Political Crossfire Forums

[red dragon]

And does that logic stem from one report in the Guardian summising that MI5 assasinated him. I have given links showing a reasoinable supposition that he was killed by disgruntled IRA men with an axe to grind. What have you given?? There is no logic to think about at all, logic is flawed if you think that you can tie this killing with 'logic' it's a plainly ridiculous thought.



Also the reports say he was apparently tortured, not may have been or could have been.

Quote: The IRA has denied any involvement in the murder which has been condemned by the British and Irish Governments. But individual republicans had vowed that he would never be allowed to return to live in Belfast.

Quote: Earlier, Taoiseach Bertie Ahern told the Irish parliament that police had previously warned Mr Donaldson that his life could be under threat.

Quote:

Denis Donaldson was shortlisted in the ‘Survivor of the Year’ category at tonight’s Magill Politician of the Year Awards...

By El Matador, at 04 April, 2006 22:10

Quote: "Eyes will be turned toward IRA/ Sinn Fein on this issue," said Paisley, who repeated widespread rumors that the killers cut off Donaldson's hand, in a gesture similar to the mutilations inflicted on IRA informers throughout Northern Ireland's sectarian conflict.

Plenty of Northern Irish republicans, who want the province to break away from Britain and join the Irish Republic, would have been happy to see Donaldson dead. His exposure as a British agent last December, when he served as a prominent Sinn Fein official, came as one of the movement's most embarrassing scandals in years.

Quote: When Donaldson was exposed as a spy, Sinn Fein assured him that he would be safe. However, individual republicans indicated that he would no longer be welcome in Belfast.


Now I wonder whast news reports you were reading. There is very strong cirmcumstantial evidence that he was warned by Bertie Ahern, he was threatened by IRA men with an axe to grind and you say it's all baloney. Interperate as you will, but Im think it's pretty obvious. You may think that I am blaming the IRA or SF. I am not, I am blaming an individual, or a group who wanted revenge and enacted it on their own initiative. You also dismiss the timing of him being found by a jornoolist and then his killing.

[red dragon]

Erin wrote: red dragon wrote: Tortured


Yep looks like someone took their time to get information out of him first, ye looks like mMI5 would really do that.

MI5 are more similar to the CIA than the FBI and if they ordered the hit on Donaldson they are smart enough to make it look like the Provos did it!
.

No they are not at all, the CIA are a foreign intelligence agency who may not work on domestic soil, the equivelant of MI6, whilst the FBI are a domestic agency like MI5, except the FBI have powers of arrest. Get your facts right.

[Ssushi]

red dragon wrote: Like I have been trying to explain sushi these guys are rapidly being left behind in the 16th century with the taliban, whilst the rest of the world moves on. .

The thing is that I think it'll go on way way longer than that... these views are strong in the poor, uneducated areas of Ireland; so long as there's a section of society being left behind, these views will remain...

red dragon wrote: I think it is embarrassing that people like this exist in the UK. My personal opinion is that NI will join Ireland in the next couple of decades when the timing is right. that being most of these extremists are too old to do bugger all and all the past hate would have died away with them, and when Ireland is ready security wise to accept the Protestant communities.

I'd like that to be the case but there are a few issues first (like them or not):

1) Typically, the south doesn't actually want the north and cannot afford to pay for it.

2) The north is severely split between people who strongly believe this in Britain - how does Britain therefore give this back?

3) The Union Jack comprises 3 flags, one of which is Ireland. If northern ireland returns to ireland, the union jack is gone. Not that I see this as being a legitimate reason, but I do see it getting in the way, although no politician will ever admit it...

[Ssushi]

De Bhaldraithe wrote: Trust me friend, anti-English sentiment is not restricted t our island. You'll find an anti-English sentiment in quite a lot of countries throughout the world because of your seedy past.

And there we have it again...

Whos seedy past?

Did I oppress you?
Did my parents?
Did my grandparents?

So who has the seedy past?

[De Bhaldraithe]

Ssushi wrote: De Bhaldraithe wrote: Trust me friend, anti-English sentiment is not restricted t our island. You'll find an anti-English sentiment in quite a lot of countries throughout the world because of your seedy past.

And there we have it again...

Whos seedy past?

Did I oppress you?
Did my parents?
Did my grandparents?

So who has the seedy past?

Just England in general. Sorry for being so generalistic, no offense intended.

[De Bhaldraithe]

red dragon wrote: You may think that I am blaming the IRA or SF. I am not.

But earlier you said:

red dragon wrote: The IRA killed him exacting revenge for stitching his fellow terrorists going back 20 years, the IRA have always dealt with grasses this way.

Are we missing something here? :?

[red dragon]

I see what you mean but that was not my intention. Gerry Adams has way too much to lose internationally to risk anything like this, but none the less it is my opinion that it was carried out by dissident IRA men, which I have said more than once, I just don't think you picked up on that part.

[De Bhaldraithe]

red dragon wrote: I see what you mean but that was not my intention. Gerry Adams has way too much to lose internationally to risk anything like this, but none the less it is my opinion that it was carried out by dissident IRA men, which I have said more than once, I just don't think you picked up on that part.

I have said that that is my opinion also. If you read my posts, you too will pick up on that.

But you have to admit that after all of the work that the IRA and Sinn Féin have put into the peace process and the political process, it would have been absolutely insanely illogical for them to have had any part in the murder. They have given concession after concession in order to try and build a stable political environment here - why throw it all away now? And why such terrible timing?

You also must admit that the spooks in MI5 and special branch would have very legitimate motives in wanting to kill him - to keep him quiet about how he was recruited, about what information he had given them, etc, etc. It is also very much in their interest that he is dead.

The people that have absolutely nothing to gain from this murder are as follows:

Sinn Féin
IRA
The Governments
The ordinary people of the six counties


The people that are benefiting from this murder are:

Dissident republicans intent on ruining the peace process
Loyalists
The DUP (excuse for stalling)
Special branch
MI5

[red dragon]

Quote: You also must admit that the spooks in MI5 and special branch would have very legitimate motives in wanting to kill him - to keep him quiet about how he was recruited, about what information he had given them, etc, etc. It is also very much in their interest that he is dead.

No I won't admit that as it is plainly ridiculous. There is no secret in how they recruited him. Read any book on modern intelligence and you will see how it is done. The most obvious is money, secondly it can be ideological and thirdly it maybe in order to remove a rival so that person can advance themselves up the pecking order. Alternatively he may have been having an affair with a senior IRA's man's wife, he may have been caught with child pornography, he may have been caught cottaging in a well known gay hangout. They sound all different, but they are all real situations which would have made him a prime recruit or he volunteered himself becoming disillusioned with how the IRA were going. It is no big secret.

My personal one is that he may have been caught on his way to maybe a bombing, or was carrying a weapon and faced jail. Lots of enforcement agencies do that, the US has a witness protection scheme and most of those are people who have been arrested and turned grass in order not to go to jail. Also he would not have known who his handlers were, and probably had several all with the name John. Who knows. He may have used a dead letter drop or a phone number to pass information and he may have never met his handlers, so there would be no need to kill him.

[De Bhaldraithe]

But it isn't actually common knowledge despite your desire to speculate on the issue, so why must you insist on saying that it is no big secret.

It is also quite a big secret what exactly the man had told MI5 whilst he was working for them.

It is also quite a big secret what techniques the MI5 used in dealing with the information provided to them by him - who was involved? what was done? was anyone killed because of the information given to them by him?


If you can answer these questions for me, then I shall accept that the spooks had no reason to kill him as he posed no threat to them by exposing any of their secrets.

Does that sound like a good deal to you?

[red dragon]

De Bhaldraithe wrote: But it isn't actually common knowledge despite your desire to speculate on the issue, so why must you insist on saying that it is no big secret.

It is also quite a big secret what exactly the man had told MI5 whilst he was working for them.

It is also quite a big secret what techniques the MI5 used in dealing with the information provided to them by him - who was involved? what was done? was anyone killed because of the information given to them by him?


If you can answer these questions for me, then I shall accept that the spooks had no reason to kill him as he posed no threat to them by exposing any of their secrets.

Does that sound like a good deal to you?

All I'm saying is it's no big deal, if you know the environment which this carried out. To other people it is surrounded in mystique and skullduggery, most of the time I can assure you everyman has his price.

[De Bhaldraithe]

red dragon wrote:
All I'm saying is it's no big deal, if you know the environment which this carried out. To other people it is surrounded in mystique and skullduggery, most of the time I can assure you everyman has his price.

Oh yes definitely. Completely valid point. No man is stronger than the cause. Sure didn't Judas sell Jesus down the river for thirty pieces of silver.

However, this man did carry big secrets to his grave. Special branch have surely waived a big sigh of relief at seeing him dead.

[maxtsu]

Ssushi wrote:
...
1) Typically, the south doesn't actually want the north and cannot afford to pay for it.
...
I have heard this argument many a time pointed out by unionists.

This defines NI as a money pit, that requires consistent funding by its benefactor.

Surely you would expect a region to stand on its own two feet and be a net contributer, not a net taker.
Imagine if Scotland said, "you need to fund us just to be". I am sure London would give two fingers.

People in NI have to stop thinking in this defeatist attitude.
I am sure NI can be fully self-sufficient, and does not require a benefactor to fund the region.

[De Bhaldraithe]

maxtsu wrote: Ssushi wrote:
...
1) Typically, the south doesn't actually want the north and cannot afford to pay for it.
...
I have heard this argument many a time pointed out by unionists.

This defines NI as a money pit, that requires consistent funding by its benefactor.

Surely you would expect a region to stand on its own two feet and be a net contributer, not a net taker.
Imagine if Scotland said, "you need to fund us just to be". I am sure London would give two fingers.

People in NI have to stop thinking in this defeatist attitude.
I am sure NI can be fully self-sufficient, and does not require a benefactor to fund the region.

I'd like to agree with you but don't think so.

There are so many factors contributing to why we could not sustain ourselves and be self-sufficient.

Firstly, the last forty years haven't helped and we are still paying for it.

Secondly, there is an unbelievable rate of unemployment here which sickens me to the teeth where people just live on state handouts from the British government.

Thirdly, we have brilliant universities here who train up the cream of their fields, be it dentistry, medicine, education, whatever, and they feck off to Australia, New Zealand etc where the pay is better. Really is a shame.

The list is endless, though that is why we need devolved government - to work on these problems.

Hopefully also, with the peace process, we will see a nice boom in tourism, which I have already started to notice. That'd be great for the economy.

[red dragon]

maxtsu wrote: Ssushi wrote:
...
1) Typically, the south doesn't actually want the north and cannot afford to pay for it.
...
I have heard this argument many a time pointed out by unionists.

This defines NI as a money pit, that requires consistent funding by its benefactor.

Surely you would expect a region to stand on its own two feet and be a net contributer, not a net taker.
Imagine if Scotland said, "you need to fund us just to be". I am sure London would give two fingers.

People in NI have to stop thinking in this defeatist attitude.
I am sure NI can be fully self-sufficient, and does not require a benefactor to fund the region.

Of course it needs a benefactor, mostly for security. secondly who's going to invest a company in an unstable area, when the potential for trouble to start again looms. I'm sure NI can stand on it's feet in the future, but the short term outlook is a no. Saying that some businesses, mainly ex pats are returning and slowly it will pick up.

As I mentioned before, do you think the Celtic tiger wants to take on all the responsibility of a united Ireland. The protestants will be a significant number of people who will not want it to happen. The potential for civil war is huge, something that nobody in their right mind wants. It will take decades, otherwise I am sure if the political environment is right, the democratic vote says 'yes' then it will unite, until then I doubt very much it will happen. And that is acting as a responsible country the Balkans are a good example when independence is rushed.

I think a lot of people need to get out of their minds that somehow the UK needs to keep hold of NI for prestige reasons and old empire, most people in the UK really couldn't care it's up to a democratic vote in a referendum and as long as peace persists then everyone will be happy. But what is not going to happen is uniting Ireland under a threat or terrorism, it's not going to happen end of story.

[De Bhaldraithe]

red dragon wrote:
I think a lot of people need to get out of their minds that somehow the UK needs to keep hold of NI for prestige reasons and old empire, most people in the UK really couldn't care it's up to a democratic vote in a referendum and as long as peace persists then everyone will be happy. But what is not going to happen is uniting Ireland under a threat or terrorism, it's not going to happen end of story.

100%. To quote Peter Brooke,

"Britain has no strategic or economic interest in Northern Ireland and will accept unification of Ireland if that is the wish of the people."

[thundertaker]

De Bhaldraithe wrote: red dragon wrote:
I think a lot of people need to get out of their minds that somehow the UK needs to keep hold of NI for prestige reasons and old empire, most people in the UK really couldn't care it's up to a democratic vote in a referendum and as long as peace persists then everyone will be happy. But what is not going to happen is uniting Ireland under a threat or terrorism, it's not going to happen end of story.

100%. To quote Peter Brooke,

"Britain has no strategic or economic interest in Northern Ireland and will accept unification of Ireland if that is the wish of the people."

So why do you excuse the IRA bombing s**t on the mainland?

[De Bhaldraithe]

thundertaker wrote: De Bhaldraithe wrote: red dragon wrote:
I think a lot of people need to get out of their minds that somehow the UK needs to keep hold of NI for prestige reasons and old empire, most people in the UK really couldn't care it's up to a democratic vote in a referendum and as long as peace persists then everyone will be happy. But what is not going to happen is uniting Ireland under a threat or terrorism, it's not going to happen end of story.

100%. To quote Peter Brooke,

"Britain has no strategic or economic interest in Northern Ireland and will accept unification of Ireland if that is the wish of the people."

So why do you excuse the IRA bombing s**t on the mainland?

Where have I excused IRA activity you imbecile?

[thundertaker]

De Bhaldraithe wrote: thundertaker wrote: De Bhaldraithe wrote: red dragon wrote:
I think a lot of people need to get out of their minds that somehow the UK needs to keep hold of NI for prestige reasons and old empire, most people in the UK really couldn't care it's up to a democratic vote in a referendum and as long as peace persists then everyone will be happy. But what is not going to happen is uniting Ireland under a threat or terrorism, it's not going to happen end of story.

100%. To quote Peter Brooke,

"Britain has no strategic or economic interest in Northern Ireland and will accept unification of Ireland if that is the wish of the people."

So why do you excuse the IRA bombing s**t on the mainland?

Where have I excused IRA activity you imbecile?

You have stated that you pine for the days of punishment beatings, and you accuse British forces of 'terrorism' but can't bring yourself to say the same about the IRA.
Do you or do you not believe the IRA are terrorists?

[mulberrymagnet]

De Bhaldraithe wrote: red dragon wrote: I see what you mean but that was not my intention. Gerry Adams has way too much to lose internationally to risk anything like this, but none the less it is my opinion that it was carried out by dissident IRA men, which I have said more than once, I just don't think you picked up on that part.

I have said that that is my opinion also. If you read my posts, you too will pick up on that.

But you have to admit that after all of the work that the IRA and Sinn Féin have put into the peace process and the political process, it would have been absolutely insanely illogical for them to have had any part in the murder. They have given concession after concession in order to try and build a stable political environment here - why throw it all away now? And why such terrible timing?

You also must admit that the spooks in MI5 and special branch would have very legitimate motives in wanting to kill him - to keep him quiet about how he was recruited, about what information he had given them, etc, etc. It is also very much in their interest that he is dead.

The people that have absolutely nothing to gain from this murder are as follows:

Sinn Féin
IRA
YOU'RE 'AVIN US ON!!!! :lol:
The Governments
The ordinary people of the six counties


The people that are benefiting from this murder are:

Dissident republicans intent on ruining the peace process
Loyalists
The DUP (excuse for stalling)
Special branch
MI5