Gerry Adams has never been convicted for being a member of the Provisional IRA army council. In fact he has never been convicted of IRA membership. The connection between the IRA and Sinn Fein has to my knowledge never been proved in a court of law.
America or the CIA has never been prosecuted in a court of law for kidnapping, torturing and transporting of prisoners through Shannon. .
Now this is just two examples of things people believe, report and criticise others for that have yet to be proven in a court of law. Yet these two things are readily believed by the media and the opposition parties. Most of the papers have stated as fact that the IRA Sinn Fein are one in the same thing. Read any opinion column and you will see this. Also have a read of Indymedia and you’ll find countless articles about the CIA torture flights.
So why suddenly do we hear claims of innocents until proven guilty. While the likes of indymedia need no court case to claim the CIA are torturing nor do they even need leaked official documents. The majority of the evidence of their claim is based on hear say and jumped up plane spotters not a lot of which would stand up in court. Yet suddenly they need court cases over Frank Connolly
If back in 2004 I said Mutu took drugs is that an accusation aimed at Chelsea or the player. Obviously it is against the player the fact that he played for Chelsea at the time is irrelevant. Similarly with Frank Connolly he worked at the Centre of Public Enquiry acquisitions against him are not in a bid to destroy the centre. The centre was created to be an independent inquiry agency. Would it be right for the head of such powerful independent agency to have broken the law? And possibly support 2 terrorist organisations one of which would like to bring down the state and the other is a major drug exporter? Considering that this centre is to inquire into government no matter who is in power. Is it then right that party A is supported by the head? Someone who may make sure all parties except party A are investigated. Would removing such a person from that position not in fact be insuring its independence?
(Edit: This paragraph added 00:30)In fact considering that the PIRA wishes to bring down the state wouldn’t requirement No 1 of the Centre of Public Enquiry be that the person in charge of the organisation that could bring down the state doesn't want to bring down the state or have any links at all to the PIRA. How would addreasing that not be in the nations security interest?
So the question I feel that needs to be answered is why is there suddenly a need for a court case for proof when Adams and the CIA have not had the luxury? Is this a case of McDowell bashing, media protecting their own or genuine grievances?
If you do have a genuine grievance and truly believe in innocent till proven guilty. Then be true to your principles and reprimanded people who say the CIA torture, Sinn Fein/IRA are linked and Gerry Adams is on the IRA council with the same vigour as you would Michael McDowell over this issue. If however you would find your self reprimanding yourself maybe you should reconsider your stance on this incident or your stance on all other incidents. For to say CIA’s and Sinn Fein/IRA's guilt needs no court but Connolly’s does is a double standard.