You are being pedantic David. I'm sure there are many illegal weapons on both sides of the border which were not declared by individual Republicans, human nature being what it is.

The important thing is that NI is now largely a peaceful place and will remain so.

Matt,

Tell that to the family of Paul Quinn.

Considering that in 1997 Michael McKevitt, the then Quartermaster General, broke away from the IRA to form the Real IRA, I would imagine that he would have been able to transfer many of the weapons from the Provisionals to the Dissidents. Stop trying to create an issue when there isn't one.

Show one shred of evidence David that the IRA had anything what so ever to do with Paul Quinn's murder.

Seamus

1. If the IRA had nothing to do with it why wasn't he just shot? It would have been a lot less trouble and a lot less complicated. But it would have broken the ceasefire.

2. Nobody else in the area could have brought trouble like that to the provos door and gotten away with it.

3. Paul Quinn was known to be in dispute with local provos and his family believe they killed him.

Now the IRA has never been charged with any crime and can not be charged with this one. It's very exisence is a crime in both juristictions.

But only individuals can be charged and each one of them is entitled to the presumption of innocence. An illegal organisation is not. We are perfectly entitled to make a political judgement about it on the balance of probabilities.

We can be fairly certain now that the IRA won't kill any police or British Army. And they won't kill any unionists.

They are only a danger to nationalists and it's past times they stood down completely. Anything they do now can only damage their reputation.

"If the IRA had nothing to do with it why wasn't he just shot? It would have been a lot less trouble and a lot less complicated. But it would have broken the ceasefire."

If the IRA where involved the probably would have just shot him. It would have been cleaner, easier to do, less need to co-ordinate properly. Every IRA attack was done behind a veil of secrecy. Very rarely were more than one cell involved in an attack but this attacked used over ten people, which is over three cells. Even and ASU would have that many members.

"Nobody else in the area could have brought trouble like that to the provos door and gotten away with it."

The attack is believed by both the leadership of Sinn Féin, the Irish Government and the British Government to be linked to an ongoing feud between diesel smugglers.

"Paul Quinn was known to be in dispute with local provos and his family believe they killed him."

Yes, his family have said they think the IRA killed him. That is not proof of the IRA's guilt or even the guilt of IRA members just because he got into a scrap with a Provo's son.

Seamus

His mother said that there had been altercations between Quinn and local IRA tough guys. When he was murdered, she immediately thought that the IRA did it.

This is not proof of anything, but it is a set of circumstance that IRA apologists have never quite explained away.

Seamus

If the IRA where involved the probably would have just shot him.

With what?

Every IRA attack was done behind a veil of secrecy.

That's a slightly romantic view, Seamus. There was that whole informer problem.

Very rarely were more than one cell involved in an attack but this attacked used over ten people, which is over three cells.

I'll bow to your superior knowledge of the operational side of things.

That is not proof of the IRA's guilt

What would prove their guilt to your satisfaction?

But to accuse the IRA of murder, which is what people like Jim Allister and the rest of the Traditional Unionists are doing, just because before he died, Paul Quinn got into a fight with the son of a Provo.

I operate under the innocent until proven guilty routine and the is no evidence what so ever to suggest that Paul Quinn was murdered because of a fight with the son of an IRA member.

I still contend that if the IRA had killed Paul Quinn then they would have shot him. It would have been much easier to do.

Seamus

The principle of innocent until proven guilty applies to accused persons. The IRA can't be tried as an entity so legal proof is not an issue here. It's a question of judgement.

Proof, like forensics or eye witness accounts of the murder would I think help. But none of them have been produced.

What would the IRA have shot him with? Now, that is a loaded question. Without giving David and his friends too much ammunition [I'm full of the puns aren't it], the IRA almost certainly kept a small amount of weapons just encase we had another August 1969.

I still contend that if the IRA had killed Paul Quinn then they would have shot him. It would have been much easier to do.

Again, with what? Don't you believe they decomissioned?

Seamus

So then you presumably think that the murderers of the Parachute Brigade are innocent too, since no jury has ever convicted them for what they did.

Seamus

So you think the IRA still has guns despite their denials. But you believe their denial of the murder of Paul Quinn. How can you tell which denials are real?

Just a belief Henry. I feel the IRA have kept weapons to defend the people in the event of another attack. I don't believe that the IRA as an organisation would kill Paul Quinn, especially as there is a belief by the two governments and Sinn Féin, that Paul Quinn was murdered because of a smuggling feud, a belief that has been surpressed and denounced as Character Defamation.

Phantom, are you talking about Warrenpoint where the IRA killed many members of the Parachute Regiment or Bloody Sunday?

On another note Phantom, most trials in Northern Ireland in the last thirty years haven't had juries. You don't need to be convicted by a Jury if it's for "Terrorist related Crimes". It means that if a Peeler said you did it, the Judge believed him and convicted you.

I speak of Bloody Sunday.

Since they were not convicted of anything, those Paras are to be regarded as innocent I suppose. Every one of them.

Until they are proven guilty then yeah, the are innocent.

"Detectives recovered an old Webley revolver, which was loaded, as well as ammunition and some cash"

Wow ! real state of the art gear I'll bet those crims paid top dollar for that.

Must be a slow news day.

It means that if a Peeler said you did it, the Judge believed him and convicted you.

I think you may be mixed up in your jurisdictions there. Wasn't it the word of a senior Garda officer, mixing it up with diplock courts.

Very rarely were more than one cell involved in an attack but this attacked used over ten people, which is over three cells.

errr.... The exception to this reorganisation was the South Armagh Brigade which retained its traditional hierarchy and battalion structure and used relatively large numbers of volunteers in its actions.[4] Some operations, like the attack on Cloghogue checkpoint or the South Armagh sniper squads, involved as many as 20 volunteers, most of them in supporting roles.

Until they are proven guilty then yeah, the are innocent.

What about people like Scappatticci who won't be brought to trial due to the involvement of the state? You are a great believer in British justice.

Yes, his family have said they think the IRA killed him. That is not proof of the IRA's guilt or even the guilt of IRA members

Seamus, you think the family are talking nonsense. How about this family?

THE sister of a man who bled to death following a so-called punishment shooting has called on the IRA to finally admit responsibility and apologise a decade on from the murder.

and it goes on.....Mr Kearney’s sister Eleanor King said that in a private meeting with the IRA a some years ago she was told the organisation had been responsible for her brother’s shooting and that it had been a sanctioned operation.

However, on the 10-year anniversary of his death today she said it was time that admission was made public and that her family was given an official apology.

Families aren't stupid...!

"Since they were not convicted of anything, those Paras are to be regarded as innocent I suppose. Every one of them."

Yes! I believe they were in the wrong place at the wrong time with the wrong orders and stupid leadership.

The real scandel was what happened afterwards.

Matt,

You mean the millions wasted on serial enquiries which allow Provo godfathers like McGuinness to take the 5th?

Hmmm...IRA members involved, albeit indirectly with the drugs trade. Don`t their loyalist counterparts also engage in drug dealing activity?

IRA.....tweedledum

UVF/UDA tweedledee.

David i think millions could be saved from such inquiries if the British govt didn't obfuscate, lie and refuse to co-operate, in several high profile ones.

There's a simple solution to costly inquiries. The state shouldn't murder it's own citizens.

And if they do then they shouldn't lie about it.

"You mean the millions wasted on serial enquiries which allow Provo godfathers like McGuinness to take the 5th?"

Sure, and the rest.