http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northern-ireland/half-of-all-top-ira-men-worked-for-security-services-
Half of all top IRA men 'worked for security services'
By Liam Clarke
Wednesday, 21 December 2011
Half of all senior IRA members in the Troubles were working for intelligence services, a secret dossier of evidence into the murder of two RUC men has claimed.
The remarkable document has laid bare a startling series of claims about the infiltration of both the police and terror groups during the 'Dirty War'.
It claims the IRA ran agents in the RUC and also that Dundalk Garda station was regarded by British intelligence as "a nest of vipers", with at least two officers actively assisting the Provos.
The information is contained in a secret 24-page document in the name of Ian Hurst — a British intelligence whistleblower — which has been seen by the Belfast Telegraph.
The sensational claims are due to be made to Justice Peter Smithwick's Dublin tribunal of inquiry into the murder of two senior RUC officers in 1989.
The victims, Chief Superintendent Harry Breen and Superintendent Robert Buchanan, died in a hail of IRA gunfire as they crossed the border following an intelligence exchange with the Garda in Dundalk.
The dossier also claims:
The shadowy Force Research Unit (FRU) had a file on suspected rogue gardai prepared to pass information to the IRA and act as its agents. MI5 also had a network of agents with the Garda.
The IRA had a network of informants in public agencies such as social security offices and vehicle licensing departments.
One in four IRA members was an agent, rising to one in two among senior members.
Martin McGuinness was involved in all strategic military decisions taken by the IRA.
At the centre of the web of intrigue sat the IRA's head of internal security, the agent known as Stakeknife, who took information from rogue gardai while himself working for British intelligence.
Perhaps the most shocking claim is that a rogue Garda Sergeant leaked intelligence to Stakeknife. Stakeknife has been identified as Freddie Scappaticci, a veteran Belfast republican.
Scappaticci has strongly denied working for British intelligence and said he had cut his links with the IRA in 1990. He is legally represented at the Smitwick Tribunal and is now considering giving evidence in person.
Last night Mr Hurst refused to comment on the document.
He said: "I believe that this was made public to mess me about. I cannot comment on it because of an injunction preventing me from giving details of my career in special forces."
Mr Hurst worked in military intelligence between 1981 and 1990, spending most of that time in the FRU, responsible for handling agents and informants in Irish paramilitary groups. The injunction has been varied to allow him to give evidence to Smithwick in Dublin.
However tribunal lawyers are insisting that he give his testimony in closed session, something he suspects is part of a deal with the British authorities to limit potentially embarrassing disclosures.
One of the alleged rogue officers in Dundalk has already been indentified. Owen Corrigan, a detective sergeant, was named by Jeffrey Donaldson under Parliamentary privilege. Mr Corrigan, now retired, has always denied the allegation and appeared at the tribunal to reject them. He is one of three gardai, two based in Dundalk and one in Donegal, named in the document.
In the document Mr Hurst says "the fact that a Garda was passing information to the IRA did not bother me anymore or any less than in the same way members of the RUC/UDR/BA (British Army) occasionally passed information to the IRA and regularly to members of various loyalist paramilitaries."
Mr Hurst assisted John Stevens' inquiry into security force collusion with terrorists in Northern Ireland.
The document states Lord Stevens told him that of 210 terrorist suspects he arrested, only three were not security force agents, and some worked for several agencies.
Background
The Smithwick Tribunal is examining claims that members of the Irish police or other employees of the Irish State colluded in the murders of the two most senior RUC officers to die in the Troubles. Chief Superintendent Harry Breen and Supt Robert Buchanan were shot dead while returning from a meeting at Dundalk Garda station in the Republic. The tribunal has so far heard evidence from a number of witnesses, some of whom have alleged that members of the Garda passed information to the IRA.
A MAN FROM THE DARK CORNER OF MILITARY INTELLIGENCE
Doubts about Ian Hurst's reliability were dispelled after I published stories based on his information back in 1999.
The first, an unlikely sounding tale claiming military intelligence had doctored bullets used to shoot Gerry Adams, was immediately confirmed by the Defence Advisory Committee. After that he was arrested, and I was questioned under caution.
For a time I gave him the pseudonym Martin Ingram to obscure his identity, but now that alias has been dropped.
He was the first member of the Force Research Unit (FRU) — the dark corner of military intelligence which ran agents in terrorist groups — to speak publicly.
He had two tours of duty in Northern Ireland. Between 1982 and 1990 he was in Londonderry handling agents like Frank Hegarty, an IRA quartermaster later murdered for betraying a cache of Libyan weapons, and Willie Carlin, who got out just ahead of the execution squad.
A second tour was in Enniskillen between 1990 and 1991. There he met his wife, from a Donegal republican family. That affected his vetting and he bought himself out of the Army in 2003.
Penetration of the Provisionals
Mr Hurst was responsible for handling agents in the IRA and for a time had enhanced access to other agents' reports, though not their names, on military intelligence computers. He has painted a picture of an organisation penetrated at almost every level and with its head of security, Stakeknife, working for the other side. The document says: "As a rough guide you should expect one in four PIRA volunteers to be agents of one agency or another." Lord Stevens (above), the former Met chief, is quoted as
saying that only three out of 210 terrorist suspects he arrested in a collusion probe in Northern Ireland were not working for either the RUC, MI5 or the Army. The document claims that Hurst secretly taped a conversation with RAF Air Vice Marshal Andrew Vallance, who was quoted as telling him that the most sensitive matter was the identity of Stakeknife and his role as a British agent.
IRA agents within the Garda
The document claims that the FRU had a file on suspected rogue gardai prepared to pass information to the IRA and act as its agents. It names three people who were allegedly on the list, two in Dundalk and one in Donegal. It quotes Basil Walsh, a senior Garda officer who Mr Hurst met in 1999, as saying he was aware of one named Garda who worked for the IRA. Mr Walsh allegedly told him "that every time something was done to try and eradicate the mess something happened to intervene". The document also claims MI5 had a network of agents with the Garda. MP Jeffrey Donaldson has named retired detective sergeant Owen Corrigan under Parliamentary privilege in the House of Commons in April 2000, as being a "rogue garda". Mr Corrigan denies all allegations of collusion. Last week former agent Kevin Fulton claimed Corrigan was passing information to the IRA and was regarded as a "friend" of the group
Role of McGuinness in the IRA
MR Hurst once backed claims that Martin McGuinness reported to MI6, the British foreign intelligence agency. This was based on a document passed to him, and accepted by him in good faith, after he left the Army but which appears to have been a forgery. The document does not repeat that claim but it does put Mr McGuinness in a central role in the IRA. It states the IRA's "security unit came under the operational command of Northern Command" and adds "the person in charge of that unit throughout the entire Troubles was PIRA member Mr James Martin McGuinness". It accuses McGuinness of being "directly involved in matters of life and death for persons rightly or indeed wrongly suspected of informing on PIRA members. Mr McGuinness was also a key player in the long-term strategic strategies used by PIRA". McGuinness has always denied such a leading role and stated that he left the IRA in the early 1970s.
Republican intelligence gathering
It is claimed that the IRA had a network of informants in public agencies such as social security offices and vehicle licensing, North and South. This echoes claims by Martin McGartland , a former RUC agent in the IRA. One section of the document reads: "PIRA was extensively penetrated at all levels, most sources of the information to PIRA were readily identified (by military intelligence) but seldom compromised." To back up its claims that the intelligence services turned a blind eye to IRA intelligence sources, it claims that in the early 1990s a FRU agent was targeted by the IRA with the help of a social security employee who is still working in the same office. It claims that the IRA could informally "obtain information from driver licensing, social security, councils, utilities far quicker than the FRU", especially in cross-border areas where red tape was involved in working through the RUC and Garda.
Stakeknife, the Army's key agent
Stakeknife was a key military intelligence agent within the IRA, a man with a hotline of his own which gave him direct contact with dedicated handlers in an office known as the 'rat hole'. When he called, he identified himself with a code number, but Mr Hurst learned his true identify by chance while manning the phone. Stakeknife had been caught drink-driving and gave uniformed police the hotline number in an effort to extricate himself. Hurst vouched for him, and it has been claimed that Stakeknife was Freddie Scappaticci, though Mr Scappaticci strongly denies this. The document expands on Stakeknife's role as head of the IRA internal security. It claims he controlled IRA agents in the Garda. The most corrosive suggestion which Justice Peter Smithwick will have to consider is that officers Breen and Buchanan were allowed to die rather than risk compromising the Army's most important agent in Ireland.
The web of collusion and spies
MR Hurst has frequently claimed some members of the RUC, UDR and Army colluded with terror groups. The statement portrays a wilderness of mirrors in which every organisation has the other penetrated to some degree and "all sources have a shelf life". It talks of British agents in the Garda, Garda agents in Northern Ireland, IRA agents in the RUC and Garda and RUC agents in the IRA. It states "the fact that a Garda was passing information to the IRA did not bother me any more or any less than in the same way members of the RUC/UDR/BA (British Army) passed information to the IRA and members of various loyalist paramilitaries. It was a matter for HQNI and the RUC and way above my pay grade ... in other words it was a strategic and not a tactical problem". It concludes that none of this "registered massively on the Richter scale, it was just a fact of life, indeed it was well within the rules of our game!"
Read more: http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northern-ireland/half-of-all-top-ira-men-worked-for-security-services-16093721.html#ixzz1hD2sVoM7
There is no doubt the Provos were riddled with informers and full blown agents but "half" is a lot. It's 50%. Dirty War indeed.
Quote from: Tony Baloney on December 21, 2011, 10:31:23 PM
There is no doubt the Provos were riddled with informers and full blown agents but "half" is a lot. It's 50%. Dirty War indeed.
The article states 1 in 4 members, rising to 1 in 2 at leadership.
Quote from: Minder on December 21, 2011, 10:43:26 PM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on December 21, 2011, 10:31:23 PM
There is no doubt the Provos were riddled with informers and full blown agents but "half" is a lot. It's 50%. Dirty War indeed.
The article states 1 in 4 members, rising to 1 in 2 at leadership.
Dirtier still.
'written' by Liam Clarke.
Even worse source of info than the flawed 'Cain report'
!!!!!!!
Quote from: lynchbhoy on December 21, 2011, 10:56:27 PM
'written' by Liam Clarke.
Even worse source of info than the flawed 'Cain report'
!!!!!!!
Clarke isn't the source of the information.
I knew you would applaud his article though :D
:D Imagine the British Army privately admitting it couldn't beat the IRA, despite the "fact" that they made up 25% of it's membership and 50% of it's leadership!!
Silly season is on it seems!!
Quote from: Minder on December 21, 2011, 11:15:32 PM
Quote from: lynchbhoy on December 21, 2011, 10:56:27 PM
'written' by Liam Clarke.
Even worse source of info than the flawed 'Cain report'
!!!!!!!
Clarke isn't the source of the information.
I knew you would applaud his article though :D
Correct, Clarke didn't write the source material. A member of British Intelligence Services did. And we all know they never lie or make things up lol.
Sure wasn't it an MI5 operative that drove the truck for the Canary Wharf job (a statistical certainty, apparently).
What a load of shite!! Of course there was informants and collusion to a certain degree, it was a dirty war! If what that says in that article is true, what the f**k was the point??
This story get released once a year by the security "whistleblower". If course, no evidence is ever produced. Are we meant to believe one of the largest armies in Europe couldn't defeat the ira even though it owned 50% of its leadership and 25% of the foot soldiers? Ridiculous.
British propaganda machine at work.
Quote from: mylestheslasher on December 22, 2011, 12:01:09 AM
This story get released once a year by the security "whistleblower". If course, no evidence is ever produced. Are we meant to believe one of the largest armies in Europe couldn't defeat the ira even though it owned 50% of its leadership and 25% of the foot soldiers? Ridiculous.
At least you got your percentages right ;)
How many are working for Al Quida and was Osama Bin Laden working for the British government? And how about Kim Jong Il or Seamus McEnaney!!! This shit runs deeper the more you extrapolate!!
But yeah, my point is, it's just going down the same never ending spiral of back and forward accusations. How much more before they throw in the towel for these tribunals?
Quote from: Minder on December 21, 2011, 11:15:32 PM
Quote from: lynchbhoy on December 21, 2011, 10:56:27 PM
'written' by Liam Clarke.
Even worse source of info than the flawed 'Cain report'
!!!!!!!
Clarke isn't the source of the information.
I knew you would applaud his article though :D
'a source of info'
Not
The source of info (here)
Nope - once I see his name I never bother reading any further as I know it's going to be tactless rubbish
Quote from: lynchbhoy on December 21, 2011, 10:56:27 PM
'written' by Liam Clarke.
Even worse source of info than the flawed 'Cain report'
!!!!!!!
Someone challenged you a few weeks ago to state why you constantly refer to the Cain 'report' (it's a database) as flawed. You didn't respond then, yet here you are at it again. You really are shameless.
written by Henry McDonald's workers party sidekick Liam Clarke (a big fan of the WP in their neo-unionism phase) and the source is British Intelligence :D :D
Ho Ho Ho....Merry Christmas.
what about the men who died with hunger? were they working for the brits as well?
paper never refused ink ::)
Quote from: lawnseed on December 22, 2011, 09:13:22 AM
what about the men who died with hunger? were they working for the brits as well?
paper never refused ink ::)
At least 2.5 of them apparently.
I was a minor agent myself. My codename was toothpick. I think I was working for the Welsh Secret Service, who were secretly running MI-four-and-three-quarters, a classified unit of British Intransigence which was surreptitiously under the direction of the Garda traffic squad. My job was to report the movements of dangerous elements who were in possession of sensitive inside information such as:
Quote from: Tony Baloney on December 21, 2011, 10:31:23 PM
... "half" is a lot. It's 50%.
I think its important that we (nationalist society) deny that there might be a shredd of truth in such accusations.
The same thing in Afghanistan with the Taliban. 47% infiltrated. Apparently Mullah Omar is in fact an Eton educated toff whose real name is Nigel Featherston-Haugh .
Quote from: mylestheslasher on December 22, 2011, 12:01:09 AM
This story get released once a year by the security "whistleblower". If course, no evidence is ever produced. Are we meant to believe one of the largest armies in Europe couldn't defeat the ira even though it owned 50% of its leadership and 25% of the foot soldiers? Ridiculous.
Usually from Liam Clarke. His stories are so obviously from MI5 that I'm amazed in these hard times for the meeja that anyone will pay him to 'write' them
In Shinner land the only agents or touts were those we know of (Scap, Donaldson etc) and those that got a bullet from Scapps nutting squad, what, a tout lookin for touts? You couldn't make it up .
Quote from: Trout on December 22, 2011, 02:13:41 PM
In Shinner land the only agents or touts were those we know of (Scap, Donaldson etc) and those that got a bullet from Scapps nutting squad, what, a tout lookin for touts? You couldn't make it up .
Trout on touts out
Quote from: Trout on December 22, 2011, 02:13:41 PM
In Shinner land the only agents or touts were those we know of (Scap, Donaldson etc) and those that got a bullet from Scapps nutting squad, what, a tout lookin for touts? You couldn't make it up .
50% of IRA leaders and 25% of IRA membership all touts? You couldn't make it up!....
Oh wait, someone did make that up!!
The Brit securocrats have just issued clarification:
Just to clear things up - yes, indeed, we had so many intelligence operatives at all levels in PIRA that we were effectively fighting against ourselves, and we didn't stand a chance. Sorry Old Bean.
The Brits would have been looking for an end to the killing and bombing and keeping the Union intact & having a political process in place in the six counties. Job done I would say, with the help of their PIRA friends. SF were served up on a silver platter to the Brits, no matter how they try furiously to revise and rewrite history, for the benefit of their sheep.
The question is.................which half?
(http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcStkVXVmRxFHTP0KYfW4LuNpC9bEYE0iKrABmMNvNdr9412CET_)
Quote from: lawnseed on December 22, 2011, 09:13:22 AM
what about the men who died with hunger? were they working for the brits as well?
paper never refused ink ::)
They didn't die 'with hunger', though, did they. They chose to starve themselves in pursuit of a political objective. Huge difference.
Quote from: LostInSpace on December 21, 2011, 11:51:22 PM
What a load of shite!! Of course there was informants and collusion to a certain degree, it was a dirty war! If what that says in that article is true, what the f**k was the point??
To answer that you just need to look at the final line of the article
Quoteit was just a fact of life, indeed it was well within the rules of our game!"
As long as things are "stable" in Stormont, you will probably never know the full extent of it. I don't think it was as rampant as Hurst is saying but i also think there were far more than Sinn Fein would have you believe.
Quote from: Minder on December 22, 2011, 10:27:45 PM
As long as things are "stable" in Stormont, you will probably never know the full extent of it. I don't think it was as rampant as Hurst is saying but i also think there were far more than Sinn Fein would have you believe.
There's no end to the (MI5-inspired) crap you're willing to swallow, if you're a heterosexual female your boyfriend is totally infatuated with you. ;)
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on December 23, 2011, 10:06:55 AM
Quote from: Minder on December 22, 2011, 10:27:45 PM
As long as things are "stable" in Stormont, you will probably never know the full extent of it. I don't think it was as rampant as Hurst is saying but i also think there were far more than Sinn Fein would have you believe.
There's no end to the (MI5-inspired) crap you're willing to swallow, if you're a heterosexual female your boyfriend is totally infatuated with you. ;)
Do you believe it was just the few that we are aware of, seriously?
Quote from: Minder on December 23, 2011, 10:25:34 AM
Do you believe it was just the few that we are aware of, seriously?
You post something by that MI stooge Liam Clarke and ask about what 'we are aware of'? Seriously?
Quote from: Fear ón Srath Bán on December 23, 2011, 10:47:27 AM
Quote from: Minder on December 23, 2011, 10:25:34 AM
Do you believe it was just the few that we are aware of, seriously?
You post something by that MI stooge Liam Clarke and ask about what 'we are aware of'? Seriously?
Nicely side stepped.
One in four IRA members were informers Smithwick tribunal told
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-18521165
20 June 2012 Last updated at 19:12 Share this pageEmailPrint
One in four in IRA members were informers Smithwick Tribunal told
One in four IRA members, including some in the highest echelons, were informers, a tribunal has been told.
Former garda Owen Corrigan said the RUC and the Army paid "endless sums of money" for poor quality information.
He claimed that the British government were putting such pressure on the security services that they were "grateful for any tittle tattle".
The Smithwick Tribunal is investigating alleged Garda collusion in the IRA murder of two senior RUC officers.
Chief Supt Harry Breen and Supt Bob Buchanan were shot dead in an ambush in south Armagh in March 1989 as they returned from a meeting in Dundalk Garda station.
At the tribunal on Wednesday, Mr Corrigan, a retired detective sergeant from Dundalk, said the informers congregated at night in the town and travelled to Northern Ireland the following day.
He said they would tell on each other as "they had no sense of loyalty".
Mr Corrigan said he had information that the "execution" of the two officers had been planned months in advance and involved a considerable number of people, yet he had not received any hint in advance that the murders were to take place.
Allegations have been made that Mr Corrigan himself colluded with the IRA in the murders of the officers.
But on Tuesday, Mr Corrigan rejected any suggestion he may have been a double agent working for the IRA.
During Wednesday's hearing, Mr Corrigan, said informers had leaked his name because he was a "thorn in their side".-
He also dismissed claims from security journalist and author Chris Ryder that he had sought payment for potential stories, when he met him in the 1970s.
Mr Corrigan said it was "a scurrilous slur" on his good name. He then claimed that Mr Ryder was a member of MI5 - a claim the journalist has denied.
The former garda was questioned by the tribunal about an RUC intelligence document which named him in 1985 as someone who was passing information to the provisionals.
The source of that document was grain smuggler John McAnulty, who was later tortured and murdered by the IRA.
Mr Corrigan pointed out that although the intelligence had been graded as "believable" by the RUC officers who compiled it, their boss, with whom he had a good working relationship had dismissed it as rumour and gossip.
The tribunal continues on Friday.
Chief Supt Breen and Supt Buchanan were the most senior RUC members to be murdered during the Troubles.
I wonder did anyone check their travel expenses?
If half or a quarter or whatever fraction is current of IRA members were informers and the operation to kill these two policemen was months in the planning and involved a large number of people, how come the Guards/RUC seem to know nothing about it and hundreds of other IRA operations ???
Quote from: AQMP on June 21, 2012, 09:29:18 AM
If half or a quarter or whatever fraction is current of IRA members were informers and the operation to kill these two policemen was months in the planning and involved a large number of people, how come the Guards/RUC seem to know nothing about it and hundreds of other IRA operations ???
And how is it that a number of British army/govn figures admitted they couldn't beat the IRA?
Half or a quarter?! ::)
Quote from: Nally Stand on June 21, 2012, 10:39:19 AM
Quote from: AQMP on June 21, 2012, 09:29:18 AM
If half or a quarter or whatever fraction is current of IRA members were informers and the operation to kill these two policemen was months in the planning and involved a large number of people, how come the Guards/RUC seem to know nothing about it and hundreds of other IRA operations ???
And how is it that a number of British army/govn figures admitted they couldn't beat the IRA?
Half or a quarter?! ::)
Because then the "Game" would be over.
Quote from: Minder on December 21, 2011, 10:43:26 PM
Quote from: Tony Baloney on December 21, 2011, 10:31:23 PM
There is no doubt the Provos were riddled with informers and full blown agents but "half" is a lot. It's 50%. Dirty War indeed.
The article states 1 in 4 members, rising to 1 in 2 at leadership.
I've no idea if that claim is true or not but I know the more or less the same thing was said of the Old IRA back in the War of Independence.
Going by what I've read ad been told by some of those in the 'RA back then, it seems the Sinn Fein government had feck all control over the various active service units.
Each unit acted as an autonomous entity and the commandment was a warlord in his area.
He could act against the Brits, or the prods or indeed anyone he had a gripe with.
The same thing was said about the East Tyrone Brigade back in the 80s.
One of Bertie's ministers told me that the G2, the Irish army's intelligence unit, believed that the Loughgall ambush was set up by members of the northern command who were pissed off by what this unit was up to.
It wouldn't surprise me if that was true because it would not be the first time that leaders acted as informers in any struggle against the brits.
It's gone on since the time of Diarmuid McMurrough!
Quote from: Nally Stand on June 21, 2012, 10:39:19 AM
Quote from: AQMP on June 21, 2012, 09:29:18 AM
If half or a quarter or whatever fraction is current of IRA members were informers and the operation to kill these two policemen was months in the planning and involved a large number of people, how come the Guards/RUC seem to know nothing about it and hundreds of other IRA operations ???
And how is it that a number of British army/govn figures admitted they couldn't beat the IRA?
Half or a quarter?! ::)
But did the IRA beat the British? Maybe it was a draw? Is there extra time and penalties then?!
At this stage in the process does anyone really care who squealed on who. We have a semblance of peace that's all that matters. One thing though, having lived through all of the current troubles and having a clear recollection of the hunger strikes, their cause and the raw emotion nationalists of all hues felt, I find the ignorant comments from some on here quite distasful and indeed unhelpful. Although perhaps they are made more for effect than fact.
Quote from: AQMP on June 21, 2012, 09:29:18 AM
If half or a quarter or whatever fraction is current of IRA members were informers and the operation to kill these two policemen was months in the planning and involved a large number of people, how come the Guards/RUC seem to know nothing about it and hundreds of other IRA operations ???
Re the two RUC Officers, if their murder really had been "months in the planning", that would mean that the murderers knew the date of the RUC visit to Dundalk and the return route home months in advance.
That is patently impossible. In fact, the significance of their murder is alleged at Smethwick to be quite the contrary, namely the IRA were able to mount the ambush at relatively short notice, since they had an agent in Dundalk Gardai Station tipping them off.
And as for the "hundreds of other IRA operations", it is widely known and accepted that for every operation which was launched, many other proposed or planned operations were aborted variously because:
(a ) they were felt to be too risky for the operatives; and/or
(b ) the targets' own security precautions were too effective; and/or
(c ) the operatives were infiltrated by informers; and/or
(d ) Security Forces electronic interception and technical capabilities etc were increasingly to give them an advantage over the IRA.
Quote from: Evil Genius on June 21, 2012, 11:25:05 AM
Quote from: AQMP on June 21, 2012, 09:29:18 AM
If half or a quarter or whatever fraction is current of IRA members were informers and the operation to kill these two policemen was months in the planning and involved a large number of people, how come the Guards/RUC seem to know nothing about it and hundreds of other IRA operations ???
Re the two RUC Officers, if their murder really had been "months in the planning", that would mean that the murderers knew the date of the RUC visit to Dundalk and the return route home months in advance.
That is patently impossible. In fact, the significance of their murder is alleged at Smethwick to be quite the contrary, namely the IRA were able to mount the ambush at relatively short notice, since they had an agent in Dundalk Gardai Station tipping them off.
And as for the "hundreds of other IRA operations", it is widely known and accepted that for every operation which was launched, many other proposed or planned operations were aborted variously because:
(a ) they were felt to be too risky for the operatives; and/or
(b ) the targets' own security precautions were too effective; and/or
(c ) the operatives were infiltrated by informers; and/or
(d ) Security Forces electronic interception and technical capabilities etc were increasingly to give them an advantage over the IRA.
I take your point EG, but just to clarify the "months in planning" bit came from the BBC article above:
Mr Corrigan said he had information that the "execution" of the two officers had been planned months in advance and involved a considerable number of people, yet he had not received any hint in advance that the murders were to take place.Your quote:
it is widely known and accepted that for every operation which was launched, many other proposed or planned operations were aborted variously because:Feck me, the 'RA must have been wild busy if the number of attacks carried out represents a fraction of those planned or proposed!! While it must be true that the IRA was infiltrated by security forces (I remember a veteran Republican telling me in the early 80s that "the war will be lost in the pubs") figures such as 50% or 25% seem to me to be more or less plucked out of the air.
If you were getting paid by the British security services but the information you were giving was horse manure would you still be counted in the stats? Could have been a good way to fundraise :P
Quote from: AQMP on June 21, 2012, 11:35:26 AM
I take your point EG, but just to clarify the "months in planning" bit came from the BBC article above:
Mr Corrigan said he had information that the "execution" of the two officers had been planned months in advance and involved a considerable number of people, yet he had not received any hint in advance that the murders were to take place.
Your quote: it is widely known and accepted that for every operation which was launched, many other proposed or planned operations were aborted variously because:
Re the BBC quotation ("months in the planning"), if Corrigan were an IRA agent, then it is in his interests to make this claim, since if it were a last minute job, then suspicion would inevitably fall on the Gardai officers on duty in the station in on the day.
Quote from: AQMP on June 21, 2012, 11:35:26 AMFeck me, the 'RA must have been wild busy if the number of attacks carried out represents a fraction of those planned or proposed!!
Yes, the IRA certainly
were "wild busy" - otherwise how do you think they managed to murder over 1500 people, whilst maiming thousands more and destroying untold amounts of property etc.
Anyhow, having been born and brought up in a border area and having had many friends, neighbours and relatives etc murdered etc, I have
absolutely no doubt that this is true.
Some of the people murdered were attacked several times, over many years, before the IRA succeeded, and these were only the attacks that were mounted, known to have been mounted, and subsequently disclosed.
Quote from: AQMP on June 21, 2012, 11:35:26 AMWhile it must be true that the IRA was infiltrated by security forces (I remember a veteran Republican telling me in the early 80s that "the war will be lost in the pubs") figures such as 50% or 25% seem to me to be more or less plucked out of the air.
It is in the interests of the Security Forces to exagerrate the number of informants, just as it is in the interests of the IRA to deny it.
I personally couldn't say exactly where the truth lies, but it is pretty much indisputable that the IRA came to be heavily infiltrated - increasingly so as The Troubles went on - including up to a very high (the highest?) level.
Quote from: LeoMc on June 21, 2012, 10:42:25 AM
Quote from: Nally Stand on June 21, 2012, 10:39:19 AM
Quote from: AQMP on June 21, 2012, 09:29:18 AM
If half or a quarter or whatever fraction is current of IRA members were informers and the operation to kill these two policemen was months in the planning and involved a large number of people, how come the Guards/RUC seem to know nothing about it and hundreds of other IRA operations ???
And how is it that a number of British army/govn figures admitted they couldn't beat the IRA?
Half or a quarter?! ::)
Because then the "Game" would be over.
The game would be over if they admitted they couldn't defeat the IRA? That's the thing though, they did say as much.
Here's the former head of the British Army:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRJGfe0k7rI&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRJGfe0k7rI&feature=related)
And here's a report on a British Army document, uncovered by the Pat Finucane Centre:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/6276416.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/6276416.stm)
Tony Blair is even on record as stating that the IRA were not defeated.
If the IRA were not defeated as you state Nally, then why did they surrender? Why did they surrender their arms as part of the terms of this surrender. And if they didn't surrender then where is their 32 county republic?
Well he would say that wouldn't he. :o
Quote from: Agent Orange on June 21, 2012, 12:24:54 PM
If the IRA were not defeated as you state Nally, then why did they surrender? Why did they surrender their arms as part of the terms of this surrender. And if they didn't surrender then where is their 32 county republic?
It was some defeat for the Brits, the North still in the Union, IRA out of action and decommissioned their weapons, unity further away than ever and Sinn Fein administering British rule in Stormont.
So Trout ... what's your super solution ?
Quote from: Rossfan on June 21, 2012, 09:07:48 PM
So Trout ... what's your super solution ?
Don't worry about him, he has a handshake like a wet fish. ;)
At the start of the thread 50% of the ira were informers, now its 25%. It will be 10% in 12 months I suppose. ::)
Quote from: mylestheslasher on June 21, 2012, 11:12:02 PM
At the start of the thread 50% of the ira were informers, now its 25%. It will be 10% in 12 months I suppose. ::)
I think the claim was half of the leadership and 25% of the foot soldiers.
Quote from: Nally Stand on June 21, 2012, 12:10:37 PMTony Blair is even on record as stating that the IRA were not defeated.
Has he got a Dossier on the matter, by any chance? ::)
Anyhow you may argue what you like, but the fact remains, just as only one undefeated Army gets to march through Belfast - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H97khaS0xqg&feature=related - only one Armed Forces flag will be flying over the City Hall next week:
(http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/61050000/jpg/_61050039_53549855.jpg)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-18546644
So much for the shared future Unionist's spout on about. Alliance have shown themselves up for the unionist party they are. City hall should be a neutral venue. This is Alliance adding their voices to the croppies lie down chant...And Marty wants tea with the Queen. Lets see atricolour at city hall if they want a shared future. And lets not have any of the tried and trusted Flag of the country Shit it has only the support of half the population.
Quote from: Applesisapples on June 22, 2012, 01:06:03 PM
So much for the shared future Unionist's spout on about. Alliance have shown themselves up for the unionist party they are. City hall should be a neutral venue. This is Alliance adding their voices to the croppies lie down chant...And Marty wants tea with the Queen. Lets see atricolour at city hall if they want a shared future. And lets not have any of the tried and trusted Flag of the country Shit it has only the support of half the population.
My post was nothing to do with "shared future" etc.
Rather it was in response to those who claim the IRA "was never defeated " by the British Army.
On which point I think it pertinent that now the conflict is over, only one of the two gets to parade and salute the flag etc in Belfast.
Quote from: Evil Genius on June 22, 2012, 02:04:12 PM
Quote from: Applesisapples on June 22, 2012, 01:06:03 PM
So much for the shared future Unionist's spout on about. Alliance have shown themselves up for the unionist party they are. City hall should be a neutral venue. This is Alliance adding their voices to the croppies lie down chant...And Marty wants tea with the Queen. Lets see atricolour at city hall if they want a shared future. And lets not have any of the tried and trusted Flag of the country Shit it has only the support of half the population.
My post was nothing to do with "shared future" etc.
Rather it was in response to those who claim the IRA "was never defeated " by the British Army.
On which point I think it pertinent that now the conflict is over, only one of the two gets to parade and salute the flag etc in Belfast.
Let us know when the B Specials, RUC and UDR are parading down the streets.