Sinn Fein fail to fill District Policing Partnership posts.

[grainne]

Sinn Fein fail to fill District Policing Partnership posts.

Sinn Fein has been unable to find candidates to fill positions on the District Policing Partnership in Strabane.


The party was given five posts on the board, but could only find three councillors willing to participate.

It comes after weeks of internal wrangling within Sinn Fein. As a result the two spare posts were offered to the DUP.

Sinn Fein West Tyrone MP Pat Doherty said he was disappointed, but said his party is fully committed to engaging with all of the policing structures.


http://u.tv/newsroom

[Comrade Ryan]

Not often you see a public mutiny like this in SF.

No matter what the circumstances it is a blow to the leadership.

It may be for politcal reasons. The talk has been of disquiet around this issue in Strabane for sometime now. The majority of the cllrs may just be plain refusing to serve on DPP's over problems with the british policing issue.

Indeed, Doherty's comment would seem to point in that direction, for my money anyways.

Or they just may not be up for attending extra meetings and so forth, particularly if they view them as being a waste of time.

Regardless of which (and I still plump for the first one) it is a rare sign of mutiny in the ranks.

[robertemmett]

as i remember the sf cumanns in strabane were anti cops at the ard fhies.

is this correct?

[Carlos McJackle]

id like to congratulate those shinners who displayed a bit of character on this one and refused to be browbeaten . Theyve ensured that in the future their family name will not be tarnished by touting and collaboration . Well done , theyre an example to others in their party .
Which is why theyll probably be kicked out , for personal reasons of course .

[Takeshi]

I would expect a major purge of that cumman to take place soon. The leadership aren't going to let people embarrass them like this and allow them to remain in the party. There doesn't seem to be any room for this type of dissent within the party.

[manus1916]

The party was given five posts on the board, but could only find three out of eight councillors willing to participate. seats then went to the D.U.P

this will be a real problem for the leadership........ come down with a heavy hand to re-instill disipline in the ranks but at the same time risking the possibility of having the 5 resign and become independants becoming larger than sinn feins representation in the area which is a possibility, because they usually try and bully one lone cllr who would go independant but wouldn't work on a group of five comrades

or let it pass and brush it under the carpet exposing a weakness in leadership allowing others in the party to think if they stick together in future revolts it ties the leaderships hands.

either way their on a slipery slope and the only way is down

Fair play to them anyway standing their ground no doubt they were each read the riot act before the final outcome and still stood strong........ hats off comrades

[DublinRepublican]

It doesnt really suprise me, they arent the first people to refuse positions.

[Rory O'Connor]

Wed, Dec 05, 2007

Sinn Féin's support for policing in the North was questioned today after two councillors in Co Tyrone shunned places on a District Policing Partnership (DPP).

Unionist MEP Jim Allister warned Sinn Féin's leadership needed to act after the Strabane District councillors' move. The party was entitled to nominate five members to the DPP, but only three took posts.

Sinn Féin's leadership and most members have endorsed policing with around 55 councillors taking up places on the DPP scrutiny bodies.

However, Mr Allister said: "It doesn't square with full support for police and the rule of law. Actions do speak louder than words so these actions point to a deficit in terms of their supposed commitment to the rule of law.

"If there is a problem you would have thought the leadership would sort it out and obviously they have not been able to."

On Monday it emerged Fermanagh and South Tyrone MLA Gerry McHugh was leaving the party after reportedly becoming disillusioned with its "undemocratic" nature. The move was also linked to personal differences with the party.

He will still sit in the Northern Ireland Assembly as an independent.

Sinn Féin MP Pat Doherty said: "Obviously there is disappointment that our party grouping on Strabane Council did not reach agreement on its full complement of nominees to the DPP at this time.

"Sinn Féin is fully committed to engaging with all of the policing structures."

DUP Policing Board member Jeffrey Donaldson said: "There is an element within Sinn Féin who clearly have not been able to come to terms with what is happening, but they must not be allowed to hold the whole republican movement back."

[communitarian]

Ever Since they Expelled themselves From Sinn Féin in 1986, the Adamsite strategy has became more and more Blatent in its support for progressive acceptance of Partition and persuit of Capitalism, Hopefully when these councillors Get the same Dicipline that was meeted out to Bernice Swift in Fermanagh by the authoritarian undemocratic Belfast leadership, they will re-examine the period 69-85, 86-07 and when reaching the only viable conclusion rejoin an all-Ireland Republican, Sinn Féin determined to implement Éire nua and realise that Compromise means nothing no matter how ruthless compared to legitimate and principled Continuity which Defends the right of the All Ireland Dáil Éireann.

[Mellows1922]

Ever Since they Expelled themselves From Sinn Féin in 1986, the Adamsite strategy has became more and more Blatent in its support for progressive acceptance of Partition and persuit of Capitalism, Hopefully when these councillors Get the same Dicipline that was meeted out to Bernice Swift in Fermanagh by the authoritarian undemocratic Belfast leadership, they will re-examine the period 69-85, 86-07 and when reaching the only viable conclusion rejoin an all-Ireland Republican, Sinn Féin determined to implement Éire nua and realise that Compromise means nothing no matter how ruthless compared to legitimate and principled Continuity which Defends the right of the All Ireland Dáil Éireann.

If you feel so strongly about RSF, why is it you can't motivate yourself to join this party you endlessly drone on about.

[Rory O'Connor]

Ever Since they Expelled themselves From Sinn Féin in 1986, the Adamsite strategy has became more and more Blatent in its support for progressive acceptance of Partition and persuit of Capitalism, Hopefully when these councillors Get the same Dicipline that was meeted out to Bernice Swift in Fermanagh by the authoritarian undemocratic Belfast leadership, they will re-examine the period 69-85, 86-07 and when reaching the only viable conclusion rejoin an all-Ireland Republican, Sinn Féin determined to implement Éire nua and realise that Compromise means nothing no matter how ruthless compared to legitimate and principled Continuity which Defends the right of the All Ireland Dáil Éireann.

It was Republican Sinn Féin who expelled themselves from Sinn Féin in 1986, not the other way around.

[communitarian]

It most certainly was not!!
THose who Broke the Constitution upon an illigimate and Gerrymandered Vote a constitiution Banning Participation in partitionist assemblies and declaring those who do take part be expelled "and dealt with as such" were the Adamsites and Rendered them selves partitionists and usurpers of the Irish Republic and Slowly we have realised this usurption to be what the Republican Movement Realised in 1986 as the road to Surrender!!

There is One Legitimate and Republican Sinn Féin whom Did not break faith with the Republic! Adamsites Pre-cluded themselves from membership in 86.

[Rory O'Connor]

Republican Sinn Féin participated in a vote to change Sinn Féin's constitution to abandon abstentionism. Their constitution was legitimately changed via a two thirds majority vote to change it and Republican Sinn Féin expelled themselves from Sinn Féin simply because they didn't agree with the change in their constitution. Sinn Féin are still the "legitimate Sinn Féin," even if they are no longer republicans.

[communitarian]

Republican Sinn Féin participated in a vote to change Sinn Féin's constitution to abandon abstentionism. Their constitution was legitimately changed via a two thirds majority vote to change it and Republican Sinn Féin expelled themselves from Sinn Féin simply because they didn't agree with the change in their constitution. Sinn Féin are still the "legitimate Sinn Féin," even if they are no longer republicans.

?????
I think abit of reading up is in order.

100 ghost votes? spooky

[Rory O'Connor]

If there were votes that were unaccounted for, then Republican Sinn Féin should have began an independant republican party that doesn't claim to be the "legitimate Sinn Féin" or they should have remained in Sinn Féin to challenge it's changed constitution to abandon abstentionism.

[communitarian]

Why did over 100 votes exist in 86 that didn't exist in 85 or 87?
It suits those who followed in the bastardization of the Irish Republic to Give Adamsites Credibility untill 1998 though there had been alot of Compromise unjust compromise from 86-98, though only the Republican Movement Called it out each time and each time are proven correct!

[MarkyMark]

surely when a minority walks out it is they who have expelled themselves

[communitarian]

Then are Fianna Fáil the Legitimate Government of Ireland they had a clearer majority over Sinn Féin in 37/38?
Personalities or Principle?

[belfast rep]

Why did over 100 votes exist in 86 that didn't exist in 85 or 87?
It suits those who followed in the bastardization of the Irish Republic to Give Adamsites Credibility untill 1998 though there had been alot of Compromise unjust compromise from 86-98, though only the Republican Movement Called it out each time and each time are proven correct!

what were the numbers for and against

[communitarian]

The story of how Gerry Adams tried to turn an eighty year old revolutionary movement into a British Constitutional party. How he broke the Sinn Féin constitution, created fake cumainn to give him fake votes and barred life long republicans from voting. How he managed to expel himself and his supporters from Sinn Féin membership. And, how a small band of republicans managed to keep the Sinn Féin constitution and traditional policy in tact.

The story of how Gerry Adams tried to turn an eighty year old revolutionary movement into a British Constitutional party. How he broke the Sinn Féin constitution, created fake cumainn to give him fake votes and barred life long republicans from voting. How he managed to expel himself and his supporters from Sinn Féin membership. And, how a small band of republicans managed to keep the Sinn Féin constitution and traditional policy in tact.

In 1986 Section 1b. of the Sinn Féin constitution read as follows:

“No person who is a member of any political party organisation or who approves of or supports the candidature of persons who, if elected, intend taking part in the proceedings of the Westminster or partitionist 26-County or 6-County parliaments or who approves of or supports the candidature of persons who sign any form or give any kind of written or verbal undertaking of intention to take their seats in these institutions, shall be admitted to membership or allowed to retain membership."

The Adams leadership put forward a motion, titled Resolution 162, at the 1986 Ard Fheis. Its wording was as follows:

RESOLUTION 162

THAT this Ard-Fheis drops its abstentionist attitude to Leinster House. Successful Sinn Fein parliamentary candidates in 26-County elections:

a. Shall attend Leinster House as directed by the Ard Chomhairle.

b. Shall not draw their salaries for personal use. (Parliamentary representatives shall be paid a Sinn Fein organiser’s subsidy, and the Leinster House salary shall be divided at the direction of the Ard Chomhairle to defray national and constituency expenses.)

To accommodate this change, the Constitution and Rules be amended as follows:

That Section 1b of the Constitution be amended to read:

No person who is a member of any political party organisation or who approves of or supports the candidature of persons who, if elected, intend taking part in the proceedings of the Westminster or partitionist 6-County parliaments or who approves of or supports the candidature of persons who sign any form or give any kind of written or verbal undertaking of intention to take their seats in these institutions, shall be admitted to membership or allowed to retain membership.

Motion 162 supports and approves of the candidature of persons who, if elected, would be of the intention to take their seats in certain circumstances i.e. on the direction of the Ard Chomhairle. Obviously, Motion 162 infringes Section 1b. Section 1b. was in effect at the time this Resolution was presented. Its clear that Adams made a mistake in procedure. He should have sought a majority decision to amend Section 1b. in 1986 and returned in 1987 to propose entering Leinster House. Trying to amend Section 1b. and propose taking seats in the “partitionist 26-County Parliament” in the same Resolution was a logical impossibility.

Can anybody say that the wording:

“That this Ard-Fheis drops its abstentionist attitude to Leinster House. Successful Sinn Fein parliamentary candidates in 26-County elections:

a. Shall attend Leinster House as directed by the Ard Chomhairle”

does not constitute the supporting and approving of the candidature of persons who intend to take their seats in Leinster House as directed by the Ard Chomhairle?
Clearly Adams was in breach of Section 1b. and according to that section he had expelled himself, and all those who voted for Resolution 162.

Brian Feeney, in his book, Sinn Féin 100 Turbulent Years, puts forward the argument that Adams had managed to bypass Section 1b, by introducing a motion in 1983 allowing the “discussion” of any aspect of the Sinn Féin constitution. This change may indeed have facilitated debate on abstentionism but it did not infringe on the content or effect of Section 1b in any way. To discuss something is not the same as formally proposing or supporting it. For example, conventions are held regularly where drug addiction is discussed without any of the delegates proposing or supporting it. In fact the line Adams added in 1983 was superfluous, as the Sinn Féin constitution had never banned the “discussion” of anything – just the “approving” and “supporting” of taking seats in named partitionist parliaments.

Of course its not illegal to amend or remove section 1b. Section 1b. bans the approval or support of candidates who intend to take seats in British assemblies. It can be removed or amended at any Ard Fheis by a two thirds majority. The reason for doing so could be many. Perhaps delegates might feel that it implies that they cannot be trusted to be loyal to the Republic. In fact its not necessary, according to the constitution, to give any reason. But you cant amend or remove section 1b. in the same resolution as you support and approve of entering Leinster House, as Resolution 162 tried to do. Once section 1b. has been removed, then, at the next Ard Fheis its possible to propose entering any assembly you want.

So it takes a minimum of two years, two Ard Fheiseanna. Year one amend or delete Section 1b. then year two you can propose to enter any assembly you want. Adams tried to amend section 1b. and propose entering Leinster House in the same Resolution 162.

Of course Adams had good reason not to want the process to take two years – giving people too much time to think of the implications would not have suited his cause.

Another point at which Adams broke the constitution was that the constitution states that all cumainn must recieve three months notice of a motion addressing a policy change at an Ard Fheis. Cumainn were told of Resolution 162 in early October - the Ard Fheis began on October 31th.

The breaking of rules didn’t end here. In one famous case, the University College Dublin cumann, the rules were completely ignored. The rule stated that a member had to be a member for at least three months before they were allowed to take part in decisions. In UCD an "observer" from Belfast insisted that three new members who had only been in the cumann for a couple of weeks be allowed to vote. This visitor implied that he was acting with the authority of PIRA and that anyone who voted against supporting Resolution 162 would be voting against PIRA. Naturally, the vote was carried. It also could be noted that life long members like Seán Keenan, who had been voted honorary life long president of Derry Sinn Féin, was turned away at the door of the Ard Fheis because it was know that he rejected Resolution 162. Tony Ruane, an honorary vice president for life, who had been Sinn Féin national treasurer for decades, was also refused entry for the same reason.

However breaking the rules of the constitution alone would not have secured victory for Adams in 1986.

Its interesting to look at the attempt of Adams and co. to weaken abstensionism at the 1985 Ard Fheis. Comhairle Limistéir Bhaile Átha Cliath put forward a motion proposing that abstensionism “be viewed as a tactic and not as a principle.” Adams supporters Danny Morrison, Tom Hartley and Seán Crowe were the main speakers in favour. The motion was rejected by 181 votes against to 161 in favour. That means that there were 342 delegates representing 171 cumainn. This was a serious setback for Adams. To drop absentionism on these numbers he would need to change the vote of 60 delegates. That would have taken years if he had played by the rules. So what did Adams do? Besides intimidation of existing cumainn, merging of hostile cumainn and just plain refusing to let hostile voices into the Ard Fheis? Well, he just created over a hundred new, fake, paper cumainn. If we look at the figures of the vote in 1986 on Resolution 162: 429 in favour and 161 against. That means a total number of 590. What? There were now 295 cumainn. 124 new cumainn??? In the space of a year? And they all supported Resolution 162? And even stranger these 124 new cumainn just disappeared in 1987, because at the 1987 PSF Ard Fheis the numbers were back to about 340 delegates.

Given the above, its obvious that many comentators operate on the false premise that a legal and democratic vote was held on Resolution 162 and that the losers of that vote went on to form a “splinter” group known as Republican Sinn Féin. It would be more accurate to describe RSF as the “remainder” of the Sinn Féin party after an unscrupulous leadership subverted the party’s constitution for their own ends. A group of members who had not broken the contitution by supporting Resolution 162 walked out of the Mansion House. They reconvened the 1986 Ard Fheis at the West County Hotel in Chapelizod, west county Dublin, with the constitution still intact. The traditional Sinn Féin policy of giving its allegiance to the 32 county Republic, and refusing to recognise all British created assemblies continues. At that, reconvened, Ard fheis the word “Republican” was added to the party’s name to emphasise the republican beliefs of the party as opposed to the new party of self expelled ex Sinn Féin members which Adams led into the British Monarchist Constitution.
https://indymedia.ie/article/76848?comment_order=asc


Also Ed Moloney's article......http://www.nuzhound.com/articles/irish_times/arts2007/jan27_Tammany_tactics_SF__EMoloney.php

[belfast rep]

The story of how Gerry Adams tried to turn an eighty year old revolutionary movement into a British Constitutional party. How he broke the Sinn Féin constitution, created fake cumainn to give him fake votes and barred life long republicans from voting. How he managed to expel himself and his supporters from Sinn Féin membership. And, how a small band of republicans managed to keep the Sinn Féin constitution and traditional policy in tact.

The story of how Gerry Adams tried to turn an eighty year old revolutionary movement into a British Constitutional party. How he broke the Sinn Féin constitution, created fake cumainn to give him fake votes and barred life long republicans from voting. How he managed to expel himself and his supporters from Sinn Féin membership. And, how a small band of republicans managed to keep the Sinn Féin constitution and traditional policy in tact.

In 1986 Section 1b. of the Sinn Féin constitution read as follows:

“No person who is a member of any political party organisation or who approves of or supports the candidature of persons who, if elected, intend taking part in the proceedings of the Westminster or partitionist 26-County or 6-County parliaments or who approves of or supports the candidature of persons who sign any form or give any kind of written or verbal undertaking of intention to take their seats in these institutions, shall be admitted to membership or allowed to retain membership."

The Adams leadership put forward a motion, titled Resolution 162, at the 1986 Ard Fheis. Its wording was as follows:

RESOLUTION 162

THAT this Ard-Fheis drops its abstentionist attitude to Leinster House. Successful Sinn Fein parliamentary candidates in 26-County elections:

a. Shall attend Leinster House as directed by the Ard Chomhairle.

b. Shall not draw their salaries for personal use. (Parliamentary representatives shall be paid a Sinn Fein organiser’s subsidy, and the Leinster House salary shall be divided at the direction of the Ard Chomhairle to defray national and constituency expenses.)

To accommodate this change, the Constitution and Rules be amended as follows:

That Section 1b of the Constitution be amended to read:

No person who is a member of any political party organisation or who approves of or supports the candidature of persons who, if elected, intend taking part in the proceedings of the Westminster or partitionist 6-County parliaments or who approves of or supports the candidature of persons who sign any form or give any kind of written or verbal undertaking of intention to take their seats in these institutions, shall be admitted to membership or allowed to retain membership.

Motion 162 supports and approves of the candidature of persons who, if elected, would be of the intention to take their seats in certain circumstances i.e. on the direction of the Ard Chomhairle. Obviously, Motion 162 infringes Section 1b. Section 1b. was in effect at the time this Resolution was presented. Its clear that Adams made a mistake in procedure. He should have sought a majority decision to amend Section 1b. in 1986 and returned in 1987 to propose entering Leinster House. Trying to amend Section 1b. and propose taking seats in the “partitionist 26-County Parliament” in the same Resolution was a logical impossibility.

Can anybody say that the wording:

“That this Ard-Fheis drops its abstentionist attitude to Leinster House. Successful Sinn Fein parliamentary candidates in 26-County elections:

a. Shall attend Leinster House as directed by the Ard Chomhairle”

does not constitute the supporting and approving of the candidature of persons who intend to take their seats in Leinster House as directed by the Ard Chomhairle?
Clearly Adams was in breach of Section 1b. and according to that section he had expelled himself, and all those who voted for Resolution 162.

Brian Feeney, in his book, Sinn Féin 100 Turbulent Years, puts forward the argument that Adams had managed to bypass Section 1b, by introducing a motion in 1983 allowing the “discussion” of any aspect of the Sinn Féin constitution. This change may indeed have facilitated debate on abstentionism but it did not infringe on the content or effect of Section 1b in any way. To discuss something is not the same as formally proposing or supporting it. For example, conventions are held regularly where drug addiction is discussed without any of the delegates proposing or supporting it. In fact the line Adams added in 1983 was superfluous, as the Sinn Féin constitution had never banned the “discussion” of anything – just the “approving” and “supporting” of taking seats in named partitionist parliaments.

Of course its not illegal to amend or remove section 1b. Section 1b. bans the approval or support of candidates who intend to take seats in British assemblies. It can be removed or amended at any Ard Fheis by a two thirds majority. The reason for doing so could be many. Perhaps delegates might feel that it implies that they cannot be trusted to be loyal to the Republic. In fact its not necessary, according to the constitution, to give any reason. But you cant amend or remove section 1b. in the same resolution as you support and approve of entering Leinster House, as Resolution 162 tried to do. Once section 1b. has been removed, then, at the next Ard Fheis its possible to propose entering any assembly you want.

So it takes a minimum of two years, two Ard Fheiseanna. Year one amend or delete Section 1b. then year two you can propose to enter any assembly you want. Adams tried to amend section 1b. and propose entering Leinster House in the same Resolution 162.

Of course Adams had good reason not to want the process to take two years – giving people too much time to think of the implications would not have suited his cause.

Another point at which Adams broke the constitution was that the constitution states that all cumainn must recieve three months notice of a motion addressing a policy change at an Ard Fheis. Cumainn were told of Resolution 162 in early October - the Ard Fheis began on October 31th.

The breaking of rules didn’t end here. In one famous case, the University College Dublin cumann, the rules were completely ignored. The rule stated that a member had to be a member for at least three months before they were allowed to take part in decisions. In UCD an "observer" from Belfast insisted that three new members who had only been in the cumann for a couple of weeks be allowed to vote. This visitor implied that he was acting with the authority of PIRA and that anyone who voted against supporting Resolution 162 would be voting against PIRA. Naturally, the vote was carried. It also could be noted that life long members like Seán Keenan, who had been voted honorary life long president of Derry Sinn Féin, was turned away at the door of the Ard Fheis because it was know that he rejected Resolution 162. Tony Ruane, an honorary vice president for life, who had been Sinn Féin national treasurer for decades, was also refused entry for the same reason.

However breaking the rules of the constitution alone would not have secured victory for Adams in 1986.

Its interesting to look at the attempt of Adams and co. to weaken abstensionism at the 1985 Ard Fheis. Comhairle Limistéir Bhaile Átha Cliath put forward a motion proposing that abstensionism “be viewed as a tactic and not as a principle.” Adams supporters Danny Morrison, Tom Hartley and Seán Crowe were the main speakers in favour. The motion was rejected by 181 votes against to 161 in favour. That means that there were 342 delegates representing 171 cumainn. This was a serious setback for Adams. To drop absentionism on these numbers he would need to change the vote of 60 delegates. That would have taken years if he had played by the rules. So what did Adams do? Besides intimidation of existing cumainn, merging of hostile cumainn and just plain refusing to let hostile voices into the Ard Fheis? Well, he just created over a hundred new, fake, paper cumainn. If we look at the figures of the vote in 1986 on Resolution 162: 429 in favour and 161 against. That means a total number of 590. What? There were now 295 cumainn. 124 new cumainn??? In the space of a year? And they all supported Resolution 162? And even stranger these 124 new cumainn just disappeared in 1987, because at the 1987 PSF Ard Fheis the numbers were back to about 340 delegates.

Given the above, its obvious that many comentators operate on the false premise that a legal and democratic vote was held on Resolution 162 and that the losers of that vote went on to form a “splinter” group known as Republican Sinn Féin. It would be more accurate to describe RSF as the “remainder” of the Sinn Féin party after an unscrupulous leadership subverted the party’s constitution for their own ends. A group of members who had not broken the contitution by supporting Resolution 162 walked out of the Mansion House. They reconvened the 1986 Ard Fheis at the West County Hotel in Chapelizod, west county Dublin, with the constitution still intact. The traditional Sinn Féin policy of giving its allegiance to the 32 county Republic, and refusing to recognise all British created assemblies continues. At that, reconvened, Ard fheis the word “Republican” was added to the party’s name to emphasise the republican beliefs of the party as opposed to the new party of self expelled ex Sinn Féin members which Adams led into the British Monarchist Constitution.
https://indymedia.ie/article/76848?comment_order=asc


Also Ed Moloney's article......http://www.nuzhound.com/articles/irish_times/arts2007/jan27_Tammany_tactics_SF__EMoloney.php

i have not been to too many Ard fheis but are votes not taken by a show of hands unless they are close

[Rory O'Connor]

Ruairí Ó Brádaigh was a member of the committee that chose how many cumainn could be represented at Sinn Féin's Ard Fheis during 1986, so he should have noticed whether or not Gerry Adams was creating votes that couldn't be accounted for.

[communitarian]

1986 is an extremely important event in Irish History but it is the Present that Vindicates the position of the Republican Movement when adamsites saught to legitimise Partition.
Adamsites have always been prepared to boast of their willingness to Compromise to further their strategy, have always wanted to show that they are fresh new and Politically radical unfortunately as this Process was halted by the acceptance of a Unionist Veto in the Occupied 6 Counties and Complete Leinster House Rejection there is no way back to Republicanism From Nationailist using a redmodite strategy infuenced by John Hume and he British Establishment.
The Republican Movement are Confident that their main point of strength..Legitimacy and Principle as before will stand to the test of Time and Partitionists as always will continue in their attempts to Justify abandonment of the All Ireland Dáil and Cite their success in Respective British/Free state assemblies.
Although as Recent election results show for those prioritsing electoral Success as their main source of Strength Adamsites have much work and Grovelling to do if they are to outlast the Run of Fianna Fáil in the South and match them as the First Party in the North as it is evident of their redundancy in the 26 county state.

[communitarian]

Ruairí Ó Brádaigh was a member of the committee that chose how many cumainn could be represented at Sinn Féin's Ard Fheis in 1986, so he should have noticed whether or not Gerry Adams was creating votes that couldn't be accounted for.

Are you having a laugh?

From 86-07 what has occured that Sinn Féin (poblachtach) did not highlight in '86


So where had the extra 300 or so votes come from in 1986? The passage of time eventually loosened enough republican tongues for the truth to emerge. The IRA had arranged for the creation of over 100 ghost cumainn that were all duly registered at Sinn Féin's headquarters, whose bureaucracy was by then safely under the Army Council's control. Although none of the new branches had any members they were entitled to send two delegates each to the 1986 conference, which they duly did. According to republican sources these were really Army Council delegates, loyal IRA members committed to dropping abstentionism no matter what Sinn Féin thought. In such a way was history made and the peace process made possible.

http://www.nuzhound.com/articles/irish_times/arts2007/jan27_Tammany_tactics_SF__EMoloney.php

Seamus McElwaine Jim Lynagh and Padraig McKearney all Opposed Leinster house participation (along with several other IRA figure in the surrounding area) and were reprimanded by Belfast for declaring that sacrificing finance for electoral strategy in an area attemting create a maoist trail was not an option, they effectively became independent of the Leadership Seamus McElwaine (whom would be the closest to my self to have been killed 24-04-86 and best known and researched)well his Father (a PSF councillor) was the Founder of the South Fermanaghnorth Monaghan Branch of (R) SF...and the tale is well known and well told, but has been proven with out a campaign against PNM by their own Actions

[Mellows1922]

Are you having a laugh?

From 86-07 what has occured that Sinn Féin (poblachtach) did not highlight in '86


You're the one having a laugh.

Was O'Bradaigh an incompetent ?

If he wasn't and there were a myriad of bogus votes why did he not notice that through the steering committee before the Ard Fheis ? There was a full listing of all delegate passes issued. He would have known how many votes were eligable.

[belfast rep]

i have not been to too many Ard fheis but are votes not taken by a show of hands unless they are close

can you clarify this for me

[communitarian]

The fact remians 1986 was the turning point in Modern Irish Republicanism. The Position of O'Conail and O'Bradaigh
Continually Vindicated not by the words of Sinn Féin (poblachtach) but by the actions of adamsites

The End

An Phoblacht Abu

[belfast rep]

Are you having a laugh?

From 86-07 what has occured that Sinn Féin (poblachtach) did not highlight in '86




http://www.nuzhound.com/articles/irish_times/arts2007/jan27_Tammany_tactics_SF__EMoloney.php

Seamus McElwaine Jim Lynagh and Padraig McKearney all Opposed Leinster house participation (along with several other IRA figure in the surrounding area) and were reprimanded by Belfast for declaring that sacrificing finance for electoral strategy in an area attemting create a maoist trail was not an option, they effectively became independent of the Leadership Seamus McElwaine (whom would be the closest to my self to have been killed 24-04-86 and best known and researched)well his Father (a PSF councillor) was the Founder of the South Fermanaghnorth Monaghan Branch of (R) SF...and the tale is well known and well told, but has been proven with out a campaign against PNM by their own Actions

you do know that Seamus's Comrade who was with him when they both shot would tell a different story, especailly that they were acting as independants.
as he has stated both in private and public that they were on an IRA operation

[communitarian]

Do you know I know that man More than well, and I also happen to Know of the tale told considering I used to Visit th long kesh long before he was standing to loose in elections- the tale of the ambush... no mention ever of the events surrounding partitions recognition , The story of Lynagh McKearney and McElwaines meeting and subsequent reprimand where never argued by any of the PNM leadership I questioned "I dont know" was about the height of it , The south Fermanagh Brigade infact,the 3 men were of Different Brigades would have had no reason to inform their men...
It is volley to presume one of those ambushed with Séamus who disagrees with (R) SF also maintains that Lynagh and McElawine did not agitate strongly on the side of Militancy....

It has long been and was a provo argument this was an independent unit! long before sevastopol street replaced cruinniú i cluan eois!!

A unit and a fact we took pride in!

[communitarian]

And for the Record every member of our people the people us once unquestionable youths worked for for years have perhaps disagreed but encouraged our beliefs sure they taught us young turks, to the extent of even taking us down as sort of guests for the PNM "cead blain celebrations" to carry "cannon Tom's banner", pruod moment a fitting farewell one might say-
I'll take you down to the Next cumann Séamus McElwaine Commemoration and you can have a look around....then bundoron in august a real culture shock...cant hang on the Coat tails of Men with feet made of clay forever, Cant let the Belfast men Drive a wedge between neighbours friends and Family of a simple rural community either..

[scarface]

look we could turn every thread into this same arguement the RSF people on here say RSF is Sinn Féin and the PSF people say they are SF it's pointless let's get back to the topic at hand and that is the fact that the strabane provos clearly don't support the peelers or the DPP but what annoys me about this is that they are prepared to represent and be members of a party that supports the RUC you can't ride two horses in different directions

[belfast rep]

And for the Record every member of our people the people us once unquestionable youths worked for for years have perhaps disagreed but encouraged our beliefs sure they taught us young turks, to the extent of even taking us down as a guest for the PNM "cead blain celebrations" to carry cannon Tom's banner, pruod moment a fitting farewell one might say-
I'll take you down to the Next cumann Séamus McElwaine Commemoration and you can have a look around....then bundoron in august a real culture shock...
your going off on a rant again, slow down and it will be easier to understand what you on about

cant hang on the Coat tails of Men with feet made of clay forever
what does this mean? are you talking about Seamus's comrade?

[communitarian]

what does this mean? are you talking about Seamus's comrade?

Pesonally an Idol or "local celebrity" for a long Time manys a chat I relished as a child (although obvious barriers were present like the Long Kesh wall and that) agus bhi se suimuil s'aige sa gaeilge which encouaged me to learn it just to be likened really sad but true!! (and I also probably tortured the poor man and still do on hearing each time I do something not befitting a young gentleman)
Still Talk to and Respect the man, but fundementaly disagree with his parties current position and think for him a solider who fought uniformed under the terms of geneva conference, a solider if whom had have been killed that morning there would be 30 songs about, to be rejected at the local poll because obviously the voters aren't too keen on heroics and True Soliders, is testimoney to the transition from 86 to the present day...The days of putting anyone on a pedestol finished when the order came to surrender the peoples Guns, should have finished in '86 but what were young fellas like us to know at least we do now and I do not see myself longing for anything Different than the exact same goal Séamus McElwaine Fell For...which is why 86 is of massive importance to the Republican Movement, and as Ive stated what will never happen is a wedge been driven in by the City men between a simple rural community

The other thing I have noticed from members of PNM under 30 is their pedestol worship which is wrong and unhealthy to respect someone is not to do as they do or see as they see. Letting Older men tell younger men they can never hope to achieve what they did soesnt make sense, If the young man beieves the old man didn't achieve anything that hadn't existed before hand!!
Is it by your standards Belfast Rep Correct to question and Challenge the Past if you believe the past to have been Wrong?

[inla-supporter]

Pat doherty phoned the oc of the RDA in clady asking him would the RDA have any objection to the two psf councilors , who live in clady, going on the ddp's. Pat was told that they would not be allowed to live there. This was not a principled stand by those who did not take their seats. If they indeed had any principles left they would have resigned from psf. Strabane psf have a long history of being yes-men and general ballbags.

[Tir Eoghain]

Pat doherty phoned the oc of the RDA in clady asking him would the RDA have any objection to the two psf councilors , who live in clady, going on the ddp's. Pat was told that they would not be allowed to live there. This was not a principled stand by those who did not take their seats. If they indeed had any principles left they would have resigned from psf. Strabane psf have a long history of being yes-men and general ballbags.

And what do you think the IRA in that area did during the war , sit back and scratch their bag.

[robertemmett]

is this the strabane where Cricket is main sport of young nationalists??

[Craobh Gal Gréine]

Sinn Fein fail to fill District Policing Partnership posts.

Sinn Fein has been unable to find candidates to fill positions on the District Policing Partnership in Strabane.


The party was given five posts on the board, but could only find three councillors willing to participate.

It comes after weeks of internal wrangling within Sinn Fein. As a result the two spare posts were offered to the DUP.

Sinn Fein West Tyrone MP Pat Doherty said he was disappointed, but said his party is fully committed to engaging with all of the policing structures.


http://u.tv/newsroom



I'd be led to believe that the strong presence of the IRPS's and other anti-agreement groups in the Strabane area, and helped with the slow uptake of positions on the policing board. Other Sinn Fein cllrs, should have the courage to reject the PSNI, even at this late stage.

[Craobh Gal Gréine]

Are you having a laugh?

From 86-07 what has occured that Sinn Féin (poblachtach) did not highlight in '86




http://www.nuzhound.com/articles/irish_times/arts2007/jan27_Tammany_tactics_SF__EMoloney.php

Seamus McElwaine Jim Lynagh and Padraig McKearney all Opposed Leinster house participation (along with several other IRA figure in the surrounding area) and were reprimanded by Belfast for declaring that sacrificing finance for electoral strategy in an area attemting create a maoist trail was not an option, they effectively became independent of the Leadership Seamus McElwaine (whom would be the closest to my self to have been killed 24-04-86 and best known and researched)well his Father (a PSF councillor) was the Founder of the South Fermanaghnorth Monaghan Branch of (R) SF...and the tale is well known and well told, but has been proven with out a campaign against PNM by their own Actions



Seamus Mc Elwaine, Jim Lynagh and Padraig McKearney were three great men, who would all have opposed any flitations with Stormont and the PSNI/RUC. These men fought against foreign occupation, not for the Provo's to become middle managers for English rule.

[Craobh Gal Gréine]

Republican Sinn Féin participated in a vote to change Sinn Féin's constitution to abandon abstentionism. Their constitution was legitimately changed via a two thirds majority vote to change it and Republican Sinn Féin expelled themselves from Sinn Féin simply because they didn't agree with the change in their constitution. Sinn Féin are still the "legitimate Sinn Féin," even if they are no longer republicans.



Well surely if that was the case, the Officials could next be claiming to be the real Sinn Fein/IRA. RSF members participated in the vote, only to save the party being hijacked and being driven on a route, where we ended up in today's position. They must be complimented for having the principle to set up their own traditional branch of Sinn Fein.

[robertemmett]

""not for the Provo's to become middle managers for English rule."

like that. thats a good line

[scarface]

Pat doherty phoned the oc of the RDA in clady asking him would the RDA have any objection to the two psf councilors , who live in clady, going on the ddp's. Pat was told that they would not be allowed to live there. This was not a principled stand by those who did not take their seats. If they indeed had any principles left they would have resigned from psf. Strabane psf have a long history of being yes-men and general ballbags.

i'm surprised they did'nt go running to the press with stories of RDA threats. although maybe it's because these guys are a recent spin off of the provos

[robertemmett]

what has ever happened in this story.

do the posts remain unfilled.

have the party councillors been reprimanded.

????

[Carlos McJackle]

whats the RDA ?

[liam]

whats the RDA ?

republican defence army :hmmm:

[Hildy]

Yer joking! LOL, no it is "Regional Development Agency".

The RDAs are funded by five different central government departments, those being:

Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform
Department for Communities and Local Government
Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
Department for Culture, Media and Sport


Also, to answer robert's question, I believe since Sinn Féin were unable to find 5 councillors willing to join the District Policing Partnership only 3 of their councillors took up their positions and the remaining two places went [under the d’Hondt system] to the DUP.

[robertemmett]

Yer joking! LOL, no it is "Regional Development Agency".

The RDAs are funded by five different central government departments, those being:

Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform
Department for Communities and Local Government
Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
Department for Culture, Media and Sport


Also, to answer robert's question, I believe since Sinn Féin were unable to find 5 councillors willing to join the District Policing Partnership only 3 of their councillors took up their positions and the remaining two places went [under the d’Hondt system] to the DUP.

thanks Hildy, as i had heard no more word of it. :bow: