02.22
Sinn Fein are going to have to face some financial restrictions today after evidence emerged that they’re a bunch of criminals who’ve never really abandoned the ‘old ways‘.
This is a shame because they’d managed to do something that almost every terrorist group in the world would love to do. They bombed their way to the negotiating table.
Some will argue that I’ve got confused between the IRA and Sinn Fein, that they’re different groups. But I haven’t and it’s very questionable that they are. The line between the two is extremely blurry at best. All I know is what I’ve been told and read over the years. And that quite clearly demonstrates that the criminal element in Sinn Fein runs to the very top.
Not that they care of course. They’ve done their dirty work and earned their millions along the way. They’ve destroyed, murdered and lied in the name of religion and political belief and have suffered no punishment for it at all. They, unlike their victims, most definitely have some bloody big guardian angels looking out for them. People like this cheapen human life.
Bastards.
‘Sinn Fein could face penalties of more than £500,000 a year, following accusations the IRA was responsible for the Northern Bank robbery in Belfast’
‘…accusations…’
The problem here is that no-one has been found guilty of the robbery. No member of the IRA. No member of Sinn Fein. No-one. Until that time, until a court of law has convicted someone for the robbery, any action against Sinn Fein is premature. No matter how much the Unionists or the right or the english government want it to be true, surely the rule of law must apply?
I think the security forces and the government must have some pretty solid proof Dave. I haven’t yet heard and spokesmen from SF saying they’re going to challenge this in any legal terms. So, yes, while no ‘one’ has been found guilty of this, I’d say that as an organisation, and a British governmental organisation at that, they’ve got caught out this time…
I must disagree. I know it’s the job of liberal lefties like me to suspect the security forces and police and such, but you cannot deny that there is form in these cases: Guildford 4, Birmingham 6, the Maguires…
In such a case, and with the likes of the DUP baying for blood, it behoves us to take the position ‘innocent until proven guilty’, even if we believe strongly otherwise. To do otherwise is to abandon the moral high ground. Worryingly, the current government in Westminster seems increasingly to race to judgement in any number of these matters. I see few differences in approach between this situation and that of the persons detained without trial in Belmarsh: if it is known that a crime has been committed, then bring them to trial and then impose punishment.
To do otherwise (ie announce a crime, then punish in advance of a trial) invites comparison with the justice of less enlightened times. Like the US in the McCarthy era…
…or unrestricted detainment of ‘Suspected’ terrorists, house arrest etc…now who in their right mind would allow such a thing to happen in an enlightened democracy….ummmm