Claudy bomb - the priest that got away with murder

[likesfish]

been reliably informed sentry duty on an open mass graves is not a barrel of laughs.
forensic anthropology is rather a slow process and in the balkans theres still people who would rather the truth did'nt get out.
As I've said before 3500 dead plus countless injured in 30 odd years is horrible but far from what was possible if the various parties had really decided to go for it

 

[Deareg]

The priest got moved under rather dodgy circumstances.
fact is putting him in front of a court would be bad because unionists would go batshit (headbangers would go even more batshit ) leading to a lot more death.

would possibly had a major coup to the ira think catholic countries sending support to the provos etc etc
might even get the irish state invovled.
at least one person claims mcguiness might have been invovled so trying to set up peace talks with one of the major players in jail would'nt have helped.
britsh states plan as such was it to go away

not sure how correct you are if at all saying this, the loyalist paramilataries were so infiltrated by the security forces (at times they were almost another arm of the british government) that just about everything they planned to do, if not already sanctioned was known to them

 

[LiamO]

Which is quite different to what you suggest they've said.

they??? I quoted likesfish, nobody else.

How am I 'suggesting' they said anything?

Likesfish wrote... "would also have looked bad internationaly evil brits arrests "man of peace" back in the 1970s the catholic church still had a public reputation to lose. Whitelaw was trying to get peace talks going so a high profile arrest that may well have given the provos a cash boost/ properganda victory would'nt have helped"

What other conclusions could you draw from those words other than the one I drew?

 

[LiamO]

The priest got moved under rather dodgy circumstances.

Yes he did. He got moved because a British politician asked his (the priest's) boss without offering any evidence. These are VERY dodgy conditions. Cardinal Conway should have told Willie to put up or shut up!

 

[Streathamite]

Likesfish wrote... "would also have looked bad internationaly evil brits arrests "man of peace" back in the 1970s the catholic church still had a public reputation to lose. Whitelaw was trying to get peace talks going so a high profile arrest that may well have given the provos a cash boost/ properganda victory would'nt have helped"

What other conclusions could you draw from those words other than the one I drew?

I would say - and this is borne out by looking at all of likesfish's posts here-that he is suggesting that such arrests would have inflamed tensions in all parts of NI - across religious and political divides, and may have triggered a chain-reaction series of events (a la Beirut, 1975) that would have ended up in one huge great meltdown.

 

[LiamO]

would possibly had a major coup to the ira think catholic countries sending support to the provos etc etc
might even get the irish state invovled.

What, like 'catholic' countries were queueing up to send support in '69? After Bloody Sunday? the summer of 72? Why would foreign sovereign states give a fiddler's fuck about a priest being (credibly?) tried for mass murder? Where is the precedent or evidence for this?

This is pure catastrophising, an extrapolation of an extrapolation of an extrapolation. Just because something sounds plausible in your head doesn't mean it is credible. This is not credible.

As for the 'irish state' getting involved... don't make me laugh!

 

[ViolentPanda]

So apart from an RUC Special Branch Inteligence report and an anonymous letter to 'Chairman Meow's' Dad there doesn't appear to be any evidence against Fr Chesney? No doubt if there was they would have lifted him, but they did not.

They quite possibly didn't lift him at the time because of the sensitivity of Anglo-Irish and cross-border relations at the time, and that would have meant that when they were in a position to lift him, to do so would have pointed up some inconvenient truths of the time.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Would it? Did not Loyalists believe that many priests were IRA men anyway? Were not priests like Des Wilson, Raymond Murray, even Denis Faul not consistently tarred with this brush?

Believing something and having it proven beyond doubt are two different things.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Not sure about that last bit. There were a lot of hot heads running around in the 26, but at the same time when the balloon went up the Dublin govt asked the army about the possibility of intervening in the 6, and was told that they could probably hold Newry for 24 hours while taking massive casualties. . .

I shall try and remember which pol's memoir it was that I read about the high levels of testosterone spilling around The Dail, and causing people to fantasise about driving the brits out.

 

[LiamO]

I shall try and remember which pol's memoir it was that I read about the high levels of testosterone spilling around The Dail, and causing people to fantasise about driving the brits out.

in 1974?!?

Not unless they'd been lying about in a drunken stupor since 1969...

 

[ViolentPanda]

not sure how correct you are if at all saying this, the loyalist paramilataries were so infiltrated by the security forces (at times they were almost another arm of the british government) that just about everything they planned to do, if not already sanctioned was known to them

Problem being that historically, MI5 et al have been willing to let a lot of stuff ride, as long as it's served their longer-term strategy.
People tend to forget that while a lot of intel work seems reactive, it's often part of a long-term strategic objective, so letting a shooting war slide would be allowed if it served the right interests. G-d knows they let enough other shite slide.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I would say - and this is borne out by looking at all of likesfish's posts here-that he is suggesting that such arrests would have inflamed tensions in all parts of NI - across religiousd and political divides, and may have triggered a chain-reaction series of events (a la Beirut, 1975) that would have ended up in one huge great meltdown.

The situation with reference to men of the cloth on both sides of the religious divide was still much the same in the 1980s, and I say that from the perspective of serving there at the time. There were people who couldn't be touched, and places of worship you couldn't follow someone into, because to do so would have lit a fire.

 

[ViolentPanda]

in 1974?!?

Not unless they'd been lying about in a drunken stupor since 1969...

Well, you're obviously the authority here, what with telling people what they do or don't know!

 

[ViolentPanda]

What, like 'catholic' countries were queueing up to send support in '69? After Bloody Sunday? the summer of 72? Why would fore4ign sovereign states give a fiddler's fuck about a priest be tried for mass murder? Where is the precedent or evidence for this.

This is pure catastrophising, an extrapolation of an extrapolation of an extrapolation. Just because something sounds plausible in your head doesn't mean it is credible. This is not credible.

As for the 'irish state' getting involved... don't make me laugh!

Many thanks to your learned self for letting us lesser mortals know the truth of the matter, then!
Of course, when I say "truth", I mean "your unsupported perspective" rather than your voicing of an eternal verity.

 

[Streathamite]

in 1974?!?

Not unless they'd been lying about in a drunken stupor since 1969...

tensions and sentiments rose considerably between 1972 and 1974, due to a combination of Bloody sunday, the mainland pub bombings, and the effects of internment....

 

[LiamO]

dual post

 

[LiamO]

Well, you're obviously the authority here, what with telling people what they do or don't know!

I was merely making the point that by 1974 the sabre-rattling (such that it was) was long gone from Dail Eireann.

Can you point out where I have attempted to tell people what they do or don't know. That is not really a coherent statement is it?

 

[LiamO]

Many thanks to your learned self for letting us lesser mortals know the truth of the matter, then!
QUOTE]

I have stated repeatedly that I have no idea what the 'truth' here is. However I think it is important to maintain a healthy cynicism and to ask questions.

I have posited no theory here - perhaps that is what is pissing you off, nothing to aim at - but I have asked questions of yours. I find your 'theory' less than convincing, that's all.

 

[LiamO]

Believing something and having it proven beyond doubt are two different things.

Quite.

 

[LiamO]

My apologies over all this 1974 confusion - the Claudy bomb was of course in '72.

It was me who introduced '74 in my post about cardinal Daly

 

[ViolentPanda]

I was merely making the point that by 1974 the sabre-rattling (such that it was) was long gone from Dail Eireann.

The public sabre-rattling. I thought I'd made it clear I was talking about a political memoir of the time, and how the pols were fantasising, not about how they were beating the war-drum in public.

Can you point out where I have attempted to tell people what they do or don't know. That is not really a coherent statement is it?

Sorry, should have suffixed "to be true", in reference to your dismissing of views that don't, in your opinion, add up.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I have stated repeatedly that I have no idea what the 'truth' here is. However I think it is important to maintain a healthy cynicism and to ask questions.

What is healthily cynical about nigh-on ruling out opinions or speculations at variance to yours or using dismissive language such as "pure catastrophism"?

I have posited no theory here -

Quite. You've merely dismissed anything that you don't agree with.

perhaps that is what is pissing you off, nothing to aim at -

You're flattering yourself! I'm about as "pissed off" as a cake-eating fanatic in a fully-stocked cake shop!
As for "nothing to aim at", I'd disagree.

but I have asked questions of yours. I find your 'theory' less than convincing, that's all.

But you don't say why, except for your broad brush-strokes of how "sabre-rattling was long gone by 1974" (wrong date and out of context on your part, but so it goes) and "this is pure catastrophising". You don't stir yourself to explain what is or isn't convincing.

 

[Deareg]

Problem being that historically, MI5 et al have been willing to let a lot of stuff ride, as long as it's served their longer-term strategy.
People tend to forget that while a lot of intel work seems reactive, it's often part of a long-term strategic objective, so letting a shooting war slide would be allowed if it served the right interests. G-d knows they let enough other shite slide.

That is more or less what i was trying to say, but you put it much better

 

[LiamO]

Problem being that historically, MI5 et al have been willing to let a lot of stuff ride, as long as it's served their longer-term strategy.
People tend to forget that while a lot of intel work seems reactive, it's often part of a long-term strategic objective, so letting a shooting war slide would be allowed if it served the right interests. G-d knows they let enough other shite slide.

This analysis I have absolutely no problem in accepting. Some of your extrapolations however, I find less than convincing. I have no illusions about the capabilities of british Intelligence, their MO, nor indeed their complete lack of what us mortals might term a 'moral' compass - ie they couldn't give a fuck who gets hurt or killed providing the right pieces are moved on their strategic chessboard. If it suited them they could (and would) arrange bombings never mind cover them up.

As an aside, I think they are playing just such a long-term game with the Jihadi's at the minute... give 'em enough rope etc. I think we can expect a monumental 'fuck-up' like Omagh sometime, maybe sooner than we think.

The main issues I have here, that I find it incredible are...

1. That the RUC SB (and indeed the RUC in general) were willing participants in this and none of them ever was tempted to blow the gaffe on this.

2. That Conway buckled wiothouit being presented with any evidence.

3. That if Chesney was such a potentially dangerous and embarrassing (for the Church) figure , why did they only move him a few miles away to Derry - which was awash with 'on the run republicans' at the time? Why not a nice job with the missions in Africa or South America, or at least somewhere far away like Waterford

4. Where is the evidence (rather than gossip) against Chesney?

For example... one witness apparently claims to have seen Chesney 'running away' from the car-bomb. I read a letter in the irish News yesterday from some fella claiming that Chesney was only out of hospital (afetr a lengthy stay) and was barely able to walk at the time. It cannot be rocket science to check this out, can it?

There are other questions too.

 

[Pickman's model]

1. That the RUC SB (and indeed the RUC in general) were willing participants in this and none of them ever was tempted to blow the gaffe on this.

some good points in your post, but this one's not all there. this supposes that knowledge was shared throughout the sb and wider ruc, which is to say the least unlikely. as for 'blowing the gaffe', i can't see that that would have been a happy prospect for any ruc officer.

e2a: have ruc officers ever leaked similar things?

 

[LiamO]

e2a: have ruc officers ever leaked similar things?

well there's the one who 'blew the gaffe' on the Glenane Gang and robert nairac for a start... but fair point!

And I'm sure that many's the journalist has been 'tipped the wink' by serving cops... and my own gut suspicion that this would just be too big a swallow for unionist cops, too juicy.

Anyways, that's me for a while... back to school tomorrow

 

[trashpony]

He had traces of explosives in his car

You might want to listen to the long-ish piece and interview that they did on PM last week - I think it might answer some of your questions Liam. Enjoy the new term, hope your pencils are sharpened and you've got a new bag

 

[LiamO]

Like the Birmingham 6 had traces of explosives on their hands?

Only last night I was talking to a friend who was filling me in developments in the case of a Mr Thornton - a civilian who was shot dead whilst driving past a british army fort in Belfast (in '71 or 72). The HET apparently have had contact with a group of local women - who gave statements at the time - that a cop car pulled up at the scene after he was shot and the cop proceeded to attempt to place a short arm in the car. Whebn they spotted what he was at and began shouting at him, he simply picked up the short, strolled back to his car and drove off.

Now what was that about traces of explosives in Chesney's car?...

What is PM? Do you have a link to the programme?

Gotta go, need a new lunch-box as my spongebob one is sooo last year.

 

[trashpony]

PM is on Radio 4 - Not sure it's still available to listen to.
I thought the interview was pretty compelling but obviously we all bring our own prejudices to bear - I'm not feeling that charitable towards the Catholic Church for obvious reason at the moment. You clearly have a different sort of prejudice

 

[LiamO]

I thought the interview was pretty You clearly have a different sort of prejudice

please expand on this... you are suggesting I am in some way sticking up for the CC, are you?