|
By Danny Morrison
www.dannymorrison.com
There, I've said it. The IRA did it. And as a result of my
assertion I suddenly become the bosom pal of many. I am
fulsomely quoted and praised by even the DUP for my honesty and
integrity. I am reported favourably in the 'Daily Telegraph'.
Out-of-the-blue, even my books are posthumously declared
excellent reads, such is the reward for conforming to the
prevailing orthodoxy: that is, bashing Sinn Fein.
But if I say the IRA didn't do it then I am just a 'mouthpiece
for the Provos', to be dismissed by those still fighting the war
by other means and aiming to curtail the electoral growth of
Sinn Fein.
For the purpose of discussion let us respectfully examine the
mindset of the PSNI and the Garda Siochana by which they reached
the conclusion that the IRA did the Northern Bank raid.
Firstly, it was incredibly well-planned and executed and
involved a large number of people who made a clean getaway. To
expect to successfully launder such a considerable sum of money
requires a huge organisation of sympathisers. Their conclusion:
'only the IRA could have done it, therefore the IRA must have
done it'.
We are told that after the event the PSNI and Garda were able to
make sense of things they saw and monitored through surveillance
and bugs before the event, with broad hints and leaks about
senior members of Sinn Fein being seen in the company of senior
members of the IRA. Their conclusion: for days beforehand we saw
the barn door open but it never occurred to us that one hell of
a horse was planning to bolt. Not very bright intelligence
officers, nor does this 'evidence' amount to a hill of beans.
The authorities claimed that after the event they received
definite intelligence indicating IRA responsibility. Their eyes
and ears on the ground - that is, informers - have now confirmed
to them that the talk in the bars or among the dogs in the
street is that the IRA did it.
This suggests that there is no loose talk in the IRA before an
operation, but plenty afterwards. However, the loose talk
inexplicably stops when it comes to the location of the white
van and the #26.5 million.
Let's examine the reliability of informers. Certainly, a lot of
their information has led to the deaths and imprisonment of many
republicans and innocent people. But let's examine the only ones
who were ever stripped of their anonymity and whose credibility
was scrutinised in public. I am referring, of course, to those
supergrasses that were used to imprison hundreds of people over
a five-year period in the early1980s.
Raymond Gilmour is a representative sample who was described by
the Lord Chief Justice as being "entirely unworthy of belief".
He was "a selfish and self-regarding man to whose lips a lie
invariably comes more naturally than the truth." The then Chief
Constable of the RUC, John Hermon, swore by Gilmour's
credibility, as he swore by the credibility of thirty others,
all of whose evidence was eventually rubbished in the appeal
courts. Conclusion: if informers are the main source for the
PSNI and the Gardai suspecting the IRA then I fully sympathise
with Michael McDowell not making a laughing stock of himself by
divulging his 'dodgy dossier' to Gerry Adams.
For several years now media security pundits (quoting the
intelligence services) and dissident republicans have jibed that
the ceasefire IRA cannot move because it has been infiltrated
from top-to-bottom. That the bank heist was not thwarted
disproves that assertion for it indicates that the intelligence
services had no prior warning, otherwise they would have
captured the raiders or monitored their getaway and arrested
even more.
All of the above, of course, merely proves the weakness of the
case for the prosecution. It does not prove that the IRA didn't
carry out the heist.
There are republican supporters who have even taken succour from
the IRA denial along the lines of "sure, the 'RA would have to
say that". They appreciate that a formal admission would create
an even greater crisis but that the operation itself sends a
powerful message to Tony Blair that he has been taking
republicans and their compromises for granted.
If that were to turn out to be the correct interpretation then
we are at a crossroads but not one as bleak as has been made
out. The British government factors into its calculations and
negotiations that the IRA cannot return to armed struggle
without Sinn Fein paying a heavy price electorally. Undoubtedly,
because there is a degree of association, Sinn Fein's vote would
suffer. However, the reason why a return to armed struggle would
be foolhardy is because it would be a return to a military
stalemate.
It is obvious that Sinn Fein does not represent nor can it speak
for the IRA. Yet, London and Dublin propagate that assumption
and exploit it to punish Sinn Fein. Even though the crisis in
the peace process was caused by the DUP, prior to the Northern
Bank raid, the governments do not punish it. The majority of
nationalists in the North reject and resent this double standard
and these attacks on them and their elected representatives. And
that is why the SDLP will not be joining a gerrymandered
executive led by Ian Paisley - which appears to be one of the
crackpot notions being considered by Blair.
If the two governments insist that 'the IRA did it' and punish
Sinn Fein then Sinn Fein should refuse to mediate between the
IRA and Dublin and London. Let them do a better job. Sinn Fein's
mandate derives from the majority of nationalists in the North,
people who are denied their full rights by a combination of
British rule, which they bear under sufferance, and DUP
intransigence. Attack Sinn Fein and you attack those people.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
