said before they were strange times and decisions made on all sorts of things that were wrong and this was def one of them.Informers were shot not only for being informers and endangering the lives of volunteers but also as a deterant to others,I know this sounds very cold and callus but people can be driven to do some terrible things in drastic situations.Again I am not trying to excuse what happened.

You saying "I am not trying to excuse what happened" does not mean you are not trying to excuse what happened.

Is he trying to excuse what happened? I must have missed that.

The post is one long litany of excuses.

Quote from: deiseach on November 06, 2013, 11:59:41 AM

Quote from: glens abu on November 06, 2013, 11:29:14 AM
In hindsight that is what should have been done,but as I said before they were strange times and decisions made on all sorts of things that were wrong and this was def one of them.Informers were shot not only for being informers and endangering the lives of volunteers but also as a deterant to others,I know this sounds very cold and callus but people can be driven to do some terrible things in drastic situations.Again I am not trying to excuse what happened.

You saying "I am not trying to excuse what happened" does not mean you are not trying to excuse what happened.

I understand that people like yourself will never believe what I or others who think like me say and I respect that.Sinn e

Quote from: hardstation on November 06, 2013, 12:15:44 PM

Quote from: deiseach on November 06, 2013, 12:13:27 PM

Quote from: hardstation on November 06, 2013, 12:09:22 PM

Quote from: deiseach on November 06, 2013, 11:59:41 AM

Quote from: glens abu on November 06, 2013, 11:29:14 AM
In hindsight that is what should have been done,but as I said before they were strange times and decisions made on all sorts of things that were wrong and this was def one of them.Informers were shot not only for being informers and endangering the lives of volunteers but also as a deterant to others,I know this sounds very cold and callus but people can be driven to do some terrible things in drastic situations.Again I am not trying to excuse what happened.

You saying "I am not trying to excuse what happened" does not mean you are not trying to excuse what happened.

Is he trying to excuse what happened? I must have missed that.

The post is one long litany of excuses.

In hindsight that is what should have been done,but as I said before they were strange times and decisions made on all sorts of things that were wrong and this was def one of them.

Why did you stop reading there?

Quote from: hardstation on November 06, 2013, 12:19:23 PM
Telling us the reason why the IRA shot touts is not excusing it. It is, erm, telling us the reason why they did it.

You could apply the same logic to those who defend the Paras on Bloody Sunday. "I'm not excusing it, but..."

Quote from: hardstation on November 06, 2013, 12:26:09 PM
...and it was def wrong".

I refer you to my original post.

The concept of killing touts/traitors was something that had gone on in a lot wars, the British did it for years, killing soldiers suffering from shell shock (306 British  soldiers were executed for desertion during World War I) many of these were suffering from this.

These people who were joining up weren't all at the top of the clever tree, most of them were better educated once they were caught and imprisoned, as they were mainly rioting from an early age and in those days in Belfast it was lethal. If they happened to be picked up and given a beating by the police they could have caved in to the pressure put on them, for some people it doesn't take much I'd say.

That's when you are truly fcuked, if caught by the IRA, dead, you did not give information then it would have been prison for life (well they thought that at the time) and family taken off you (again told that at the time) must have been mental in fairness.

Quote from: Nally Stand on November 06, 2013, 12:23:11 AM

Quote from: trileacman on November 05, 2013, 11:41:23 PM

Quote from: Nally Stand on November 05, 2013, 10:43:36 PM

Simple concept Maguire. My disgust for certain actions of the IRA does not diminish my belief that the IRA campaign in general was justifiable. You may disagree on whether or not it was justifiable but that's neither here nor there; the simple fact is that any armed campaign anywhere by any army (guerrilla or otherwise), no matter how legitimate it may have been to the world, is always going to have included certain despicable acts. It's possible and acceptable to condemn such acts without condemning the entire campaign and it's legitimacy.

I find it hard to disassociate the two as easily as this and so when it comes to IRA commemorations or other events I just can't swallow the glorification of the armed struggle that is presented to us (largely by Sinn Fein). The rebel songs, the slogans, the emblems, the epitaphs, the wall murals, they all conveniently leave out the times when a young mother was dragged out of her house, murdered and dumped in an unmarked grave.

It's the same as when I meet a member of the British armed forces, no matter how short or insignificant the meeting, should I just meet them in an airport or on the streets of an English city, I feel a reflex of distrust and dislike. I make no apology for that as they are part of an organisation that I know is capable of evil and brutal acts, which they demonstrated during the Troubles.

And that too is the way I view the IRA, as countless times they perpetrated the murder of Irish people in the name of freeing those self-same people.

Again, that's your perspective and that's fair enough. I don't happen to share it and I don't expect you to change your mind. Each to their own. From my own perspective, as I said in my last post, if we use the logic you apply above then no army or armed group anywhere, ever, can be looked at with pride and none should have commemorations for fallen members. While the IRA (as with every army) carried out vile acts I could never condone and actively condemn, I still view their campaign in general as justifiable and unavoidable, and as far as I'm concerned, it was as a result of their campaign that Britain was forced to take seriously nationalist demands for equality and peace. I seen no evidence to suggest that without their campaign, Britain/Unionism would have magically/willingly given us a fraction of the equality we have today without doing so under duress. Anyway, this that is widening the topic a bit far into an area which is debated often enough across countless other threads.

Eh you're trying to warp my opinion to make serve you're own political ends there Nally.

If we use your logic then all acts of violence and murder can be excused should it serve a greater good.

Condemning certain actions but supporting the campaign isn't truly condemning it, is it. And despite what you said up there murdering Jean McConville had nothing to do with nationalist demands for "peace".

Quote from: trileacman on November 06, 2013, 01:43:50 PM

Quote from: Nally Stand on November 06, 2013, 12:23:11 AM

Quote from: trileacman on November 05, 2013, 11:41:23 PM

Quote from: Nally Stand on November 05, 2013, 10:43:36 PM

Simple concept Maguire. My disgust for certain actions of the IRA does not diminish my belief that the IRA campaign in general was justifiable. You may disagree on whether or not it was justifiable but that's neither here nor there; the simple fact is that any armed campaign anywhere by any army (guerrilla or otherwise), no matter how legitimate it may have been to the world, is always going to have included certain despicable acts. It's possible and acceptable to condemn such acts without condemning the entire campaign and it's legitimacy.

I find it hard to disassociate the two as easily as this and so when it comes to IRA commemorations or other events I just can't swallow the glorification of the armed struggle that is presented to us (largely by Sinn Fein). The rebel songs, the slogans, the emblems, the epitaphs, the wall murals, they all conveniently leave out the times when a young mother was dragged out of her house, murdered and dumped in an unmarked grave.

It's the same as when I meet a member of the British armed forces, no matter how short or insignificant the meeting, should I just meet them in an airport or on the streets of an English city, I feel a reflex of distrust and dislike. I make no apology for that as they are part of an organisation that I know is capable of evil and brutal acts, which they demonstrated during the Troubles.

And that too is the way I view the IRA, as countless times they perpetrated the murder of Irish people in the name of freeing those self-same people.

Again, that's your perspective and that's fair enough. I don't happen to share it and I don't expect you to change your mind. Each to their own. From my own perspective, as I said in my last post, if we use the logic you apply above then no army or armed group anywhere, ever, can be looked at with pride and none should have commemorations for fallen members. While the IRA (as with every army) carried out vile acts I could never condone and actively condemn, I still view their campaign in general as justifiable and unavoidable, and as far as I'm concerned, it was as a result of their campaign that Britain was forced to take seriously nationalist demands for equality and peace. I seen no evidence to suggest that without their campaign, Britain/Unionism would have magically/willingly given us a fraction of the equality we have today without doing so under duress. Anyway, this that is widening the topic a bit far into an area which is debated often enough across countless other threads.

Eh you're trying to warp my opinion to make serve you're own political ends there Nally.

If we use your logic then all acts of violence and murder can be excused should it serve a greater good.

Condemning certain actions but supporting the campaign isn't truly condemning it, is it. And despite what you said up there murdering Jean McConville had nothing to do with nationalist demands for "peace".

So despite my repeated condemnation of what happened to the disappeared, you're accusing me of "excusing all acts of violence and murder" and of supporting/excusing what happened to Jean McConville? That's an utterly incredible bit of word twisting from someone accusing me of warping things to suit my own ends!

Quote from: trileacman on November 06, 2013, 01:43:50 PM
If we use your logic then all acts of violence and murder can be excused should it serve a greater good.

Horseshit. My logic is in reference to a campaign which in my own opinion was justified. Nowhere did I state (or come remotely close to stating) that all acts of violence and murder should be excused. You being grossly misleading and downright bizzare to claim I did say as much.

Quote from: trileacman on November 06, 2013, 01:43:50 PM
Condemning certain actions but supporting the campaign isn't truly condemning it, is it.

Yes it is. To use your claim on a smaller scale and then a bigger scale: GAA players on a field regularly strike eachother. Do you condemn such actions but continue to support the GAA, or do you withdraw all support for the GAA over certain actions by it's members that you condemn? Some allied forces carried out obscene acts in WWII. Should the entire allied campaign have not been supported as a result of that? If condemning individual actions makes it impossible to support a campaign in general, then has there ever been an armed campaign by anybody, anywhere, that was worthy of supporting?

Quote from: trileacman on November 06, 2013, 01:43:50 PM
And despite what you said up there murdering Jean McConville had nothing to do with nationalist demands for "peace".

I referred to the IRA campaign, not to an individual act carried out by the IRA. To carry on the analogy from above, I continue to support the GAA's aims of fostering a 32 County national identity, but that doesn't mean I can't condemn individual acts by it's members. So do please quote "what I said up there" where as you claim, I specifically said that murdering Jean McConville was a nationalist demand for peace. I've tried to be civil in my last post but your attempts to put words in my mouth in that last post are absolutely disgusting.

Quote from: Nally Stand on November 06, 2013, 02:11:14 PM

Quote from: trileacman on November 06, 2013, 01:43:50 PM
Condemning certain actions but supporting the campaign isn't truly condemning it, is it.

Yes it is. To use your claim on a smaller scale and then a bigger scale: GAA players on a field regularly strike eachother. Do you condemn such actions but continue to support the GAA, or do you withdraw all support for the GAA over certain actions by it's members that you condemn? Some allied forces carried out obscene acts in WWII. Should the entire allied campaign have not been supported as a result of that? If condemning individual actions makes it impossible to support a campaign in general, then has there ever been an armed campaign by anybody, anywhere, that was worthy of supporting?

Surely that analogy is flawed? This wasn't actions of a few individual members - it was sanctioned from the top of the organisation - it was effectively policy. The analogy would be the Árd Comhairle directing players on to "regularly strike each other".

Quote from: Ulick on November 06, 2013, 09:29:15 AM

Quote from: Milltown Row2 on November 06, 2013, 08:50:11 AM

Quote from: Ulick on November 06, 2013, 08:07:29 AM

Quote from: T Fearon on November 05, 2013, 02:35:05 PM
Billy Mc Kee had no issue with the killings, as long a the corpses were left by the roadside. Did he not say himself he had no problem with killing Jean Mc Conville, but with the "disappearing" of her corpse, or words to that effect.

Why would he have a problem with it? She was an informer and if not already responsible for the death of volunteers was endangering the lives of others. After being warned she knew the risk she was taking by continuing with her actions. Arguably any officer in a conflict who does not take similar action to neutralising such a threat to those under his command should not be in the position. Disappearing the remains was a cruel and unnecessary act, the death itself, although harsh was probably the only course of action available at the time.

I didn't think there was official confirmation that the IRA said she was an informer, besides they didn't give her much time to stop her actions as they 'arrested' her the next day and killed her.

I still don't get the logic behind not doing what they normal (fcuk like its normal) did when dealing with informers, i.e shooting them and leaving them in a ditch, you seemed informed enough on the matter maybe you could shed some light as to why they were disappeared?

Hughes (the person who said Adams gave the order) said she was caught with a radio and warned what would happen if she did it again. A number of weeks later she was caught again. She was shot. I have no idea why they were disappeared - my only guess was to save on some short term bad press.

Does that mean you believe that Adams gave the order?

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 06, 2013, 05:28:22 PM

Quote from: Nally Stand on November 06, 2013, 02:11:14 PM

Quote from: trileacman on November 06, 2013, 01:43:50 PM
Condemning certain actions but supporting the campaign isn't truly condemning it, is it.

Yes it is. To use your claim on a smaller scale and then a bigger scale: GAA players on a field regularly strike eachother. Do you condemn such actions but continue to support the GAA, or do you withdraw all support for the GAA over certain actions by it's members that you condemn? Some allied forces carried out obscene acts in WWII. Should the entire allied campaign have not been supported as a result of that? If condemning individual actions makes it impossible to support a campaign in general, then has there ever been an armed campaign by anybody, anywhere, that was worthy of supporting?

Surely that analogy is flawed? This wasn't actions of a few individual members - it was sanctioned from the top of the organisation - it was effectively policy. The analogy would be the Árd Comhairle directing players on to "regularly strike each other".

Agreed, and the GAA discipline players as well, the IRA still haven't done anything to return the body of Jean McConville.

Quote from: Nally Stand on November 06, 2013, 02:11:14 PM
So despite my repeated condemnation of what happened to the disappeared, you're accusing me of "excusing all acts of violence and murder" and of supporting/excusing what happened to Jean McConville? That's an utterly incredible bit of word twisting from someone accusing me of warping things to suit my own ends!

Yeah but you did warp what I said when their was no need to. You can't cry foul now, next time leave it well enough alone and stop twisting the words of others.

Quote
I referred to the IRA campaign, not to an individual act carried out by the IRA. To carry on the analogy from above, I continue to support the GAA's aims of fostering a 32 County national identity, but that doesn't mean I can't condemn individual acts by it's members. So do please quote "what I said up there" where as you claim, I specifically said that murdering Jean McConville was a nationalist demand for peace. I've tried to be civil in my last post but your attempts to put words in my mouth in that last post are absolutely disgusting.

You's have f**k all to be disgusted about if you'd have left what I said alone, you didn't and now you're on you're high horse when it happens to you. Grow up.

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 06, 2013, 05:28:22 PM
Surely that analogy is flawed? This wasn't actions of a few individual members - it was sanctioned from the top of the organisation - it was effectively policy. The analogy would be the Árd Comhairle directing players on to "regularly strike each other".

Any proof that it was "sanctioned from the top"? Or are you presenting Brendan Hughes' claim as fact? And again, no mater who sanctioned it, top, middle or bottom; while it was obscene, disappearing bodies was not typical of IRA operations and I again state my view that it is possible to view the IRA's campaign as justifiable, while seeing certain of their actions/decisions as anything but.

Much as many will hate to have it brought up, the Old IRA disappeared bodies in their time too (estimated to be around 180. That's about 171 more people that the Provos disappeared), but I'm sure most Irish people if asked would still view their campaign as justifiable and necessary.

What annoys me is there are people commenting on this subject who still are not aware that Jean McConville's boby was found years ago. :-[

Quote from: glens abu on November 06, 2013, 05:58:38 PM
What annoys me is there are people commenting on this subject who still are not aware that Jean McConville's boby was found years ago. :-[

Happened upon by members of the public, not returned by the IRA.

Trileac, you took word twisting to simply chronic levels and claimed I made direct statements that I did not.

Quote from: trileacman on November 06, 2013, 05:39:58 PM
the IRA still haven't done anything to return the body of Jean McConville.

If you had as much concern for Jean McConville as you'd like us to believe, you would know that her body was discovered in 2003. While her body was discovered by accident, in recent years the remains of six other IRA victims have been found, while a fairly narrow search area has been seemingly confirmed as the location for another. Do you genuinely believe these bits of progress, however slow, have been made without assistance from the IRA? Now before anybody gets on their high horse and accuses me of lavishing praise on the IRA for this, I am not. I am merely stating that it is nothing more than waffle to suggest that they haven't been assisting with the recovery of remains.

Quote from: trileacman on November 06, 2013, 06:04:50 PM

Quote from: glens abu on November 06, 2013, 05:58:38 PM
What annoys me is there are people commenting on this subject who still are not aware that Jean McConville's boby was found years ago. :-[

Happened upon by members of the public, not returned by the IRA.

too late,asshole.

Is there any proof she was an informer?? sounds to me like certain people spreading rumors to take away from the lowlife act that was carried out. Did the same IRA men not spread disinformation that she was alive and away safe in another location to the community?. We supposed to believe from them same people that she was a informer, yeah right!!!

Quote from: Wildweasel74 on November 06, 2013, 06:44:58 PM
Is there any proof she was an informer?? sounds to me like certain people spreading rumors to take away from the lowlife act that was carried out. Did the same IRA men not spread disinformation that she was alive and away safe in another location to the community?. We supposed to believe from them same people that she was a informer, yeah right!!!

There is no proof that she was an informer and likewise there is no proof to suggest Gerry Adams was involved. People will decide what they want to believe or what suits them best to believe though. There are people (including some on here I can imagine) who will blindly and with some glee accept Brendan Hughes' claim that Adams ordered her disappearance, but will scoff at his other claim that she was an informer who had been warned to cease her activities. Doubtless there are people who will believe the vice-versa of Hughes' claims. Fact is there is no definitive proof for either allegation.

Quote from: Nally Stand on November 06, 2013, 05:50:39 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 06, 2013, 05:28:22 PM
Surely that analogy is flawed? This wasn't actions of a few individual members - it was sanctioned from the top of the organisation - it was effectively policy. The analogy would be the Árd Comhairle directing players on to "regularly strike each other".

Any proof that it was "sanctioned from the top"? Or are you presenting Brendan Hughes' claim as fact? And again, no mater who sanctioned it, top, middle or bottom; while it was obscene, disappearing bodies was not typical of IRA operations and I again state my view that it is possible to view the IRA's campaign as justifiable, while seeing certain of their actions/decisions as anything but.

I didn't think it was in dispute that these killings were sanctioned. Hughes (and Price) allege Adams as Belfast OC ordered that one particular killing - that allegation of involvement has been denied by Adams, but i'm fairly sure there's no denial that these were sanctioned killings - and if I recall correctly, there was reference in the programme to an IRA decision to abandon this practice, which also indicates that it was 'policy'. for a time

Also, i'd consider it an important distinction in terms of whether it was sanctioned activity or a 'solo run' by some members at the 'bottom'. Apply the same logic to security forces involved in collusion - the distinction is fairly critical.

Quote from: Nally Stand on November 06, 2013, 06:56:11 PM

Quote from: Wildweasel74 on November 06, 2013, 06:44:58 PM
Is there any proof she was an informer?? sounds to me like certain people spreading rumors to take away from the lowlife act that was carried out. Did the same IRA men not spread disinformation that she was alive and away safe in another location to the community?. We supposed to believe from them same people that she was a informer, yeah right!!!

There is no proof that she was an informer and likewise there is no proof to suggest Gerry Adams was involved. People will decide what they want to believe or what suits them best to believe though. There are people (including some on here I can imagine) who will blindly and with some glee accept Brendan Hughes' claim that Adams ordered her disappearance, but will scoff at his other claim that she was an informer who had been warned to cease her activities. Doubtless there are people who will believe the vice-versa of Hughes' claims. Fact is there is no definitive proof for either allegation.

You're right - apart from testimony, there's no definitive proof of either. But one ended with a mother of 10 killed and disappeared.

Sorrowful Gerry joins in call to find IRA victims
Adams was certainly unanimous with himself in his opinion that he was one of the good guys

Miriam Lord
Wed, Nov 6, 2013, 01:00

It's a pity the man who was commander of the IRA in west Belfast all those years ago wasn't in the Dáil chamber yesterday afternoon.
He could have cleared up a few questions.
The harrowing story of those people now known as "the Disappeared" was very much on the minds of party leaders on the day after a television programme was aired about their abduction, murder and secret burial.

An evil, squalid episode epitomised by the fate of Jean McConville, a mother of 10 wrenched from her young family and taken to her death. Her body was found, by chance, decades later. Other families suffered similar grief. And some continue to wait into their old age, hoping they will get the chance to bring their loved ones home to rest.

Palpable hurt
"It's a long time ago but the hurt is obviously as palpable and as relevant now as it was then," the Taoiseach told a hushed Dáil.

The Fianna Fáil leader spoke for those families who still didn't know where their loved ones were hidden or buried. "I would ask that every effort is made to pursue the case of the murder of Jean McConville and that all involved should be in a position to co-operate fully," said Micheál Martin.

Gerry Adams couldn't agree more. A sorrowful Sinn Féin leader told the House that he had also seen the documentary. Not only that, but he took part in it. He seemed quite proud of this.

"I took part in the programme in order to focus on the necessary effort to get those whose remains have not been recovered to be retrieved as quickly as possible and returned to their families."

Did Adams see the icy-expressions on the faces around him as he spoke? Did he hear the cynical sighs of disgust? And if so, did he wonder why?

"I would ask the Taoiseach to join with me in assisting very actively in the work of the commission which was established under the last government . . . and I think the programme last night should be a huge motivation to anyone who has information whatsoever to bring it forward."

Gerry Adams was certainly unanimous with himself in his opinion that he was one of the good guys.

But judging by the chilly atmosphere in the chamber and the eye-rolling of the vast majority of deputies present, they did not share his assessment of his performance.

The Taoiseach coolly noted that Adams had taken part. He too hoped that some good would come out of the programme.

Looking directly at the Sinn Féin leader, who still insists he wasn't in the IRA, he mused: "The fact of the matter is that somebody ordered that Jean McConville be murdered. Somebody instructed that people take her away. Somebody instructed that Dolours Price drive that vehicle across the Border and somebody instructed that what happened took place."

The Sinn Féin leader and TD for Louth listened, sitting back in his seat, arms folded across his body.

Two IRA volunteers, now deceased, named Gerry Adams as that person. He has always vehemently denied this and says they named him because of their opposition to the peace process and the part he played in it.

The Taoiseach didn't name any names in the Dáil yesterday. Neither did Micheál Martin. And when Fianna Fáil's Brendan Smith raised the issue of "the Disappeared" during Topical Questions, he didn't name anybody either.

However their comments were as much about what went unsaid as what they put on the record.

"It may well be that those people are still around and they know what happened, and your own appeal from this may well have some effect, and I hope it has," said Enda to Gerry. "I hope the programme stimulates active minds to make their information available. There were some, eh, very direct comments made, indeed, about your own presence on the programme yesterday . . ."

He left it at that.

Brendan Smith, a TD for Cavan-Monaghan, returned to the subject later. In a powerful speech, he retold the bleak tale of the Disappeared

"These are the silent witnesses to some of the grimmest and most cynical crimes of that troubled time," he said. "Sons, brothers, husbands, fathers and mothers were ruthlessly taken from their families in the dark of night on the orders of self-appointed local warlords. Some were barely old enough to shave before they disappeared into the depths of an IRA conspiracy."

He named some of the victims and spoke of the agony of those left to mourn them; people like Charlie Armstrong's widow.

"Mrs Armstrong's quiet dignity and strength as she visited the grave of her husband stood in stark contrast to the weasel words of Gerry Adams as even now he tries to muddy the waters."

Very strong words to use on the floor of the Dáil against a sitting deputy. Adams wasn't in the chamber to hear him.

"The IRA still refuse to accept responsibility for the murders and legitimate questions are not answered by deputy Adams and others."

Brendan Smith wasn't pulling any punches.

"Contrary to what Deputy Adams and others would like now to claim, everyone in the North does not share responsibility for what happened there," he said, pointing out that nationalist communities across the North were resisting the IRA's campaign of terror while trying to rear families and live in peace.

Speaking of those still trying to recover the remains of loved ones he hoped "all members in this House rise to their moral responsibility to help those families".

He wanted to hear what the IRA leadership at that time had to say now about these murders. But who were those leaders and who was the commander, Brendan?

Gerry Adams can't help him out there, much as he might want to. As we all know he was never in the IRA . . .

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/oireachtas/sorrowful-gerry-joins-in-call-to-find-ira-victims-1.1584942?page=1

Can this be downloaded anywhere lads? Looked in the usual spots but can't find it.

IN RESPONSE to the recent BBC/RTÉ programme concerning those people shot and secretly buried by the IRA, Breige Wright, the sister of Belfast man Seamus Wright – in a letter to An Phoblacht – wishes to clarify a number of points.

These particularly concern interventions and accusations attributed to Dolours Price and Brendan Hughes.

My brother, Seamus Wright
By Breige Wright
MY BROTHER, Seamus Wright, an IRA Volunteer, was killed and secretly buried by the IRA in 1972.

They have said why they killed him. They have identified the location where they buried his body.

In 2010, for the first time, my family made a public intervention following comments by Dolours Price in relation to the disappearance and death of our brother Seamus.

At that time we challenged her to either bring forward information that could help recover Seamus's remains or to stop using his death in pursuit of her own political agenda. We asked her to engage with the Independent Commission for the Location of Victims Remains (ICLVR).

Contrary to what some media reports have said, she did not engage with the ICLVR.

Others, including Brendan Hughes, sought to use Seamus's death and the circumstances surrounding it in a similar fashion.

None of these people brought forward any information that has been of help in the search for Seamus's remains.

Following Seamus's disappearance there were many rumours and stories. Some suggested that he had gone into hiding with those who had recruited him as their agent – British Military Intelligence; others suggested that he had been killed and buried by the IRA.

In 1999, the IRA publicly accepted its responsibility for killing Seamus.

My family has grieved as any other family. Our loss is no greater or no less than anyone else's.

I have met with the ICLVR. I have met with republicans. I accept the difficulties outlined by the ICLVR and by republicans. These include: the deaths of some of those directly involved in the actual event; the impact of time on people's memories; major physical changes at the site; and the hostility of some, who might have information, to those republicans trying to bring closure. All of these points are a matter of public record.

I know there is a strong concern that previous digging at the site might have disturbed the grave and the remains.

Mr Geoff Knupfer of the ICLVR has recently acknowledged this in relation to another site (The Irish Times, 1 October 2013).

Only the small number of people involved in the killing and burial of my brother have information that might help. Everything else is speculation and rumour. I am satisfied that information has been passed onto the ICLVR in good faith.

I ask those who have genuinely engaged with the ICLVR to continue to do so. I would call on anyone else with genuine information that might help locate the remains of any of those whose bodies have not yet been recovered to pass that information to the ICLVR through whatever conduit they choose.

I would like to thank all of those who have been trying to help our family achieve closure: Gerry Adams, Fr Alex Reid, Fr Brendan O'Callaghan, the ICLVR, Geoff Knupfer and his team, and others who have been working quietly over the past 14 years.

All we as a family want is to be able to bury our brother's remains beside our father, mother and sister.

Premium Online Service For Only €10 Per Year
For less than €1 a month, you get An Phoblacht's Premium Online Service. Sign up today!


PREMIUM SERVICE:
Full access to all An Phoblacht articles
Interactive online PDF Booklet of each edition
Access to our historic Archives
Discounts for the Online Sinn Féin Shop
Only €10 Per
Year Get It Here


An Phoblacht
44 Parnell Sq.
Dublin 1
Ireland
Republican Roll of Honour

 "In Ireland our party has no regular source of income, whatever resources we have secured it has been through our own efforts, we state in confidence to you, that we do not allow ourselves to be restricted in the methods of raising resources," states a four-page letter to the SED  [East German Ruling Party,the East German Socialist Unity Party of Germany ] central committee, dated February 26th, 1989.

"Legal and illegal means have been employed by us. We well recognize the dangers involved in some of our resources raising activity in Ireland and we are constantly examining ways and means whereby this danger can be eliminated."

So said Sean Garland, general secretary of the Workers' Party in 1989. In 1989 both Rabbitte and Gilmore were elected as Workers' Party TDs. Gilmore joined the Official Republican movement when he was in college in 1975. Rabitte was first elected as a Workers' Party councilor in 1985. Today Eamon Gilmore today is of course leader of the Labour party,  Tánaiste and Minister for Forign Affairs and Trade. Rabbitte is Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources.

We are all familiar with Gerry Adams denials he was in the PIRA, but at least he didn't pretend that they didn't exist. The Workers' Party, in which Gilmore and Rabbitte were leading members, routinely denied that the OIRA or "Group B" existed. However with the release of Garlands letter in the Irish Times (incidentally his old buddies in Labour campaigned to stop him from getting extradited to America recently over "superdollar" forgery charges. Garland was ultimately successful in his attempts to block extradition) we have a clear admission that the Workers' Party had no "regular" income and was funded by "illegal" means.

Everyone already knew this, but this letter serves as final confirmation. The Workers' Party was funded by bank robberies, theft, intimidation and forgery. (A printing press linked to the party was involved in forging money)

"Raising party funds was crucial to fight effective campaigns on both sides of the Border, he wrote, particularly as the party had just ordered a new offset printing press costing a total of £170,000 with a five-year bank "laese" (sic).
"Over the past years we have had to borrow large amounts of money to expand and maintain the party. Our technical section has been severly restricted for tactical reasons because of the dangers involved in illegal activity."

Were the numerous election campaigns of the Workers' Party, including those of Gilmore and Rabbitte during the eighties and later funded by the OIRA? Garland says the party was funded by "illegal" means. Gilmore and Rabbitte have "both denied having any knowledge of illegal fundraising by their former political party." They also stated that they received no funds from Workers' Party headquarters for their 1989 general election campaign. What about their previous election campaigns? Ones such as these for example?


Eamon Gilmore – Workers Party- Dun Laoghaire- November 1982
Eamon Gilmore- Workers Party -1985 Local Elections - Ballybrack
Pat Rabbitte – Workers Party – Dublin South West, 1987 General Election
Eamon Gilmore -Workers Party -Dun Laoghaire, 1987 General Election

Are we supposed to believe that Gilmore and Rabbitte never got any money at all from their party to run campaigns or to carry out any other political activity? Ever?



[From "The Lost Revolution"]
"Group B's continued importance was evident in a financial report...in October 1990. From October 1989 until September 1990, costs covered by party head office had amounted to £360,300, of which WP funds provided £189,900 with the balance of £170,600 met by Repsol."

Repsol were their publishing organ and were involved, according to the book and other sources, with money laundering and all sorts of other illegal activity. Take a look at who published and printed the election leaflets previously linked.

It is incomprehensible that members of the Workers' Party did not know of "Group B" and their activities. In fact in the book it is asserted that De Rossa (former IRA prisoner, TD, MEP) a close ally of the twosome was assured by Garland around 1990 that Group B was to be wound up and criminal activity would stop... ie De Rossa knew of "Group B" and their activity. Garland lied anyway and activity did not cease. Gilmore, De Rossa, Rabbitte and co split from the workers party and set up Democratic Left after 92 and merged (and later in effect took over) Labour in 1999.

Throughout the 1980s, allegations that the Official IRA remained in existence and was engaged in criminal activity appeared in the Irish press. In June 1982 the feud with the INLA flared again after OIRA member James Flynn, the alleged assassin of Seamus Costello,[13] was shot dead by the INLA in Dublin.[14] In December 1985 five men, including a Mr. Anthony McDonagh, pleaded guilty to charges of conspiracy to defraud the Inland Revenue in Northern Ireland—McDonagh was described in court as an Official IRA Commander.[15] In February 1992 a British Spotlight programme alleged that the Official IRA was still active and involved in widespread racketeering and armed robberies.[16]
These eventually proved a considerable political embarrassment to the Workers' Party, and in 1992 the leadership proposed amendments to the party constitution which would, inter alia, effectively allow it to purge members suspected of involvement in the Official IRA. This proposal failed to obtain the required two-thirds support at the party conference that year, and as a result the leadership, including six of the party's seven members of Dáil Éireann, left to establish a new party, later named Democratic Left.

What's the relevance to the disappeared?

I don't know if this is an original thought or if I've heard it somewhere in the past associated with this, but does anyone else feel that the labelling of these poor people as 'the disappeared' almost belittles what they have been through. They didn't disappear - they were taken! Against their will. And murdered. They didn't disappear.

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 16, 2013, 05:43:10 PM
What's the relevance to the disappeared?

Which statement do you not equivalent with the disappeared ?

Quote from: glens abu on November 16, 2013, 09:10:07 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 16, 2013, 05:43:10 PM
What's the relevance to the disappeared?

Which statement do you not equivalent with the disappeared ?

The one in relation to senior members of Labour.

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 16, 2013, 10:05:36 PM

Quote from: glens abu on November 16, 2013, 09:10:07 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 16, 2013, 05:43:10 PM
What's the relevance to the disappeared?

Which statement do you not equivalent with the disappeared ?

The one in relation to senior members of Labour.

Well was just pointing out the lies Labour tell about their past and not a mention even by the partners in Government,yet they say GA is telling lies and it's covered by every news media ,and Enda and the boys tell us about it every day.The Sticks for years have been involved in all sorts of criminality but very seldom mentioned.

Quote from: glens abu on November 16, 2013, 10:28:29 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 16, 2013, 10:05:36 PM

Quote from: glens abu on November 16, 2013, 09:10:07 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 16, 2013, 05:43:10 PM
What's the relevance to the disappeared?

Which statement do you not equivalent with the disappeared ?

The one in relation to senior members of Labour.

Well was just pointing out the lies Labour tell about their past and not a mention even by the partners in Government,yet they say GA is telling lies and it's covered by every news media ,and Enda and the boys tell us about it every day.The Sticks for years have been involved in all sorts of criminality but very seldom mentioned.

I don't believe there's any allegation of these politicians being involved in disappearing people. That being the case, this isn't the thread.

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 17, 2013, 08:18:17 AM

Quote from: glens abu on November 16, 2013, 10:28:29 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 16, 2013, 10:05:36 PM

Quote from: glens abu on November 16, 2013, 09:10:07 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 16, 2013, 05:43:10 PM
What's the relevance to the disappeared?

Which statement do you not equivalent with the disappeared ?

The one in relation to senior members of Labour.

Well was just pointing out the lies Labour tell about their past and not a mention even by the partners in Government,yet they say GA is telling lies and it's covered by every news media ,and Enda and the boys tell us about it every day.The Sticks for years have been involved in all sorts of criminality but very seldom mentioned.

I don't believe there's any allegation of these politicians being involved in disappearing people. That being the case, this isn't the thread.

Truth might hurt you Maguire,but I think it's important that people know about the men they have in Government and the hypocrites they are.People on this board prepared to believe drunken liars who make statements about a man they turned against but don't like to hear about others.

Quote from: glens abu on November 17, 2013, 08:45:42 AM

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 17, 2013, 08:18:17 AM

Quote from: glens abu on November 16, 2013, 10:28:29 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 16, 2013, 10:05:36 PM

Quote from: glens abu on November 16, 2013, 09:10:07 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 16, 2013, 05:43:10 PM
What's the relevance to the disappeared?

Which statement do you not equivalent with the disappeared ?

The one in relation to senior members of Labour.

Well was just pointing out the lies Labour tell about their past and not a mention even by the partners in Government,yet they say GA is telling lies and it's covered by every news media ,and Enda and the boys tell us about it every day.The Sticks for years have been involved in all sorts of criminality but very seldom mentioned.

I don't believe there's any allegation of these politicians being involved in disappearing people. That being the case, this isn't the thread.

Truth might hurt you Maguire,but I think it's important that people know about the men they have in Government and the hypocrites they are.People on this board prepared to believe drunken liars who make statements about a man they turned against but don't like to hear about others.

Worthy of discussion indeed.But not in an attempt to take the heat off your own party and the specific issue being discussed here.

And I'm not sure why any truth would hurt me.

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 17, 2013, 09:04:55 AM

Quote from: glens abu on November 17, 2013, 08:45:42 AM

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 17, 2013, 08:18:17 AM

Quote from: glens abu on November 16, 2013, 10:28:29 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 16, 2013, 10:05:36 PM

Quote from: glens abu on November 16, 2013, 09:10:07 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 16, 2013, 05:43:10 PM
What's the relevance to the disappeared?

Which statement do you not equivalent with the disappeared ?

The one in relation to senior members of Labour.

Well was just pointing out the lies Labour tell about their past and not a mention even by the partners in Government,yet they say GA is telling lies and it's covered by every news media ,and Enda and the boys tell us about it every day.The Sticks for years have been involved in all sorts of criminality but very seldom mentioned.

I don't believe there's any allegation of these politicians being involved in disappearing people. That being the case, this isn't the thread.

Truth might hurt you Maguire,but I think it's important that people know about the men they have in Government and the hypocrites they are.People on this board prepared to believe drunken liars who make statements about a man they turned against but don't like to hear about others.

Worthy of discussion indeed.But not in an attempt to take the heat off your own party and the specific issue being discussed here.

And I'm not sure why any truth would hurt me.

My party used to heat so no pressure there,up another 2% in today's latest opinion poll.Just think a little truth required once in a while,but sure unlikely when we keep getting more popular.

Quote from: glens abu on November 17, 2013, 11:29:19 AM

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 17, 2013, 09:04:55 AM

Quote from: glens abu on November 17, 2013, 08:45:42 AM

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 17, 2013, 08:18:17 AM

Quote from: glens abu on November 16, 2013, 10:28:29 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 16, 2013, 10:05:36 PM

Quote from: glens abu on November 16, 2013, 09:10:07 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 16, 2013, 05:43:10 PM
What's the relevance to the disappeared?

Which statement do you not equivalent with the disappeared ?

The one in relation to senior members of Labour.

Well was just pointing out the lies Labour tell about their past and not a mention even by the partners in Government,yet they say GA is telling lies and it's covered by every news media ,and Enda and the boys tell us about it every day.The Sticks for years have been involved in all sorts of criminality but very seldom mentioned.

I don't believe there's any allegation of these politicians being involved in disappearing people. That being the case, this isn't the thread.

Truth might hurt you Maguire,but I think it's important that people know about the men they have in Government and the hypocrites they are.People on this board prepared to believe drunken liars who make statements about a man they turned against but don't like to hear about others.

Worthy of discussion indeed.But not in an attempt to take the heat off your own party and the specific issue being discussed here.

And I'm not sure why any truth would hurt me.

My party used to heat so no pressure there,up another 2% in today's latest opinion poll.Just think a little truth required once in a while,but sure unlikely when we keep getting more popular.

With the "national question" of Irish Unity well and truly off the table.

Quote from: Saffrongael on November 17, 2013, 11:52:49 AM

Quote from: glens abu on November 17, 2013, 11:29:19 AM

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 17, 2013, 09:04:55 AM

Quote from: glens abu on November 17, 2013, 08:45:42 AM

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 17, 2013, 08:18:17 AM

Quote from: glens abu on November 16, 2013, 10:28:29 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 16, 2013, 10:05:36 PM

Quote from: glens abu on November 16, 2013, 09:10:07 PM

Quote from: Maguire01 on November 16, 2013, 05:43:10 PM
What's the relevance to the disappeared?

Which statement do you not equivalent with the disappeared ?

The one in relation to senior members of Labour.

Well was just pointing out the lies Labour tell about their past and not a mention even by the partners in Government,yet they say GA is telling lies and it's covered by every news media ,and Enda and the boys tell us about it every day.The Sticks for years have been involved in all sorts of criminality but very seldom mentioned.

I don't believe there's any allegation of these politicians being involved in disappearing people. That being the case, this isn't the thread.

Truth might hurt you Maguire,but I think it's important that people know about the men they have in Government and the hypocrites they are.People on this board prepared to believe drunken liars who make statements about a man they turned against but don't like to hear about others.

Worthy of discussion indeed.But not in an attempt to take the heat off your own party and the specific issue being discussed here.

And I'm not sure why any truth would hurt me.

My party used to heat so no pressure there,up another 2% in today's latest opinion poll.Just think a little truth required once in a while,but sure unlikely when we keep getting more popular.

With the "national question" of Irish Unity well and truly off the table.

It's not quite as important as getting your feet under the table. But this thread is about the disappeared, so best leaving it to that topic.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-26631551


Jean McConville murder: Pensioner arrested by police

A 77-year-old man has been arrested by police investigating the abduction and murder of Belfast woman Jean McConville

Quote from: orangeman on March 18, 2014, 02:14:52 PM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-26631551


Jean McConville murder: Pensioner arrested by police

A 77-year-old man has been arrested by police investigating the abduction and murder of Belfast woman Jean McConville

Ivor Bell according to the news.

Ivor Bell to be brought to court in the morning to face charges relating to Jean McConville. Will this rattle Sinn Fein's cage? Will any members be worried about where they stand? Or are the big guns untouchable due to the delicate political setup in the north?

Quote from: omagh_gael on March 21, 2014, 11:11:47 PM
Ivor Bell to be brought to court in the morning to face charges relating to Jean McConville. Will this rattle Sinn Fein's cage? Will any members be worried about where they stand? Or are the big guns untouchable due to the delicate political setup in the north?

No, their cage wont be rattled as they have their letters/Queens pardon. Despite 2 former comrades of Gerry Adams pointing the finger at him for ordering the disappearance of Jean McConville, he remains untouchable, and I don't see that changing.

Just like Gerry McGeough, Ivor Bell was supporting an independent candidate in the upcoming elections, and like Geryy, he has been taken out of the picture. The famous words spoken by George Bush ring through in these parts. "You are either with us, or you are against us"

Quote from: give her dixie on March 21, 2014, 11:40:46 PM

Quote from: omagh_gael on March 21, 2014, 11:11:47 PM
Ivor Bell to be brought to court in the morning to face charges relating to Jean McConville. Will this rattle Sinn Fein's cage? Will any members be worried about where they stand? Or are the big guns untouchable due to the delicate political setup in the north?

No, their cage wont be rattled as they have their letters/Queens pardon. Despite 2 former comrades of Gerry Adams pointing the finger at him for ordering the disappearance of Jean McConville, he remains untouchable, and I don't see that changing.

He knew when interviewed for the various programmes a while ago that he was untouchable. The top brass in the Shinners have been absorbed into the establishment now and won't be touched. They know too much!

Quote from: Tony Baloney on March 21, 2014, 11:44:01 PM

Quote from: give her dixie on March 21, 2014, 11:40:46 PM

Quote from: omagh_gael on March 21, 2014, 11:11:47 PM
Ivor Bell to be brought to court in the morning to face charges relating to Jean McConville. Will this rattle Sinn Fein's cage? Will any members be worried about where they stand? Or are the big guns untouchable due to the delicate political setup in the north?

No, their cage wont be rattled as they have their letters/Queens pardon. Despite 2 former comrades of Gerry Adams pointing the finger at him for ordering the disappearance of Jean McConville, he remains untouchable, and I don't see that changing.

Exactly Tony. They are the establishment now.

He knew when interviewed for the various programmes a while ago that he was untouchable. The top brass in the Shinners have been absorbed into the establishment now and won't be touched. They know too much!

Does Ivor not run with Gerry's gang anymore ?

Obviously not given the events.

Ivor was dismissed from the Republican movement in 1985.This is a kick in the balls for all those who had so much hate for SF and Adams that they got ex comrades to tout,Dixies chum McIntyre must be in hiding now as his plan has backfired on him.

Have the cops uncovered new evidence in this case or has Ivor in his old age confessed to some involvement ?

Quote from: orangeman on March 22, 2014, 11:17:27 AM
Have the cops uncovered new evidence in this case or has Ivor in his old age confessed to some involvement ?
[/quote

Would doubt Ivor confessed to anything but the men who used old Republicans with drink problems and a grip against Adams to tout on former comrades might have something to do with it.The man involved in Priory Hall and the Boston tapes should hang his head in shame and those who support him should likewise

In a statement today, Sinn Fein President Gerry Adams said:

"Due process prevents me from commenting on the recent charging of a man in relation to the death of Jean McConville. This is now a matter for the courts.

"However, the killing of Jean McConville and the disappearing of her remains was wrong and a grievous injustice to her family.

"The injustice suffered by the McConville family is one of many legacy issues relating to the conflict.

"We must bear in mind in all of this that there has been a virtual amnesty for British armed forces including state and state-sponsored killings.

"It is Sinn Féin's view that legacy issues and dealing with the past, including past conflict events, are best addressed through an independent, international, truth recovery process.

"In the absence of that, we have agreed to and are seeking the implementation of the Haass compromise proposals. These include the right of families to choose whether to pursue legal action or to seek maximum truth recovery."

Adams still talking about wanting an "international truth recovery", yeah course he does  :-[

What happened afterwards to Mrs McConville's kids. They were orphaned.

Suzanne Breen–

DETECTIVES questioning Ivor Bell about the murder of Jean McConville are "keenly interested" in Sinn Fein leader Gerry Adams's alleged role in the killing.


Sources close to the investigation said it was "far from over" and that detectives want more information on anyone suspected of involvement in the murder, including Mr Adams.

The Sinn Fein president strongly denies any involvement in the Belfast mother of 10's abduction and death in 1972.

The PSNI is also seeking to question former IRA man turned writer Anthony McIntyre about his Boston College interviews with ex-Provisionals on Ms McConville's murder.

As the interviewer for the US university's oral history project, Mr McIntyre's evidence would be crucial in the case against Bell – and any other alleged former IRA leaders who may in future be charged with involvement.

Belfast Magistrates Court heard on Saturday that Bell was an interviewee in one of the tapes and was known as 'Man Z' – something which Bell denies.

The 77-year-old is charged with IRA membership and aiding and abetting in the murder of Jean McConville.

Other alleged former IRA members are expected to be arrested in coming weeks by detectives – who have in their possession tapes of seven republicans, who are all still alive, allegedly discussing the McConville killing.

TAPE

It is understood the PSNI wants to question Mr McIntyre about Bell's alleged interview and the conditions in which it took place, in order to corroborate the claims allegedly made on the tape.

Mr McIntyre would also be quizzed as to whether Bell was 'Man Z'.

However, sources said there were "absolutely no circumstances" in which Mr McIntyre would co-operate with police.

Refusal to do so could result in him facing charges of withholding information – but the sources said he would "go to jail rather than compromise source protection".

Mr McIntyre is a member of the National Union of Journalists and the issue is to be raised with the union this week.

The ex-IRA man has previously said he has "every sympathy with the McConville family in their search for truth recovery" – but added that "journalists, academics, and researchers need protection if they are to gain the necessary information which offers a valuable insight into the past".


As the lead researcher for the Belfast project for Boston College between 2001 and 2006, Mr McIntyre conducted over 170 interviews with 26 republicans. They were undertaken on the agreement that they wouldn't be released until after the interviewee's death.

Tapes of now-deceased IRA members Dolours Price and Brendan Hughes – who both accused Gerry Adams of ordering Jean McConville's murder – were handed over to the PSNI by Boston College.

However, a major legal battle followed over the taped interviews of republicans who are still alive.

Ed Moloney is one of the journalists behind the Boston project which was the catalyst for the McConville case   

http://thebrokenelbow.com/2014/03/22/a-short-response-to-mary-lou-mcdonald/

Another very interesting post here

http://thebrokenelbow.com/2014/02/26/on-the-runs-trickery-by-blair-shows-how-the-future-is-trapped-by-the-past/

Blair was a complete chancer

Quote from: orangeman on March 24, 2014, 09:04:47 AM
Suzanne Breen–

DETECTIVES questioning Ivor Bell about the murder of Jean McConville are "keenly interested" in Sinn Fein leader Gerry Adams's alleged role in the killing.


Sources close to the investigation said it was "far from over" and that detectives want more information on anyone suspected of involvement in the murder, including Mr Adams.

The Sinn Fein president strongly denies any involvement in the Belfast mother of 10's abduction and death in 1972.

The PSNI is also seeking to question former IRA man turned writer Anthony McIntyre about his Boston College interviews with ex-Provisionals on Ms McConville's murder.

As the interviewer for the US university's oral history project, Mr McIntyre's evidence would be crucial in the case against Bell – and any other alleged former IRA leaders who may in future be charged with involvement.

Belfast Magistrates Court heard on Saturday that Bell was an interviewee in one of the tapes and was known as 'Man Z' – something which Bell denies.

The 77-year-old is charged with IRA membership and aiding and abetting in the murder of Jean McConville.

Other alleged former IRA members are expected to be arrested in coming weeks by detectives – who have in their possession tapes of seven republicans, who are all still alive, allegedly discussing the McConville killing.

TAPE

It is understood the PSNI wants to question Mr McIntyre about Bell's alleged interview and the conditions in which it took place, in order to corroborate the claims allegedly made on the tape.

Mr McIntyre would also be quizzed as to whether Bell was 'Man Z'.

However, sources said there were "absolutely no circumstances" in which Mr McIntyre would co-operate with police.

Refusal to do so could result in him facing charges of withholding information – but the sources said he would "go to jail rather than compromise source protection".Mr McIntyre is a member of the National Union of Journalists and the issue is to be raised with the union this week.

The ex-IRA man has previously said he has "every sympathy with the McConville family in their search for truth recovery" – but added that "journalists, academics, and researchers need protection if they are to gain the necessary information which offers a valuable insight into the past".


As the lead researcher for the Belfast project for Boston College between 2001 and 2006, Mr McIntyre conducted over 170 interviews with 26 republicans. They were undertaken on the agreement that they wouldn't be released until after the interviewee's death.

Tapes of now-deceased IRA members Dolours Price and Brendan Hughes – who both accused Gerry Adams of ordering Jean McConville's murder – were handed over to the PSNI by Boston College.

However, a major legal battle followed over the taped interviews of republicans who are still alive.

This is the man who spends his life getting others to tout on former comrades but will pretend to be very principled and not tout himself :o :o,also so principled he distroyed lives of the people who lived in Priory Hall.Dixie please come on and defend this man as you are always keen to quote from his writing.

Quote from: orangeman on March 24, 2014, 09:04:47 AM
Suzanne Breen–

DETECTIVES questioning Ivor Bell about the murder of Jean McConville are "keenly interested" in Sinn Fein leader Gerry Adams's alleged role in the killing.


Sources close to the investigation said it was "far from over" and that detectives want more information on anyone suspected of involvement in the murder, including Mr Adams.

The Sinn Fein president strongly denies any involvement in the Belfast mother of 10's abduction and death in 1972.

The PSNI is also seeking to question former IRA man turned writer Anthony McIntyre about his Boston College interviews with ex-Provisionals on Ms McConville's murder.

As the interviewer for the US university's oral history project, Mr McIntyre's evidence would be crucial in the case against Bell – and any other alleged former IRA leaders who may in future be charged with involvement.

Belfast Magistrates Court heard on Saturday that Bell was an interviewee in one of the tapes and was known as 'Man Z' – something which Bell denies.

The 77-year-old is charged with IRA membership and aiding and abetting in the murder of Jean McConville.

Other alleged former IRA members are expected to be arrested in coming weeks by detectives – who have in their possession tapes of seven republicans, who are all still alive, allegedly discussing the McConville killing.

TAPE

It is understood the PSNI wants to question Mr McIntyre about Bell's alleged interview and the conditions in which it took place, in order to corroborate the claims allegedly made on the tape.

Mr McIntyre would also be quizzed as to whether Bell was 'Man Z'.

However, sources said there were "absolutely no circumstances" in which Mr McIntyre would co-operate with police.

Refusal to do so could result in him facing charges of withholding information – but the sources said he would "go to jail rather than compromise source protection".

Mr McIntyre is a member of the National Union of Journalists and the issue is to be raised with the union this week.

The ex-IRA man has previously said he has "every sympathy with the McConville family in their search for truth recovery" – but added that "journalists, academics, and researchers need protection if they are to gain the necessary information which offers a valuable insight into the past".


As the lead researcher for the Belfast project for Boston College between 2001 and 2006, Mr McIntyre conducted over 170 interviews with 26 republicans. They were undertaken on the agreement that they wouldn't be released until after the interviewee's death.

Tapes of now-deceased IRA members Dolours Price and Brendan Hughes – who both accused Gerry Adams of ordering Jean McConville's murder – were handed over to the PSNI by Boston College.

However, a major legal battle followed over the taped interviews of republicans who are still alive.

Suzanne Breen has got a serious hardon for Gerry Adams.

Quote from: Keyser soze on March 24, 2014, 11:00:38 AM

Quote from: orangeman on March 24, 2014, 09:04:47 AM
Suzanne Breen–

DETECTIVES questioning Ivor Bell about the murder of Jean McConville are "keenly interested" in Sinn Fein leader Gerry Adams's alleged role in the killing.


Sources close to the investigation said it was "far from over" and that detectives want more information on anyone suspected of involvement in the murder, including Mr Adams.

The Sinn Fein president strongly denies any involvement in the Belfast mother of 10's abduction and death in 1972.

The PSNI is also seeking to question former IRA man turned writer Anthony McIntyre about his Boston College interviews with ex-Provisionals on Ms McConville's murder.

As the interviewer for the US university's oral history project, Mr McIntyre's evidence would be crucial in the case against Bell – and any other alleged former IRA leaders who may in future be charged with involvement.

Belfast Magistrates Court heard on Saturday that Bell was an interviewee in one of the tapes and was known as 'Man Z' – something which Bell denies.

The 77-year-old is charged with IRA membership and aiding and abetting in the murder of Jean McConville.

Other alleged former IRA members are expected to be arrested in coming weeks by detectives – who have in their possession tapes of seven republicans, who are all still alive, allegedly discussing the McConville killing.

TAPE

It is understood the PSNI wants to question Mr McIntyre about Bell's alleged interview and the conditions in which it took place, in order to corroborate the claims allegedly made on the tape.

Mr McIntyre would also be quizzed as to whether Bell was 'Man Z'.

However, sources said there were "absolutely no circumstances" in which Mr McIntyre would co-operate with police.

Refusal to do so could result in him facing charges of withholding information – but the sources said he would "go to jail rather than compromise source protection".

Mr McIntyre is a member of the National Union of Journalists and the issue is to be raised with the union this week.

The ex-IRA man has previously said he has "every sympathy with the McConville family in their search for truth recovery" – but added that "journalists, academics, and researchers need protection if they are to gain the necessary information which offers a valuable insight into the past".


As the lead researcher for the Belfast project for Boston College between 2001 and 2006, Mr McIntyre conducted over 170 interviews with 26 republicans. They were undertaken on the agreement that they wouldn't be released until after the interviewee's death.

Tapes of now-deceased IRA members Dolours Price and Brendan Hughes – who both accused Gerry Adams of ordering Jean McConville's murder – were handed over to the PSNI by Boston College.

However, a major legal battle followed over the taped interviews of republicans who are still alive.

Suzanne Breen has got a serious hardon for Gerry Adams.

;D ;D she sure does but not on her own. :-[ 

Sinn Féin president Gerry Adams has asked his solicitor to contact the police to check if they want to interview him about the murder of Jean McConville.

Mr Adams again declared that he was not involved in the disappearance of the west Belfast mother of ten.

She was taken from her flat by the IRA in December 1972 and murdered.

Mr Adams said he was aware of speculation that police might want to talk to him about the McConville case.

Bet McIntyre is down hiding with his Priory Hall chum McFeely,he and all those who touted on their former comrades are now in a mess.

This is going to be interesting!  I presume the evidence against Bell comes from an alleged interview he gave to the "Boston Tapes" project and whether that constitutes a confession and also even if it does whether that is admissible in court given the circumstances under which it was obtained.

Even with that I'd be surprised if anything led to Adams.

I see another arrest has been made in the Jean McConville case.  What interesting about this is that according to the BBC the arrested man is 56 years old which would have made him 14 or 15 when Jean McConville was abducted.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-26849023

Quote from: AQMP on April 02, 2014, 12:07:51 PM
I see another arrest has been made in the Jean McConville case.  What interesting about this is that according to the BBC the arrested man is 56 years old which would have made him 14 or 15 when Jean McConville was abducted.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-26849023

Probably another who has given statements to Boston college,hearing some interesting things about this project now that the sh1te is hitting the fan.27/28 have given statements all anti SF people,the main man was paid £100K and houses are going up for sale as we speak as they now fear for their own freedom. ;D ;D.Some of those involved fearing their statements will be handed over are saying they exaggerated their roll just to get the money. McIntyre and his crew could have a lot of questions to answer. :-[ :-[