Sean Garland, The Workers Party, The Columbia 3 and Extadition.

by Mick Price - cynics (M-L) Wed Nov 16, 2005 14:44

Why don't you put this point to the WP at the public meeting next Tuesday 22 in Liberty Hall? Interesting to see that Joe Higgins is a speaker (in WP view a Trot counter-revolutionary 2 decades ago, they supported Kinnock's kicking them out of the Labour party in England) and Jimmy Kelly (SWP) was a speaker at the Garland rally in Waterford (even worse provo-Trots).
On the other hand maybe everybody is just maturing (a bit too late but never mind). As for Sean Garland, fair play to him!

by pat c Wed Nov 16, 2005 15:01

I'm putting it to the WP here, it'll get a bigger audience than at the meeting. The WP Press office post their releases about Sean Garland. You can be sure they'll read it.

Given the diatribe by the Devil O'Hagan and other stuff on the Sean Garland site they dont seem to have changed their opinions about SF, the IRSP or Trotskyists. They are happy to accept their support though.

by SFM Wed Nov 16, 2005 15:18

You sad man Pat C. You seem to want to fight in battles you know so little about and are now over - one post you are looking for the release of Dessie O’Hare - who if he does get out is likely to meet a quick end for the horrific deaths he imposed on well meaning members of the INLA - now you show your fear of voicing your infantile opinions at an opening meeting but prefer to voice them in diatribes on the net. Sean Garland is an old revolutionary warrior - if you what to bring revolution off the drawing board - or computer screen in your case - it is very difficult - Sean made mistakes - he would admit that himself. I also see that some people took delight that there was not many at the protest on O’Connell Street for Sean on Saturday - if you were more than mere keyboardist you might know that Sean was attending the funeral, along with a number of other, WP veterans for a former member of the Republican movement and latter Soar Eire. I heard it often said by former paramilitaries and revolutionaries that they tend to find the most divisive and vitriolic people they encountered down the years were those that were never near the action - how true it seems.

Welcome home Sean - Irish Law for Irishmen - your judge shall be history and the Irish Working Class.

by pat c Wed Nov 16, 2005 15:36

I wont be going to the Sean Garland meeting because I have a more important one to attend.

You are the only sad person here. Like O'Hagan all you can do is shower me with abuse.

I have said that I oppose the extradition of Sean Garland.

The question is: Do the WP oppose the extradition of the Columbia 3? Do the WP finally have a principled position of opposition to extradition?

No amount of abuse from you can make that question go away.

by pat c Wed Nov 16, 2005 15:39

It seems obvious that the only mistake that Sean Garland will admit to is being a Republican at one stage. The O'Hagan diatribe and the other attacks on rival organisations on the Sean Garland site illustrate this. Or are you saying that Sean Garland doesnt agree with this materiel.

by pat c Wed Nov 16, 2005 15:43

The Sean Garland meeting is not advertised on Indymedia. You might want to put the details up under Events.

by CYNIC Wed Nov 16, 2005 16:15

You have a good explanation for the low turnout for Sean Garland last Saturday, I would like to know who the old Republican was. But how do you explain the previous Sean Garland protests at the Spire and Larkin statue. None of these had more than 20 in attendance.

You are a funny man SFM accusing Pat C of using cyber anonymity (we all know who he is) but like me you choose to remain anonymous yourself. As for Dessie O'Hare he wasnt imprisoned for killing anyone but Official IRA members have been convicted both North and South of murder. Their actions would have been sanctioned by Sean Garland while he was holding the posts of Adjutant-General and subsequently Chief of Staff of the OIRA. All of these OIRA murderers have now been released. As you oppose the release of Dessie O'Hare I can only presume that you want these OIRA murderers returned to prison.

As for your meeting I would issue a word of caution to anyone thinking of attending. Be careful of asking awkward questions, you are likely to be roughed up by WP/OIRA stewards. You would be lucky if you were just thrown out.

by stick Wed Nov 16, 2005 16:33

Personal Statement by Sean Garland Relating to the US Demand for his Extradition from the UK to the US

My first point is to repeat, in the strongest possible terms, my denial of any involvement in any criminal activity.


Since my stay in hospital from 31st October last I have given much thought to my present situation. After much examination and discussion of the UK-US Extradition Treaty Act of 2003 it is clear to any independent observer that this Act does not allow for any person to be given a fair hearing.

in full at

seangarland.org

under latest news

by fitzman Thu Nov 17, 2005 10:40

why give this topic any time. Sean Garland and the WP are a pathetic embarassment for anyone left of centre. The sooner we forget them the sooner they will go away. unfortunetly they still think if they stand candidates they might get votes - losers.

by pat c Thu Nov 17, 2005 11:17

Its good to read the personal statement from Sean Garland. Sean Garland writes: "it is clear to any independent observer that this Act does not allow for any person to be given a fair hearing." I agree with this.

But equally I am sure you would agree that the Columbia 3 will not get justice in Columbia therefore I would be grateful if you would clarify the WP position on extradition (seeing as you posted on this thread I doubt that you missed the opening article): do the WP oppose the extradition of the Columbia 3?

by POP watch Thu Nov 17, 2005 11:20

Once more for slow learners: Ask them

Head office

John Lowry
General Secretary
23 Hill Street
Dublin 1

Tel (01) 8740716
fax (01) 8748702

Press Officer
John Jefferies
Tel (086) 300 4573

email:wpi@indigo.ie

by pat c Thu Nov 17, 2005 11:28

This is Indymedia, people write articles here; other people respond to them. If Lowry, Garland, Jeffries, O'Hagan etc wish to respond they are welcome to do so.

by POP watch Thu Nov 17, 2005 11:30

"do the WP oppose the extradition of the Columbia 3?"

Here it is again (and again and again). Stop trolling and go ask them.

by pat c Thu Nov 17, 2005 11:31

You are the troll. A WP member posts here and doesnt mention the questions raised in the opening article. Its reasonable to question him. You might also give your position on the Columbia 3.

by sean Thu Nov 17, 2005 12:20

Pat you make a good point. The WP have been appauling on the issue of extradition. They have never shown any solidarity to anyone from the PIRA/INLA or any others regarding this issue.

Now thy find them selves in a 'sticky situation' excuse obvious pun, as their president is being extradited. Like republicans in the past, he will not be given a fair trial. Pat asks the question, are the WP against the extradition of the Colombia 3?

I dont know the answer to this question.

What I know is that the WP will probably have to review their position on extradition, in doing so they will have to reassess their position or lack of one on the Colombia 3 and look at their past position.

This would be facilitated and greatly enhanced if the WP were not left to fight the Garland extradition alone. If people like pat were to join in the campaign and talk to the wp activists involved there would be some learning.

I think the wp position in the past on extradition was because of who was being extradited namely Provos and Earps - not specifically the issue of extradition. Pat is entitled to point out wp inconsistantcies. But, Pat must campaign against the extradition of Garland with the same vigour that he did in the past otherwise he is just the same as the wp.

by Seamus O R Thu Nov 17, 2005 12:30

Pat C. your good questions to the stickies are dodged time and again. All they seem to do is throw insults at you and then tell you to come to the meeting and ask questions there. Dont do it, think they plan to give you a punishment beating if you turn up, smells like a trap.

Pity we dont have bounty hunters in this country, Id be only too happy to hunt down Garland and throw the rotten stickie to the yanks.

by pat c Thu Nov 17, 2005 12:37

I am prepared to oppose the extradition of Sean Garland with gritted teeth because I oppose extradition on a point of principle. I am however quite aware of the history of Sean Garland and the WP.

I rally do not want to have rehash how the WP have acted towards Republicans over the past generation. I am sure that you are aware of it. Working with them on this issue would be difficult for me.

But no this doesnt make me as bad as the WP. I didnt oppose Political Status for H Block prisoners, I didnt slander the supporters of the Guilford 4 and Birmingham 6 as being Provo Hushpuppies, I didnt hail North Korea as being a Workers Paradise.

Get a sense of perspective Sean.

by pat c Thu Nov 17, 2005 12:43

I dont think I'd feel at all safe at a WP meeting. If I were to attend I would make sure it was as part of a burly group. The WP are not renowned for tolerating dissent or even being questioned.

But I disagree with you about bounty hunters. Sean Garlan might not be innocent but he wont get a fair trial in the US. Its as well we dont have bounty hunters here some of those Ex OIRA who Garland fell out with over the last few years might come after him for the reward.

by sean Thu Nov 17, 2005 12:57

Ok Pat - you opposed extradition of people accused of crimes such as kidnapping, robbery, sectarian murder, blowing up civilian shoppers etc.

You did this because you thought the accused could not get a fair trial - I assume -not because you supported the actions they were accused of.

You also didn't consider the political links of the Provo accused with Libya - a bastion of democracy and free speech.

You didnt necessairly support Eire Nua, or punshment beatings, or the political programme of Sinn Fein to oppose extradition. You didn't have to support the shooting of Kingsmill workers or Darkly Hall church goers.

So you are taking a position similar to the WP

by pat c Thu Nov 17, 2005 13:37

"Ok Pat - you opposed extradition of people accused of crimes such as kidnapping, robbery, sectarianmurder, blowing up civilian shoppers etc"

Which IRA or INLA members were facing extradition for Sectarianmurder or blowing up civilian shoppers? I would oppose the extradition of the OIRA members who killed 6 female cleaners at the Para HQ, it was a militarytarget.

"You also didn't consider the political links of the Provo accused with Libya - a bastion of democracy and free speech. "

SF didnt have any political links with Libya and never hailed it as a paradise. The IRA was certainly happy to get supplies from the Colonel.

"You didnt necessairly support Eire Nua,"

It was an outdated document.

"or punshment beatings, "
Right I preffered resorative Justice. But you should not underestimate the demands that local communities make for hoods to be dealt with.

"You didn't have to support the shooting of Kingsmill workers or Darkly Hall church goers. "

You are right there. As you are aware, these actions were not sanctioned by the IRA or INLA. I could probably raise some OIRA actions which you would say were not sanctioned by OIRA GHQ.

"So you are taking a position similar to the WP"

No. I dont think you have proved your case

by sean Thu Nov 17, 2005 13:47

You were not out against the extradition of Dessie Ellis then?

I seem to recall SF having an 'embassy' in Tripoli and a permanant representative in the country.

by Rabble rouser Thu Nov 17, 2005 13:50

"Right I preffered resorative Justice. But you should not underestimate the demands that local communities make for hoods to be dealt with."

The demands of the community in Gilford and Birmingham were for the hanging of all accused of IRA membership. Never bow down to the demands of the mob. Provos should be ashamed of maiming kids who are victims of poverty and brit repression.

by pat c Thu Nov 17, 2005 13:57

yes you are right. i pointed out that i supported restorative justice. but lets not forget that the birmingham 6 and guilford 4 were framed by the british.

yeah those bombings were terrible but they pale in comparison to the horrors carried out by the british state.

all of this of course is taking us away from Sean Garland. if you continue these attackjs then i'll start quoting from the charges against him.

Dont forget the Columbia 3, they should not be extradited either.

by pat c Thu Nov 17, 2005 14:00

dessie ellis was found not guilty of the charges. some of the charges he faced extradition for were committed while he was already in prison.

why are you trying to derail this thread?

by simple maths - how does 400 = 1,700 Thu Nov 17, 2005 14:49

Pat, the Provos killed 1,700-1,800 people in the last 30 years. About 600 were civilians. The RUC, ('the most descredited police force in the world') killed 52, of which about half were civilians. Now of course you will cry collusion (and you would be right), but the UDA/UVF didn't need direction for everyone they killed. The British Army/SAS killed about 400 (exact figures in lost lives) of which about half again were not in rep or loyalist groups. Bloody Sunday was their biggest massacre of civilians. Now the Provos killed 19 in b'ham, 12 at La Mon, 11 at Enniskillen, 10 at Knigsmills etc so while it may be handy rhetoric to say the Brits did far worse actually they didn't. In the north the rebels killed more than the government forces. Cue semantics, whataboutery, excuses....
btw when marty and gerry go to New York they get led into the big fund raisers by the NYPD Emerald Society Pipe band; check out how many civilians the NYPD get through in a year.

by pat c Thu Nov 17, 2005 14:52

This is about Sean Garland, The WP , The Columbia 3 and Extradition. Perhaps you missed the title.

You are attempting to derail the thread. If you wish to discuss other matters then start off a new thread.

by Senility - cant remember Thu Nov 17, 2005 15:56

Yes or no will do. Why the obfuscation? I cannot agree with extradition of S Garland (thru gritted teeth, similar to a contributor above), and equally I cannot see how the Colombia 3 would get justice if sent back to Colombia. Why is the WP finding this so problematic to answer?

At the end of the day, these people are/ were scum - or maybe to be kind, fatally misintended! They controlled RTE in the 80s, keeping better & more truthful talents off-air, and their type still controls certain orifaeces of the media - such as the Sindo. Bow down on one knee Eoghan Harris, to your boss who’s inadequacies shine when insisting on the "Sir" being used by his publications; its a shame/ historical oversight that either have knees left upon which to genuflect...
How and ever, jokes aside, perhaps Phoenix magazine has the best understanding, in that with the 6 county conflict over, the now politically expendable S Garland can be held to account for the accusations of rolling out the greenbacks.
These people are from another age; Dessie O´ Hagans dementia-driven drivel reminds us all of a worse time on this island. Its long overdue that they were put into secure nursing care to see out their days. No to SGs extradition, but equally no to the C 3 being sent back. Now if any of sticks out there could answer with equal clarity, maybe SG might have a chance…Or is their senility getting in their way of clear thinking?

by Tim Thu Nov 17, 2005 16:04

He was laundering counterfeit US dollars printed by the Communist North Korean government - that is a crime under US law.
He should stop hiding in Ireland and face up to what he was doing.

by P W Thu Nov 17, 2005 16:10

Go back to the post at 10.20. If you want to know the answer - go ask them.
Wheren't they right about the provo's - only twenty five years ago. I bet you were a cheerleader for the 'boys', probably through a few different groups. Might even have had relations in the sticks, eh?
Why not I'll agree no extraditon for the Colombia 3. Sure aren't they all sticks now.
You probably will be saying the same about Gerry and Marty in a decade's time.

by pat c Thu Nov 17, 2005 16:21

The WP have had 4 yrs to make their views on the Columbia 3 known. They could now let us know if they oppose the extradition of the Columbia 3.

If you want to talk about 25 yrs then then it could result in an interesting discussion about the activities of the OIRA over the last 25 years. But further discussion of this might be damaging to Sean Garland.

I really think we should stick to the topic - Sean Garland, WP, Columbia 3 and Extradition.

by simple maths - not a stick Thu Nov 17, 2005 16:32

no to extradition of the Columbia 3, are you happy? its easy for me to say, but I'm not a stick. I just find the rage and hatred towards them a bit funny coming from people who either supported or wished they were in organisations who also lied (B'ham, Kingsmills wasn't us), robbed, cheated, had their own media outlets (Phoenix...ahem, expose all the stories except those about the MacCartney family or Andrew Keraney) or the likes of super-patriot Damien Kiberb, going on the 'Free State' not since 1949 Damien! And worse are still selling hyprocrisy and lies and promoting green, catholic (small c) nationalism. I hated the WP's lies when they were a going concern, but there a joke now (albeit with a few decent activists in Cork, Waterford) however excuse if I don't puke when I hear about how terrible Gerry and Marty and the boys had it when their organisation killed more people than anyone else. Watching them taking their economic direction from the likes of Daily Ireland is also pretty painful, but hey lets all hate the stickies its so easy and it means we can pretend to be provos (old school, when there was a war on like).

by pat c Thu Nov 17, 2005 16:38

i can see that you are genuine but a lot of the issues you raise could be better dealt with elsewhere. Why not write an article based on points you have made and publish it on Indymedia?

by P W Thu Nov 17, 2005 16:41

I think you'll find I mentioned the extraditon of the Colombia 3.

by pat c Thu Nov 17, 2005 17:13

i acknowledge your opposition to the extradition of the Columbia 3.

by Cynic Fri Nov 18, 2005 11:36

This article from the Sunday Business post has some good stuff on Sean Garlands finances, North Korea, Madame Bao, and Sean Garland seeking Russian Gold for the WP. An extract here, the article is at the URL.

'Sean Garland may be wanted by the United States government for his alleged role in a plot to produce millions of counterfeit “super dollars", but what we know about the finances of the Workers' Party president would suggest a businessman of more modest means.

Garland was arrested nine days ago as he stood poised to deliver a broadside against the Provisional IRA and “US imperialism'‘ at the party's annual conference in Belfast.

After a three-year investigation involving officials from the CIA, FBI, Pentagon and State Department, the US government is preparing to seek Garland's extradition.

He is currently on bail and living with a friend in Downpatrick, Co Down.

Garland, who lives in Kentstown, Co Meath, is accused of helping to mastermind a conspiracy to distribute millions of forged US dollars.

American officials claim the plot originated in communist North Korea as part of its “global criminal activities'‘. '

by Cynic Fri Nov 18, 2005 12:00

Another interesting piece from Independent Newspapers. They have been strangely soft and quiet on Sean Garland since this affair started. Now that Sean Garland has fled to the South you would expect them to demand Sean Garland be arrested as they did in the case of the Columbia Three. The same is true of FF, FG, PDs. So do they think Sean Garland is irrelevant or is this in return for services rendered?

Heres an extract, the rest ist at the URL.

'WORKERS Party president, Sean Garland, has beenoffered support from a perhaps surprising source as he fights extradition to the US on counterfeiting charges.

Although they have not spoken since the party split in the mid-Nineties, Mr Garland's old comrade, Proinsias De Rossa, now a Labour MEP, said he was concerned with how the media is reporting the case and said he'd add his name to criticism of the extradition process.

"The way it's being dealt with in the media is as if it won't have an impact on an American jury," the former Workers Party president said.

According to the US indictment, Mr Garland played a significant role in distributing counterfeit $100 notes, known as "supernotes" which were printed in North Korea. Mr Garland, 71, rejects any wrongdoing, claiming a climate is being created to deliberately "blacken" his name. '

by pat c Fri Nov 18, 2005 12:07

Thanks to the various anonymous Stickies who posted on this story. If you search for Sean Garland on Google, this story comes up as number 6.

Thanks also to those posters who help to expose the duplicity of certain sticks and thanks to PW and Simple Maths for opposing the extradition of the Columbia 3.

by Spartacus Fri Nov 18, 2005 14:00

It is strange that the very parties who were calling for the arrest of the Columbia Three on their return to the Republic are silent regarding Sean Garland. Not totally silent though.

This is from the Sean Garland Website:
"Fine Gael leader Enda Kenny expresses interest

The leader of Ireland's largest opposition party (Fine Gael) Mr. Enda Kenny has said he will continue to monitor the situation. "

"The arrest and ongoing attempt to extradite Sean Garland to the United States was also raised at the Seanad (Irish Senate).Yesterday (19th October) Waterford Senator Maurice Cummins of the Fine Gael Party raised the matter on the Order of Business and was supported by a number of other Senators"

Enda Kenny and Maurice Cummins showed no such concern for the Columbia Three.

Ruari Quinn LP raised the Sean Garland case in the Dail. The Labour Party prevented Joe Costello from attending the trial of the Columbia Three as an observer.

One law for Sean Garland; another law for the Columbia Three.

by Wondering Fri Nov 18, 2005 14:21

....Garland knows where the 'bodies' are buried or can open a few cupboards.

by Truth In The Media Fri Nov 18, 2005 14:49

In the paragraghs from the Sunday Business Post article (mentioned above) here Sean Garland claims that the Washington Post is owned by the Monnies. That as Sean Garland and the WP well know is completely untrue.

The Moonies own the Washington Times. The Washington Post is the paper which uncovered the Watergate scandal. It is owned by a Trust and is totally independent.

"According to reports in the Washington Post in 2001, US intelligence noted a 1997 meeting between Garland and the bureau director of the International Liaison Department of the Chinese Communist Party, Cao Xiaobing.

The paper said Cao's department was Beijing's official channel for supporting foreign communist parties.

A US air force reconnaissance plane was alleged to have picked up details of the meeting while monitoring communications near the Chinese coast. A leaked National Security Agency report stated that Garland and Cao had discussed “unidentified business opportunities'‘.

The same top secret report said that Garland was “suspected of being involved with counterfeiting US currency, specifically the supernote, a high-quality counterfeit $100 bill.”

Garland pointed out that the Washington Post was owned by the Moonies, a cult known “for its anti-communism and its organising of mass weddings of deluded people'‘."

by An bata Fri Nov 18, 2005 14:54

You will find that the SBP made the mistake. Bill Gertz does in fact work for the Moonie owned Times.

by Spartacus Fri Nov 18, 2005 15:50

I hope Sean Garland wrote to the SBP and asked them to correct their error.

Perhaps you could also clear up a few things about Madame Cao. The Sean Garland site says: "Sean Garland can confirm that he has met with Cao Xiaobing - his visit to China was open and legitimate and he has never denied it. Business links between Ireland and China have been ongoing for a long time."

But it does not say what business was transacted. Or why Sean Garland was representing a Company called GKI rather than the WP. Madame Cao is not an ordinary businesswoman. She is a high ranking member of the Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party. The CCP along with the military control prison camps and the factories based there. This is effectively slave labour.

Could Sean Garland and the Workers Party be importing (through a front company, GKI) into Ireland goods which were manufactured by slave labour in China? This would truly be an appalling vista.

Any light the WP could shed on the business transacted between Madam Cao and Sean Garland would be most welcome

by W.H. - None Fri Nov 18, 2005 17:26

As a Northern Ireland Protestant who last voted DUP I was very impressed by the resonable and thoughful pieces written by Mr Garland and Mr. O'Hagan on these threads - Mr O'Hagan's analysis in the oration particularily corresponded to what I saw happening in Northern Ireland in the last 35 years. This was in stark contrast to the abusive language which was coming from that part of the Irish political spectrum that has been responsible for the worst psychotic murders in the same period.

by Unimpressed agnostic Fri Nov 18, 2005 17:29

That would be the activities of the Shankill Butchers.

by TTP Sat Nov 19, 2005 11:37

There is no comparison between garland and the columbia 3. Mr Garland is to be extradicted to the US, which is a democracy. The Columbia 3 are to be extradicted to Columbia, which is a state run by a military junta which operates death squads and where trial by jury and due process are not quite the order of the day.
btw when's the assets recovery agency going to get on the job? and who put up garlands bail and will they now have to pay the £300,000?

by Phil Sat Nov 19, 2005 12:05

just took a look at the garland site. There was a hilarious rant by des o'hagan on it quoting johnny 'the Irp' white as 'a former IRA man', to prove that the free state was out to assasinate garland because of him being a big danger to the free state - the revolution was only minutes away...
Somebody call Liam O Comain quick. I'm sure he'll have plenty to say

by tom eile Sat Nov 19, 2005 14:10

why wouldn't the labour party back Garland -he's got the dirt on their leadership.Don't forget that Rabitte and De Rossa are former sticks .If Fine Gael have to go into coalition with the LP then they would be most certainly interested in monitoring the case . Joe higgins is backing Sean no surprises there . The trot SP has almost identical two nationist positions as the stalinist workers party regarding the north . In the south they have the same opportunist orientation to the trade union bureaucracy and the Dail . The workers party is dead on its feet ,Joe is courting its remnants for votes . And so is the SWP ;they would go to bed with anyone now that their Michael Davitt/People Before Profit alliance has collapsed . The sticks still have influence with loyalism seeing as they worked for the same paymaster for so long - the swp will be hoping the loyalists and their DUP mentors can deliver a few transfer votes for the SEA when the time comes .The Green Blazer brigade are obviously in there because they know that Gerry Adams could be next in line for the chop once he's fully delivered on the peace process (nobody seriously believes that he's going to get a seat in the House of Lords do they?)
It's all very sickening

by marshall sheriff deputy vigilantee lyncher traditionalist Sat Nov 19, 2005 14:10

you've all obviously missed the fact that this Garland man the "fugitive" as you call him, crossed the border from Northern Ireland.
How did he do it?
Who helped him?
Is this what we have to expect now? hordes of people escaping the courts of the northern ireland jumping the hedgerows of Fermanagh? snorkling the Erne? pole vaulting the Jonesborough lower field?
Where's 9mm Willie? Why isn't he keeping our border safe? Is anyone keeping an eye on how many of these "fugitives" there are? Is this what we got for joining the common market and the EEC?

an open border????????????????

I won't vote again.

by Harry D Sat Nov 19, 2005 14:15

Re: the obsession with the Colombia 3.

What exactly do you think that Larry, Mo and Satch were doing there? Acting as Kate Moss' personal shoppers?

by pat c Sat Nov 19, 2005 14:19

funny you should mention mo. mo mowlam also visited the FARC held area in Collumbia. Maybe shes a terrorist as well.

by Harry D Sat Nov 19, 2005 14:33

At least Mo's wig was more convincing than "Mortar" Monaghan's hair do.

Still - for one who is so persistent in asking questions about support for the C3, why don't you try answering mine?

by pat c Sat Nov 19, 2005 15:52

They have already made it clear that they were there to observe the peace process.

Now lets get back to the topic of this story. Will the WP support the Columbia 3.

by Harry D Sat Nov 19, 2005 17:02

I am greatly looking forward to reading the three wise men's long overdue report on the Colombian "peace process" - much as those who are gullible enough to believe that story are looking forward to Santa visiting their hearths on the 25th December.

by Pernicious Polly Sat Nov 19, 2005 17:16 ppolly at hotmail dot com

Boo hoo hoo!
If either Garland or the columbians were innocent they would go and stand trial.
But no, you losers will try and claim that they wouldn't get a fair hearing - so how come George Galloway was able to go to the US and laugh at them?
Because he was INNOCENT and Garland and the other gunmen gangsters won't face trial because they are GUILTY and they know it.
You lot gve genuine socialists a bad name - not that I care!
LOL
PS Girl power

by Harry D Sat Nov 19, 2005 17:21

So Georgie is a true socialist and innocent.

I liked his Father Ted defence, i.e., the money was only resting in my wife's account.

i salute your indefatigibility, madam

by pERNICIOUS pOLLY Sat Nov 19, 2005 17:27

Oh Yeah?
But he went and faced them down - your IRA boys (stickey/official/Provoies/'make-up-a-name-to-make-us-seem-political-instead-of-gangsters/IRA) seem a bit shy........wonder why?

by pat c Sat Nov 19, 2005 18:13

i answered your question. you choose to doubt it.

how about Sean Garland? Do you have any questions for him? You could ask him why he met with Mde Cao or why he met with Irish & English gangsters, why he travelled to Moscow via Minsk, why he stayed in a $500 a night suite.

by Harry D Sun Nov 20, 2005 08:14

I have absolutely no idea why anyone would travel to Moscow via Minsk or Mursheen Durkin for that matter.

What I will not supply are patently ludicrous answers like yours which could only be believed by the sort of people who would make substantial bids on eBay for Wolfe Tone's rosary beads

by Pernicious Polly Sun Nov 20, 2005 12:22

Harry says that

"What I will not supply are patently ludicrous answers like yours which could only be believed by the sort of people who would make substantial bids on eBay for Wolfe Tone's rosary beads"

Well I don't have much use for rosary beads (I'm not RC). But are you seriously saying that you don't believe these guys are gangsters?
Do you expect people reading this who don't care about your little inter-republican dispute to be convinced that Garland is NOT a gangster because the columbia 3 ARE? Like they couldn't both be guilty or anything!

That argument is soooooooooo stupid. I believe that every thing you say about the Columbia 3 is true - and I also believe that Garland is a crook. Maybe you can say something to convience me that I'm wrong. But please, pretty please, don't start trying to prove garland's innocence by proving the Columbia 3's guilt. The one doesn't prove the other. It's like a rapist trying to prove he's innocent because somebody else is a paedophile - there's no connection.

by pat c Sun Nov 20, 2005 15:18

no i wouldnt buy wolfe tones roary beads but i wouldnt mind getting my hands on his copy of paines "the rights of man".

if you have any evidence that the columbia 3 were training FARC then provide it. the judge in the original trial rejected all such "evidence" and reccomended that some of the prosecution witnesses be charged with perjury. the appeals court without hearing any new evidence or allowing the columbia 3 to adress it, overturned the verdict. a politically motivated decision. so lets see your evidence.

funny that you have notning to say about sean garland.

by pat c Sun Nov 20, 2005 15:22

i also believe gallowy is innocent. he has given reasons why money for various charities were moved to accounts. with all the MI6, CIA etc attention dont you think they would have got something concrete on george by now?

i have criticisms of galloway but thats for another day.

by He Who Observes Sun Nov 20, 2005 17:01

Our friend TTP above has quried the inactivity of the CAB regarding Sean Garland. I share that annoyance. Why dont the CAB move on Sean Garlands and the WPs property Empire and the money they make from protection rackets. The same question should be asked of the ARA in Northern Ireland. Amazing the way Sean Garland still seems to have a hold over some State Agencies and politicians.

I wonder if I have solved part of the Madam Cao mystery. Portadown Council are replacing a bridge and are using good granite, no shoddy materiels for them. But oddly enough they are importing the granite from China! Given the involvement of the WP/OIRA in protection rackets in the building industry perhaps Sean Garland brokered the deal.

by Harry D Sun Nov 20, 2005 17:49

I'm sure, if Wolfie had been on that Kingsmill's workers' bus in '76, his copy of the Rights of Man might have come in handy - stuck in his breast pocket to deflect the assassins' bullets fired by the C3's comrades in their sectarian murder gang.

by Harry D Sun Nov 20, 2005 17:57

Answer what question?

I'm not defending anyone's innocence here. And what makes you think I'm a republican (whatever your definition of a republican is)?

For a Gorgeous George fan to accuse anyone of gansterism is a bit rich - like the man himself.

How do you explain the $150 K of money meant for food and medicine for Iraqi kids, ending up in his wife's bank account?

by pat c Sun Nov 20, 2005 18:01

why have you got nothing to say about Sean Garland or the OIRA? Your attempts to derail this thread wont succeed.

If you wrack your memory you might remember the OIRA bombing at Aldershot where 6 women and a chaplain were killed. This was an authorised OIRA action. Kingsmill was not an authoriesd IRA action.Now if you like I could name civilians working at RUC bases who were killed by the OIRA. Or I could name the RUC man killed by the OIRA in a bank robbery, the last RUC man they killed, somehow appropriate it was in a bank robbery seeing as the OIRA became gangsters. We could spend a lot of time discussing the OIRA and Sean garland.

Anyway why did you have to go back 30 years for Kingsmill? Why not provide your proof of the C3s guilt?

You really should cop yourself on Harry. You are just causing more hassle for Sean Garland. This story is now number 5 if you enter "Sean Garland" in google. Thanks for your help Harry.

by Harry D Sun Nov 20, 2005 18:14

Far from derailing this thread - it was you who brought up the subject of the C3 (acknowledged members of a sectarian murder militia).

I haven't expressed any support for anyone who styles themselves as IRA, UDA, or even C&A.


I just happen to believe, on the balance of probability, that the C3 are guilty - as Mr Adams did shortly after they were nicked, when, like St Peter, he denied all knowledge of them ere the cock crew three times..

by Pertinent (and impertinent) Polly Sun Nov 20, 2005 19:51

Who said I'm a George Galloway 'fan'? I just compared his behaviour with that of your on the runs. You say that you don't support the IRA - but you seem to support Garland and he's IRA. Please, pretty please, don't bore me with nonsense about Provos and stickies and how one lot only shot a few people ('yawn').
OK here's the question you won't answer - do you support Sean 'stickey IRA' Garland? And do you accept that any IRA or terrorist group is undemocratic even if they are not killing people at the moment (They still have guns, presumably they keep them in case they feel like killing people again. No, no, no1 You're going to blab on about how they only have them to defend themselves or defend nationalists or defend socialists or whatever - how do the rest of us manage without guns? But then, we're not FASCISTS)
Girl power - no guns needed

by Harry D Mon Nov 21, 2005 00:30

I've already stated that I don't support any paramilitary group - and I don't know how you could make that presumption from my posts.

You have boldly stated that Galloway is innocent. So what do you make of the $150 k in his wife's bank account.

If you're not into fascism - why would you stand up for this man whose supporters advocate the Islamic version of it? And, incidentally, Galloway is also a big fan of the Hibernian (Provisional) variety as well.

by djugashivili Mon Nov 21, 2005 01:31 revival852 at aol dot com

George Galloway's supporters do not support 'Islamo-Fascism'. This is a racist phrase invented by so-called liberals who support US/British torture, murder and theft of national resources in the Middle East. Regrettably, many of George Galloway's supporters are Trotskyists who end up siding with imperialism on most issues. They are hardly supporters of fundamentalism, though. Does having any association at all with Muslims make you a supporter of 'Islamo-Fascism'. In Nazi Germany anyone with a Jewish friend was a 'supporter of the Judeo-Bolshevik conspiracy' and vulnerable to persecution. Plus ca change.

Whatever is said Sean Garlands's past, it is obvious that the law the US imperialists are trying to extadite him under is part of the US push to impose it's dictatorship of the bourgeoisie across the world. We should oppose it in the name of socialism and the establishment of proletarian democracy.

by pat c Mon Nov 21, 2005 10:32

i find your unwillingness to even use the name Sean garland a bit odd. it makes me suspect that you are a member or supporter of WP/OIRA.

you still havent pointed to any evidence which backs up your belief that the C3 are guilty of training FARC. as i pointed out the judge in the original trial rejected all such evidence as flawed and reccomended that some of the prosecution witnesses be prosecuted for perjury. without hearing any evidence or allowing any lawyers to be present the appeals court overturned this verdict and convicted the C3 of training FARC.

I brought up the C3 in the context of wondering if the WP were prepared to oppose all political extraditions. I oppose the extradition of Sean Garland. I still wonder if the WP as an organisation opposes the extradition of the Columbia 3.

by Con - anti imperialist Mon Nov 21, 2005 12:08

Pat c and others accuse other posters of deflecting the thread. The point actually isd that the whole thread is a deflection of the real issue. An Irish citizen who is in an unpopular political party is accused of crimes by the US authorities. He has been already tried and found guilty in the media. He will not get a fair trial.

It matters not what his beliefs are. He has civil rights irrespective of his political viewpoints on the colombia three or anything else.

First They Came for the Jews
First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.


Pastor Martin Niemöller

by tom eile Mon Nov 21, 2005 13:38

Con, Has he already been tried by the American media? I doubt if many people in America have heard of Sean Garland. US authorities will be bringing him before a judge and jury presumably - he won't be going to Guantanamo .
I agree with Pat C on opposing extradition because of the precedent it might set for the Colombian 3 , but , on a personal level , wouldn't it be nice to see him get turned over ? Think of the message it would send . The brits bought him ; now that they've got everything they want from him ,he gets rendered over to the land of the free (buy one and get one) . The rebel who sold out the patriot game getting sold on .
But this isn't personal . Britain will be aware of and will use republican/socialist reluctance to campaign for a stool-pigeon to undermine any future resistance to political extradition . To counter that ,princilpled campaigners should oppose Garland's extradition but should link their opposition to the call for an independent investigation into the machinations of the Sticks over the years -how they were set up ,encouraged utilized ,tolerated , facilitated etc by the 26 county and British states as a bulwark against insurrection .

by anti imperialist Mon Nov 21, 2005 14:14

All the sticks did is say the Provos are wrong. When the Provos then said you are collaberators, get out of working class Belfast, the sticks told them to F@*k off. The sticks attacked and defended for their right to exist.

when they were accused of betraying the "struggle" by the Provos it was because they argued for a POLITICAL solution to the "Troubles" because they supported DEVOLUTION, because they had decided upon a CEASEFIRE. Because they decided to run in DAIL elections and take COUNCIL seats. They did all this 25 years before the Provos.Thus saving countless of deaths.

So Tom I look forward to your denunciation of ADAMS and the 'lads' of the PIRA for their betrayal and collaberation with the Brits

chuckey r' law

by Barry Mon Nov 21, 2005 15:53

Utter rubbish . In west Belfast in particular it was the sticks who forced the provos to fight for their survival in many areas . For example when Bobby Sands family were intimitaded out of their home by loyalists they moved to Twinbrook . They began selling a sinn fein news sheet and were regularly harassed and threatened by the sticks , and were even attacked by hurley bat weilding thugs .

In the Lower Falls and Ballymurphy which the sticks controlled young provisionals were regularly harassed , beaten and even stopped and searched . The sticks openly supported and collaborated with crown forces , acting in a classic counter gang role . They supported all manner of draconian legislation , publicly opposed political status for prisoners and supported extradition as well .They passed information regularly to the brits and did their utmost to harass and disrupt the resistance against them . Their leadership adopted the "enemys enemy is your friend" analysis , only it was the Brits they chose as friends .

South of the border their men and women within RTE current affairs did their utmost to ensure section 31 was applied to basically anyone who might criticise the British , not just Sinn Fein . An entire generation of Irish people in the 26 counties have been brought up with a wholly one sided establishment view of the conflict in which Britain was never criticised and their own countrymen portrayed as mindless savages , a mindset unfortunately entrenched in southern society today . The sticks were shameless and often murderous collaborators par excellance .

Its true however that Adams ( a reluctant/ opportunistic provo himself) has taken his cue from their collaborator approach to the conflict and basically adopted their methodology if not the Marxist rhetoric . Marxism served its purpose for a while as a means of undermining his opponents within the provos and was hastily discarded once it had served its purpose . However Adams learnt from the Sticks mistakes and pursued their tactics in a much more slick manner , gradually over time and not all at once which was the sticks downfall .
As regards Garland and Adams it seems to be a case of buy one get one free .

by pat c Mon Nov 21, 2005 16:24

you are aptly named. in the story at the start of this i made it clear that i oppose the extradition of Sean Garland.

Whats wrong with asking about the WP position on the extradition of the Columbia 3?

First they came for Dominic McGlinchey. The WP did not speak out for him.

Then they came for Dessie Ellis. The WP did not speak out for him.

Then they came for the Columbia 3. The WP has so far not spoken out for them.

Now they come for Sean Garland. Despite his previous support for extradition people are speaking out for him.

by anti imperialist Mon Nov 21, 2005 16:45

Barry, if you read provo propaganda then youll get provo propoganda. Are you saying that the Provos didnt ever threaten any sticks? Were never beaten by provos or are you saying the provos only beat up kids for "anti social behaviour"? Get back on planet earth Barry. The sticks gave as good as they got. Everyone knows the Provos have and had the capacity to beat people up so your saying they never beat up the sticks! Pathetic. During the Provo progroms against the sticks they intimidated, beat, burned out, shot and murdered sticks including six year old Eileen Kelly. As for harrassment and intimidation, I personally have spoken to kids who were bullied in school because their parents were sticks - they were not involved themselves.

Agreed they didn't offer any support to thew Provos and their campaigns even when the were about civil rights/human rights. But shooting people has a tendency to blunt your sympathy for their plight.

Adams has rightly pointed out that the mid 1970's were the darkest days for republicanism. The feuds achieved nothing the brits inflamed them enjoying watchuing Irishman kill Irishman. Working Class living in Republican areas were sickened by both sides and pleaded for the madness to end. You have a rose tinted version of the 1970's I am under no illusions. Brother attacked brother, families broke up, innocents were beaten, atrocities were committed by both sides.

Provos now acknowledge the sticks, they cannot but. History has proven their position correct. The sticks after the feud degenerated into a political viod. Their hatred of the Provos was paramount. But understand that the Provos had as much hatred, some still do.

by con Mon Nov 21, 2005 16:50

you ignore the central point of my comment. This whole discussion is a distraction. BTW have not seen much support for the campaign from the left and none froom you. Unless you think posting attacks on SG are in some way a perverse way of offering support.

by pat c Mon Nov 21, 2005 16:52

I oppose the extradion of Sean Garland. Do you oppose the extradition of the Columbia3?
Its a simple question and it just requires a plain answer.

by pat c Mon Nov 21, 2005 17:04

You are missing the point. This article set out to discover the WP position on extradition: do the WP oppose the extradition of the Colombia 3.

The article was then attacked by sticks. Well if you make attacks then people are going also write nasty things about you. A lot of things written here about Sean Garland and the WP and OIRA would never have been posted if it wasnt for the Stickie attacks. People who live in glass houses should be careful about throwing stones.

by Weary Mon Nov 21, 2005 17:16

The WP bravely stood up to the murderous sectarian fascist Provos, shoulder to shoulder with the UVF (also known as the Shankill Butchers)

I agree with the condemnation of the Provos, but it's hypocracy as the WP supported Loyalist sectarian fascists.
So sectarianism and fascism are not the real problem for the WP at all.

Any young people out there reading this, the message is clear, stay away from these people. They are too mixed up with loyalist gangs, intelligence services and gangsterism. Join a decent left-wing group. It doesn't matter if its the SWM, SP, Labour, Communist Party or whatever - just make sure they are free of hoods and gunmen.

by Hebe Mon Nov 21, 2005 17:34

Might not agree with all of your formulations but your basic message is right. Just also consider the WSM and Organise as options for groups to join.

Lest there be any misunderstanding I also disagree with extraditing the Columbia Three and even Sean Garland deserves fairplay. He shouldnt be extradited either.

by Cynically Cynical Mon Nov 21, 2005 17:57

"but it's hypocracy as the WP supported Loyalist sectarian fascists."

Tell that to the McMenamin family.

by anti imperialist Tue Nov 22, 2005 10:27

I oppose the extradition of the colombia 3. I believe that even if they were offering logistical support, whatever the hell that is, they should not be sent back to Colombia where fascist dictator runs a military dictatorship and by night right wing paramilitaries murder trade unionists. Clear enough Pat? But I am not a member of the workers party so I don't know how this helps you.

by pat c Tue Nov 22, 2005 11:30

just wanted to know where you stood. the thread is going a bit off topic with a general discussion of sticks versus provos. i

just wanted to bring things back to Sean Garland and the Columbia 3 and whether posters oppose extradition in both cases.

by Spartacus Wed Nov 23, 2005 18:41

Another article on Sean Garland. I'll just give the headline story. You will have to go to the URL to access the other links.

Extradition from Northern Ireland—Sean Garland Flees

Sean Garland, the head of the Irish Worker’s Party, has fled from Northern Ireland to escape extradition.[1] According to the Washington Times, a statement on Mr. Garland’s personal website states that “he has decided to remain in the Republic of Ireland, where British authorities allowed him to travel two weeks ago for medical treatment.”[2]

Since Mr. Garland’s arrest in early October, details about his alleged involvement with a huge North Korean counterfeit currency ring have been made public.[3] The Koreans are accused of creating massive amounts of so-called “supernotes,” which are exceptionally high quality US$100 bills.[4] Mr. Garland is accused of trafficking in more than US$1 million of the currency.[5]

According to the Washington Times, Mr. Garland “initially agreed to return to Belfast for an extradition hearing related” to the charges, but he then determined that the proceedings would not be fair.[6] That may be, but it is more likely that he is aware that the Republic of Ireland is a far more difficult country from which to get extradition suspects than Northern Ireland is. See, for example, our post on such difficulties, here.

We have previously discussed Mr. Garland here.

In an unrelated, but interesting piece of news, Rachid Ramda, who we mentioned yesterday, will be extradited to France.[7] He will no longer be the man who has been waiting in British jail the longest for an extradition decision.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] Bill Gertz, Irish Forgery Suspect Flees to Avoid U.S. Extradition, Washington Times, Nov. 17, 2005, available here.
[2] Id.
[3] Id. See also, Tim Johnson, N. Korea Accused of Printing Bogus U.S. $100 “Supernotes,” San Diego Union-Tribune, Oct. 29, 2005, available here.
[4] Johnson, supra note 3.
[5] Gertz, supra note 1.
[6] Id.
[7] Algerian Terror Suspect to Face Extradition from Britain, Agence France-Presse, Nov. 17, 2005, available here.

by marshall sheriff deputy vigilantee lyncher traditionalist Thu Nov 24, 2005 11:39

well it seems that someone was keeping an eye on all those fugitives who crossed the border with such ease as to be almost contempt that I referred to above.
mr blair is going to give them a presidential pardon.
http://www.rte.ie/news/2005/1123/northpolitics.html

by Cynic Thu Nov 24, 2005 11:43

Will this amnesty apply to OIRA members on the run? Theres a few senior members of the WP who would be interested in this. Especially those who participated in the planning and execution of the OIRA Aldershot bo mbing which killed six female domestics and a priest.

Sean Garland is safer in the South, less chance of him being extradited to the US.

by Iskra - LP Thu Nov 24, 2005 17:56

Sean garland might face extradition from the Republic to Northern Ireland. Hes skipped bail and that is a 'crime'. He might be able to opt to be tried on that charge here. At the very most he would receive a light custodial sentence. If Sean Garland was extradited to Northern Ireland it would likely be on the proviso that he only be charged with jumping bail.

If Sean Garland was extradited to the US he could be subject to all sorts of Homeland Security legislation. How long would a 71 year old man who suffers from Angina and Diabetes survive under CIA interrogation?

Sean Garland should not be extradited.

The Columbia Three would face possible death from either State or Paramilitary squads if they were sent back to Columbia. They should not be extradited.

by Spartacus Thu Nov 24, 2005 18:04

It lokks as if the Yanks are going to pursue Sean Garland in the South as well.

"A spokesman for the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia said yesterday that the U.S. government will continue efforts to have Mr. Garland extradited, if he cannot be returned to Northern Ireland, which is under the legal jurisdiction of the British government.

"We will be seeking extradition of Mr. Garland from the Republic of Ireland," said the spokesman, Channing Phillips.

Mr. Garland was indicted by a federal grand jury in May on charges of using his party contacts in North Korea to coordinate the purchase of fake $100 bills produced there. "

by Cynic Fri Nov 25, 2005 12:25

The US are increasing the pressure on North Korea and the threats are becoming less thinly veiled over the Sean Garland counterfeiting case. An extract is published here. The entire article is at the link.

US Official Warns Consequences for NK's Counterfeiting



WASHINGTON (Yonhap) -- A senior U.S. official warned Wednesday there will be "significant consequences" for North Korea for its government involvement in the circulation of fake American dollars.

"There are counterfeiting rings out there producing very high quality counterfeit U.S. currency that are associated with the government of North Korea," Stuart Levey, treasury undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence, said in remarks at the Heritage Foundation in downtown Washington.

"That's something we can't just allow to occur without significant consequences," he said.

Sean Garland, believed to be a leader of the Irish Republican Army, was indicted in the United States last month on charges of conspiring with North Korea to circulate millions of dollars of fake U.S. currency, commonly known as "supernotes."

by Cynic Mon Dec 05, 2005 12:26

The US are forging ahead with their extradition request. It will be interesting to see how the Irish authorities react. No doubt it will go all the way to the Supreme Court. Heres a Sunday business Post story on it. Its an edited version of that which appeared in the print edition of the SBP. There may be a full version on the SBP site but I could not find it.

'US wants Garland extradited over counterfeiting controversy

04 December 2005 By Paul T Colgan
The US is to demand that the government extradite Workers' Party president Sean Garland in the coming weeks for his alleged role in a North Korean conspiracy to make counterfeit US dollars.

Garland jumped bail in the North two weeks ago, and is believed to be at his home in Co Meath. The veteran political figure had been arrested by the Police Service of Northern Ireland on foot of a warrant issued by the US government.

Officials at the US Attorney's Office said they planned to made a formal request for Garland's extradition as quickly as possible. “We have yet to make a formal request, but it is our intention to have him extradited,” said one of the officials, Channing Phillips.'

by Cynically Cynical Mon Dec 05, 2005 12:38

Perhaps if you looked under the ad you might have seen the rest of the article.

by Cynic Mon Dec 05, 2005 12:40

It must be browser problems on my side. Anyway the Indy Editors prefer if a whole article is not submitted so readers can go to the link.

by Cynic Mon Dec 12, 2005 13:51

The Defend Sean Garland Campaign seems to have gone into hibernation in Ireland. According to the Sean Garland site: "Dublin: Public Meeting Tuesday 22nd November - Liberty HallThis meeting has been postponed - new arrangement will be posted shortly." This was done at short notice and no plausible reason was given to the listed speakers. (This can be checked with Roger Cole and Joe Higgins) All other public meetings have also been cancelled.

Sean Garland has now apparently gone to ground after undergoing a remarkable improvement in his health. Perhaps the WP think the whole affair will go away if they continue with the ostrich approach.

by Cynically Cynical Mon Dec 12, 2005 13:59

"The Defend Sean Garland Campaign seems to have gone into hibernation in Ireland. According to the Sean Garland site: "Dublin: Public Meeting Tuesday 22nd November - Liberty Hall. This meeting has been postponed - new arrangement will be posted shortly." This was done at short notice and no plausible reason was given to the listed speakers. (This can be checked with Roger Cole and Joe Higgins) All other public meetings have also been cancelled."

Did anybody need a plausible reason except for you. He's staying in the south. The nature of the campaign has changed.

"Sean Garland has now apparently gone to ground after undergoing a remarkable improvement in his health. Perhaps the WP think the whole affair will go away if they continue with the ostrich approach."

Gone to ground. I think not, he was on the Irish Ferries march on Friday marching proudly behind the WP banner in full view for all to see.

by oultimer Mon Dec 12, 2005 14:20

Yes, I saw Sean Garland there. I also saw Jim Monaghan on the march. Great to see people putting their differences aside to act in a common cause (for once).

by Curious Mon Dec 12, 2005 14:24

The Colombia 3 one or the oul trot that's hostile to the WP?

by oultimer Mon Dec 12, 2005 14:41

I was refering to the Colombia 3 one, of course. I don't know anything about the other individual you mention, I generally avoid those elements.

by pat c Mon Dec 12, 2005 16:35

The other Jim Monaghn is a genuinely non-sectarian Trotskyist. Seán Garland might remember him from the days when Seán Garland was in the same faction as Seámus Costello. In those days Seán Garland would also have been a friend of the US Trotskyist, Gerry Foley. Its odd that Des O'Hagan should describe Gerry Foley as a CIA agent. Gerry helped Garland and Costello to develop their positions in opposition to the Goulding leadership of the Official IRA and Official Sinn Féin.

Strangely enough Seán Garland only broke with Costello after visit to the USSR. Another participant on this trip describes how Garland was whisked away for private business. (This is from a private source but I will provide details to the Indymedia Editors if so requested.) What happened? What promises were made? Was Garland suborned by the KGB or the Soviet CP? Only Seán Garland can answer those questions.

Gerry Foley holds no grudges against Seán Garland, the last time I spoke to Gerry he remembered Seán fondly. He said that: "Seán Garland tried to turn the Official Republic Movement into a Revolutionary Party; he just wasnt big enough to carry it off".

by An bata Mon Dec 12, 2005 16:45

I'm not sure that I'd use that description when talking of Jim and the WP. I'm not sure he would either although I think his wife got on better with them.

by pat c Mon Dec 12, 2005 17:10

Jim is a fair minded guy, like myself he would disagree withe WPs support for the Stalinist Dictatorship in North Korea and I think he would find a few other faults with the WP as well. But he doesnt think that Seán Garland was born evil, Seán Garland had a choice of going with Moscow or the Trots. Seán Garland chose Moscow, you can hardly blame him when you consider the balance of resources available from the Moscow option.

Seán Garland thought he was taking the high road to Socialism but he has ended up at the helm of a Stalinist Sect. Albeit one that has some good activists.

by pat c Mon Dec 12, 2005 17:28

Danny Morrison though casting a critical eye on Seán Garland opposes his extradition. The full article is at the link below.

"Garland has said that he has skipped bail on the grounds that Britain’s extradition treaty with the USA is “grossly unjust” and that in a US court he would not get justice. Clearly, the US authorities, who had the warrant for six months and could have issued it in the South, waited until Garland was in the North and subject to the UK-US Extradition Treaty Act. That act has lower standards of proof than the agreement between Ireland and the US and does not require the requesting country to make a prima facie case.

Undoubtedly, Garland would not receive justice in a US court – neither a fair trial nor in terms of the sentence imposed were he found guilty.

The Irish authorities could now face extradition requests from Britain to have Garland returned to the North or from the USA for his extradition which will certainly force all the political parties in the South to declare their stance. His defence will be relying on the political exception clause even though this has been virtually whittled away over the years in cases involving Irish republicans.

Since his arrest the Workers Party has launched an anti-extradition campaign, which has attracted support from many who never expressed their opposition to extradition in the past. "

by pat c Mon Dec 12, 2005 18:09

sorry i forgot to add the link to the story about Sean Garland.

by labourwatch Sun Jan 29, 2006 19:59

Sunday Independent > National News Today's Date: Sun January 29th 06

Sean Garland shunned

DON LAVERY

THE Labour Party yesterday distanced itself from the appearance of a former Official IRA leader, wanted in the US for allegedly forging millions of dollars, at a conference Dublin it organised on the future of Europe.

Sean Garland, the president of the Workers Party, intervened from the floor at the conference in the Mansion House to criticise EU Commissioner Charlie McCreevy.

In an audience debate on the EU Services Directive, Mr Garland said of Commissioner McCreevy: "The less said about him the better."

He also criticised the lack of help given to left-of-centre politicians to promote their policies in the EU.

Garland is wanted by the US on a warrant alleging he was involved in forging huge quantities of $100 bills.

A Labour Party spokesman said Mr Garland had not been invited to the conference.

by pat c Sun Jan 29, 2006 20:13

apparently he wouldnt contribute any of his superdollars.