Deareg
Well-Known Member
another high ranking member of the provisional republican movement has been revealed as a tout
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/4535774.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/4535774.stm
sinn fein informer
- Thread starter Deareg
- Start date
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
All sounds very fishy given he was the person supposedly implicated in the alleged security breach at Stormont. Dirty tricks by the security forces does look to be the root cause of the bringing down of devolved government.
spikey_r
last train to Skaville...
there's loads more to this i think:
why did sb allow him to remain in custody in 2k2. for them to debrief him?
did Gerry Adams and the SF hierarchy know before today? if it was before the July cessation announcement, did it have any bearing on it?
the look on Bertie Ahern's face during the tv interview appeared to show that he didn't know of Denis Donaldson's activities.
why did sb allow him to remain in custody in 2k2. for them to debrief him?
did Gerry Adams and the SF hierarchy know before today? if it was before the July cessation announcement, did it have any bearing on it?
the look on Bertie Ahern's face during the tv interview appeared to show that he didn't know of Denis Donaldson's activities.
But don't people have a legal duty to report criminal activity - especially elected politicians who are, after all, meant to be responsible for passing laws and overseeing the police and justice systems?Deareg said:
What is wrong with him reporting stolen documents or illegal activity by paramilitaries in the place where he worked?
How does this make him a "tout"?
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
You've got totally the wrong end of the stick about what's going on here.
Were we misinformed by our state apparatus?
The story we plebs were told by our compliant establishment-friendly media was of course the exact opposite. The guy was spying for the British state and we were told, when things got hot, that he was spying for the Republicans. I wonder how often we have been misinformed in this way.
The story we plebs were told by our compliant establishment-friendly media was of course the exact opposite. The guy was spying for the British state and we were told, when things got hot, that he was spying for the Republicans. I wonder how often we have been misinformed in this way.
pilchardman
Dances With Penguins
That's what They want you to think!Binkie said:
I'm not saying he wasn't working for the british, just that announcing that Mr Donaldson was not under any threat from the republican movement and has merely been expelled may be a simple "look we didn't touch him, we're good boys now" message.Binkie said:
Larry O'Hara
Well-Known Member
TAE said:
Not quite the point here. The situation in N/Ireland now seems to have been
1) The Brit secret state used the UDA/UFF (via Brian Nelson) to 'take out' Republicans they didn't like
2) They also used Scappatticci to 'take out' IRA members who the Brits wanted to target
3) Via this latest asset, it appears that the whole business of Sinn Fein 'targetting' security apparatus members was a British put up job from the start, designed by spooks to interfere with the political process.
4) In all of these scenarios/operations civilians of all hues & none will have been 'collateral damage'.
In the light of the above, we are entitled to ask just how much further spook manipulation of politics in Ulster went, given that the most juicy bits are most likely still under wraps. The British (secret) state orchestrating, licensing & condoning murder by their assets, with zero regard for the people of Northern Ireland or elsewhere, seems to be routine. The next level of questions revolves around the Dublin Monaghan bombings & the Birmingham bombing. Foreknowledge & permissive license concerning the Omagh bombing, already fairly well established, might well be understating the matter.
In such eventualities as that we are now facing, timing is always important--has this low-life asset been thrown to the wolves now to drown out questions concerning MI5 asset David Rupert? We shall see, or not...
Larry O'Hara
Well-Known Member
TeeJay said:
1) I say this because charges against all three accused were dropped on 8/12, showing that the state knew there was never a 'spy ring' as has been repeatedly claimed, & was at the time.
2) Given that Donaldson has now admitted he has been an SB agent for 20 years, and I heard him half an hour ago on the radio (BBC World Service no less) state that allegations of the spy ring were (in his words) a "fiction".
-----I'd say the answers to your questions are pretty plain, as too is the fact that regular as clockwork you can always be relied upon to ask meretricious questions when state malfeasance is alleged/proved.
I'll deal with this comment first: You seem to make a habit of grand claims on what seems like fairly meagre evidence - for example laying into Howard Marks and Offline as you seemed to think he was an MI6 asset or somesuch idea. I therefore bring a healthy scepticism to what you say. Anything wrong with this?Larry O'Hara said:
I have had to look up what "meretricious" means:
meretricious adj.
* Attracting attention in a vulgar manner: meretricious ornamentation.
* Plausible but false or insincere; specious: a meretricious argument.
* Of or relating to prostitutes or prostitution: meretricious relationships.
...yeah well fuck you too, whichever one of those you meant.
It doesn't show this at all. There can be all sorts of reasons why charges are dropped, and you are just inventing a reason that suits your argument, without any actual proof.Larry O'Hara said:
He may well be saying that, but it seems that one way or another he has been lying through his teeth about a lot of things for a long, long time. Again, you are choosing to believe him because it fits in with what you already want to believe.Larry O'Hara said:
In fact there are all sorts of possible combinations of what he and other people may and may not have done and whther various people are telling the truth or trying to paint things to their advantage.
Again, I therefore bring a healthy scepticism to what you (and he) say. I don't understand why we should believe your pronouncements of knowledge about what went on, in the absence of any compelling evidence either way.
Larry O'Hara
Well-Known Member
TeeJay said:
1) To take the question of Howard Marks--I merely drew attention to the fact (which he admits in Mr Nice) that he worked with MI6, via an Oxbridge chum at least, and questioned the received wisdom of the dynamics of that relationship, and its longevity. You do not refute this, merely cast snide insinuations, including bracketing my comments on him with the entity of Offline, as though there is an equivalence. I merely dared to express an opinion that in my view, I wouldn't contemplate listening to him at Offline as a radical 'alternative' figure for the reason stated. Cue extensive abuse--but what I said I stand by. If you are one tenth as knowledgeable as you affect to be, you would not have made this meretricious point, either.
2) You can use a dictionary & engage in personalised abuse against myself--how very intelligent of you (not). For the record, I meant the second meaning of the word meretricious.
3) Concerning Donaldson, nothing in your post contradicts my original, indeed amplifies it. If I have you right, the very fact he worked as an SB agent for 20 years ("he has been lying through his teeth about a lot of things for a long time long time") is actually used to show that when he speaks of operations he was directly involved in like this (he was one of the three charged) Donaldson must be lying. On that logic (if we can call it that) nothing Donaldson says can be taken seriously at all--how very convenient for the British secret state.
4) As for attacks by the likes of yourself on my right and capacity to offer opinions on these topics, I'll leave that to those who know my track-record and/or who have dispassionately read my book on MI5 'Turning Up the Heat' or read Notes From the Borderland magazine to judge. Sadly, you yourself seem, how shall I put it, not to have an easily verifiable track-record of investigating such areas. Unless you are the estranged son of Chapman Pincher & I can claim my £5.00?
5) I trust most (although perhaps not all) people on U75 can distinguish between genuine contributions and (keeping it topical) 'snow jobs'. Look that one up in your online phrase book & astound us all with your further erudition (another one for you).
I won't end by saying "fuck you" because I'd really rather not, thanks.
Fisher_Gate
Active Member
pilchardman said:That's what They want you to think!
John Le Carre couldn't have written a better story than this one!
Your use of long words doesn't hide the fact that you talk a lot of shite. Apart from using this website at every opportunity to plug your books and magasines, you then go and slag off Offline on the basis that Howard Marks was coming, and you were burbling on about him being an 'MI6 asset'. I suppose that gives u75 'strong links' to parts of the 'secret state' does it? At least in your la-la say-anything-to-sell-a-book land it does maybe. Maybe you should stop using it as a free advertising space then?
My question was "meretricious"? Well it wasn't a "false" question, neither was it "insincere", so you should pull that dictionary out of your arse and find a better word.
"Concerning Donaldson, nothing in your post contradicts my original, indeed amplifies it."
But you haven't produced any evidence about why the prosecutions were dropped or what he did in relation to this case. All you have done is engage in speculation and draw your own self-serving conclusions.
You are the "intellectual" version of Dr Jazzz.
First you say there were no operations and then you say he was involved with them. Which is it?
Why should we believe anything that Donaldson says now if he has been lying through his teeth to everyone around him for so many years?
In any case what has he actually said about the operations?
I am not the one claiming that these stories *show* anything - you are the one claiming to know about all sorts of conspiracies. On what are you basing your claims? My claim is simply that you *don't know* - and all I have to show for that is that you can't show us any evidence.
So where is it?
I have no attacked your "right and capacity to offer opinions on these topics" - you are free to write what you want and offer opinions, but if you don't want people to have the right to cricitise or question what you write then confine it to your books and magasines. Maybe start your own website where you can get rid of people who question your theories?
I won't end by saying "fuck you" because I'd really rather not, thanks.
Very droll but you must be some kind of twat if you don't know what "fuck you" means.
Oh I see - you are being 'clever' again.
My question was "meretricious"? Well it wasn't a "false" question, neither was it "insincere", so you should pull that dictionary out of your arse and find a better word.
"Concerning Donaldson, nothing in your post contradicts my original, indeed amplifies it."
But you haven't produced any evidence about why the prosecutions were dropped or what he did in relation to this case. All you have done is engage in speculation and draw your own self-serving conclusions.
You are the "intellectual" version of Dr Jazzz.
First you say there were no operations and then you say he was involved with them. Which is it?
Why should we believe anything that Donaldson says now if he has been lying through his teeth to everyone around him for so many years?
In any case what has he actually said about the operations?
I am not the one claiming that these stories *show* anything - you are the one claiming to know about all sorts of conspiracies. On what are you basing your claims? My claim is simply that you *don't know* - and all I have to show for that is that you can't show us any evidence.
So where is it?
I have no attacked your "right and capacity to offer opinions on these topics" - you are free to write what you want and offer opinions, but if you don't want people to have the right to cricitise or question what you write then confine it to your books and magasines. Maybe start your own website where you can get rid of people who question your theories?
I won't end by saying "fuck you" because I'd really rather not, thanks.
Very droll but you must be some kind of twat if you don't know what "fuck you" means.
Oh I see - you are being 'clever' again.
Likewise I see no reason to believe otherwise.TAE said:
I'm interested by the dupes and friends demanding answers but it occurs to this poster that they may not like the answers. What then? Demand more?
As it happens the fact that there was never any spyring is no news to anyone who has cared to observe.
Anyone worth his/her salt knew that to be the case.
Confirmation was not required.
Larry O'Hara
Well-Known Member
Dilzybhoy said:
Agreed--and the continued refusal by some to accept evidence says more about them than Donaldson, or myself. Mendacious as well as meretricious.
Your basis for saying "there was no spying" is that Donaldson says so?
The police say that they did recovered lots of stolen documents, but have now dropped the charges.
I have merely said that I don't believe posters here who claim to know that the whole thing was a "set up".
What evidence exactly do I have to produce regarding my sceptism about claims of conspiracies and set ups?
The police say that they did recovered lots of stolen documents, but have now dropped the charges.
I have merely said that I don't believe posters here who claim to know that the whole thing was a "set up".
What evidence exactly do I have to produce regarding my sceptism about claims of conspiracies and set ups?
FruitandNut
New Member
As my old granny told me as I sat on her knee many moons ago - 'What tangled webs we do weave when first we practice to decieve.'
Deareg said:
let us try this hypothesis: stakeknife, donaldson & possibly another ("observer" 18/12/05) + revelations of robin ramsey/"lobster", eg low intensity operations, the 6 counties basically fitting the "years of lead" of the raf & rote armee fraktion historical junction.
basically, as we all know the unionists are another wing of the british parapolitical state apparatus. where do the republicans fit?
within the provisional movement, the "touts" are a direct avenue of communication to elements of the british state apparatus, or at least certain elements within.
extend this argument, and one can see the spectacle for what it really is...
try the brighton bombing 1984, the assinations of mountbatton, airey neave etc. who actually benefits? qou vadis? the provos or the british state?
Divisive Cotton
Now I just have my toy soldiers
Statement in full - Denis Donaldson
"My name is Denis Donaldson. I worked as a Sinn Féin Assembly group administrator in Parliament Buildings at the time of the PSNI raid on the Sinn Féin offices in October 2002 - the so-called Stormontgate affair.
"I was a British agent at the time. I was recruited in the 1980s after compromising myself during a vulnerable time in my life.
"Since then I have worked for British intelligence and the RUC/PSNI Special Branch. Over that period I was paid money. My last two contacts with Special Branch were as follows: two days before my arrest in October 2002 and last night, when a member of Special Branch contacted me to arrange a meeting.
"I was not involved in any republican spy ring in Stormont. The so-called Stormontgate affair was a scam and a fiction. It never existed. It was created by Special Branch.
"I deeply regret my activities with British intelligence and RUC/PSNI Special Branch. I apologise to anyone who has suffered as a result of my activities, as well as to my former comrades, and especially to my family who have become victims in all of this."
"My name is Denis Donaldson. I worked as a Sinn Féin Assembly group administrator in Parliament Buildings at the time of the PSNI raid on the Sinn Féin offices in October 2002 - the so-called Stormontgate affair.
"I was a British agent at the time. I was recruited in the 1980s after compromising myself during a vulnerable time in my life.
"Since then I have worked for British intelligence and the RUC/PSNI Special Branch. Over that period I was paid money. My last two contacts with Special Branch were as follows: two days before my arrest in October 2002 and last night, when a member of Special Branch contacted me to arrange a meeting.
"I was not involved in any republican spy ring in Stormont. The so-called Stormontgate affair was a scam and a fiction. It never existed. It was created by Special Branch.
"I deeply regret my activities with British intelligence and RUC/PSNI Special Branch. I apologise to anyone who has suffered as a result of my activities, as well as to my former comrades, and especially to my family who have become victims in all of this."
Similar threads
- Poll
