I’ve just come from listening to Good Morning Ulster(sic) on BBC Radio Ulster/Raidio Uladh. When I left, Noel Thompson was querying various informed people as to how and why the UDA was still in existence. Not a particularly fruitful inquisition: Rev Chris Hudson said something about the ‘mechanisms for the disappearance of the UDA not being in place. Along with other people, he talked about the good work that former paramilitaries were doing. Which is good. But it still doesn’t answer why an illegal paramilitary group is still in existence nearly twenty years after they were supposed to have evaporated.
There’s a simple answer. The people charged with the maintenance of the rule of law, the PSNI, are scared to arrest known members of the UDA, in case that would make a bad situation worse. The UDA might then rally unionist support both locally and across the six counties, and all hell might break loose.
Or it might be that unionist politicians are happy to have the UDA remain in the wings, since that should be a strong incentive for the IRA not to plan any renaissance. And of course it would also act as a dampener on any demands by nationalist/republican politicians.
Either of these situations is deplorable. If you heard that there was a Mafia outfit in New York and the NYPD, either through fear or instructions, was unwilling to take them on and take them apart, you’d be shocked. What ever happened to the rule of law?
Or maybe a parallel closer to home would bring out better the absurdity of the present situation. Supposing it emerged that the IRA was still in existence and that, according to one of its members, was up to its neck in extortion, prostitution, rape, drugs, and just about any other social evil you can imagine. Do you think you’d be likely to hear a prominent Catholic priest on air explaining that the mechanisms weren’t in place for the IRA to vanish? And if such a thing was to happen, that there’d be a screech of indignation coming from Stormont and throughout this little state?
Most nationalist/republicans know that when it comes to paramilitarism, unionist politicians see loyalist paramilitaries as, in the end, the good guys. There in reaction to IRA atrocities. Supporting the police and British army. Our own. They won’t say it out loud, but some things you don’t need to say. In this case inaction and silence speak louder than any words.
Will all that change now, given the fuss over what this UDA insider has revealed? Let me answer that with another question: will last night’s supermoon come down to our kitchens later this morning and deliver a delicious consignment of cheese?
Jude says:
“Most nationalist/republicans know that when it comes to paramilitarism, unionist politicians see loyalist paramilitaries as, in the end, the good guys.”
I can’t see any evidence for this claim.
Unionist politicians are most definitely reluctant, frightened even, to face down these gangs but that is a long way from seeing them as good guys.
Maybe there was some of that during the troubles but i doubt if it holds true now.
Evidence?
Just look at the treatment and language used by Unionist politicians when talking about the UDA/UVF etc and then look at the same thing when dealing with the IRA.
Many Unionist politicians have absolutely no problems sharing platforms/meeting etc with known loyalist terrorists but the same politicians flatly refuse to talk to or shake the hands of ex IRA personnel who have turned their backs on the violence of the past and embraced democratic means to meet their objectives.
As Jude says imagine if the IRA were still operating in the same way that the UDA etc were operating. Can you imagine the outcry? It would never be out of the media, the spotlight would be firmly fixed on them by Unionist politicians AND the media.
Michal
I have a pretty low opinion of Unionist politicians but I am not convinced they generally view the thugs and bullys of the loyalist paramilitaries as ‘good guys’.
If they did why not say so as republican politicians have done about their thugs and bullys?
Is it not more likely that they see them for what they are but have decided to appease them for the sake of votes?
Also Jude says that keeping the UDA in the wings is a strong incentive for the IRA not to plan any renaissance.
Would the IRA really be frightened of the existence of the UDA as he suggests?
So your basing you’re conclusion on the fact that Unionist politicians have not come out publicly and said the UDA are good guys? Really?
They’ve had plenty of opportunities to come out and condemn them but frequently stop short there. Strange that.
They have no problems attending marches commerating dead UDA and UVF men either. They have no problems shaking hands with them, sharing platforms or going to bat to ensure they receive public money.
Actions speak loud than words Gio.
Their hypocrisy stinks.
As previously mentioned, imagine if the IRA were still as active as the UDA are today. Imagine if SF publicly courted them as Unionist politicians and leaders do with the UDA
Now imagine the outcry from the Unionist politicians, media and public.
Michael
Are you saying Unionist politicians never condemn loyalist crimes?
All the things you mention go towards suggesting that Unionist politicians are frightened of alienating this group and the core of voters that support them.
None of that means they actually think of them as the good guys.
Republican politicians are not shy about voicing their admiration for the PIRA knowing it pleases their support base, so why would Unionist politicians not do the same?
Please point out where I said Unionist politicians never condemn loyalist crimes?
The PIRA have long decommissioned and stepped away from violence. The very same republican politicians you speak off often come out to condemn dissident violence, parades and other actions. They do this quite freely as they see it as an obstacle to peace
The UDA is still extremely active. If Unionist leaders really wanted the UDA et al gone it would be up to them to convince them to go, to step down, it what they call political leadership but the political will isn’t there and that’s not down to losing votes. As pointed out already, imagine the shoe was on the other foot.
Their hypocrisy can be heard on the radio and tv every day.
The narrative that we were all led to believe was loyalist terrorists were only there to “protect their communities”. Who they protecting them from now? Dee Stitt even alluded to this recently, the same Stitt who works hand in hand with Unionist politicians to ensure large sums of money goes under his control. Strange that. Surely if those Unionist politicians really wanted to stomp out these UDA commanders and their cohorts they could simply not give them money. A stroke of a pen, but no, this continues in even greater amounts.
Coming out publicly, shining a light on this issue, keeping their focus on them, using the power at their disposal to really tackle active loyalists terrorists just seems to beyond their capabilities.
“Are you saying Unionist politicians never condemn loyalist crimes?”
Condemning means nothing Gio, as Michael said: “Actions speak louder than words”.
It was Unionists who printed 40,000 leaflets to spur Loyalists out onto the streets…..they then “condemned” the violence afterwards and months of unrest…..
It was Unionist politicians like Paisley who repeatedly spoke at Unionist rallies of Catholics as a danger to this state and how that danger must be “removed”……he then “condemned” the sectarian mass murders by Unionists that occurred afterwards…..
It was Unionist politicians that encouraged besieging Gravaghy Road in their sectarian demand to march through that community……they then “condemned” the violence afterwards…..
I’m starting to see a trend here……
Michael
“Please point out where I said Unionist politicians never condemn loyalist crimes?”
I didn’t say you did,I asked you the question, based on your comment:
“They’ve had plenty of opportunities to come out and condemn them but frequently stop short there. Strange that.”
So you accept that they do routinely condemn such crimes even though they apparently see them as the good guys?
If a british soldier committed a crime gio, they would hardly be described as a good guy, but when they are engaged in conflict, you can be sure that unionists would consider them to be the good guys. just as I consider the IRA to have been the good guys in the recent conflict here.
And if you are suggesting that unionist politicians who have routinely defended loyalist paramilitary actions in the past, calling it counter terrorism, being on the right side, or defending ulster, to Paisley claiming his DUP would provide cover for loyalists, or more recently claiming they in spite of being nearly 20 years on and confirmed up to their necks in criminality are still defended by unionist politicians as being in transition and still moving away from violence do not differentiate between loyalist groups and the IRA who they get their knickers in a twist if there is a memorial in a graveyard with a volunteers name on it, then it really does say a lot about you gio.
I knew IRA men who used to put a poppy in the car windows when on a mission, they knew if they were stopped at a checkpoint, the army would wave them on when they saw the poppy. Loyalist paramilitaries worked hand in hand with state forces and had a very different attitude indeed.
To nationalists there was no difference between the UDR and loyalist paramilitaries other than one got a wage. Unionist politicians still today support the UDR, there is a statue in lisburn showing one stopping traffic, just like they must have done before murdering the miami showband with private Robin Jacksons unit, the mentor of billy wright.
I would say that are a very sad apologist for unionism gio, but the reality is you are simply a brit at heart.
“If a british soldier committed a crime gio, they would hardly be described as a good guy, but when they are engaged in conflict, you can be sure that unionists would consider them to be the good guys. just as I consider the IRA to have been the good guys in the recent conflict here.”
But the ‘IRA’ was committing crimes. Thousands of them. Nearly 2000 murders.
“I knew IRA men who used to put a poppy in the car windows when on a mission, they knew if they were stopped at a checkpoint, the army would wave them on when they saw the poppy. Loyalist paramilitaries worked hand in hand with state forces and had a very different attitude indeed.”
Odd that the police brought more prosecutions against loyalists than they did republicans, even though loyalists committed fewer crimes, isn’t it? When they were ‘working hand in hand’ with them. Or maybe you’re exaggerating?
“To nationalists there was no difference between the UDR and loyalist paramilitaries other than one got a wage.”
Nationalists were wrong.
“Unionist politicians still today support the UDR, there is a statue in lisburn showing one stopping traffic, just like they must have done before murdering the miami showband with private Robin Jacksons unit, the mentor of billy wright.”
We should all be thankful for the risks the UDR took to.protect us, and paid a heavy price for it. You should stop trying to characterise the entire regiment based on the illegal and appalling actions of a tiny number of members.
“But the ‘IRA’ was committing crimes. Thousands of them. Nearly 2000 murders.”
No they weren’t, their communities asked them to defend them and the continued unionist aggression led to conflict.
The majority of war crimes committed in that conflict were on the british side. They told loyalists to kill innocent Catholics to turn the community against the IRA. The UVF refused to follow british force instructions to murder 30 primary school children in south Armagh, claiming it would have raised the conflict to all out civil war.
In my eyes, the british are the murderers. If unionists want to have any future in the north of Ireland, you will have to accept that or move to britain or to the republic. The soon to be northern majority will never share your views and will reject a united Ireland if the republic takes the same line.
“Odd that the police brought more prosecutions against loyalists than they did republicans, even though loyalists committed fewer crimes, isn’t it? When they were ‘working hand in hand’ with them. Or maybe you’re exaggerating?”
I have never claimed everyone in the RUC was involved. RUC members who interfered were also murdered by british state forces so clearly not all were. That is documented fact. You knew when you met the RUC who were involved and those who weren’t. They didn’t hide it. I was frequently harassed, beaten and once strip searched for no reason other than humiliation.
“To nationalists there was no difference between the UDR and loyalist paramilitaries other than one got a wage. Nationalists were wrong.”
So robin jackson who murdered the miami showband as a UDR private and was involved in the dublin monaghan bombings was just one of the few bad apples was he?
MT, I knew many loyalist paramilitaries who were also in the UDR.
It wasn’t a secret back then. It was not denied or hidden.
“We should all be thankful for the risks the UDR took to.protect us, and paid a heavy price for it. You should stop trying to characterise the entire regiment based on the illegal and appalling actions of a tiny number of members.”
There it is, the few bad apples.
Well, I am grateful for the IRA without whom 10s of thousands of Catholics would have been driven out of the north as was the intent of political unionism.
In time in northern Ireland they will be properly commemorated and their families will receive medals.
UDR statues will be pulled down and the north will no longer be a unionist friendly place.
That is the future continued unionist intransigence will lead to.
“No they weren’t, ”
Yes they were. Countless crimes, right up to murder. Over 1700 murders.
“their communities asked them to defend them and the continued unionist aggression led to conflict..”
Their communities didn’t ask them to defend them and they weren’t defending, they were attacking.
“The majority of war crimes committed in that conflict were on the british side.”
There were no war crimes committed as there was no war. But if there had been a war, the vast majority of war crimes would have been committed by the PIRA.
“In my eyes, the british are the murderers.”
Your eyes are wrong. The PIRA committed more murders than everyone else combined.
“If unionists want to have any future in the north of Ireland, you will have to accept that or move to britain or to the republic.”
Why? What will happen if they don’t accept your ridiculous belief?
“The soon to be northern majority will never share your views and will reject a united Ireland if the republic takes the same line.”
The republic does take the same line and northern nationalists don’t reject a ‘united Ireland’.
“So robin jackson who murdered the miami showband as a UDR private and was involved in the dublin monaghan bombings was just one of the few bad apples was he?”
Yes, of course.
“MT, I knew many loyalist paramilitaries who were also in the UDR.”
How many and how did you know them?
“Well, I am grateful for the IRA”
Hang your head in deep shame. You are hate-filled. A hesrtless monster who cares nothingfor thedestruction and traumatisation of human life..
“without whom 10s of thousands of Catholics would have been driven out of the north as was the intent of political unionism.”
No it wasn’t.
I”n time in northern Ireland they will be properly commemorated and their families will receive medals.:
No it isn’t.
“UDR statues will be pulled down and the north will no longer be a unionist friendly place.
That is the future continued unionist intransigence will lead to.”
No it isn’t.
“Yes they were. Countless crimes, right up to murder. Over 1700 murders. ”
Had the IRA killed people simply for being protestant MT, my community would have rejected them outright.
It is a fact that loyalists murdered the most people for simply being catholic and often just for being in a catholic area, hence so many protestants accidentally killed for being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
I don’t think anyone could deny that with any credibility.
Many loyalists have claimed to have been influenced by unionist politicians and I think there has been enough evidence that state forces directed loyalists in the 70s including the instruction to kill innocent Catholics as a strategy that I simply do not accept your views that what could be considered war crimes was one sided.
Conflict is a disgusting waste of human life and to try to demonise killings on one side just to justify killings the other is not something I can agree with you on.
The conflict was wrong in the first place and no killing in it was justified, fight or flight is simply human nature.
“Their communities didn’t ask them to defend them and they weren’t defending, they were attacking.”
What are you basing this assertion on MT?
I am giving you real life memories from my own community in lurgan and I assure you that it did.
The place was filled with panic, fear and confusion when we came under attack from the RUC and British army.
I still remember the lines of landrovers slowly moving up the road, one after one until we were locked in with landrovers lining the road facing the estate, and soldiers getting out and pointing rifles down into the estate.
Women would be screaming to get the boys out and cross with them if they took too long.
There would be cheers when the IRA started shooting back.
There are many emotions and memories engrained into my being that are as raw to me now as when they happened.
My community supported the IRA, not because we wanted conflict, but because we had no one else when the aggression started by unionist leaders such as paisley brought conflict to our door. Something you and unionism in general have yet to acknowledge.
Why do you think you know best about what happened in my community, or do you simply not care, other than the opinion you hold on everything is more important?
“Had the IRA killed people simply for being protestant MT, my community would have rejected them outright.”
Your community did reject them. And the IRA did kill people simply for being Protestant.
But there is a deeply disturbing subtext to your comment: you think it’s OK to murder people so long as you don’t do so based on the religion of the victim.
“Many loyalists have claimed to have been influenced by unionist politicians and I think there has been enough evidence that state forces directed loyalists in the 70s including the instruction to kill innocent Catholics as a strategy that I simply do not accept your views that what could be considered war crimes was one sided.”
Enough evidence? I’m not aware of any evidence that ‘state forces directed loyalists in the 70s including the instruction to kill innocent Catholics as a strategy’. Could you point me to all this evidence?
“Conflict is a disgusting waste of human life and to try to demonise killings on one side just to justify killings the other is not something I can agree with you on.”
I don’t demonise killings on one side just to justify killings on the other. Unlike you I’m against all murders regardless of who carried them out.
“The conflict was wrong in the first place and no killing in it was justified, fight or flight is simply human nature.”
Then why do you champion the PIRA monsters?
“What are you basing this assertion on MT?”
You made the assertion. The onus is on you to provide evidence of these requests.
“My community supported the IRA”
The Catholic community opposed the IRA.
I have never claimed it was ok to kill anyone.
It is you who believes conflict and wars can be justified and that killings by one side are ok.
I believe unionism is rotten to the core and has not moved on from the hate filled sectarian and bigoted political cult that started the conflict in the first place.
If there is no evidence of wrong doing, why is britain refusing to provide access to essential information to legal teams of so many victims of state terror?
There is plenty of evidence and both states know it well.
And if the Catholic community opposed the IRA as you say, then explain to me why loyalists deliberately targeted innocent Catholics. Surely that would make no sense.
Why do you champion the british forces monsters?
“I have never claimed it was ok to kill anyone.
It is you who believes conflict and wars can be justified and that killings by one side are ok.”
You regularly express support for – and recently even gratitude to – the PIRA death squads.
“If there is no evidence of wrong doing, why is britain refusing to provide access to essential information to legal teams of so many victims of state terror?”
Nobody said there is no evidence of wrong doing.
I take it from your failure to answer that you cannot point to any evidence that “‘state forces directed loyalists in the 70s including the instruction to kill innocent Catholics as a strategy’”
“And if the Catholic community opposed the IRA as you say, then explain to me why loyalists deliberately targeted innocent Catholics. Surely that would make no sense.”
You would need to ask the loyalists. I believe they claim it was to instill terror into PIRA host communities to put pressure on PIRA to stop.
“Why do you champion the british forces monsters?”
I don’t.
MT, the PIRA whether you like it or not, prevented the continuation of mass displacement of catholics at the hands of unionist thugs, brought onto the streets en masse by a unionist firebrand and backed up with b specials together they killed totally innocent civilians for absolutely nothing.
Of course they have my gratitude, I hope a future northern Ireland state shall in time issue medals for them to their families.
“You would need to ask the loyalists.”
But I have asked loyalists MT, I’ve spoken with many of them throughout the 80s and early 90s.
They told me they were told to join the police and army reserves to receive weapons training before completing their membership of loyalist paramilitaries.
There was no direct relationship with the RUC and loyalist groups in general, there were RUC members who were also members of loyalist groups though, and they brought billy wright about in landrovers to avoid check points to and from assassinations.
There should be evidence in phone logs of phone calls from RUC stations to pubs where billy wright would take them that correspond with assassinations he carried out. Ralph hewitts is one such phone they would have used.
As for being instructed to kill innocent catholics, that was not told to me directly.
It is a claim made by loyalists I have read about, as is anything relating to the events in the 70s which happened before I would have understood what was going on.
“I still remember the lines of landrovers slowly moving up the road, one after one until we were locked in with landrovers lining the road facing the estate, and soldiers getting out and pointing rifles down into the estate.”
Did it never occur to you that these raids were in response to the PIRA terror campaign? And did you not notice that once the terror campaign was stopped so too did the raids?
“Did it never occur to you that these raids were in response to the PIRA terror campaign? And did you not notice that once the terror campaign was stopped so too did the raids?”
The PIRA were a response to mainstream unionism attacking my community for seeking civil rights, unionist politicians encouraging loyalists to engage in violence and the british army joining in. Thousands of catholic families lost their homes.
Had unionism not started the conflict, thousands of families would not have suffered.
Unionism has a lot to answer for, but has yet to even acknowledge its past.
Unionist refusal to accept the truth of their actions that started the conflict is not something we can move on from.
The truth has to come out.
“Did it never occur to you that these raids were in response to the PIRA terror campaign? And did you not notice that once the terror campaign was stopped so too did the raids?”
“The PIRA were a response to mainstream unionism attacking my community for seeking civil rights, unionist politicians encouraging loyalists to engage in violence and the british army joining in. Thousands of catholic families lost their homes. Had unionism not started the conflict, thousands of families would not have suffered. Unionism has a lot to answer for, but has yet to even acknowledge its past. Unionist refusal to accept the truth of their actions that started the conflict is not something we can move on from.The truth has to come out.”
That’s a ‘no’, then.
“So you accept that they do routinely condemn such crimes even though they apparently see them as the good guys?”
Where did I say I accepted that?
Michael,do you know what a question mark is?
Stop hedging
Do they routinely condemn loyalist crimes or do they not?
jessica
The way you harangue people with personal attacks is just a form of bullying.
I hope you don’t treat your employees in the same way.
“Odd that the police brought more prosecutions against loyalists than they did republicans, even though loyalists committed fewer crimes, isn’t it? When they were ‘working hand in hand’ with them. Or maybe you’re exaggerating?”
I would like to see the evidence for that M.T. How do you explain republicans took up more space/blocks in long kesh than unionist paramilitaries?
Remember Kitsons handbook; the occupier will strive to project a semblance of ‘law and order’ in order to undermine allegations and accusations of its enemy, thus enabling the occupier to continue its objective of reducing support from the community within which its enemy emanates. I am sure you recognise this deviousness M.T.
“I would like to see the evidence for that M.T. How do you explain republicans took up more space/blocks in long kesh than unionist paramilitaries?”
The evidence is in the da Silva report and Steve Bruce’s the Red Hand.
Bruce provides a table of numbers charged with murder from 1981 to 1987 and notes: ‘very similar numbers of loyalists and republicans were charged with murder but the republicans killed 386 people while loyalists killed only 69’. He cites Ed Moloney, writing in 1982 that ‘the RUC’s conviction rate for republican murders was between 50 and 60 per cent while that for loyalists was between 90 and 100 per cent’.
Da Silva notes re 1988-89 that ‘the success rate in charging loyalist terrorists was disproportionately high’. He recited 271 loyalists charged with terrorist offences and 412 republicans, yet republicans were responsible for three times as many murders.
Da Silva also notes police successes in seizing loyalist weapons.
Da Silva was satisfied ‘that intelligence operations led by the Security Service and RUC Special Branch played a significant part in effectively nullifying the terrorist threat from the UDA in certain geographical areas in the late 1980s [the exception was the West Belfast UDA]. Intelligence was also critical to the successes achieved by the security forces in seizing arms during this period’.
Da Silva says: ‘It is important to note that the authorities were taking significant action against loyalist terrorists during the late 1980s. I have no doubt that the action taken by the security forces did frustrate loyalist terrorists and significantly reduce their operational capacity in Northern Ireland as a whole. Any attempt to crudely describe loyalist terrorists as simply ‘state-sponsored forces’ is in my view untenable and fundamentally at odds with a substantial body of contemporary evidence and the historical context of the relationship between loyalists and the security forces during this period’.
To be honest, there is not a lot in your post MT, that I would have any problem believing.
The British security forces were pretty much unbound by law or controls when the conflict started and managed the loyalist groups directly over the early years.
Robert Nairac was the most extreme element in this group and he was responsible for by far the worst acts of terror during the conflict.
Loyalists were directed to kill innocent Catholics to turn the community against the IRA.
Billy Hanna who had a habit of phoning his handlers to confirm orders before carrying them out caused concern about leaving a trail of evidence and Nairac had Jackson bump him off to take over the mid ulster UVF.
Jacksons unit also murdered an RUC officer who was getting too close.
Together they carried out the Dublin Monaghan bombings.
During the 1975 ceasefiles, Nairac did not want them to succeed, his colleagues have reported that he wanted to escalate the conflict to bring the SAS into the mix.
He is believed to have been behind a string of attacks to end the ceasefires and which succeeded in brining the SAS into the conflict, including the Reavey and O’Dowd killings and the Kingsmill Massacre.
By the 1980s, the british changed direction and embarked on a criminalisation policy.
It would make sense that they would scale back and put more distance between themselves and loyalists who continued to target and kill innocent Catholics.
I don’t find it hard to believe at all that they would have a high arrest rate among loyalists, they didn’t have to worry about covering their tracks before, it was covered up for them. Plus its not like they were a brainy lot.
“The British security forces were pretty much unbound by law or controls when the conflict started and managed the loyalist groups directly over the early years.”
What is your evidence for this claim?
“Loyalists were directed to kill innocent Catholics to turn the community against the IRA.”
What is your evidence for this?
I know very well what a question mark is.
And the answer is no.
I thought my several posts prior to this made that clear but it’s obvious from your responses that you are not fully reading or taking in what I’m saying.
This is gonna get quite boring, very quickly if I’m gonna have to repeat myself.
gio, MT and only a few other pro union posters here have no interest in reality, only their views matter, they have no first hand experience of most of the things they talk about and ignore those of us who do.
Where they face opinion that goes against their views, the turn to obtuse, mind numbing vagueness or to pointless questions to frustrate the reader and make the conversation turn as nauseating as possible.
May be best just to ignore them when they go this route Michael.
Michael
I am just trying to get it clear.
So you are saying no to the question,’do unionist politicians routinely condemn loyalist crimes.’
That surprises me. It is not the impression I have got over the years.
Why don’t they just come out and say as Jude claims they believe, ‘these are the good guys’? It would surely be a vote winner.
Gio, you seem to believe unionist politicians routinely condemn loyalist crimes, and perhaps they do.
Can you tell us the last time you are aware off that unionist politicians condemned loyalist crimes in general?
If it is as frequent as you make out, you should have plenty of examples.
If unionist politicians condemned UDA crimes, they why would they support the head of the UDA being head of Charter NI and being in control of millions of public purse money.
Surely that goes against your claim that they do not see loyalists such as the UDA chief as being good guys?
But as you well know, actions speak louder than words and giving a UDA chief control over millions of pounds would mean a lot more than simply claiming he was a good guy.
You obviously agree that they are good guys or you would not be defending them so vigorously.
jessica
This from last year took me 30 seconds to find:
“Last night DUP MLA for South Belfast Jimmy Spratt said the party has a “consistent record of condemning all terrorism whether it was yesterday or 40 years ago”.
“There is no place in our society for the commemoration of those who took innocent life. All such acts of glorification only serve to confuse this generation,” he said.
“Paramilitaries were a scourge on their communities. No-one should look on those who were involved in murder as being heroic.”
No doubt there are plenty more,but your constant personal abuse bullying and misrepresentation leaves me reluctant to engage with you.
To suggest I think loyalist paramilitaries are ‘good guys’ is deceitful and ignorant even for you.
First of all gio, nowhere in your post is criminality by loyalists even mentioned never mind condemned.
Once again, you leap to defend the unionist position, bereft of evidence and with as much zealously as the MT himself.
You both have a lot in common.
For info, usually when unionists refer to terrorism, they are referring only to the actions of the IRA and are not including killings on their side. But then you know that, as it is the exact same position you hold yourself.
You unionists are free to commemorate all of your combatants in the conflict here as the UDR statue in Lisburn demonstrates. The commemorations unionism considers to be glorification, are commemorations of IRA volunteers.
You could well be in the DUP yourself gio, you appear to have all the desirable traits.
While the official party line may be “these paramilitaries are a scourge on our communities” the actions and often the words of politicians is frequently in contrast to that.
I think I’ve made that clear in what I’ve been discussing.
When you start a question with “So you accept..” or “Are you saying…” suggests that I have previously accepted or said something when I clearly havnt.
“Last night DUP MLA for South Belfast Jimmy Spratt said the party has a “consistent record of condemning all terrorism whether it was yesterday or 40 years ago”.
‘All terrorism’. It depends on what or how Jimmy defines ‘terrorism’ isn’t that right Gio?
Btw, if you were genuine about all of us getting along with each other then you’d be better paid telling people to not neccessarily judge people by their words rather their actions. For example, the DUP is ‘opposed to all terrorism’ but regularly lends credence to unionist terrorists by granting funds to them, why? Reward for their efforts? Rewards for their continued loyalty? Dee stitt isn’t the only one that doesn’t add up.
jessica
You have said I consider loyalist paramilitaries to be ‘good guys’.
That is a lie,
You say frequently I am a unionist.
That is a lie.
You are simply a liar jessica
“You are simply a liar jessica”
I may not be perfect but I don’t tell lies gio
Michael
Questions not statements.
Trying in vain to stick to the point here,no-one has provided any evidence that Unionists in general see loyalist paramilitaries as ‘the good guys’.
.
Just like you have provided zero evidence that unionist politicians condemn loyalists (lets stick with the UDA) for criminality.
Also you have not responded as to how the DUP could possibly support millions in public funding being managed by the current leader of a currently very active criminal gang (as described by the PSNI), the UDA if they condemn the actions of said organisation.
You are ignoring evidence in the form of actions, based on seeking evidence that a unionist politician has used the term ‘the good guys’.
That is not turning a blind eye to not only the criminality of the UDA, or the fact the DUP support them and obviously have very close ties with them, but it really shows the lengths you would go to, to defend unionism.
You are possibly the most vocal supporter of everything bad about unionism on this site.
What are you talking about now Gio?
If you haven’t understood my stance from my several posts by now you never will.
I suspect you don’t want to understand as it leads to an uncomfortable truth.
M.T, what’s that oul saying about statistics?
If you have more time on your hands give us a break down of all the unionist terrorist charges and sentences. If it’s anything like the sentences a handful of official British state murderers got eg Thain,clegg etc and did jail time over, it should tell a tale.
And remember Kitsons handbook, especially the art of black operations. Devious stuff them British agencies get up to. No better example of British deviousness when they shot Brian Robinson(unionist terrorist). That allowed the Brits to claim that there was no truth to republican allegations that the state was taking sides, ‘sure look, we killed one of them loyalist didn’t we’. Lmfao
“M.T, what’s that oul saying about statistics? If you have more time on your hands give us a break down of all the unionist terrorist charges and sentences. If it’s anything like the sentences a handful of official British state murderers got eg Thain,clegg etc and did jail time over, it should tell a tale. And remember Kitsons handbook, especially the art of black operations. Devious stuff them British agencies get up to. No better example of British deviousness when they shot Brian Robinson(unionist terrorist). That allowed the Brits to claim that there was no truth to republican allegations that the state was taking sides, ‘sure look, we killed one of them loyalist didn’t we’. Lmfao”
When confronted with evidence that challenges your biased views you simply dismiss it and then resort to deflection.
I’m not in the least surprised. Informed discussion is beyond you.
M.T
Eh?
What about Kitson? Let’s hear your unbiased views mo chara………
http://m.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/northern-ireland-first-minister-arlene-foster-refuses-to-back-calls-for-uda-boss-dee-stitt-to-quit-charter-ni-35223489.html
Have you been living under a rock?
These are the same Unionist politicians that fought like tigers to get the £1.7 million of public money handed across to a self-confessed UDA man – the same UDA that was at the same time hounding a young man to a gruesome death over a £600 drugs debt.
The same Unionist politicians who repeatedly ”accidentally” turn up at Loyalist commemorations to sectarian lunatics like Joe Bratty and Brian Robinson.
The same Unionist politicians that milked the Twaddell stand-off and Fleg protests for everything they were worth, and used fascistic street-violence to muscle back East Belfast from the Alliance.
The two sides of Unionism and Loyalism are inextricably linked, and mutually dependent. Paisley started the journey, Robinson embraced it, and Arlene is equally shameless about it. We, the public, now pay for sectarian Bonfires. We pay for flutes. We subsidise the Orange Order. We pick up the tab for the extra Policing of contentious parades. We find and invent jobs for the ”community activists” that are given a free Red Hand to do whatever they like.
If Unionist politicians thought that the Loyalist paramilitaries were ”bad”. they could end these subsidies to Sectarianism overnight at the stroke of a pen. They clearly don’t think they are ”bad”.
“I can’t see any evidence for this claim”
You will if you take off MT’s blinkers that you borrowed Gio.
Wasn’t it the UDA that helped with the Unionist strike in 1970’s, which involved many Unionist politicians? Its well known that Unionist politicians have sat with the UDA, even at the time when they were actively engaged in mass sectarian murder. Indeed Unionist politicians to this day STILL sit with the UDA, despite the PSNI informing us they are still involved in drug dealing, murder, human trafficking, etc. They were also regularly standing with UVF members at Twaddell. Indeed BBC Journalist Tara Mills slammed Mike Nesbitt for his hypocrisy live on TV. Ulster Resistance, the DUP’s very own paramilitary, even gave the UDA weapons which were used in over 100 sectarian murders. Peter Robinson is even on video defending UDA prisoners and even representing them. I could go on.
Gio, we’re not fleg protestors, I just want to remind you of that.
“Unionist politicians are most definitely reluctant, frightened even, to face down these gangs but that is a long way from seeing them as good guys”
Its funny how when they were frightened of the IRA they were stamping up and down demanding their complete destruction, even setting up their own paramilitaries in the process. But when it comes to Loyalists….according to Gio…..they are “frightened”…..not scared enough to sit with them for decades or defend them though…..
“Maybe there was some of that during the troubles but i doubt if it holds true now”
Yeah, and Arlene Foster is a First Minister for all…..
Ryan
Just like Jude you are reaching back 50 years in your efforts to find evidence.
Arlene Foster was a child in the 70s for goodness sake.
Your point about Unionists having a different attitude to Republican paramilitaries is just silly..
They were never going to lose any votes by condemning the IRA now were they?
And you have not explained why they do not come out and say the loyalist paramilitaries were the’good guys’.Surely a vote winner if the PUL community was as full of bigotry as is often claimed about here.
Unionism gave birth to the UDA. In many ways Unionism through its actions in the 1960s gave birth to the IRA (the one who fought the recent conflict not the Dublin led one known as official ira).
Unionism used working class protestants as cannon fodder in their relentless pursuit of superiority in Ireland.
Paisley made it a religious holy war to add the extra dimension of intransigence and determination that comes when sectarian divides are between god and the anti christ.
When the british forces pulled back from directly directing loyalist gangs, the DUP encouraged gun running and inspired continuation even getting directly involved to show the way before retracting back into political cover only to save their hides and leave the incarceration to the more poorly educated working class protestants now working solo with less support from the british forces.
Loyalism is Unionisms baby. Not surprising its actions still today or lack of them when it comes to removing it from society are virtually non existent.
But it has worked.
We have examples of progressive unionists on this blog who remain blind or worse indifferent to what is truly going on in their own communities and in the name of unionism in general.
They think they understand unionism better than those who still suffer over unionist intransigence even though the majority of which are from their own communities but too afraid to speak out. Many of whom would if allowed the free will to choose to live in shared peace on this island.
But even as you say, when their elected representatives stand shoulder to shoulder with them on flag protests or over marching issues when unionism requires some muscle to lend weight to their graduated responses against the parades commission or anything that goes against unionist supremacy, they still don’t truly see the connection.
Why is what it so plainly obvious to me and many others so invisible to others.
I guess when the truth is too hard to bear and goes against everything you believe in, it is easier to close your eyes to it and instead adopt your own version of reality more acceptable to your outlook.
If they don’t believe me, they should go into their own communities and ask their own people. I have done. There will be no reconciliation without the truth.
The only point where I would differ with you is in thinking that unionism and loyalism are in any way separate entities – to me they are the same thing using flags of convenience.
But how would they operate so comfortably except for the fact that Sinn Fein give them political cover to do so.
If Sinn Fein told their mates in the DUP that such shenanigans were unacceptable, and that they would crash the Stormont executive if the UDA and UVF were not disbanded, things might change somewhat.
But with Quisling Marty McGuinness running Sinn Fein, they seem to have lost all backbone, and we are back to being second class subjects!
I agree with most of what you say Jessica. When it comes to reconciliation I don’t think we’re anywhere near genuine reconciliation, I always remember the term Gerry Adams used: “We don’t have peace, we have a cessation of violence”. That’s proven, not for the first time, by the UDA buying new guns from Manchester drug gangs. The PSNI/Westminsters refusal to tackle these loyalist groups, turning a blind eye to their activities, is simply modern day Collusion.
Remember when the ‘Dublin led’ IRA/ Sinn Féin were the subject of ridicule by the newly born Provisional Alliance. They were despised because they attended Leinster House, they attended Stormont, they condemned their dissidents,they supported the RUC, they recognised that the British state up here had to be negotiated out of existence not bombed, they attended Armistice Day ceremonies etc etc. Now where does the Provisional Alliance measure against these yardsticks of Republican (never, never ,never) principles? I note, Jessica, that you refer to the Provos as the ones who fought the latest conflict. I note you didn’t say won. A blind man could see that winners don’t surrender their arms and turn on their allies.
Only a fool would think there are winners of conflicts Fiosrach but what I witnessed was not attempts to win but to live in our own land.
I was but a child at the time you refer to, but based on what I have seen growing up when my own community came under attack from the RUC/british army, and the desperation to get the message to the IRA (as I remember it, yes the provos). Mothers grabbing their children in from the streets, bin lids clanging out the warning signal, kids piling out onto the streets in excitement. Not living in the kilwilkie estate I had friends in, I often found myself stranded and basically where I should not have been, sometimes my mother would have spotted the lines of land rovers and walked through them and across the fields that became no mans lands during the rioting and gun battles to get me and bring me home, other times when she was unaware of what was happening I would have been right in the middle of burning cars and busses overturned at the bottom of the levin road when youths blocked the roads to put up barricades to protect from army bullets.
I remember vividly the land rovers inching across the fields in lines with rows of RUC in riot shields slowly walking behind them, the army snipers behind the landrovers, rifles pointing towards the estate providing cover, occasionally exchanging fire with IRA men shooting from the path between two rows of terraced housing.
I will never forget sitting on the mural wall when one IRA man put down his gun and lifted me off the wall as rubber bullets were flying past, he said it was not safe there and set me down, picked up his rifle and ran back around the back of the houses again.
I remember being right on the front row of the estate, RUC charging past, shooting rubber bullets at short range at anyone in the road charging into the youths wielding their batons and clearing the streets so they could come in and destroy homes looking for guns.
Thankfully those days are gone and I consider the IRA to have had the courage to acknowledge this and to leave the stage without the need to be declared the winner.
As for dissidents, these are not allies.
They are not even republicans and are criminal scum bags who want to maintain fear and control over their communities, they are no different from the loyalist paramilitaries that still blight unionist communities.
How many of these dissident do you know Fiosrach. How many have you debated with.
I have debated with them over the years following the GFA, and they are brainless idiots bereft of common sense who saw their opportunity to make themselves military style leaders, thinking they are someone.
I will never forget being asked to leave the table, as we have business to attend to. In a pub facing a police station where listening devices publically visible can tune in to every conversation.
Geniuses.
Brtiain could wipe out dissidents over night if they chose to Fiosrach.
Unionism wants so desperately for dissidents to restart the conflict. It will mean they don’t have to face up to the reality that unionism started the conflict in the first place.
It will prolong the cover up of the british states true role in the conflict.
It will ensure the funding remains available to maintain minority control in the north.
No, if dissidents were truly republicans, they would negotiate the release of all state evidence revealing the truth to the world, the resolution of legacy issues and the removal of MI5 in return for their complete decommissioning and disbandment.
I don’t give a shit about past political differences, I base my opinions on my own life experiences.
Just asking as I thought I detected animosity in your post to the IRA. I wish I had your ladylike turn of phrase.
you must have great faith in the ruc/psni and the british army when your calling for(complete)decommissioning.
“you must have great faith in the ruc/psni and the british army when your calling for(complete)decommissioning.”
I not only have no faith in dissidents billy, I despise them.
But you, as someone who looks towards Mrs May to sort out his immigration problems, don’t talk to me about my faith in british law enforcement.
i never asked had you faith in people who dissent from british rule.swerving on to immigrants doesnt explain your faith in british law enforcement as you call it.
John Stevens has said that during his inquiries they examined 11 murders. They arrested 219 loyalists and discovered that 213 were British agents. Go figure
It’s a disgrace; every paramilitary mural in the land should be blanked out, all paramilitary flags taken down (fines for those putting them up) and any band or stall found selling paramilitary memorabilia should be fined on the spot.
But it is ok for us to be ruled by a state who’s official forces pro-actively directed loyalist murders, encouraging the murders of innocent Catholics known to have no involvement just to turn opinion against the IRA. A strategy continued by loyalist paramilitaries long after their British handlers were pulled away.
It is ok for us to be ruled by a state who would risk the peace process to hide all evidence proving its true involvement in the conflict to maintain its post criminalisation policeman role between two warring factions and cover up its ruthless hand in many cold blooded murders on both sides.
Nice thought AG, but you are still not seeing the bigger picture.
There are no paramilitaries any more, only armed criminal gangs, the majority of which remain paid state agents some still protected from the PSNI by british security.
You really don’t understand just what truly went on here at all do you AG?
“But it is ok for us to be ruled by a state who’s official forces pro-actively directed loyalist murders, encouraging the murders of innocent Catholics known to have no involvement just to turn opinion against the IRA”
Two different topics. I understand you want to turn everything into an Anne Cadwallader investigation but this is not a suitable ‘in’.
“It is ok for us to be ruled by a state who would risk the peace process to hide all evidence proving its true involvement in the conflict to maintain its post criminalisation policeman role between two warring factions and cover up its ruthless hand in many cold blooded murders on both sides.”
Hmmmmmmm, “WHY DO UNIONISTS NEVER CONDEMN LOYALISM WHY DO UNIONISTS NEVER CONDEMN LOYALISM!!!”
AG condemns loyalism: “WHAT ABOUT…. WHAT ABOUT…. WHAT ABOUT????”
“Nice thought AG, but you are still not seeing the bigger picture.”
I understand the bigger picture perfectly well but I have principles to adhere to and the intolerance of illegal paramilitaries and criminal gangs is one of them.
This might upset you but I’m sorry I’m not going to change it.
“There are no paramilitaries any more, only armed criminal gangs, the majority of which remain paid state agents some still protected from the PSNI by british security.”
And if that’s true it’s a disgrace and furthermore I’d love some proof on the matter to boot.
“You really don’t understand just what truly went on here at all do you AG?”
Just because I don’t share your view on things doesn’t make me ignorant, I heard that argument all my childhood from people who resented reasoned points of view.
I have never asked you or anyone to condemn loyalism and I never will AG.
In fact I understand why and how loyalists got involved in the conflict and have no issue with that. They were defending their communities from republican attacks in a conflict and following instructions they got from official british security forces channels.
Once conflict starts it takes on a life of its own and hatred and fear make people do terrible things.
Some choose to condemn the person who pulls the trigger, I don’t and I hold no grudges against any loyalists.
I have only ever expressed condemnation against the british state for their role in allowing and supporting unionism to start the conflict in the first place and for their disgusting behaviour in encouraging and prolonging the violence here.
British rule will never be acceptable here over this. Not ever.
But the conflict is over and thankfully my community has moved on, though there is still a small number of dissident fools we have to put up with.
Loyalism has persisted in greater numbers and is more of an issue in unionist communities due to their continued support for confrontation and refusal to embrace reconciliation. These are unionist problems and I could not care less whether you condemn anyone about them or not.
In my eyes your community is getting exactly what it deserves.
” These are unionist problems and I could not care less whether you condemn anyone about them or not.”
For someone who doesn’t care about my condemnation you sure wrote a lot of words.
“For someone who doesn’t care about my condemnation you sure wrote a lot of words.”
Not sure what point you are making AG
I write a lot of words because I resent unionism holding back progress on this island over its own selfish interests a lot.
I resent unionist intransigence and the fact it would risk peace and tolerate another generation to suffer over maintaining british rule in Ireland a lot.
I resent the fact that even today, unionism still drives a wedges between the people on this small island.
In my opinion, unionism remains a scourge on this island that through its own stubbornness refuses to build bridges on this island.
“Not sure what point you are making AG”
The point is that you attack unionists for not condemning x, y or z but when I do it you still find something to moan about.
” I write a lot of words because I resent unionism holding back progress on this island over its own selfish interests a lot.”
You have written about the violence and intransigence of unionism, flegs, collusion, all of which I have also criticised but still you use my agreement as a platform for a rant.
I think you don’t WANT unionists to see your point of view, it’d disorientate you.
“I resent unionist intransigence and the fact it would risk peace and tolerate another generation to suffer over maintaining british rule in Ireland a lot.
I resent the fact that even today, unionism still drives a wedges between the people on this small island.”
And nationalism (of your variety) prevents people from making informed decisions about a united Ireland.
If people like you can dissuade people from the notion of a united Ireland then really how useful are you to ‘the cause’?
‘In my opinion, unionism remains a scourge on this island that through its own stubbornness refuses to build bridges on this island.”
Ditto embittered nationalism.
“The point is that you attack unionists for not condemning x, y or z but when I do it you still find something to moan about.”
You have written about the violence and intransigence of unionism, flegs, collusion, all of which I have also criticised but still you use my agreement as a platform for a rant. I think you don’t WANT unionists to see your point of view, it’d disorientate you.”
I will say again, I have never attacked unionists for not condemning x, y or z, and I never will.
When the british state release the evidence they are hiding behind national security, only then the true extent of british involvement in the murder of innocent unarmed Catholics, their direct control over loyalist paramilitaries in the 70s and the fact it was Robert Nairac who ensured the conflict did not end in 1975 but escalated which made it endure far longer than it should have done.
I want unionism to support making the truth known and to stop trying to vilify the IRA for their involvement in a conflict that they did not start.
Condemnation is pointless, what is needed and what I want from everyone on this island is tolerance, understanding and honest reconciliation.
I understand Irish unionism very well.
That does not mean I understand every person who prefers to be part of the UK, because that is not what unionism is.
Unionism was always about self preservation of protestant domination in Ireland, about the difference between native Irish and the Irish british.
Had unionism supported home rule, Ireland would have remained part of the UK so to say their objection was simply over remaining with the union is not something I can accept.
I understand that it is what you would like it to be, because it is a hell of a lot better than the truth.
Unfortunately, I cannot live with that narrative, therefore we will remain at loggerheads until the truth is released and legacy issues are properly dealt with.
Simple condemnation or criticism means nothing while the truth is locked away for decades and republicans are vilified and not allowed to honour the memory of their dead volunteers who in many of our eyes were victims of the conflict started by unionism and regardless of their actions in the dirty conflict, who’s families deserve to have their memories respected and acknowledge in their own community if that is what the people there want.
How do you think it feels to republicans to be refused such respect, but to have to watch public honouring of the british forces in all conflicts including bloody sunday in derry or the ballymurphy massacre in Belfast being splashed over our screens taking place on a shared space in Ireland and with the participation of an Taoiseach who at the same time is part of the attacks on republicans. If that is what a united Ireland is to look like I want no part of it.
“But why is it such british only memorials are ok in ireland, that you claim simply represent the ordinary soldiers but ask us to simply ignore that murders the british state committed in ireland,”
I never once asked you to ignore it. After reading ‘Lethal Allies’ I’m most supportive of seeing something done.
“I never once asked you to ignore it. After reading ‘Lethal Allies’ I’m most supportive of seeing something done.”
I welcome that, as I am sure the majority of RUC officers who played no role in the conflict would be.
The truth will hurt many in the echelons of power and perhaps a Nobel peace prize may need to be handed back, but it will help clear the memory of a greater number of RUC and british soldiers who did not agree with that was done in their name.
There was a failure by the british to monitor and manage their security forces who were given a free reign to act out of uniform and basically given a carte blanche approach to the conflict which only made things worse.
I don’t want revenge on britain, I want them to acknowledge this and to build bridges between our people who are closely entwined anyway.
I want a better relationship with britain I support an Irexit and to back britain in getting a new trade deal with other nations, preferably including all parts of these islands rather than allowing the UK to fall apart, to help reform it and to pull all parts closer together.
I want a new Ireland that is very much part of day to day life with all parts of these islands and that will deliver what is best for all of our people.
I just don’t know how to achieve it and I don’t believe it is possible through vilification and intolerance of potentially unpalatable truths or possible without an end of our unionist / nationalist labels.
“It’s a disgrace; every paramilitary mural in the land should be blanked out, all paramilitary flags taken down (fines for those putting them up) and any band or stall found selling paramilitary memorabilia should be fined on the spot.”
Couldn’t agree more. And ban terror parades. Glorifying terrot should be an offence. Sadly neither the DUP nor PSF would ever agree to this.
Who’s PSF?
“Who’s PSF?”
Are you being serious?
Yes.
I’ve never seen any PSF on any ballot paper.
Who are these people that could make glorifying terrorism an offence?
And cenotaphs to state terrorism. Let’s all move forward; nobody should be left behind M.T.
“I am sure your British soldier friend would’ve did the same if ordered to. Get off your high horse. Btw, Mairéad Farrell was ‘innocent’ when British army terrorists put several slugs into her body, wouldn’t you agree? The perpetrators were well rewarded and praised, go figure.”
He probably would have, thankfully he wasn’t.
Furthermore, given that there were something like 100 000 military personnel that passed through NI in 3 decades then the statistics would be much higher.
My horse doesn’t need to be high.
I abhor wrong doing and would love to see any and all soldiers, police and politicians prosecuted for any and all trespasses, likewise I would like the sacrifice of those who did not trespass to be commemorated in a civilised fashion.
Fat chance in Northern Ireland but as far as ideals go they’re hardly aloof.
And ban paramilitary wreaths from cenotaphs.
And what about banning cenotaphs, Am Ghobsmacht? After all they commend British armed forces terrorism? Nope? It is perhaps true that Irish republicans don’t understand unionism but do unionists understand Irish republicanism?
For the record, Irish republicans care little for unionist terrorist memorials, hell and easy about them, what we have more concerns about are British memorials commending, commemorating or whatever of British armed forces.
I agree completely WT.
I would have no issue with a loyalist memorials or gardens of remembrance in the shankhill for the UVF for example, but I do object to british, loyalist or even republican memorials being in shared spaced such as these cenotaphs.
If it is not reflective of the community in which it is located it is a symbol of division and insulting.
I find them insulting a symbol of superiority would like to see these removed out of all shared spaces entirely, they only encourage open divisions and unionist intransigence and need to go.
“And what about banning cenotaphs, Am Ghobsmacht? After all they commend British armed forces terrorism?”
No they don’t. They remember the war dead.
“No they don’t. They remember the war dead.”
In your biased opinion M.T. You’d need to look up the meaning of the word ‘terror’. Try Kitsons handbook,lest we forget.
“In your biased opinion M.T. You’d need to look up the meaning of the word ‘terror’. Try Kitsons handbook,lest we forget.”
It’s not my opinion, biased or otherwise: it’s objective fact. And I don’t need to look up the meaning of the word ‘terror’.
If you can list all the ones that specifically endorse terrorism then you’d have a point.
However, I trust you with the intelligence not to conflate such scenarios with those of ordinary soldiers who died doing things they didn’t want to do.
So, please, name all the memorials that specifically endorse British terrorism in Ireland as opposed to the memorials that commemorate the poor guys who lost their lives in some wretched manner.
“However, I trust you with the intelligence not to conflate such scenarios with those of ordinary soldiers who died doing things they didn’t want to do.
So, please, name all the memorials that specifically endorse British terrorism in Ireland as opposed to the memorials that commemorate the poor guys who lost their lives in some wretched manner.”
AG, if I told you that the vast majority of IRA were ordinary decent men and women, with families who regularly went to church, who were popular in their community and were anti violence who want the best for their children.
That many were ordinary IRA soldiers who died doing things they didn’t want to do.
I accept that there were those who enjoyed the power it gave them in their community and who did abuse this and treated people poorly if they questioned their authority. I doubt it would have been possible to take on the british army in a conflict that brought such trauma to our communities without such problems.
But why is it such british only memorials are ok in ireland, that you claim simply represent the ordinary soldiers but ask us to simply ignore that murders the british state committed in ireland, but when it comes to the IRA, there is zero tolerance of any memorials within our own communities or any narrative that does not vilify them?
I trust you have the intelligence to understand that will not be acceptable to many of us.
“But why is it such british only memorials are ok in ireland, that you claim simply represent the ordinary soldiers but ask us to simply ignore that murders the british state committed in ireland, but when it comes to the IRA, there is zero tolerance of any memorials within our own communities or any narrative that does not vilify them?”
Because the Provisional IRA was an illegitimate and illegal criminal organisation rejected by society and it is important that society does not tolerate any retrospective attempts to legitimise it.
“Because the Provisional IRA was an illegitimate and illegal criminal organisation rejected by society and it is important that society does not tolerate any retrospective attempts to legitimise it.”
Then it is equally important that every self respecting Irish person on this island and on this planet who supports the ideals of the Irish republic outlined in 1916 reject fully and unequivocally, all forms of British interference in Ireland, and that we do not tolerate any retrospective attempts to legitimise their activities past or present in our country.
“Then it is equally important that every self respecting Irish person on this island and on this planet who supports the ideals of the Irish republic outlined in 1916 reject fully and unequivocally, all forms of British interference in Ireland, and that we do not tolerate any retrospective attempts to legitimise their activities past or present in our country.”
There is no British interference. It’s not in the least important for any, never mind every, Irish person to reject NI’s membership of the UK. And it certainly doesn’t follow that society’s rejection of the PIRA means Irish people should reject NI’s membership. The reality is that the consensus in Ireland is to recognise and respect it.
PIRA no longer exists MT and I hope will never again be needed in any further conflicts in Ireland..
The british have just declared ownership of ALL of Lough Foyle, probably to give their submarines better access.
It would be a good spot for Trident 2 I guess, but sure that isn’t interference and unionists would love a british nuclear submarine site here.
I am sure it wouldn’t be hard for them to buy off either Fine Gael of Fianna Fail.
As for your understanding of the Irish people, I assure you that it is very important to me MT.
Others can speak for themselves and what will be, will be.
Wolfe Tone
“And what about banning cenotaphs, Am Ghobsmacht? After all they commend British armed forces terrorism?”
If you can find the cenotaphs that specifically commend terrorism in Ireland as opposed to simply remembering the war dead then I’m all up for hearing the individual case of each one.
“If you can find the cenotaphs that specifically commend terrorism in Ireland as opposed to simply remembering the war dead then I’m all up for hearing the individual case of each one.”
AG, if EVERY cenotaph represents ALL British soldiers in ALL conflicts, then EVERY cenotaph specifically commends terrorism in Ireland.
“AG, if EVERY cenotaph represents ALL British soldiers in ALL conflicts, then EVERY cenotaph specifically commends terrorism in Ireland.”
The cenotaphs specifically remember those servicemen named on them.
“If you can list all the ones that specifically endorse terrorism then you’d have a point.
However, I trust you with the intelligence not to conflate such scenarios with those of ordinary soldiers who died doing things they didn’t want to do.
So, please, name all the memorials that specifically endorse British terrorism in Ireland as opposed to the memorials that commemorate the poor guys who lost their lives in some wretched manner.”
Well Am Ghobsmacht I was wondering when your mask would slip. You were doing so well in being all moderate and all that but from your utterances above its plain you won’t tolerate or accept alternate point of view that has the audacity to suggest the British army is terrorism. Btw, narrowing it down to simply ‘terrorism in Ireland’ misses the point I.e British army have committed terrorism all over the world; they just dress it up better. I don’t want future generations in this country paying homage to such a fraud and lie.
When will the Poppy Day farce be knocked on the head? In a hundred years from now will they still be carrying out this blood ritual?
“British army have committed terrorism all over the world; they just dress it up better. I don’t want future generations in this country paying homage to such a fraud and lie.”
Cenotaphs don’t celebrate terrorism committed anywhere by the British Army or anyone else.
“Cenotaphs don’t celebrate terrorism committed anywhere by the British Army or anyone else.”
Britain celebrates the terrorism it has unleashed in many parts of the world, far too much in my opinion, but you are entitled to your point of view.
“Britain celebrates the terrorism it has unleashed in many parts of the world, far too much in my opinion, but you are entitled to your point of view.”
Where and when do these celebrations take place? I’m not aware of them.
“Where and when do these celebrations take place? I’m not aware of them.”
Are you telling me you have never seen a round of applause or television programs celebrating british veterans?
Or is it because they are not (at least not yet) holding street parties that you refuse to acknowledge it
Nearly every presenter on the BBC is wearing a poppy, yet on a recent visit to Glasgow, barely anyone on the city at all wore one at all.
Poppy fascism is a very accurate term to describe the celebration and glorification of the activities of the british forces that is being promoted relentlessly by the UK media.
There are too many social and even now sporting events that have been poisoned by the coercion of british militarism.
Forcing whole football teams, many of which have foreign nationals to don the poison plant on their shirts is deplorable. Was it UEFA that ruled it was a political symbol and was against sporting regulation to abuse players rights in this way?
We only need to look at the problems unjustifiably put on James McClean for refusing to wear one, and spoiling the celebration of british militancy at a sporting event. So much for keeping politics out of sport.
It is another example of british interference in Ireland that we don’t need.
You are not aware of anything that does not conform to your opinion that all Irish people support the north being under british rule, that ll Irish people support the actions of the british army, that all Irish people accept partition and reject Irish nationalism.
Though from the actions of both Fine Gael and Fianna Fail over the past few decades I can see why you would believe this.
I guess there is nothing I can say to change your mind, it will be up to the Irish people to prove one of us wrong.
“Are you telling me you have never seen a round of applause or television programs celebrating british veterans? Or is it because they are not (at least not yet) holding street parties that you refuse to acknowledge it Nearly every presenter on the BBC is wearing a poppy, yet on a recent visit to Glasgow, barely anyone on the city at all wore one at all. Poppy fascism is a very accurate term to describe the celebration and glorification of the activities of the british forces that is being promoted relentlessly by the UK media. There are too many social and even now sporting events that have been poisoned by the coercion of british militarism. Forcing whole football teams, many of which have foreign nationals to don the poison plant on their shirts is deplorable. Was it UEFA that ruled it was a political symbol and was against sporting regulation to abuse players rights in this way? We only need to look at the problems unjustifiably put on James McClean for refusing to wear one, and spoiling the celebration of british militancy at a sporting event. So much for keeping politics out of sport. It is another example of british interference in Ireland that we don’t need.”
I’m not asking about veterans being applauded or poppies. I’m asking about celebrations of terrorism. I take it from your deflecting answer that you can’t provide any evidence.
“You are not aware of anything that does not conform to your opinion that all Irish people support the north being under british rule, that ll Irish people support the actions of the british army, that all Irish people accept partition and reject Irish nationalism.”
I don’t hold any of those opinions. And given that I don’t conform to those opinions myself, clearly I’m aware that all Irish people do.
“I guess there is nothing I can say to change your mind, it will be up to the Irish people to prove one of us wrong.:
Change my mind about what?
“but from your utterances above its plain you won’t tolerate or accept alternate point of view that has the audacity to suggest the British army is terrorism.”
By that logic the ALL armies are terrorism and NONE should be commemorated.
I knew soldier from Glasgow based in Derry where he lost his hearing and best friend in a bomb attack.
Before they’d raid the houses of people whom they knew were innocent and were forced to store things he’d phone them up and ask them if they’d like any furniture or fixtures repaired.
He’d make a note of it and deliberately trash said fixtures so that they’d be replaced with new ones.
Now you’re telling me this man was a terrorist.
All armies engaged in conflict are engaging in terrorism, so yes. That is the resounding truth you will get from within the communities that they are terrorising.
Because these are usually overseas and out of sight out of mind, there is not widespread comprehension that these displays of declared support for ALL the actions of british military can be considered distasteful by many. I can accept the majority of the people in GB do not understand or even realise that they are causing any offense.
I do not support the principal of just war theory, there is no justification for conflict or mass murder under any guise and I believe the british army like many nations has committed many war crimes around the planet not least of all in Ireland.
I do however accept it is an unavoidable aspect of human nature and I have no issue with families and communities acknowledging the loved ones they lost in conflicts whether they were a combatant from any grouping or not, but I would not support public displays of support for any active armies, especially within the communities where they have committed atrocities and murdered people within those communities.
No part of britain meets that criteria, but to hold such public displays in any part of Ireland while we are still in a peace and reconciliation process should not take too much intelligence to see why that may not be palatable to everyone.
Try to imagine an IRA commemoration taking place in England, with the British PM appearing to lay a wreath, that was publically televised and where absolutely every single presenter was wearing Easter lilies for days if not weeks prior.
You talk about us understanding unionism down to the individual nuances within it.
But you refuse to even at least try to understand how many people in the catholic / nationalist / republican communities consider many of the past actions of the british state forces to be equally as abhorrent as any actions committed by republican or loyalist paramilitaries, perhaps even worse being a nation state that could have resolved the conflict much sooner but instead continues its covert cover up of its past actions and makes little effort at reconciliation.
It was the UVF remember who claimed the british state asked them to murder a classroom of primary school children in south Armagh around the time of the reavey, o dowd and kingsmill attacks when nairac wanted to end the ceasefires and escalate the conflict to bring in the sas.
The truth is AG, unionism wants society throughout these islands to publically and through the education system to condemn and vilify the IRA while ignoring unionisms role in starting the conflict as well as the true role played by the british state and to get behind our wee country of Northern Ireland and to accept its place within the united kingdom.
Unfortunately AG I simply cannot accept this and no united Ireland is worth it.
“All armies engaged in conflict are engaging in terrorism, so yes. That is the resounding truth you will get from within the communities that they are terrorising.
It is patently untrue to say that all armies engaged in conflict are engaging in terrorism.
“Because these are usually overseas and out of sight out of mind, there is not widespread comprehension that these displays of declared support for ALL the actions of british military can be considered distasteful by many.”
Cenotaphs do not declare support for any never mind all British military actions. They simply remember those servicemen who died.
“I do not support the principal of just war theory, there is no justification for conflict or mass murder under any guise and I believe the british army like many nations has committed many war crimes around the planet not least of all in Ireland.”
You are a liar because you regularly express support for mass murder by the PIRA.
“I do however accept it is an unavoidable aspect of human nature and I have no issue with families and communities acknowledging the loved ones they lost in conflicts whether they were a combatant from any grouping or not, but I would not support public displays of support for any active armies, especially within the communities where they have committed atrocities and murdered people within those communities.”
There are no such displays.
“No part of britain meets that criteria, but to hold such public displays in any part of Ireland while we are still in a peace and reconciliation process should not take too much intelligence to see why that may not be palatable to everyone.”
There are no such displays.
“Try to imagine an IRA commemoration taking place in England, with the British PM appearing to lay a wreath, that was publically televised and where absolutely every single presenter was wearing Easter lilies for days if not weeks prior.”
False equivalence again: trying to legitimise the PIRA death squads.
PS. Please stop misspelling ‘publicly’.
“Try to imagine an IRA commemoration taking place in England, with the British PM appearing to lay a wreath, that was publically televised and where absolutely every single presenter was wearing Easter lilies for days if not weeks prior. False equivalence again: trying to legitimise the PIRA death squads. ”
Well spotted MT, all these wreath laying exercises and the organised poppy fascism, just as you say, they could basically be seen as trying to legitimise the british army death squads that factually terrorised many Irish families.
That is exactly my point as to why they should not take place in Ireland.
And certainly not while britain still continues to publically cover them up.
But you know, it is actually quite incredible that a state can get away Scott free with such behaviour, not only sending out groups like the MRF and then FRU to terrorise communities, but to even today have the neck to lock evidence away for 40 years and leave so many families in continued anguish.
And everyone including the media just accepts it as normal.
What a totally fucked up country we live in, eh.
“Well spotted MT, all these wreath laying exercises and the organised poppy fascism, just as you say, they could basically be seen as trying to legitimise the british army death squads that factually terrorised many Irish families.”
No they couldn’t. There is no attempt to legitimise any death squads. They are acts of remembrance for those killed in war.
“That is exactly my point as to why they should not take place in Ireland.”
In that case your point is entirely invalid.
“And certainly not while britain still continues to publically cover them up”
I asked you to stop misspelling ‘publicly’.
No MT, you don’t see the equivalence because you are totally narrow minded, but that does not mean it is not there.
After all, when I made the comparison with Enda Kenny laying a wreath for british soldiers in northern Ireland with a british PM laying a wreath for IRA, you immediately spotted that it could be construed as showing legitimacy for their actions which you are quite entitled to disapprove off.
But whether you like it or not, there are people who similarly disapprove of the actions carried out by the british army in Ireland and who feel equally as disgusted by the actions of our so called Taoiseach.
I knew you would grasp it eventually.
Thank you for helping me to finally express it in a way the unionist mind can comprehend.
“No MT, you don’t see the equivalence because you are totally narrow minded, but that does not mean it is not there.”
Wrong. I don’t see the equivalence because there is none. I’m not narrow minded. On the contrary I am broad minded. That’s why I challenge the appalling narrow and dangerous views expressed here.
“After all, when I made the comparison with Enda Kenny laying a wreath for british soldiers in northern Ireland with a british PM laying a wreath for IRA, you immediately spotted that it could be construed as showing legitimacy for their actions which you are quite entitled to disapprove off.”
Indeed. And that’s why it doesn’t happen: because they aren’t equivalent.
“Thank you for helping me to finally express it in a way the unionist mind can comprehend.”
I’ve no idea what you’re referring to.
You are so narrow minded you wouldn’t notice MT or at least you would never admit to it., but you actually did get the point I was making.
“You are so narrow minded you wouldn’t notice MT or at least you would never admit to it.”
I’m not narrow minded in the least. You are: incapable of understanding never mind respecting ‘the other’, deeply sectarian and bitter.
“, but you actually did get the point I was making.”
What point was that?
“By that logic the ALL armies are terrorism and NONE should be commemorated.”
Nope. I am saying the British army is terrorism on a wide scale. And there is plenty of evidence of that. I am sure a person of your intelligence can agree to that fact.
Btw, the yarn about the part time conscientious objector/British soldier was touching. How did he know the people he was about to raid were ‘innocent’? Did he not tell his officer his views? Why would his unit want to raid an innocent party? Spread fear into innocent people’s lives(remember Kitsons handbook)? Perhaps they were raiding a unionist terrorist household? Perhaps that’s what he meant by ‘innocent’? If that’s the case then yes he is a terrorist too.
“By that logic the ALL armies are terrorism and NONE should be commemorated.”
“Nope. I am saying the British army is terrorism on a wide scale. And there is plenty of evidence of that. I am sure a person of your intelligence can agree to that fact.”
There is evidence of wrong doing by the British army and evidence of doing things properly by the British army, the ratio of which depends on a person’s own bias and agenda.
“Btw, the yarn about the part time conscientious objector/British soldier was touching. How did he know the people he was about to raid were ‘innocent’?”
He was a soldier, not an idiot. If you’re going to raid an old lady’s home for an arms cache then there’s a good chance she’s not a Provo QM.
“Did he not tell his officer his views?”
Dunno
“Why would his unit want to raid an innocent party?
Spread fear into innocent people’s lives(remember Kitsons handbook)? ”
To give them time to move the gear which would ruin their lives
“Perhaps they were raiding a unionist terrorist household?”
Perhaps he did on occasion, but from what he told me he didn’t extend them the same courtesy.
“Perhaps that’s what he meant by ‘innocent’?”
Doubtful, he hated loyalists and NI ‘unionism’.
“If that’s the case then yes he is a terrorist too.”
But if he trailed an innocent mother into a Monaghan/Louth bog and sunk a slug into the back of her skull he’d be a ‘freedom fighter’?
“There is evidence of wrong doing by the British army and evidence of doing things properly by the British army, the ratio of which depends on a person’s own bias and agenda.”
This is very true AG, though what you are referring to is, depending on someone’s point of view.
To assert as you have done, that anyone who considers the british army to have a larger degree of wrong doing to have an agenda is not only groundless but shows your own bias would be that the level of wrong doing would be at the lower end of the scale and that you hold the typical unionist bigotry and intransigence towards people with points of view that differ from their own on this subject.
Whether you like it or not, there are many, many people in Ireland who’s experience of the british army is very different from your own.
Likewise can be said of the IRA.
Both have been involved in conflict and both have carried out appalling acts, but both also have good people.
You say there is evidence of wrong doing. That is correct and most was done by specific units of the british army, MRF, FRU, Parachute Regiment.
Then there is those who ran these units going right the way to parliament who not only allowed it, but protected them and still today cover up for them.
How do you expect us to agree with you on the ratio of wrong doing when still today there is cover up and denial of evidence?
The RUC routinely destroyed evidence at their request, obeyed orders to stay out of the way when operations such as the kingsmill massacre were taking place – taking 30 mins to get to a site 5 mins away.
Even when wrong doing is acknowledged, names are protected and no-one in the media says boo about it.
The pursuit of truth is a mountain to climb.
Well, despite their best efforts, evidence is still gradually slipping out.
Sooner or later the truth about the actions of british army units such as MRF and FRU will come out, but while the british state continues to block all efforts to get to the truth, you cannot label those of us who have less faith in the british army has having an agenda.
For many, the only agenda is to make the truth known to all, regardless who’s name is blackened.
“But if he trailed an innocent mother into a Monaghan/Louth bog and sunk a slug into the back of her skull he’d be a ‘freedom fighter’?”
I am sure your British soldier friend would’ve did the same if ordered to. Get off your high horse. Btw, Mairéad Farrell was ‘innocent’ when British army terrorists put several slugs into her body, wouldn’t you agree? The perpetrators were well rewarded and praised, go figure.
Last night there was one blue moon over Dublin, Esteemed Blogmeister: tonight we will be blessed with two Yunes, both blue over the City of the Blue Gansey.
In the shape of Enda, the blueshirted box wallah of Fianna Fail Better , and the endomorphic memsahaib of True Blue Ulster, Arlene.
Will the topic of today’s blog be raised? Pull the UDA one, bro.
Not unless, of course, the language of discourse, is bog Latin or indeed, Bog-oak Monolithic Latin. And it is a deal difficult, a bog-deal difficult indeed, to see any, erm, quantitative easing in the German Queen’s English as the lingua franca of frank discourse.
Which automatically rules out the UDA. Whose devotion, like that of its Alter-Egomaniacs, the UFF , to Compulsory Latin is as touching as the current Compulsory English test being mooted for Taxidrivers (‘you –a talkin’ to me?’) who wish to display the TAXI sign on their cabs even as they ply their trade on the streets of Dublin / sráideanna naofa Atha Cliath.
-Quis Separabit.
Is the toga-wearing slogan/ rosc catha of the UDA.
-Feriens, Tego.
Is the toga-wearing slogan/ rosc catha of the UDA’s nom de guerre , UFF.
The latter toga-wearing slogan of the hoodies of the ‘Hood never hoodwinked Classical Romanists, but:
-Striking, I defend.
(Wink, wink).
While the UVF were the better outfit to play away (cf the Glennane Organic Armoury) it is not to say that the UDA/UFF did not defensively offend Dublin: it wasn’t for want of trying.
On the 8th, November 1988, f’instance, they placed incendiary devises in cafes, cinemas and convenience, both public and stores , that sorta thingy. As it happened, the i.d’s of the UDA turned out to be damp squibs.
And so, the i.d’s did not prove nearly as incendiary as the reaction of the room-sized and turpentine-faced Cap’n Romper (a name of convenience) back home in the urbs of Belfastium.
-Carthago Delenda est !
Which was a reference to Enda, not. Neither was the name of the non-striking striker, Carthage.
The Accepted Knorritive of the Souper Stars of the Southern Yunesty, of course, is to blame it all on the Piranhas of the PIRA.
Why, as recently as only the other day, Enda the Canny attended a Remembrance Day ceremony north of the Black Sow’s Dyke in a market town beginning with E.
But that wasn’t the, erm, initial reason for his choice of venue.
No, the reason why Enda is called Enda the Canny is because he choses to attend Enniskillen (for it is it!) without wearing a Poppy, thus killing two words with one tone (non-wolfish) : the PIRA by atttending, and the Shinners by not wearing.
It is only a bunch of tyme, as they say in Ulster Scots, before Enda the Canny philosophically wears the little outspoken red and black badge in his bespoken lapel (insisting of course, on the little green leaf).
The Poppy will indubitably become the PM of the FSS much the same way, back in the day, that the whale foreskin upholstery became the bar stools on the yacht of Aristotle Onassis.
To conclude: although the 26 counties lived for 24 years next door to Malice they still harbour hopes of their returning one day, this time with more than just damp Smokey squids:
-24 years, just waiting for a chance
To let ‘em know, how we’re feeling, maybe get a second chance
Never get used to not living next door to Malice.
-Malice ! UDA fugitive is Malice?
Unionist politicians need the muscle of the UDA in case the thing kicks off again. They might be quite happy to prance about wearing red berets or march up and down hills waving gun licences, but most unionist politicians prefer to leave the dirty work to the likes of the UDA. Shooting up Catholic owned bars or beating Catholics to death with breeze blocks is best done by the boys who do this sort of thing better.
I can recall, in 1990 being involved in a project known as ‘Community Development in Protestant Area’s’ due in no part to my previous work in protestant parts of the six Ulster counties.
The conference was eventually held in Fermanagh where I was, again, involved with my, one time University, colleagues Billy Hutchinson and William Smith of the UVF, seen by many as the working face of unionism, the same side my Mrs. family came from while,,at the same time, I worked with others from in the UDA whom were very much the ‘criminal’ side of the loyalist ‘defence of protestantism’.
This is a time I recall well, the report from conference is upstairs, I did, many times, enquire as to why the recommendations contained therein, were never implemented.
The fact is clear, the civic forum was established as a sop to the voluntary sector but also to permit the UDA to have a legislative role in the new six county government.
On this, and their previous commitment to work as a force for positive change within their communities, the UDA, and to a lesser extent the UVF, failed miserably, or rather, their masters within MI5 failed.
This is now eighteen years since the Good Friday Agreement, the UDA/UVF continue, as they did in the eighties and nineties, to make a fortune from controlling their locales, in part of south Belfast, if you want a Housing Executive home you do not go to the local housing officer nor local councillor, rather it is in the gift of the local UDA boss, to avail of social housing you must agree to sell drugs for them, if you won’t, regardless of how long your family have lived in the area, you don’t get the available accommodation, rather it is then passed to a well known asian business man who uses it to keep his illegally imported prostitutes.
UDA/UVF are being paid, it was £3000 per week, by the Russian mafia here (also involved in prostitution) to permit them to sell heroin to children.
These are the protectors of the loyalist community!
Mark….That is actually very interesting to some of us who have not got the ready answers at our fingertips. You appear to have quite a story to tell and I for one would enjoy seeing those details fully fleshed out. If it is as you say it is and you have evidence for it all, then it begs the question why this is not being shouted to the rooftops in newspapers and radio and television exposes.Why are the police not sorting it out and why isn’t Stephen Nolan getting into the grim details on his television and radio programmes? I’m intrigued and I’d like to hear the rest of it.
Paddy, I am afraid the evidence is walking around us daily, and committing offences to feed their habit. Once it was nigh on impossible to obtain drugs in the six counties, now we have such good, cheap supply, addicts from the Capital are taking buses to the second city to avail of drugs.
Media and the RUC will not do anything to upset the loyalist applecart, it should be noted elements of the dissident army are at just the same thing.
“If it is as you say it is and you have evidence for it all, then it begs the question why this is not being shouted to the rooftops in newspapers and radio and television exposes.Why are the police not sorting it out and why isn’t Stephen Nolan getting into the grim details on his television and radio programmes? I’m intrigued and I’d like to hear the rest of it.”
I heard Alan McQuillan on the radio only the other day confirming that the PSNI knew the UDA are involved in drug dealing, criminality, prostitution and even accused the new legislation making paying for sex illegal as offering them another cash cow for them through not only the money collected from prostitution but from then blackmailing businessmen that do.
He confirmed it was the UDA behind it and that they had thousands of people recruited that were unable to leave even if they wanted to.
He claimed that they were unable to deal with it without political support.
I doubt there are many police services on this planet who would have evidence of such links, come publically on the radio and acknowledge it, but claim they were unable to deal with it without facing any hard questions and getting away with admitting basically they are simply ignoring such criminal behaviour.
You know my opinion as to the reason they are unable to deal with it, but those are good questions Harry.
Why do you think it is?
“I doubt there are many police services on this planet who would have evidence of such links, come publically on the radio and acknowledge it, but claim they were unable to deal with it without facing any hard questions and getting away with admitting basically they are simply ignoring such criminal behaviour.”
You do realise McQuillan doesn’t speak for the police service?
Perhaps some else heard it on radio ulster and can confirm who it was.
Welll Jessica…Mark says….
“in part of south Belfast, if you want a Housing Executive home you do not go to the local housing officer nor local councillor, rather it is in the gift of the local UDA boss, to avail of social housing you must agree to sell drugs for them, if you won’t, regardless of how long your family have lived in the area, you don’t get the available accommodation, rather it is then passed to a well known asian business man who uses it to keep his illegally imported prostitutes.
UDA/UVF are being paid, it was £3000 per week, by the Russian mafia here (also involved in prostitution) to permit them to sell heroin to children.”….
There’s at least three good stories to be written in thta paragraph alone. 1.the local UDA boss..2 the well-known Asian businessman and 3. £3000 a week by the Russian mafia…..
I mean, take them one at a time and you ‘ve got three separate dramas …any one of which could keep a police service occupied .If Mark knows about them and can name those names , what the hell are the police and everyone else doing about any of it ?Come to that …what are they actually for if not to deal with this?
Well, personally I wouldn’t advise anyone to publically post the name of any dangerous criminals on any blog or website, but I do understand why the PSNI is unable or unwilling to tackle certain crime gangs or investigate certain events.
But I was asking you Harry for your opinion as to why this might be the case.
Paddy, I am afraid there are more than one well known asian businessmen involved in law breaking in Belfast, I worked on a case year’s ago where it came out in evidence, not repeated in Court.
The RUC are very well aware of the issue with heroin, whom is importing it and whom get’s the protection from it, some month’s past a BBC journalist hinted at it to a drug squad supremo on air, he blubbed some response avoiding the answer.
I am afraid we’ll get no where with our tax funded police.
but…but..bu…..t.their here to enrich our lives with their kulture we are told.their knocking the h out 50yrds from the main drug squad hq in belfast and not a dickybird about it.
Billy, I wonder would you agree, once upon a time there was ewual division amongst the indigenous population regarding a French invasion in 1169?
The PSNI would have no problem backing most of this up Mark, though they may ignore commenting on those who are off police limits at the behest of MI5.
Why does none of our politicians on the policing board, or even the media, ask the chief constable directly, is there criminal activity in both communities that the PSNI have been instructed is off limits?
I still have a suspicion that the current chief constable would like to do more than he is currently permitted to and does not feel he has the political support to push too hard on this at present.
Ta bron orm Jessica, I ought have referenced yourself in my reply to Paddy supra.
It should be possible to do as you suggest, the problem is, whom would do it?
The only assembly member I can think would have the willingness and credibility is one James Allister, but he would be ignored as a ‘one man show’.
Modern day ‘Danegeld’. Disgraceful.
“And cenotaphs to state terrorism. Let’s all move forward; nobody should be left behind M.T.”
There are no ‘cenotaphs to state terrorism’. If there were, I’d agree they should be removed.
Oh yes there are, and in time I believe they will be
“Oh yes there are, and in time I believe they will be”
Where are they?
“Where are they?”
Right under your nose no doubt. Irish republicans should be willing to move on as do the British establishment(I am sure they can bring their loyalist terrorist units with them). None of the main protagonists(IRA and British state forces) should be left behind or indeed be allowed to be left behind. No protagonist should be allowed to absolve themselves by pretending they don’t need to ‘move on’.
“Right under your nose no doubt”
Don’t say that about MT, he’s very open minded and thoughtful…..
“Right under your nose no doubt. Irish republicans should be willing to move on as do the British establishment(I am sure they can bring their loyalist terrorist units with them). None of the main protagonists(IRA and British state forces) should be left behind or indeed be allowed to be left behind. No protagonist should be allowed to absolve themselves by pretending they don’t need to ‘move on’.”
Eh?
“Yes.
I’ve never seen any PSF on any ballot paper.
Who are these people that could make glorifying terrorism an offence?”
Wow. Your understanding of politics is restricted to what’s written on ballot papers.
PSF is Provisional Sinn Fein.
“PSF is Provisional Sinn Fein”
There is no such party as Provisional Sinn Fein……there’s Republican Sinn Fein but not Provisional….
I’ve checked with the electoral commission and they have no political party called Provisional Sinn Fein registered.
Are they wrong?
Who is this organisation?
What do they do?
What powers is it that they have that they can make glorifying terrorism an offence?
We often speak of Collusion in the sense that it only occurred many years ago during the Troubles but this refusal by the PSNI/Westminster to tackle the UVF/UDA is just modern day Collusion. Every sensible person knows that Collusion between the British Government and Unionist death squads ran very deep, to the point where the UDA/UVF were effectively controlled by the state. Even to this day the British Government tries everything to hamper investigations, delaying them by underfunding them, using the lie of “National Security”, etc. All of that is Collusion.
Now you compare this to the PSNI/British Government response to dissident republicans or the PIRA/INLA in the past, the response from the British Government is very different. There was files uncovered that plainly says that the British Army wont be tackling the UDA/UVF, despite their sectarian murder sprees. Indeed at that time the UDA were openly patrolling with British soldiers, they were even LEGAL for 20 years. Of course all of this would cause an Earthquake in the media of any decent society but the media here behaves as if this is no big deal.
Just last week I signed a petition. The petition was calling for the PSNI to stop harassing Republicans in Ardoyne and in many other locations. One of those stopped and constantly harassed was a 15 year old girl who is currently studying for her GCSE’s. So the PSNI logic is…..we’ll harass a young girl on her way to school but we’ll let drug dealers deal drugs, traffic women into a life of sex slavery, intimidate local residents for money, etc. Every nationalist knows that though the RUC may be gone, there is still some of that same rottenness in the PSNI still.
“Or it might be that unionist politicians are happy to have the UDA remain in the wings, since that should be a strong incentive for the IRA not to plan any renaissance”
I would argue the opposite, it would give republicans more incentive to return to violence. Its also important to remember, the UDA/UVF killed very few IRA members. Its been a while since I researched it but if I remember correctly less than 5% of UDA/UVF attacks were on actual IRA/INLA members…..the UDA/UVF killed far more fellow Loyalists/Unionists than Republicans. Obviously the vast bulk of their murders were random sectarian murders on Catholic civilians. Indeed they were so crude in their methods that they went to areas because they were deemed Catholic and murdered the first lonely person they came across at night. In doing this they often murdered innocent Protestants too.
Lenny Murphy, one of the Shankill Butchers, randomly murdered a couple of workmen thinking because they were not from the area that they must be Catholic. He riddled them with a machine gun. He gleefully and gloatingly went home with a few of his mates to listen to the radio news of what he had done, only to learn he murdered innocent Protestants. He was said to have went berserk and wrecked the living room. A sick and twisted man, though one who still has many admirers on the Shankill Road, as footage of his funeral alone proved when local women attacked photographers covering it.
“And of course it would also act as a dampener on any demands by nationalist/republican politicians”
In the process giving credence to the dissident republican assertion that “politics will not work because they wont let it”. With Brexit, with Stormont clearly not delivering, etc we do live in dangerous times.
“Indeed they were so crude in their methods that they went to areas because they were deemed Catholic and murdered the first lonely person they came across at night.”
The instructions to operate this way came from their british handlers in the 70s.
They told them it would remove support from the IRA. Of course it didn’t as the community that the IRA came from knew perfectly well the only protection they had from loyalist and british forces was the IRA.
Instructions to murder solicitors and human rights activists came from the british state along with information on the hits.
Sam Marshall was killed in an ambush after a random signing in to the RUC station which was tipped off to a loyalist hit squad as soon as he left the building. He got 10 mins walk away from the station. Many telephone calls were made from Lurgan PSNI station to ralphs bar where billy wright frequented including on nights that innocent people were shot dead. He bragged about how the RUC would carry him to and from hits in land rovers.
He was the prodigy of Robin Jackson who carried out the Dublin Monaghan bombings, was arrested afterwards in possession of a gun and allowed to leave after a call to his army handler.
I worked in a factory when billy wrights cousin also worked there and had interesting conversations about how they operated and how he was untouchable. How police and army reserves were training grounds for loyalist paramilitaries to receive weapons training to kill Catholics at her majesty’s convenience.
“In the process giving credence to the dissident republican assertion that “politics will not work because they wont let it”. With Brexit, with Stormont clearly not delivering, etc we do live in dangerous times.”
Don’t listen to dissidents Ryan, they don’t have two brain cells to rub together.
Stormont’s future is as a museum of unionist history in Ireland.
Remember what Bill Clinton advised, unionism must make a deal when they are at their strongest and not to wait until they were no more than an irrelevance.
They have rejected that advice and have chosen to frustrate and alienate themselves from Irish people all over the country.
Stormont has no place in the Ireland proclaimed in 1916, the one that Sinn Fein will achieve within 10 years.
But if it wasn’t for Stormont, Martin McGuinness would not be travelling all over the world meeting world and business leaders, establishing working relationships that will help Ireland build its economy and create jobs and wealth in Ireland.
Unionism is an temporary frustration to be tolerated for a short time and then when their majority is lost, their own hatred of all things Irish will be what forces them to move to britain in their droves – but without any relocation funding I recall one poster mentioning a while back.
Jessica, you will also remember the ‘raid’ on the UDR base at Queen Street, Lurgan, when a large cache of weapons and ammo were stolen, despite an armed guard on the gate.
But at the time the guards were looking the other way, and other UDR members were helping to load the getaway vehicles.
Then the British government denied any suggestions of collusion!
Im afraid I don’t sherdy, but it doesn’t surprise me at all. Most of the events I recall from that time are from physically being there, though I was very young and would not have understood what was going on at the time.
I do remember the big army base at flush place that helicopters used a lot.
I am still in my late 40s sherdy , though I suppose not for a whole lot longer.
It wasn’t until I was in my late teens and was betrayed by so called protestant friends that I actually went to lurgan library and started reading about that the hell it was all about. I could not believe what I read, I knew nothing about Irish history before then but was disgusted that they (unionists) felt they had any right to act the way they did in our country and the whole thing started to make sense. My parents had sheltered me from it all. In the end I became ultra republican and for a while I will admit I was consumed with hate.
“As for your understanding of the Irish people, I assure you that it is very important to me MT.”
Why is my understanding of the Irish people very important to you?
“Why is my understanding of the Irish people very important to you?”
It isn’t, there is a comma.
I thought you would understand english grammar
In relation to your understanding of Irish people in as far as your claim that removing british interference was not important to the Irish people, I was confirming, that as an Irish person, it was very important to me that british interference in Ireland is removed.
Hence therefore establishing the opinion of the Irish people by referendum, there is no factuality in your claims and it is simply your opinion just as mine would be quite the opposite.
“It isn’t, there is a comma. I thought you would understand english grammar”
The inclusion or absence of a comma doesn’t alter the meaning of the sentence, which is that you my opinion of the Irish people is very important to you.
“In relation to your understanding of Irish people in as far as your claim that removing british interference was not important to the Irish people, I was confirming, that as an Irish person, it was very important to me that british interference in Ireland is removed.”
First, there is no British interference. Second, you are not representative of the Irish people.
“Hence therefore establishing the opinion of the Irish people by referendum, there is no factuality in your claims and it is simply your opinion just as mine would be quite the opposite.”
Referendums were held in 1998 and many elections since. There is no evidence to suggest that opinions gave significantly changed.
If there is no british interference in Ireland, then why are there so many concerns over Brexit?
Even something as simple as fishing could embitter and end the good relationships we have established between these Irelands.
The british secretary of state has just declared ALL of the lough foyle is within the UK.
Does that mean there will be no more Salmon fishing for anyone in Donegal?
I assure it means they have considered it.
Where else are they planning hard borders that will interfere with business and day to day life.
If Ireland sides with Britain and leaves the EU to support them, but leaves partition intact, supporting unionism, will there be another civil war in Ireland?
It Ireland decides to side with the EU and britain enforces its land and sea borders which it will, then the relationship between Ireland and Britain will turn sour and unionism will demand british forces come back to defend them, there will be a risk of a return to conflict in Ireland that will for the first time be with Britain outside of the EU and Ireland within. Will the EU side with a member state against an outsider?
These are discussions which will be considered, so to say there is no interference in Ireland over britain was something you could hide post GFA with both parts of the island within the EU. Brexit has changed everything and new thinking will be required.
“If there is no british interference in Ireland, then why are there so many concerns over Brexit?”
That’s a non-sequitur if ever I saw one. People are concerned about Brexit because they’re worried about the future outside the EU.
“The british secretary of state has just declared ALL of the lough foyle is within the UK.”
No he hasn’t. That has always been the position.
“Where else are they planning hard borders that will interfere with business and day to day life.”
If there’s a hard border it will be everywhere, not just in particular places. But there doesn’t appear to be any plan for a hard border.
“If Ireland sides with Britain and leaves the EU to support them, but leaves partition intact, supporting unionism, will there be another civil war in Ireland?”
I wouldn’t have thought either scenario is in the least likely.
“If Ireland decides to side with the EU and britain enforces its land and sea borders which it will, then the relationship between Ireland and Britain will turn sour and unionism will demand british forces come back to defend them, there will be a risk of a return to conflict in Ireland that will for the first time be with Britain outside of the EU and Ireland within. Will the EU side with a member state against an outsider?”
My goodness. What sort of fantasy world do you inhabit?
“These are discussions which will be considered, so to say there is no interference in Ireland over britain was something you could hide post GFA with both parts of the island within the EU. Brexit has changed everything and new thinking will be required”
None of your fantastic scenarios will be considered, they are entirely implausible.
You know best MT.