BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning

Subject: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: Jimmy C
Date: 26 Sep 05 - 04:52 PM

News from Ireland that the I.R.A. has put all it's weapons beyond use. Thia act was witnessed by the decomissioning committee, one catholic clergyman and one protestant clergyman. This news should be welcomed with relief and open arms ? one would think,

Well think again. Almost immediately the Loyalist leaders and politicians are saying that it is not enough. (which is what I expected to hear anyway.). For all those who in the past have jumped on the bandwagon and condemned the I.R.A. for one thing or another, forgetting the fact that the I/R.A. has adhered to it's ceasefire since 1997/98, The following is part of a statement from a leading unionist.

Please bear this statement in mind when trying to pin the blame for the troubles in N.Ireland, almost entirely on the Nationalist and the I.R.A.

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

General John de Chastelain will not see loyalists decommission if "he lives to be 208", a prominent loyalist has said.
The general said he was satisfied the IRA had given up all its weapons, and said he hoped loyalists would as well.

Sammy Duddy, a member of the Ulster Political Research Group - which advises the UDA, said loyalists would not follow the IRA's lead.

"The general has no chance of seeing that achieved. Should he live to be 208, he'll never see it," he said.

"He's living in cloud-cuckoo-land if he thinks the loyalists are going to decommission and do what the IRA's doing.

'Greatest fear'

"You see, the IRA have all the clout, this is how they've come to the table today.

"They've all the clout, they can go and make another Canary Wharf tomorrow.

"The greatest fear is the threat of a united Ireland. As I said it would be resisted by all and every opportunity and we don't care about other things as such."

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

As one who has more thatn a passing interest in these development my congtatulations goes out to Sinn- Fein and the I.R.A for taking this tremendous step and leap of faith.

My prayers are also with those nationalist communities in Belfast, Derry. Arnagh, Newry, and other little towns throughout the 6 counties, because they are now in greater danger than ever,. The statement from Sammy Duddy means only one thing, that is that the catholic/natiolist areas will be attacked, tormented, goaded to a greater degree than we have seen or some time by radical loyalist hoping against hope for soem sort of retalitory response so they can break the peace accord. An accord that they never supported in the first place. In previous threads, myself and others have stated that the unionistst's want nothing short of a return to the the old days when they ruled the roost. - Mark my words, in the coming weeks the attacks on catholics and catholic neighbourhoods will increase. I hope the ones who were critical about the McCartney murders will get their eyes open and I hope they are as critical of the loyalists as they have been of the I.R.A.

Jimmy C

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: Big Mick
Date: 26 Sep 05 - 05:41 PM

Yeah, Jimmy. Looks like these Orange lads will do exactly what has always been said would be done. Many of us here have said repeatedly that the problem in the peace process lied across the divide. And Paisley and company are proving it. Shows the brilliance in the plan. Kind of has echoes of 1916, eh, in that this may turn world opinion against the obstructionists? Back then it was the acts of the British military which turned public opinion against them after the executions.

Putting the ball in their court, in the long haul, will be seen as a brilliant move. Now ...... onward to the elections.

All the best,

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: Mr Happy
Date: 26 Sep 05 - 06:37 PM

Decissioning?

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: TheBigPinkLad
Date: 26 Sep 05 - 06:41 PM

None so blind ...

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: greg stephens
Date: 26 Sep 05 - 07:06 PM

Strange the language of Irish politics. Chastelain says he believes it was done, but he doesn't know it was done. This kind of theological nit picking I find confusing.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: gnu
Date: 26 Sep 05 - 08:51 PM

Big Mick said : "Putting the ball in their court, in the long haul, will be seen as a brilliant move."

Pray they pick up the ball.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: Divis Sweeney
Date: 26 Sep 05 - 09:23 PM

Decommissioning was carried out alright, under a complete media blackout. And now we can watch and see what the loyalists do next, though I'm afraid we may already know. Hope the North is ready for all that is to come...God bless Ireland, all 32 counties.

E

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 26 Sep 05 - 09:28 PM

Sure Jimmy, the Provos deserve credit, and no-one in his right mind would "pin the blame for the troubles almost entirely on the nationalists and IRA". The biggest problem now, as I have said over and over again, is the mindset in loyalism. Not only have they lost the Ascendancy (which they abused mercilessly) but they now see themselves as an extremely vulnerable minority on the island of Ireland.

In historic terms their entitlement to live in Ireland is stronger than the entitlement of any white guy to live in north America. And arguably they have been less exploitative of the indigenous population than their white counterparts were in the US. Anyone intrested in long-term reconciliation will be cutting them some slack right now, by ignoring their stupidities and the flounderings of the feeble loyalist leadership.

I may be no fan of this Blair government, but they can't be faulted on the peace process. Likewise the Dublin government, whose justice minister is right as well as self-interested, in his concern that the proceeds of crime could now be used to fund Sinn Fein political campaigning. (This risk still holds even if the Provos had nothing to do with the Northern Bank robbery.) I can't think of any democracy in the world that takes issue with the approach of the UK government.

Incidentally, as Greg has implied, this whole decommissioning process is laughably convoluted. Does the IRA really have to be so coy? At the end of the war for independence in what was then Rhodesia, the troops of Zanu PF and Zapu PF came out of the country and into the cities, and placed their weapons on huge piles, in front of the whole world. Ian Smith and his cronies would certainly have had a credibility problem if they'd tried to deny it had happened. So why make it so easy for Paisley?

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: Jimmy C
Date: 26 Sep 05 - 10:07 PM

Mr. Happy _ a mere typo, did you never make one ???.

Greg, - Chastelaine was a witness to the event, what he did say is that he cannot prove outright that 100% of the weapons were destroyed. In fact nobodey can prove that. If an individual nationalist keeps a single revolver for example, does that diminish the big picture ?.

Peter K. I don't know much about Rhodesia but I do know that defeated armies usually pile their weapons in a bunch to be witnessed by all. However the I.R.A. were not defeated, this act today is an opening for unionists to recognise a genuine invitation to get together to settle on the future of the country, if they fail to do that then they cannot blame anyone but themselves.

I also know that they have a historic right to be there just as much as many white people in North America, the difference is that the whites in North America became North Americans, the loyalists in the 6 counties have never, even after many generations considered themselves Irish, and that mindset has to change. Of course when they leave and go to Australia, America, Canada or wherever they are all of a sudden Irish. I guarantee you will never get Paisley or any of his followers to openly declare themselves to be Irish. And that is sad, very sad.

The effects of this decommisioning will be clearly seen in the next elections with massive gains for Sinn Fein in both the north and the south.

Although I personally do not agree with giving up the guns it is asmart and politically shrewd move by the I.R.A.

The unionists tonight must imagine themselves to be stalemated.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 Sep 05 - 03:34 AM

Pity Mudcat has no contributors from the Loyalist side.
Can anyone put their arguments across?

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: Paco Rabanne
Date: 27 Sep 05 - 03:50 AM

Forget it Keith. They would just be shot down by a 100 abusive posts. Mudcat exists to reinforce certain views only.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: GUEST,Divis Sweeney
Date: 27 Sep 05 - 04:39 AM

Can we all put the last 35 years behind us and accept Catholics deserve seats in local government.The D.U.P. will always resist this, wish they would just come out and be honest. The reason for our men not to to use a gun is more important than owning one. The Republican fight is over. Can we just be seen as equals by the Ulster protestant ? I doubt this. What went into concrete yesterday was massive.A fifth of the arsenal wasn't even out of its grease packing. The Provisionals in a statement some time back apologised for the loss of life in the conflict. A few Loyalist groups did too. So gentlemen together put this to bed and lets not get into the blame game.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 27 Sep 05 - 04:59 AM

It's certainly a tough one. While it is easy to prove the existance of something it is impossible to prove non-existance of same. To prove weapons exist you simply have to find them - Ask George Bush and Tony Blair;-) To prove they don't exist by the same example you would have to ask Saddam Hussein how he fared...

As to the loyalist viewpoint - I can understand them even if I disagree. Bearing in mind that people judge each other by their own standards it becomes simple to see how the likes of Paisley believe that everyone else is lying and cheating. They firmly believe that if they give up the power they have they will be treated in the same manner as they have treated to Nationalist and Catholic peoples.

The difficult thing now will be to convince them that they will be treated fairly and justly in any future establishment. We know they will, everyone else knows they will but they genuinely believe that they will become second class citizens if they give up the power they have. Having learned, from the Nationalists, that just removing the power only causes problems the governments of both England and Ireland wnat to ensure the Unionist faction do not become the 'new IRA'.

Beyond me I'm afraid but I'm sure someone will eventualy arrive at the right solution.

Cheers

Dave the Gnome

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 27 Sep 05 - 05:31 AM

"Peter K. I don't know much about Rhodesia but I do know that defeated armies usually pile their weapons in a bunch to be witnessed by all. However the I.R.A. were not defeated"

You don't indeed know much about it, Jimmy. Zanu PF and Zapu PF were not defeated. In fact they were the outright winners. That's why Rhodesia is now Zimbabwe. I'm pointing this out only because it directly undermines the point you tried to make.

From the fact that you see a continuing case for private armies I assume you are not content with democratic process. That attitude raises legitimate concerns in the minds of decent prods, of whom there are some, believe it or not. Understandably so in my view.

Keith A, you're absolutely right. These threads tend to be tediously one-sided, with some contributors incapable of seeing the problems from any standpoint but their own.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: ard mhacha
Date: 27 Sep 05 - 05:39 AM

In 1969 when the Unionists were thinking of advocating one man one vote to the Nationalists, the UVF bombed a number of electrical power transmitters in both Northern Ireland and the Republic, knowing that the IRA would be blamed and the "generous"consession by the northern government would be overturned.

The media along with both governments blamed the IRA, when a UVF man was killed planting a bomb in Donegal the local Nationalists had their suspicions confirmed as to who the culprits were.   Let there be no doubt Nationalist areas will again be in more danger than before, as Paisley and Co urges the Protestant people to "defend Ulster".

Already the Unionists are saying that the Decommisioning body have been hoodwinked.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Sep 05 - 05:43 AM

I was so sad to read recently that when the Grand Master of The Orange Order in Belfast Dawson Baille was asked for his response to the recent disturbances in loyalist areas of Belfast he sat on television and said he totally condoned violence. He condoned all violence and understood why they did it. He added he condoned attacks against the police. He is an ex member of the Royal Ulster Constubalary himself. If this is local leadership I am sorry for your future over there.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Sep 05 - 05:50 AM

Everyone move on now. Nothing to see. All go home.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: GUEST,Divis Sweeney
Date: 27 Sep 05 - 06:34 AM

The man charged with the bombing of the electrical power transmitters was a close friend of Ian Paisley. He later admitted on television that Ian Paisley knew of the plot and this mans involvement from the planning stages, he admitted it was to blame the IRA. Referrance, Peter Taylors television series LOYALISTS. Ian Paisley held leadership rank in three paramilitary groupings. He has been photographed in badged berets of groups whose members have been charged with the murder of catholics. Both leadership of the UVF and UDA admitted me tried to control them.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: Pied Piper
Date: 27 Sep 05 - 08:47 AM

This is good news; next desegregate the schools.

PP

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: Grab
Date: 27 Sep 05 - 09:02 AM

Jimmy C, anyone thinking straight should be equally critical of the IRA protecting McCartney's killer as they are of Unionist riots and petrol-bombing police. I don't believe Catholic areas are at particular risk though. That would only be the case if Protestant gang members were avoiding attacking Catholics because they were frightened of being shot. Besides which, Protestant gang members are currently busy enough fighting each other and the police...

Flamenco ted, any views in particular that Mudcat exists to reinforce?

Greg, De Chastelain said that he personally handled and inspected every weapon, every piece of ordnance that was decommissioned. Granted he can't know that this was everything, but it was apparently in line with estimates of what they had. Maybe I'm being gullible, but it sounds legit to me, and very good news. It's just a shame the IRA didn't allow photographic evidence, because that's allowed Unionists a loophole to allege that it wasn't done correctly. Although you can only claim that if you're prepared to call De Chastelain and two priests liars, and I'll be interested to see if Paisley will stick his neck out that far.

Graham.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: GUEST,Divis Sweeney
Date: 27 Sep 05 - 10:23 AM

Dear Graham
The reason there was no photographic evidence was due to the remark by the D.U.P.'s Sammy Wilson, who said last December it would look great on their Christmas card. Also little Jeffery Donaldson said last December he would witness the surrender if no required. Remarks like that don't help. Hope this gives you some understanding. It boils down to the fact they don't want catholic backsides in seats of government, simple as that.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: Den
Date: 27 Sep 05 - 12:55 PM

Graham, one of the witnesses was a Catholic priest, the other a Church of Ireland (protestant) minister. The protestant minister has already been dubbed a traitor by Paisley in an interview yesterday.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: GUEST,clogger
Date: 27 Sep 05 - 01:11 PM

Only a lunatic could not be glad about the decommisioning by IRA
WELL DONE....... Now the Loyalists have two choices
1    Decommision their own weapons
2    Complain that it is all unfair ..... and loose all credibility

How long has this been going on for?.... and why?
Heres hoping

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: Den
Date: 27 Sep 05 - 01:54 PM

Actually the protestant minister was Former Methodist President Rev Harold Good. I apologise to Mr. Good for inadvertantly changing his denomination.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 27 Sep 05 - 01:56 PM

well looking on the bright side...

it might work and you might get peace

and if you don't. well it will be a chance to re-stock with this years models.

since the advent of crack cocaine, there are a lot more guns about. it won't take long to get a new lot.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 27 Sep 05 - 02:15 PM

Maybe I'm just cynical, but..
De Chastelain said that he personally handled and inspected every weapon, every piece of ordnance that was decommissioned. Granted he can't know that this was everything, but it was apparently in line with estimates of what they had.
I heard this described on the news as well. There it was stated that the estimates were those of the security services & others.

Presumably if the IRA had decomissioned noticeably less than the estimate, people would have a good reason to feel unsafe still.
However, they didn't decommission noticeably more than the estimate either.

"OK, we've been told what arms they think we've got, if we get rid of that amount, what are we left with?...."


I can understand De Chastelain not being confident that he has had the whole story.

Nigel

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: GUEST,Guest, Big Tim
Date: 27 Sep 05 - 02:31 PM

The war is definitely over. There's no going back.               

Now it's about point scoring. "When two tribes go to war, a point is all that you can score".

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: Den
Date: 27 Sep 05 - 02:36 PM

It'll never be enough will it Nigel? You're starting to sound like Paisley. How are we doing with Loyalists weapons by the way? Did you read Jimmy's post? Does it sound like we are going to be making any inroads into loyalist decommissioning any time soon? Forgive me for pointing this out but I remember very clearly the last time Nationalists were largely unarmed and Loyalists were armed to the teeth.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Sep 05 - 02:47 PM

weelittledrummer
Don't like the sound of the area you live in !

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Sep 05 - 03:08 PM

Nigel. The infantory was based on records of shipments delivered since 1982. These came from four countries. Prior to that the amount of AR180's/M1's/M50's was counted in the low hundreds.Colonel Gadaffi sumitted his records of supply to the British early last year. Allowing for training purposes and use, all of the Semtex H was accounted for.I imagine in time the information will become public knowledge.As to the estimates Nigel these were very close, dam close. There were allowances for dumps which could not be located due to the quartermaster death or such like.Regarding the amounts allowed here, this too proved to come in under the governments expections.So have peace of mind that tonight in a disused quarry there is a very heavy brick of setting concrete.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: Big Mick
Date: 27 Sep 05 - 03:33 PM

I am so tired of these apologist bastards. Perhaps you would be satisfied if all the IRA soldiers stood up against a wall and allowed themselves to be killed to prove that the violence is over??????? Listen ...... they decommissioned their arms, they allow their children to be harassed, they have done everything possible to bring peace. The Unionist/Loyalists continue to try and sabotage the process, harass children, burn houses, shoot police officers, and brand as traitor anyone who dares try and end this.

WHAT DOES IT TAKE???????? And when some father goes crazy at the thought of a family member being hurt or killed and reacts, you apologizist assholes will sit smugly and say, "See!"

The Nationalists continue to be the ones trying to change this to a political process. They are showing restraint and bravery. Just look at the response from the other side. And over what??? The thought that Catholics might have some say in where they live,how they live and how they are governed? One man, one vote, and no gerrymandering. Now there is a concept.

Those that equivocate on the issue are idiots. It is time for peace and politics. I find it laughable and hypocritical that the self same folks that decried the bombings and violence committed in the name of Irish freedom, now seek to alibi those that would destroy the chance at equality and peace. My Grandmother, born and raised in Athlone, would say that what you are speaks louder than what you say you are.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decissioning
From: Jimmy C
Date: 27 Sep 05 - 03:43 PM

I said in my initial post that the attacks on nationalists would increase, we have already experienced that


1 - a little 7 year old boy was hit with a brick because the car he was in was flying the Tyrone flag, after they won the all Ireland football final ????.

and secondly this piece from the B.B.C.


A crude explosive device has been discovered near Magherafelt in County Londonderry.
Army technical experts dealt with the object on the Castledawson Road on Monday night.

A gaelic football club was evacuated during the alert. The device also contained fireworks.

Police have appealed for information and asked people to be vigilant and report any suspicious activity to detectives in Magherafelt.

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

I Believe the loyalists will not rest until they do enough damage and create enough fear to get the I.R.A. to re-arm and come out and defend catholic areas again. This is what the unionists want, they have no interest in peace. I fear that if this happens all the soldiers, police and governments in the world will not get the I.R.A. to decommission ever again. You all have to know how these people think (I am not talking about ordinary decent protestants), but I am talking about anti-catholic, anti-irish bigots who have never seen the inside of any church, let alone a protestant one, but they run around calling themselves protestants, all with one thing in mind, to see the last catholic in the 6 counties dead or moved to Dublin.

Sorry it just ain't gonna happen. Enough is enough, there is no going back to the old unionist controlled system. Never again. And if to prevent that means the re-arming of the I.R.A. sometime in the future, then so be it.
They now have a chance for lasting peace, they have a chance to sit down with their neighbours and plan out the future of the 6 counties, if they refuse to meet with duly elected representatives of Sinn-fein and screw it up then they will pay the price, both on the streets and at the ballot box, because I am certain that many protestant cringe to hear these thugs call themselves protestants. Just as many catholics do with some of the specimens that claim to be catholic,
Sinn-Fein members were elected and the unionist party and Mr. Paisley and his ilk have no moral or legal grounds to deny them their place in government. Those days are gone - never to return.

Thanks be to God.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Wolfgang
Date: 28 Sep 05 - 12:57 PM

I extremely rarely wish for the death of a person, but Ian Paisley is one of the rare exceptions in that respect. The Unionist leadership is no match to the Nationalist leadership since many years. A Unionist leader with determination, creativity, vision, and the ability to try new paths and convince his followers that at least some of the old 'truths' may be in need of correction is still not in sight. Now the Unionists have to move.

British Victory At Culloden (for a dissident republican view)

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Teribus
Date: 29 Sep 05 - 04:52 AM

Only time will tell, but the reported act of completion of arms decommissioning on the part of the IRA should be welcomed and accepted at face value in order that things can move on.

That includes proactive co-operation with the Police Authorities by all sections of the population. Otherwise innocent people living in Nationalist/Republican areas and Unionist/Loyalist areas will continue to live under the threat of 'justice' as meeted out to the McCartneys and Commanders of this world - people deserve better than that.

In the post-9/11 world there will be no return to the 'armed struggle' everybody knows that.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 29 Sep 05 - 06:07 AM

Guest 0543 27th

He was not condoning the violence.
He meant to say "condemn" but got his wordsmixed up.
He did correct himself finally but made a fool of himself.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST
Date: 29 Sep 05 - 12:13 PM

Keith A of Hertford
How could someone of this standing, he is County Grand Master, make such a mistake ? are you sure ? He would have had to be voted into this position and be highly respected and I would imagine educated. Also he was an ex member of the Royal Ulster Constabulary. It would not be an easy mistake to make considering he said it several time throughout the interview. Is this an example of senior Orange Order ?

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Ringer
Date: 29 Sep 05 - 01:22 PM

"How could someone of this standing... make such a mistake? He would have had to be voted into this position and be highly respected and I would imagine educated."

But I wonder if you'd use the same arguments for George W Bush?

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Grab
Date: 29 Sep 05 - 01:33 PM

The protestant minister has already been dubbed a traitor by Paisley in an interview yesterday.

I guess I was wrong then - Paisley can so sink lower than I thought he'd go...

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 29 Sep 05 - 03:24 PM

Well let's see, William the Conqueror sent Norman knights and their armies to conquer Ireland in the 12th Century and it's been going downhill ever since; is that right? [Hence the Fitz's!]
As far as the partition of the north is concerned it was only allowed to happen because of a threat of armed insurrection by Paisley's hero Carter, backed up by a refusal of army officers based at the Curragh to enforce the referendum in which the majority of the Irish people voted for secession.
Now we have a return of the status quo, protestants [see Carter] threatening force of arms to destabilise the ongoing peace process in the Sick Counties.
Excuse me mate but can you move your legs so that I can get out, this is where I came in!
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,Beachcomber
Date: 29 Sep 05 - 05:16 PM

Not quite "Giok"
Collins had determined to carry on secretely supporting the IRA in the North of Ireland after the Treaty was ratified, seeing it as merely "a stepping stone to freedom".
People like Carson (not Carter) and his loyalist volunteers had declared their armed opposition to a law passed by the British Parliament and the Army Officers in the Curragh declared to be willing to disobey the orders of the same body. Why was this not treasonable if Democracy ruled in Britain back then ?

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 29 Sep 05 - 05:48 PM

Sorry Beachcomber of course it was Carson not Carter; sorry.
As far as the rebellion by army officers was concerned, of course it was treason, in the same way as the creation of the Sick counties was a negation of democracy, which was apparently a movable feast as far as the British government was concerned.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Teribus
Date: 29 Sep 05 - 10:28 PM

Actually old sons, if you look at politics in British Isles the Parliament in Westminster have been trying to give away Ireland since the early 1870's. Only the Irish have been too thick to realise it. Ireland has been of no use to the British since day one.

Now let's repraise some stuff

Early days England, France and Spain - one independent, the other at odds with Holy Roman Empire concept of things, the latter holding fast to that ideal. England straddles the trading route for one and is seen as being capable of manipulation by the other. If France wants to provide England with a distraction it invokes the 'Auld Alliance' and drags Scotland into the fray with promises of French support (Never actually turned up - but then the French never intended that it should). Similarly if the Spanish (Single Super Power of the day) wanted to do the same they stirred things up in Ireland - you know that great Irish patriot Chief O'Neill - hell he fled to Spain (Flight of Earls and all that bullshit) - he had no great vision of an independent Ireland the vision he had was of a Spanish controlled and governed Ireland with him as numero uno - no more no less - a typical, complete, opportunistic aristocrat. Now why did Britain bother with it? The answer to that is simple - naval power was important, therefore whoever held Ireland held the weather guage on the British Isles - To the British, Ireland didn't matter as long as no-one else controlled it - the same thing guaranteed Belgium's existence after it was created after the Napoleonic War.

Now onto latter days (Post WW 1), the Irish want independence (They got slightly miffed at the UK's reaction to them rebelling during time of war - which was totally unreasonable of them considering the circumstances and alternatives of the time). The vast majority of the country is agricultural and backward. One small part of the island is industrial and highly competitive, but it is only so in the wake of the first world war if they remain within the 'British' frame of things, so they tell the 'Irish Nationalists' that they will not leave the system that will guarantee them prosperity (perfectly understandable) - they also add that they are prepared to fight. End result partition, Eire bimbles along as a fairly impoverished nation until the UK decides that it wants to join the Common Market. Eire decides that this is a good idea - stumbling block is that the Common Market says that Irish entry (Eire) is dependent on UK entry. Fortunately for Eire, the UK does get accepted for membership, as does Eire, win-win situation for Eire and the Common Market. Eire gets subsidies thrown at it right-left-and-centre (continues to be the case - Celtic Tiger economy my arse) UK becomes traditionally second/third largest contributer to the EU's coffers.

Those brave heros of the IRA succeed in needlessly murdering about 3000 of their supposedly fellow countrymen - they do later apologise for this (OK if you happenned to have successfully lived through the period in which these tossers were 'protecting' you - you can then afford to argue semantics) They finally get fought to a standstill ( Well documented version of Martin McGuniness's appraisal of the situation, not my own) and join the political process. Across in the US a terrorist organisation crashes two planes into a well known New York landmark. Up to now America has never known real terrorism, post-9/11 they do - the administration declares a war on terrorism - their steadfast ally is the United Kingdom - quite natural, we've been living with this shit, sponsored by plastic paddy's in the US for decades. But now that the US has been hit it's serious and worthy of note.

Word to the wise for any 'Nationalist' or 'Republican' there will be no return to the 'armed struggle' as the combined weights of the US, UK and Eire Governments will come crashing down about your ears - and they will roast you. Now the hard-liners in Ulster and in Eire may shrug this off, but the pastey-faced armchair rebels in the US, who for years have provided the wherewithal might be in for one hell of a shock. It's them catching a cold that will give the 'bhoyos' in Ireland one hell of a surprise if they try to return to the good old days of protecting people.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST
Date: 30 Sep 05 - 09:48 AM

Across in the US a terrorist organisation crashes two planes into a well known New York landmark. Up to now America has never known real terrorism, post-9/11 they do - the administration declares a war on terrorism - their steadfast ally is the United Kingdom - quite natural, we've been living with this shit, sponsored by plastic paddy's in the US for decades. But now that the US has been hit it's serious and worthy of note.

And the withdrawal of US goodwill left them with no credible support. An analysis that I tend to agree with, strange to think that the US Govt ended up unwittingly playing such a masterstroke by refusing to meet the reps,favoring the McCartney sisters.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 30 Sep 05 - 10:13 AM

Ard M and Divs Sweeney,
Re the loyalist bombing which they hoped would be blamed on IRA.

If Loyalists had the insight to see that a bombing campaign by the IRA would prevent their legitimate aspirations, why did the IRA not realise that their real bombing campaign would have that effect?

(And belated well done to RUC for charging the Loyalist responsible)

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: ard mhacha
Date: 30 Sep 05 - 05:08 PM

The main aim of the Loyalist bombing campaign in the late 1960s was to bring down the Government of Terence O`Neill, the Loyalists knew that even if they hadn`t achieved their aim, the Unionists with their built-in majority were always going to be in power
The Loyalists were determined not to yield an inch, one man one vote would have meant the end of their control in Derry and other Nationalists towns.
As for your belated congratulations of a corrupt RUC they hadn`t much detective work to do as the UVF scored an own goal with a premature bomb blast and the Gardai in Donegal handed over the evidence.

The IRA campaign wasn`t in vain, what more proof do you need than the whinging from the Loyalist of the IRA being rewarded for the successful outcome of their victory.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,Beachcomber
Date: 30 Sep 05 - 05:45 PM

Good man Teribus.
But , explain to me how it came about that, if Ireland was "of no use to Britain since day one" as you say, they were prepared to go to such extremes to hold on to it ?
You admit to the strategic value of the island ? Just as a base , do I presume you mean? and nothing else ? But what about the inhabitants?
How do you explain how the British Government exploited the natural resources of the island, our woodlands initially and later our mineral deposits, miniscule though they may have been Did they buy them?
Our agricultural produce was regulated purely for the benefit of the British market, so was our textile manufacturing. Our exports, pathetic though they were , were also ordered by Westminister.
Yes it was rather a mean trick to rebel during time of war, it would have been much more like cricket to have waited until another 50 or 60 thousand troops were available to Mr Churchill to send over in 1919.
Britain made most of the rules of war, not the Irish you know.
The principal reason that the greater part of the island was backward was because the British Government made damn sure that it was.
Agricultural yes, why not,for who can fight a freedom campaign with turnips or spuds? Surprise, surprise the Irish did.
Why was the small North East of the island "industrial and highly competitive" ?
Because the British Government wanted it so.
They would not leave the system that guaranteed them , the loyalist people, and only them , power and privilege. They were largely deluded of course but what they had did seem better than what the nationalists had
"Croppys" lie down and be thankful that you have anything at all. When the "Covananters" asserted their preparedness to fight it was nationalists that they had in their sights, not the Government in Westminister who feared a political backlash and allowed them to frolic with German arms agents.
Obviously you still begrudge us the helping hand that we received through EU membership. You would prefer that we were left, as Britain held us for so long, in poverty and without infra-structure through the south of the country. For instance the only decent harbours we had were those used by the British Navy and a few used to export people and food and import soldiers and British Manufactured Goods only.
Yes we got subsidies from Europe, they were a more far seeing and
fairer partner than had ever been, up to recent times. Without them we could not , from so low a base, come quickly up to standard in economy and socially.
Now , at last, we can hold our heads up in Europe, and in Britain , as equals , not subjugated people, and can begin to pay back those who befriended us in our need.
I will not argue with you as to the amount of killings unless you specify the period to which 3,000 dead refers.
The British Army/Police force amounted to over 40,000 armed men in this country at one time but , it too was "fought to a standstill" but by a force that could never arm more than a thousand or so at any one time.
Yes, it is most likely true that 9/11 in the US brought about a seachange in thinking among many strands of violence all over the world but, not everywhere. Why not give credit to those who finally came to a change in thinking and strategies? I'm fairly sure that the PIRA could have found other sources of finance considering the many "terrorist" organisations that there are worldwide. But you musn't assume that the US war on "terrorism" is merely what it seems . It is now expedient where before it simply didn't matter to them , who bombed what, there were no pipelines in the way.
I wish and hope that you are correct about "no return to the 'armed struggle'. That is now a matter for Northern Loyalists. I wonder , do you have as much information on their "armed struggle" as you think you have about the Nationalist one?
Would you bet that protection would be provided by the PSNI if armed thugs attack nationalist homes, can Nationalists be blamed for feeling a little worried, in certain areas, just now?

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,Divis Sweeney
Date: 30 Sep 05 - 07:30 PM

Teribus
I am grateful for your line, calling our units hero's which of course they were. There are so many lines of that tripe you wrote full of errors.    Those brave heros of the IRA succeed in needlessly murdering about 3000 of their supposedly fellow countrymen.    The figures you refer to are the total death toll over the 35 year period. Regarding the number you state anyone knows almost a third were killed by British army/police.Not to forget the protestant backed groupings. Before you rant son check your figures, I really don't like to see someone become a laughing stock.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,Divis Sweeney
Date: 30 Sep 05 - 07:35 PM

GUEST, Did you say the funding from the states has dried up, no more goodwill ! If only you knew !

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Teribus
Date: 30 Sep 05 - 08:16 PM

Beachcomber,

In response to some of the points made:

Ireland was "of no use to Britain since day one" and I don't really believe that they did go to any great extremes to hold onto it - they did what they had to do to prevent it being used as a base from which attacks could be launched at Wales, England or Scotland.

As to the exploitation of the islands natural resources by the British Government (i.e. post 1707 or 1801). Ireland's natural resources were fairly minimal in extent, simply not worth transporting them to fuel the Industrial Revolution taking place on the mainlands of the British Isles. The cities and industrial centres that sprang up in England, Scotland and Wales were located close to the natural resources required to drive them - little requirement for imports.

Ireland's agricultural produce was regulated purely for the benefit of the British market, no more so than that of England, Scotland and Wales, not surprising as at the time Ireland was part of the UK. Overall Ireland actually profitted from it.

Who provided the investment for the textile industry which was, if memory serves me correct, mainly located in the North and initially relied on water for power (As in the borders of Scotland). It was of very fine quality (Belfast Linnen), but due to technological improvements the mills of Lanarkshire in Scotland and of Lancashire in England caught up and could produce the same quality of cloth cheaper - result decline in the Ulster textile industry - commercial competition, not Government design.

Totally understandable for the Irish to rebel during time of war, the ensuing reaction is equally understandable, but for some reason the Irish believe that the Government should have reacted differently. Personally I believe that the guys in the GPO should have been given a slap on the wrist, told not be such naughty boys and then sent home. Why? because Pearce and co had absolutely no support amongst the population. He led the Easter Week Rising knowing damn well it was going to fail. Had the Government had the courage to treat them like errant children they would have been made a laughingstock the length and breadth of Ireland.

The principal reason that the greater part of the island was backward was because of the stance taken on education by the Roman Catholic clergy of Ireland. The educational institutions set up by the British in Ireland are amongst the best in Europe - that was not all done post-1921. The standard of education in Northern Ireland is rated as being the best in the UK.

Why was the small North East of the island "industrial and highly competitive" because businessmen from Scotland and the North of England invested in it - not the British Government.

Obviously you still begrudge us the helping hand that we received through EU membership - not in the least - just don't dress up the reasons for Eire's current prosperity and growth on being anything other than situation and circumstance fuelled by EU hand-outs.

It was very true that by 1994 both sides had fought to a stand-still, the only difference was that the British Government could afford to maintain that stand-still - the PIRA could not, they were going nowhere and the population were starting to catch on.

It was true that 9/11 in the US brought about a seachange in thinking among many strands of violence all over the world, not everywhere (RIRA, CIRA, Loyalist Groups), but definitely with regard to the PIRA.

Why not give credit to those who finally came to a change in thinking and strategies? I do.

Under the current circumstances prevailing world wide the PIRA would find it extremely difficult to resume the armed struggle. I suppose they could appeal to FARC but that would only piss the US Authorities off even more.

Would you bet that protection would be provided by the PSNI if armed thugs attack nationalist homes, yes I would, ask the McCartney sisters. Can Nationalists be blamed for feeling a little worried, in certain areas, just now? Not at all, you have members of the PIRA wandering around believing that they are wholely above the law in those Nationalist areas, they can kill and maim whoever at will. Until the population start to back the PSNI that is what they are doomed to.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Jimmy C
Date: 30 Sep 05 - 11:52 PM

Teribus,
You are correct in stating that Pearse (not Pearce) and his comrades knew they had no chance of winning. They also knew that they did not have the full support of the irish people.

However they knew that to preserve the dream of a future all Ireland republic they had to change that situation, except they did not change it. It was England that changed it, when the rebels were taken out and shot, not even all at one time, but staggered throughout the weeks following the surrender. One (James Connolly) wounded in the fight and unable to walk was tied to a chair and shot. If the English had " slapped their wrist" maybe things would have been different, but Pearse, Connolly, Clark, McDermott, Ceannt, De Valera and the rest knew by instinct what a cruel, despotic group they were dealing with, they knew they would be executued and they knew that the mood of the Irish people would change from apathy to disgust, resulting in an increaded hatred for England and a genuine passion for a republic. England in her stupidy played the game the way Pearse and the others knew it would. When mighty England executed the teacher. the poet, the shopkeeper etc, that was when the tide turned against them, and it is still turning and will sweep them from our shores one day, and we do not need handouts from Europe or anywhere else to accomplish this. We just leave it to England and their vengeful attitude will guarantee it. What a bunch of hypocrites, at a time when they were at war with Germany for running roughshod over little Belgium and other small nations the mighty English had no hesitation in threatening to do the same by running roughshod over little Ireland. What an arrogant bunch they have proven to be year after year after year.

Before you spout any more dispersions on the I.R.A. I think you had better read some of the writings of Churchill (the greatest brit of all) as he has been referred to, especially when he declared that if foreign soldiers (germans) ever occupied his country he would form an underground army, working in small groups he would kill them when the occasion arose, he would bomb their residences, he would bome their clubs, he would disrupt the railroads, he would blackmail any store that even served them etc, etc, etc. In fact he would do exactly what the i.R.A. has done. The difference is that you would see him as a freedom fighter, but if anybody else would do the same, especially against England they would be thugs, murderers and terrotists. What a nation of bloody hypocrites, hypocrites, hypocrites.
Rule Britannia, Britannia rules the waves
Britons never, never, never shall be slaves,br> Of course it's ok if everybody else is a slave. ???>

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Teribus
Date: 01 Oct 05 - 04:58 AM

JimmyC,

Being a bit selective re-Churchill. Yes an underground movement would have fought on it would have targeted the occupying forces, as happened with the SOE backed resistence movements in occupied Europe. It would not have deliberately targeted and terrorised the civilian population as the PIRA did. As I have said before if any organisation killed and maimed the number of civilians that the PIRA did and at the same time ruined any chance of economic improvement along with it's accompanying prosperity, then had the gall to tell it was protecting me, I'd have no hesitation in telling them to bugger off and protect someone else. No doubt those with the 'glorious vision' firmly fixed in their mind's eye would view the innocent civilian deaths as just so many eggs required to make the omelette. No nationalist/republican, IRA appologist has ever been able to provide me with the name of one single IRA volunteer who ever gave his life to protect a single civilian - Examples of members of the RUC and British Forces who have done exactly that are well known.

If you bothered to base your arguement on fact instead of emotion you would quickly have seen that from the middle of the 1700's no country has done more to erradicate slavery in this world than the United Kingdom - Fact.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,Divis Sweeney
Date: 01 Oct 05 - 06:28 AM

Again wrong, wrong, wrong. I knew a volunteer who in November 1971 remained with his device until the area was cleared as it became unstable and the coop mix began to ooze from the bag it was in. He was killed, no other person was injured in the operation.Regarding the RUC and Brit army. It is also well recorded the number of them that killed civilans, both on and off duty. As for stating an arguement should be based on fact instead of emotion, spend a little more time obtaining factual information before you post. Regarding our victories, was it not your General of land forces Veron Erskine Crum in 1974 branded the PIRA one of the most successful guerilla armies in the world and only a fool would under estimate them. Did he know you ?

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Oct 05 - 07:27 AM

Sweeney, not being knowledgeable on these things, how did staying with the device help?
Could he not have helped clear the area instead?

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Teribus
Date: 01 Oct 05 - 07:27 AM

GUEST Divis Sweeney,

I think on a previous thread where this came up I did discount IRA bombers who managed to blow themselves up while making their bombs or transporting them. Had your 'volunteer' and the organisation he represented really wanted to protect civilians they wouldn't have been building the bomb in the first place.

I do not believe that the UK armed forces ever deliberately underestimate any opponent. Your point is what exactly? Fought to a standstill in a situation where at no time there never was ever going to be a military solution or 'victory', the PIRA negotiated a cease-fire in 1994, this briefly broken and resotored, 1998 saw the GFA, 2005 saw the P O'Neill statement renouncing the armed struggle and decommissioning of PIRA weapons. As previously stated the UK and Irish Governments coulld easily have continued to maintain the stalemate - The PIRA could not, especially after 9/11.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: greg stephens
Date: 01 Oct 05 - 07:43 AM

I don't fully follow this volunteer/device/own petard story either. Why was he staying with thhis oozing device while other people cleared the area? How did this action help to save civilians, which is what you say was the motivation for his actions?
    And, on the more general question of motivation, surely if your aim in life is not to hurt civilians, why wander round the streets clutching "devices"?

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Oct 05 - 07:43 AM

The British Government underestimated the long haul Iraq is turning out to be, and I see your British troops in Iraq have been behaving in the usual manner, torturing and murdering civilians.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,Divis Sweeney
Date: 01 Oct 05 - 08:14 AM

The owner of the public house was serving British soldiers and had received four verbal warnings for his activty. This should have been enough. When the device became unstable, the volunteer remained with it in an attempt to remove the blaster cap after the warning had been ignored by several customers. Another volunteer cleared the area. He did not leave the device and walk away and leave those within the building to it. If the owner of the building had acted in a responsible manner and accepted the verbal warnings this would not have had to take place.Regarding the 1994 ceasefire it was not PIRA that negotiated this ceasefire it was two of John Majors men that came to them. You will never know just how close the British government was to breaking in 1994, many felt at the time there should have been a greater push by PIRA. Well that was then, its a long time ago.Take the events since then as positive.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 01 Oct 05 - 02:23 PM

Not questioning his bravery Sweeney, but all he did was to try to save the people that he and his bomb endangered in the first place.
Do you have a better example?

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,Divis Sweeney
Date: 01 Oct 05 - 02:53 PM

I am aware you are not questioning his bravery, I only gave this example in answer to the post which stated the British army and RUC where out there saving lives on a daily basis, which we on the ground in West Belfast know otherwise.Individuals within both of these forces were found to be at fault on more than one ocassion.If I was to become involved in the supply of examples I would imagine this would roll on in a tit for tat post for acts of bravery. I cannot and do not expect you to agree with me, but the person I felt to be at fault was the owner of the primises, his own staff had asked him to consider their well being more than once. I do not ask for your understanding as to why British soldiers should not be served in public houses in the North of Ireland, I feel this should speak for it's self.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST
Date: 01 Oct 05 - 05:56 PM

It wasn't a pub exclusively serving Army personnel. And just like every other pub, where the preferred method of bombing was to throw the device through an open door, it would have killed more than 'just' Army personnel. So the arsehole blew himself up? Good.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Teribus
Date: 01 Oct 05 - 06:22 PM

GUEST - 01 Oct 05 - 07:43 AM

Iraq? Hells teeth laddie early days yet we're going to be there for years yet - and counter to what some other tosser said I've always realised that. But if you do want to assess how well we are doing down in Basra visit BBC 'have your say' - most non-Iraqi contributers trot out the same old leftist line so favoured by the Beeb, Iraqi contributers, especially those in Basra seem rather attached to us and want us to stay for a while - no accountiong for taste Eh??

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,Divis Sweeney
Date: 01 Oct 05 - 07:23 PM

GUEST, Oh I got you on a nerve, nice term that, Army Personnel, always like that term, memories come flowing back, all good ones may I add.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 02 Oct 05 - 04:17 AM

Interesting to note that on RTE Radio 1 news at 8am this morning they reported the results of a poll [ presumably in Eire ] the majority of people didn't believe that the IRA had decomissioned ALL their weapons and an even larger majority believed that the IRA were still running organised crime.

My own opinion is the we should accept the IRA word on de-comissioning, trust has got to start somewhere.

eric

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,Guest, Big Tim
Date: 02 Oct 05 - 06:12 AM

"I wish they'd done it years ago. It should have been ended a long time ago. It's a great pity the conflict ever began".

Bishop Edward Daly, 27 September 05.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Jimmy C
Date: 02 Oct 05 - 11:27 PM

Teribus, This is all getting a bit thin, but rom y 0ne of your posts where you state the " No nationalist/republican, IRA appologist has ever been able to provide me with the name of one single IRA volunteer who ever gave his life to protect a single civilian - Examples of members of the RUC and British Forces who have done exactly that are well known.

The I.R.A. lost members while protecting whole communities like the New Lodge, Ardoyne, The Markets and other districts and towns throughout the 6 counties. Without the I.R.A. in places like the Ardoyne or the New Lodge more civilians would have been killed. I come from the New Lodge, where 396 people lost their lives many on account of army action.

So please do not tell me that the IRA terrorized these civilians, if these districts had not been terrorized initially by roaming bands of loyalists, supported by the R.U.C. and later by certain regiments of the army the IRA would not have been rejuvenated in the first place.

If the civilians in these areas had been able to rely on the army and the police to protect them there would have no need for the IRA. But they were not protected and in fact were terrorized by certain regiments that were sent there to protect them - Why was the IRA necessary, well I will give you three exmples that I know of personally:
1 - A loyalist murder squad was able to walk past an army patrol, then a police patrol, enter a cul-de-sac and shoot a cathoic at his own door and after the shooting were able to walk past the same two patrols without being questioned, this is a fact, the victim was a relative of mine.
Does the word collusion mean anything.

2 - One unarmed 16 year old was shot and killed in Trainfield Street (the same street that our late member Annroi came from) ,two soldiers were charged with murder, they were found guilty and 10 years later were still serving in the british army.
3 - In Tyrone the army stopped a car with 2 occupants, one occupant ( Hugh Heron) ran accross the parking lot and was shot repeatedly in the back. the other occupant (John Paddy Mullan) exited the card with his hands up and was riddled where he stood.

These things happened on a daily basis all over the 6 counties, especially in the rural areas away from the T.V reporters and newscasters. And people wonder why the IRA exists.

Statistics show that republicans were responsible for 58.8 % of the deaths, Loyalists for 28.9% and the securuty forces fo 10.1 %.

I accept that although the I.R.A. was the greatest taker of lives there were also many other deaths for which the R.U.C. and in particular the army were responsible, many of which generated sizeable and continuing conrtroversy, such as the 1972 Bloody Sunday shootings and the R.U.C' 1982 " Shoot-to-kill" incidents, in the long run the IRA offered the the only protectiona to nationalist areas and although responsible for many lives they may have actually prevented many more that would surely have been lost if the Loyalists, R.U.C. and the army had a free rein to do whatever they wanted without the threat of facing the IRA.

Also you state that from the mid 1700's no country has done more to eradicate slavery than the U.K. - well they certainly did nothing to eradicate it in Ireland.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Teribus
Date: 03 Oct 05 - 12:37 AM

Pure emotion and myth JimmyC plain fact is if the PIRA hadn't started it's campaign of bombing and murder all those of whom you speak would still be alive. Very early on in the conflict when the British Army was protecting the Nationalist areas and disarming and disbanding the B Specials the Official IRA stated that they had no part to play in the conflict. Not good enough for some this caused a rift and PIRA was formed, they carried on the 'struggle' and 'protected' the people of Northern Ireland and murdered/maimed thousands in the process. Can you please answer why the murderers of Mr McCartney have not been brought to justice. Can you please tell me why the relatives of Mrs Jean McConville still have to gaze on the faces of her torturers and murderers every time they walk down the street - both people completely innocent of any crime - I dare say that there are countless other examples.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Paco Rabanne
Date: 03 Oct 05 - 09:51 AM

Well said Teribus.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,Divis Sweeney
Date: 03 Oct 05 - 09:55 AM

Someone please change the record. Same oul crap over and over again, can you not think of something else ?

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Oct 05 - 09:56 AM

Divis is right Bill, change the record.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,madman
Date: 03 Oct 05 - 10:04 AM

Well the ' Div ' part is right.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 03 Oct 05 - 10:39 AM

Which record is that, Div? The one that goes and I see your British troops in Iraq have been behaving in the usual manner, torturing and murdering civilians.

Or the one that goes almost a third were killed by British army/police? How can that be when JimmyC later states "Statistics show that republicans were responsible for 58.8 % of the deaths, Loyalists for 28.9% and the securuty forces fo 10.1 %."?

I am begining to dispair over the situation there. Can we not just accept that the IRA have de-commisioned. It seems at times like the republican faction here don't like the de-commisioning as much as the idiots on the loyalist side. What's the problem? Nothing left to fight about so you rake up old coals?

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST
Date: 03 Oct 05 - 12:28 PM

Being brought to their knees and globally humiliated into surrendering their arms has left them in need of face saving. If it has to be done on an internet chat forum so be it. Less messy that way.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,Divis Sweeney
Date: 03 Oct 05 - 12:34 PM

Our victory speaks for its self. We disbanded volunteerily in July05. The same can't be said for the B Specials, U.D.R. and The R.U.C. Your British government disbanded them for their actions. We will be remembered by historians as hero's one and all.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 03 Oct 05 - 01:25 PM

The belief and the desire that peaceful means will suffice is surely what is infinitely precious.

Since you ask, I live near Nottingham supposedly gun crime capital of England. So if things do get desperate, I'm sure our local lads will sort you out some good gear.

Having said that, Nottingham's yearly statistics probably would fit comfortably into a quiet weekend in New York or Chicago. I bet Americans think we are a right gang of of wooftahs, always going on about Northern Ireland. I bet they've shot more people cleaning their gun barrels and practising quick draw than got killed in the entire years of conflict.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Jimmy C
Date: 03 Oct 05 - 02:50 PM

Weelittledrummer - exactly.

Teribus re" Very early in the campaign when the british army was protecting those nationalist areas"

The fact is that they were initially greeted with open arms but a short tiem later when they started to show their true colours that was when the IRA had to really be formed. You speak as if thousands of IRA members have been sitting in the wings for years waiting for an excuse. Well I come from a nationalist area and we only heard of the IRA in songs and stories. The fact is the IRA was reformed to protect nationalis areas when the so called defender in the british army failed to do so.
I was born in North Belfast and lived in the same street for 26 years and would not have known where to go to even join the IRA.
For many years the IRA consisted of a few old men who met in pubs and sang rebel songs. I reiterate that if the army had done it's job the IRA would have been unnecessary. They didn't and the catholic/nationalist areas had to be protected. The police wouldn't do it, the army wouldn't do it, the B-Specials were disnbanded and the members just became part of the loyalists gun squads, so tell me who was going to protect thosd areas if not for the IRA. In 1969 we had only one pistol in the whole district and that belonged to an old man who apparently had been in Chigago during prohibition. We had nothing but stones and petrol bombs while the loyalists and the loyalist RUC were armed to the teeth and we got no help from the so called army defenders, no help at all.

So sorry - but the IRA was necessary, without the IRA the death toll would have been much much higher.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Jimmy C
Date: 03 Oct 05 - 02:52 PM

Guest -

Who was brought to their knees ?, certainly not the IRA.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Jimmy C
Date: 03 Oct 05 - 03:08 PM

Dave the gnome,

I welcome the decommisioning, and sincerely hope it leads to a better future., however I did not agree with it because I knew it would not be enough, and already we are seeing that. No matter what the IRA and/or Sinn Fein will do now or in the future to secure a lasting peace it will never be enough, because the loyalist do not want that, they want nothing short of a return to at Unionist Dominated Statelet. They do not want to share power with nationalist, in fact they would all be extremely happy if the nationalist/catholic community ceased to exist.
Sinn Fein agreed to the Good Friday Agreement (70% of which is unfulfilled).
They declared a cease-fire - sorry not enough >br> they decommisioned one lot of arms - sorry not enough
they decommisioned a second stockpile of arms , sorry not enough,
they now have international eyewitnesses declaring that massive amounts of arms etc has been put beyond use - sorry not enough.
I believe it is time for the British Government to give the loyalist and the unionist politicians a ultimatum. Get off your butts and work with the nationalists or you will be left out of the equation. It is time for devolution to be implemented now, in short it is time for the british to get tough with the loyalists, they had no problem getting tough with Sinn Fein and demanding this and demanding that, lets see some demands made on the unionists.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,Dave the Gnome sans biscuit
Date: 03 Oct 05 - 03:35 PM

Agreed, Jimmy - We all knew it would never be enough for Paisley and his crew. I said as much in my earlier post. But that doesn't mean it shouldn't be done. Sticking with the slavery argument from earlier, one country abolishing slavery was never enough - But if no one had started where would we be today?

As to the British Government getting tough with the loyalists. Huh? When it was tough with the republicans who shouted loudest? Why is it right for them to be tough with Loyalists but wrong for them to be tough with Republicans? I agree wholy that it seemed to have no problem fighting the IRA but how does fighting the Loyalist paras make that right? Perhaps it is not only the IRA that have had enough of bloodshed but the British government have eventualy seen sense as well?

Going back to my first post again I start with the line 'It's certainly a tough one' and finish by stating quite clearly it is beyond me. What isn't beyond my limited scope though is the fact that two wrongs do not make a right and continualy raking up old scores will do nothing to help the peace process.

Perhaps like my erstwhile contender, the Curator, said in his last post o the 'cat, Peace has broken out. Perhaps like him we can all stop fighting about who started it...

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 04:46 AM

Can anyone believe Keith wrote this about Teribus Bill .....

His posts are always high on logic and low on emotion.
He never makes personal attacks.
His opponents used to criticise him for bringing facts into the debate.

Now the truth, his posts are always full of points that are without fact.
He always makes personal attacks, well if your Irish.
His opponnents criticise him him bringing a lot of twat into the debate.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 07:36 AM

here

is a link to the facts debate.

The other 2 points just need you to prove me wrong with examples.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Wolfgang
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 11:30 AM

Sutton Index of deaths: Summary of Organisation responsible for the death

Divis is wrong and Jimmy C is right about the percentage of deaths for which the security forces are responsible.

The crosstabs in Sutton's index are also interesting, BTW.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 12:00 PM

Great to see the Germans backing up the British, what a difference 60 years makes. And to think we all thought the police and army never killed anyone in Ulster! Thanks for the insight Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,Beachcomber
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 03:39 PM

Teribus, Please , please never accuse the British army of killing civilians deliberately.
Did you read my post about the effects of saturation bombing?
Further, I'm certain that any British underground resistance movement that might have been necessary, had Hitler's troops invaded you, would have found it necessary to act against any collaberation by British citizens with such an occupying force. What do you think they might otherwise have done?
You seem to argue that the British Government was not susceptible to Industrial lobbyists at any time in history.There was deliberate supression of Irish based industry, whoever funded it!in favour of that on the "mainland".
You miss my point about exploitation, or ignore it, What gave you the right to act in this manner? Was it Britain's might?
Your provocative language concerning the 1916 Rising shows exactly why British thinking will never understand us. We as Irish people had been all but conquered, remember that, but 1916 made us question our status again and realise that we needed, as a Nation, to regulate our own affairs or we would never again get off those "knees" on which you seem (still)to prefer to see us.
The Roman Catholic authorities did collaborate with the British Government it is true. But that was not the reason for the "backward " state of our majority. In fact many thousands of Irish people were given a fairly decent education , names like DeValera and Ml.Collins come to mind.The unfortunate thing was that they were unable to earn a living as well, hence mass emigration, where? to do what ? you know the answers very well.
Perhaps a mistake was made here?
I do not believe that many here are unaware of the help we have received from the EU. Who is trying to claim that we raised ourselves unaided? I happen to believe, in fact, that with the proper people at the helm, we could have made even better use of the funds

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 06:40 PM

Now let's see JimmyC, statistically if 10 people from a cross community street had been killed in the 'Troubles' Roughly, 6 would have been killed by the PIRA, 3 by the Loyalists and 1 by the British/Irish Security Forces - Who did you say the PIRA were protecting again?

On the basis described above had the Official IRA line held 60% would still be alive today.

"I come from the New Lodge, where 396 people lost their lives many on account of army action." Now I suppose that depends on what Army action is (According to Divis Sweeney that is going into a public house to buy a drink - the IRA who are protecting you feel that it is entirely reasonable to lob a bomb through the door and kill 6 of their own just to get 1 squaddy) To put it into perspective, in North Belfast from 1969 to 2001, 576 people lost their lives. From 1969 to 2001 the total number of deaths caused by UK forces in N.I., UK & Europe related to the 'troubles' was 363 - JimmyC define "many on account of army action" - the Army must have been awfully busy in North Belfast. Perhaps something like the torture and subsequent death of Mrs Jean McConville, the Army action involved in this particular case was that this poor woman had the human decency and compassion to comfort a dying man, a British Soldier who had been shot by a sniper. Mrs McConville as we now all know was hauled off by members of the PIRA, tortured and murdered, her body was hidden in a secret grave - JimmyC and Divis tell us all how long it took before you bloody heros had the guts to own up to what you had done and provide assistance in recovering the body. Also tell us what august body advised the family not to make too much of her funeral. Heros - hardly Divis, they will go down in history as the murdering scum that they undoubtedly were.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Oct 05 - 07:44 PM

Apologies Beachcomber, I didn't mean to overlook you:

"Teribus, Please , please never accuse the British army of killing civilians deliberately." - I don't believe I ever have.

"Did you read my post about the effects of saturation bombing?" No, should I have done? Where is it? Would you in any event be making reference to the saturation bombing that took place after Guernica, Warsaw, Rotterdam, London, Coventry, Glasgow, Clydeside, etc.

"Further, I'm certain that any British underground resistance movement that might have been necessary, had Hitler's troops invaded you, would have found it necessary to act against any collaberation by British citizens with such an occupying force. What do you think they might otherwise have done?" Oh I dare say somebody might have had a quiet word, they would not have terrorised the entire population (What was it? Oh yes, 24 bombs set to off within 2 hours in Belfast City Centre - how considerate that all those collaborators got together in such a tidy fashion to allow the IRA to show them a lesson) Oh and the gallant tosser who stayed with his oozing bomb - if memory serves me right that was in response to the landlord of a pub serving British Army personnel - well, I would like to think that the resistance in the UK would have had more savvy, drunken soldiers talk, as a member of the 'resistance' I would lash them up to drink until the cows come home purely for the information that could be coaxed out of them - The Official IRA might have done that, the Provos of course would be too thick to see that opportunity, but would be all too keen and eager to terrorise their own.

"You seem to argue that the British Government was not susceptible to Industrial lobbyists at any time in history." - I don't believe I've argued anything of the sort, besides in this case it would be irrelevant.

"There was deliberate supression of Irish based industry, whoever funded it!in favour of that on the "mainland"." - Examples please. What Irish based industry? Your premise defies commercial logic. I don't believe that Harland & Wolff were suppressed. Set up after independence and funded with EU money, how did Verlome's fair down in Cork - oh yes that's right they went broke.

You miss the point about exploitation - there was damn all to exploit in the first place. Additionally I personally have never exploited Ireland.

My provocative language concerning the 1916 Rising arises from the amount of complete and utter clamp-trap that is spouted about it and the outlawed organisation that suceeded in killing and maiming thousands in the ensuing years.

The Irish have been ruled and conquered for as long as recorded history has acknowledged the existance of the place. There has never been a united Ireland or an "Irish Nation", your own inter-tribal feuds and squabbles ensured that down through the ages the front door to the place has been wide open to any who were organised - case in point look at what is happening now, today - where is the leadership and sense of common good - totally absent, not even considered, you're all still too busy scoring points.

Counter to what you seem to believe, I don't believe that "the British", as a whole, have ever given Ireland a thought, let alone voiced any preference whether or not they wanted to see the Irish on their knees, heads, elbows, or arses. Still I suppose there can't be much worse than total indifference - we probably should have gone along with A. J. P. Taylor back in the early 70's and just left, you guys could have had your civil war and that would have been that.

While "The Roman Catholic authorities" might have collaborated with the British Government, the Roman Catholic clergy did not with regard to education. What was the reason for the "backward " state of your majority?

In fact the many thousands of Irish people were given a fairly decent education, they were the ones lucky enough to attend the schools, colleges and universities set up and established by guess who? DeValera was an American by the way.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Wolfgang
Date: 05 Oct 05 - 07:28 AM

04 Oct 05 - 12:00 PM,
I have always considered both Divis and Jimmy C to be Irish (whatever their passports nay state). What makes you think I back up the British if I take sides with one of two Irish posters?

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Jimmy C
Date: 05 Oct 05 - 11:39 AM

Teribius,
I stated that many were killed because of British Army action, and that is the truth. I did not say how many or what percentage in North Belfast. I know for certain that young Duffy, shot be soldiers in Dawsaon stret was not only unarmed but also slightly mentally challenged and these heroes of britain cut him down in broad daylight. I know thatldier his only crime was trying to stop some young neighbours from rioting, the rubber bullet by the way killed him. I know also that Mrs Emma Groves was shot while in her own kitchen making dinner, she opened the window to let out some steam and was shot at close range (with a rubber bullet) by a british soldier who was so shit scared that he fired at anything that moved. this lady, a mother of a large family was left blind.
I know also from first hand that an aged gentleman pleaded with british soldiers not to fire their CS gas near his house because his daughter was asthmatic and in bed sick, The response was "too F....ing bad Paddy, get inside or we will shoot you", the gentleman was my father and the daughter my younger sister who had such a violent reaction to the gas that her heart gave out withing two days. My sister by the way was 26 years old and due to be engaged to a protestant the following week. Her death is not considered as a result of the troubles but never the less she may be alive today if not for the refusal of the army to respect my fathers request..
A big part of the problem was that these young english/scottish/welsh soldiers were not fully trained and were so skittish that nothing was safe, they even shot some cows down in Tyrone because of a noise behind a hedge.
I also know that when the army/police etc received a warning from the IRA that a bomb had been planted, many times the warning was ignored hoping for casualties that could be used for anti-IRA public relations.(maybe that was what Divis was referring to)
I did not try to hide the number killed by the IRA, but I believe that in North Belfast a district that sits between two loyalist communities (Tiger Bay and the Shankill Road) the number that would have been killed there by Loyalists/ Police and the army would have been greater than the 396 I referred to.
Just answer me one thing, what was the nationalist communities supposed to do?, who were they going to turn to for protection ?, certainly not the R.U.C. . definetely not the loyalists squads and definitely not the british army. The IRA was the only alternative, and with the IRA active in North Belfast it helped to lessen the threat from the others.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Wolfgang
Date: 05 Oct 05 - 12:14 PM

Let us have a look in the Sutton index of deaths how the deaths the British Army (not including other security forces) is held responsible for are split up:

The British Army is responsible for 278 of the 300odd deaths attributed to 'British security'.

137 of them were civilian
121 were Republican paramilitaries
11 were Loyalist paramilitaries
9 were British security.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Wolfgang
Date: 05 Oct 05 - 12:37 PM

Sutton index crosstabulation for Belfast North

One can look at such tables with the intention to score points. One extreme example:
The IRA alone is responsible for more than twice the number of Civilian deaths in Belfast North than the British army is. One point for Teribus.

But if one looks at the entries for all the Loyalists paramilitaries killing Civilians in North Belfast one gets an impression what JimmyC means when saying that the Nationalist community started looking to the IRA for protection. If night by night houses of Catholics are burned down with the security forces standing by watching one cannot but understand the despair leading to the (renewed) IRA.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Wolfgang
Date: 05 Oct 05 - 12:49 PM

Well, my link doesn't show what I meant it to show. You get what I was talking about by following the link and

(1) selecting geographical location and setting it to 'Belfast North'
(2) setting 'first variable' to 'status summary'
(3) setting 'second variable' to 'organisation' and
(4) clicking on 'produce table'

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Grab
Date: 05 Oct 05 - 01:32 PM

Now let's repraise some stuff

On second thoughts, let's not, eh? On account of how that would be off-topic and irrelevant, not to mention a prime source of a flame-war. As always, the bigger man is the one who can *stop* fighting, not the one who can't see beyond the end of his fists, and that's as true of NI as it is of flame-wars.

Graham.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,Sid the Havana King
Date: 05 Oct 05 - 03:39 PM

Just heard on the news those horid men in the UDA seem to have a shot dead a family man by the name of Jim Gray in Belfast. Can we depend on all those Mudcatters who hounded the Republican in Belfast who killed a man by the name of McCartney and then said it was the PIRA who killed him. To come out and hound these terrible men in the UDA for shooting this poor man. I am not aware if he has any sisters to go on television, but come on catters show us your voices and rid these nasty men from Northern Ireland. The PSNI said it was the UDA so it must be them. So tradgic.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,Paddy no more
Date: 05 Oct 05 - 05:02 PM

Sidney, me ould son, that's not newsworthy here in Mudcatteer UK. Prods killin' Prods doesn't make it on the big pages. Its like Prods killing Taigs. Who cares, well maybe a bunch of Taigs. I digress. Now, Taigs killin' Prods, that's anawr matter. That's like your Champion's League of news here. Even Taigs killing Taigs is big news. It sort of elevates the dead Taig to dead Prod status...if said dead Prod was killed by a Taig. Know? Anyway stick around ould han and somebody from the Mainland'll explain it till ye clearer.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 05 Oct 05 - 05:26 PM

Actually, most of us did not make much of the McCartney murder.
A nasty little pub brawl.
We took notice when it appeared that Sinn Fein oficials and election candidates were involved in covering up the crime and intimidating witnesses. Such accusations in the run up to an election would make headlines anywhere.
Then we saw the Nationalist people of the Short Strand demonstrating in the streets against SF and PIRA.
Such a thing had never, ever happened before.
Then the Sinn Fein vote in Short Strand collapsed.

As I kept saying in the previous debates, it was not the killing but the cover up that made the incident so remarkable.

No one listened then either.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST
Date: 05 Oct 05 - 07:03 PM

As I kept saying in the previous debates, it was not the killing but the cover up that made the incident so remarkable.

Add to that the offer to 'deal' with the murderers. There was only one way the balloon was going to go. And it was 'pop.'

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 06 Oct 05 - 05:10 AM

Sid, what planet are you on? Jim Gray was a champagne lifestyle drug dealer/ racketeer/gangster.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: ard mhacha
Date: 06 Oct 05 - 05:34 AM

I think Sid is,"actin` the cod"

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,Sid the Havana King
Date: 06 Oct 05 - 05:35 AM

So was McCartney, but few on this site seemed to mind.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Oct 05 - 05:54 AM

Mind what?
The killing was only a local news item. Dog bites man.
It was the political dimension that made it so controversial.
As I said, it was not the killing but the cover up that made the case significant.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,Sid the Havana King
Date: 06 Oct 05 - 06:10 AM

If this was the case, which I doubt, can you tell me for sure that the British Government has never been involved in cover up's ?? Just saw in the BBC Northern Ireland web page that two people arrested concerning this murder have been released without charge.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Oct 05 - 06:39 AM

I can tell you for sure that every government in the world has been involved in cover ups.

I can also tell you that if officials and candidates of a major politcal party are implicated in a conspiracy to cover up a murder, especially if during an election campaign, people will inevitably want to discuss it.

The fact that Loyalist and Republican paramilitaries often mrder each other is not all that interesting to outsiders. Sorry, but that is how it is.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Oct 05 - 09:53 AM

Good timing or coincidence?

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST
Date: 06 Oct 05 - 03:19 PM

One thing Jim Gray and Ronnie Barker won`t be doing again, is Porridge.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,Funky Prentice
Date: 06 Oct 05 - 03:35 PM

Come on guys, these men of Ireland are hero's throughout the world. Salute, admire and praise.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,beachcomber
Date: 06 Oct 05 - 05:33 PM

Teribus,
I don't believe that you could even conceive of a British soldier killing a civilian deliberately, could you?
If you are arguing that the bombings you mention "Guernica, Warsaw et al" were justification for British forces to do their worst to Dresden, Berlin even Balbriggan and Cork, and many other places, then I will argue no longer. What would be the point?
Terrorising people , civilians in the main, was something that British invaders taught to the world, that tactic certainly was not invented by the IRA or PIRA.
That "drinks- on- me-boyoes" trick was one of Collins' right enough, maybe we did invent that one !
Why wasn't the Irish Woollens Industry, for instance,fostered under British Rule? Because it might have interfered with the British one.
Of course Harland & Wolfe were not supressed, how ridiculous that would have been, it was in the "right" place and at the "right" time to "demonstrate" the benefits of the Union.
Yes Verholme Shipyard did close many years ago but due to worldwide slump in shipbuilding generally. Where are all the massive British Shipyards now ? even H & W could hardly be said to be in perfect health anymore.
Our people were exploited , that is beyond question.
You, and people who think like you, will never be able to understand why, back in those Victorian times, people did not want to be ruled by a foreign government. It was you who made ONE of this island for us, you who united us against your rule , including the very people who had been sent here by you to do your dirty work, because of the discriminatory laws you tried to enforce, it was you then also who divided us, with your cunning and your patronage of the minority to give them a feeling of being the chosen ones. You convinced them that they would fare better by throwing in with Britain. In the final analysis , did they? Are they any better off now ?.Our country could , as easily, have reached the same economic and social standard without your interference.
Contrary to your assertion that Ireland had been "ruled and conquered for as long as recorded history..." this country has never been fully conquered. That is the root cause of our argument.Though often invaded,it never was, because, in every time, there was always some few who refused to accept domination by force of arms, and were able to steel others to join them in rebellion, and, there always will be.
The British , many times, thought that they had conquered us, but, as you must admit now, it was all self- delusion. A state in which, even though you do not seem to realise, you are still wallowing.
There is no "Pax Brtiania", never was.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Teribus
Date: 06 Oct 05 - 10:26 PM

To GUEST,beachcomber - 06 Oct 05 - 05:33 PM

All I can honestly say having read your posting - pure emotion and myth, which is common here on the 'cat. I can't even be bothered to rip your proposition to shreds.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST
Date: 07 Oct 05 - 04:34 AM

How right you are Teribus, all of that is pure myth, you gently raised us from the slime, and sent us to heaven in your own good time,
whack fol the diddle, up yer Khyber ,eh?.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: polaitaly
Date: 07 Oct 05 - 05:34 AM

On British governement and Protestants and Catholics in North Ireland
-as Bob Dylan said once
" The South politician preaches to the poor white man
-You've got more than the Blacks, don't complain!
You're better then them, you've been
born with white skin!- They explain
And the Negro's name
it's used , it is plain
for the politician's game
and the poor white remain
on the caboose of the train
but it ain't him to blame
he's only a pawn in their game"

sorry for the spelling

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Teribus
Date: 07 Oct 05 - 09:00 AM

Aw, to hell with it beachcomber, just for the exercise and for the benefit of GUEST 07 Oct 05 - 04:34 AM:

"Rules of Engagement" apply, no such thing applies to the terrorists they are fighting. Do accidents happen? Are mistakes made? Of course they do - that unfortunately is the nature of life.

Strategic bombing of civilian targets was something introduced to modern warfare in the First World War by the Germans, they continued this during the Second World War - unfortunately for them and their axis partners the allies were just so much better at it. To such an extent that, on viewing the bomb damage to German cities in the immediate aftermath of WWII, Joseph Stalin, darling of the socialist left, put on ice any plan he had to keep the Red Army rolling westward - at least until such time as he had acquired a strategic air force capability.

Please provide examples of places where the "British" terrorised civilians in the main. Please provide the list of countries that "Britain" invaded - you obviously think that it is impressive, I think compared to other Empire building nations you will find the list rather short. The "British Empire" was something founded on trade, consent and mutual protection "in the main".

You ask, "Why wasn't the Irish Woollens Industry, for instance,fostered under British Rule?" Then provide the answer, "Because it might have interfered with the British one." Somehow I find your logic a bit at fault here, if this Irish Woollens Industry was flourishing under British Rule wouldn't it be in effect part and parcel of the British Woollens Industry? The Linnen and Woollen industry based in Ireland declined because they did not, or could not, keep pace with advances in technology at the time and lost out to competition - not by any great plan of any British Government of the day. The Irish woollen industry and those based in the Scottish Borders did survive by opting to produce quality top end garments. I see that you are perfectly willing to accept, and quote, commercial reasons for the collapse of Verholme Shipyard in Cork yet trot out the line that the Irish Woollen Industry went under because of the machinations of the British Government - inconsistent and utterly ridiculous.

Oh dear!!! "Our people were exploited , that is beyond question." Agreed, but you will find no more so than anyone else living in Europe at that time, and a damn sight less than others living elsewhere in the world, not necessarily under the rule of Europeans.

Eh Beachcomber - back in those Victorian times, "people" tended not to have a hell of a lot to say in the matter, their rulers however did. The British Empire of that time was made up of Dominions, Colonies, Crown Territories, Protectorates and later Mandated Territories. Go and look up what those terms mean and how the individual countries actually came to be part of the British Empire.

As for this rant - "It was you who made ONE of this island for us, you who united us against your rule , including the very people who had been sent here by you to do your dirty work, because of the discriminatory laws you tried to enforce, it was you then also who divided us, with your cunning and your patronage of the minority to give them a feeling of being the chosen ones. You convinced them that they would fare better by throwing in with Britain. In the final analysis , did they? Are they any better off now ?.Our country could , as easily, have reached the same economic and social standard without your interference." What I personally did all that????

"Pax Britannia" a period recognised by historians the world over as beginning in 1815 at the end of the Napoleonic Wars until the outbreak of the First World War in 1914. It did exist Beachcomber, it did exist, it saw the ending of the slave trade, it saw the development of world trade and commerce, it saw the erradication of piracy, amazing breakthroughs and discoveries in the fields of technology, science and medicine - oh it did exist Beachcomber.

You passionately state that - "this country(Ireland) has never been fully conquered. .....Though often invaded,it never was, because, in every time, there was always some few who refused to accept domination by force of arms, and were able to steel others to join them in rebellion." Really? Irish Rebellions between 1798 and 1916 please?

In 1975 I can remember a Dutchman having been ridiculed by a self-proclaimed Brigade Sergeant in the IRA (which means of course that he was nothing of the sort) along the lines you cling to in your post. The gist of the message was - "We've never been conquered, whereas you bloody Dutch, Hitler went through you lot in seven days" To which the Dutchman replied, "That in assigning countries to races, had God given Ireland to the Dutch - it would now be one of the world's most advanced, wealthiest, liberal, progressive countries. If on the other hand God had given Holland to the Irish, it would have disappeared beneath the waters of the North Sea centuries ago."

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,SLR V AR180
Date: 07 Oct 05 - 12:01 PM

Come on Bill loosen up.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,Beachcomber
Date: 07 Oct 05 - 04:01 PM

Teribus,
My God, when it comes to rants....!
I have never read such twisted logic in my life.
Your determined argument however, becomes quite understandable when one reads such self-righteous slaverings of Imperialistic wrath.
Wake up lad and smell the shamrock, your Empire is long gone . We put a little hole in it in 1922 and it has been unravelling ever since.
I do not believe that your (now apparent) racism is in any way typical of the more modern thinking Britisher, in fact, your latest post might more suitably have been added to that earlier one about "Anti-Irishness among Mudcatters"
Insulting remarks are not an argument as far as I am concerned and , in fact, only go to demonstrate your inherent attitude towards all things Irish. I could throw insults around too if I so wished, but, to what end?
Your opinion on the various points raised is just that, an opinion. We are all convinced of the validity of our own and so will never allow ourselves to be persuaded otherwise.
There is plenty of proof throughout history to back up just about any theory , just be open minded about it.
Now, good lad , go and look at those matters from our perspective for a change.
The only emotion I feel Teribus is one of pity , you really must (in the study of history sense) get out more.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,Dvis Sweeney
Date: 07 Oct 05 - 05:11 PM

Beachcomber, Bill is an ex british soldier what do you expect from him ?

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Jimmy C
Date: 07 Oct 05 - 06:26 PM

Teribus re: Really? Irish Rebellions between 1798 and 1916 please?",

Just because there as no major outbreak of fighting does not mean the nationalist spirit was dead. It raised its head on quite a few occasions and will continue to do so. 1803 - Robert Emmet marches towards Dublin Caste with about 100 followers. - insignifican number I know but it happened. The same year (1803) Michael Dwyer surrende4ec and was transported to Australia, Dwyer and his men had been fighting a guerilla war in thw Wicklow mountains since 1798. again minor skirmishes but still fighting.
1819, Legislation is drafted to curb Rural Secret Societies ?. - no trouble as such but still organizing.
1823 - Daniel O'Connell forms the Catholic Association to agitate for emancipation ? so much for your anti-slavery theory.
1825- The House of Lords rejects a Bill granting Catholic Emancipation ?, ( see above note on slavery). 1828 - Daniel O'Connell wins the Clare by-electin but cannot enter Parliament because of the "Oath of Supremacy", this was overturned the following year, wasn't tat nice of them , to allow a duly elected official to take his seat, even though he was a catholic. Of course he was informed that as the repeal of the Act was not retrospective, he would have to run in another election, he won, unopposed.
Of course we also had a thing often referred to as a famine, that sort of put any thoughts of open rebellion on the back burner for a while.
1846 - this is a real beauty - Despite the famine, large quantities of grain are exported to pay rents of absentee landlords, - how does that little items grab you ?.
1848 - John Mitchell begins publishing the rebel newspaper : United Irishman". Also in 1848 the Government passes the Treason-Felony Act to deal with the Young Irelander movement , now aht do you think they were all about ?. 1856 - Jeremiah O'Donovan Rossa founds the Phoenix Society
1858 James Stephens founds " The Irish Republican Brotrherhood".
1859 - The Fenians, an Irish-American group similar to the I.R.B is founded in New York
1860 The Irish Volunteers of teh Fighting 69th refuse to parade before the Prince of Wales, small act but still defiant.
1866, Some 800 fenians invade Canada, occupoy Fort Erie and retret across the border after a battle at Lime Ridgeway. again small but defiant
1867 The Fenian rising planned for March is betrayed, the arrest of the leaders in Manchester lead to an attempted rescue of Tomas Kelly, in which a policeman was killed, three irishmen - Allen, Larkin and O'Brien - The Manchester Martyrs paid the price for this.
1869 ' The Amnesty Association is formed after reports that fenian prisoners were being persecuted in prison. Teribus, I could go on and on but I hope the above will dispel ther notion that republicianism died after 1798 and was not reborn until 1916. I guarantee that with sufficient time and effort one could probably find at least one act of republicianism, either by word or deed in every year after '98 and many more in the years previous. The idea of one inited Ireland did not start in 1798 and has not ended to date. Pax Britannia my arse.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Oct 05 - 04:42 AM

Jimmy C - 07 Oct 05 - 06:26 PM

Lets have have a look at JimmyC's Irish Rebellions between 1798 and 1916:

Just because there as no major outbreak of fighting does not mean the nationalist spirit was dead.

Hey Jimmy we're talking rebellion here not just thinking about it - if such is the qualification somebody getting just slightly miffed and giving themselves a damn good talking to on his way back from the chip shop of a Thursday night would count as a significant political statement.

1803 - Robert Emmet marches towards Dublin Caste with about 100 followers. - The walk home from the chip shop revisited. Came to nothing, signified nothing, meant nothing, achieved nothing.

The same year (1803) Michael Dwyer surrende4ec and was transported to Australia, - Probably just wanted a free ticket out of the damn province how many of his lads did he take with him, obviously not enough. Dwyer and his men had been fighting a meaningless and ineffectual guerilla war in the Wicklow mountains since 1798 that no other bastard happened to notice, until even he reached such a high water point of boredom that he gave himself up.

1819, Legislation is drafted to curb Rural Secret Societies ?. - Any such legislation put into force? No trouble as such but still organizing.

1823 - Daniel O'Donnell forms the Catholic Association to agitate for emancipation ? so much for your anti-slavery theory. Should have stuck to his concerts for old ladies, he obviously stuck to that guaranteed recipe for success later in his career. Acknowledged fact, world wide - the United Kingdom led the anti-slavery movement and the fact that that had fuck all to do with Catholic Emancipation did not make it a "bad thing".

1825- The House of Lords rejects a Bill granting Catholic Emancipation ?, ( see above note on slavery). Well in all fairness anything Daniel O'Donell was infavour of, the natural reaction is to oppose so what the hell, they were probably right in doing so.

1828 - Daniel O'Donnell wins the Clare by-electin but cannot enter Parliament because of the sweater some of his most ardent fans insist that he wears, this was overturned the following year, on the condition that he wear an overcoat.

Of course we also had a thing often referred to as a famine, as did the rest of Europe which you bastards seem to forget.

1846 - this is a real beauty - Despite the famine, large quantities of grain are exported to pay rents of absentee landlords, - how does that little items grab you ?. With incredible surprise as what was commonly referred to as the great hunger did not manifest itself until 1847 and lasted until 1851.

1848 - John Mitchell begins publishing the rebel newspaper : United Irishman". Was this paper banned, if that was when he started, when did he ever complete his task?

Also in 1848 the Government passes the Treason-Felony Act to deal with the Young Irelander movement , now aht do you think they were all about ?. Fuck knows, like the bulk of the population of Ireland, never heard of them, they therefore must have been pretty significant in the minds of republican Irishmen

1856 - Jeremiah O'Donovan Rossa founds the Phoenix Society - to do what sell insurance? Certainly not cost the goverment of the day a wink of sleep.

1858 James Stephens founds " The Irish Republican Brotrherhood". As those who wished to join the "Pheonix Society" did not generally know how to spell Pheonix. Meanwhile the government of the day still sleeps soundly.

1859 - The Fenians, an Irish-American group similar to the I.R.B is founded in New York. They thought that they had better do it there as no fucker was paying the blindest bit of notice back across the other side of the Atlantic.

1860 The Irish Volunteers of teh Fighting 69th refuse to parade before the Prince of Wales, who actually could not have cared less being completely brassed off with the whole agenda. All he wanted to do was to retire to a well known hostelry and have a good time. By the way what were those Irish Volunteers volunteeering for in 1860 - the country being at peace at the time they were probably a bunch of idle wasters - big on theatricals short on action - hence the nom-de-guerre "The Fightin' 69th" in 1860 their only possible adversaries would have been themselves.

1866, Some 800 fenians invade Canada, occupoy Fort Erie (unoccupied at the time - typical sort of move for these fucking heroes) and retret across the border after a battle at Lime Ridgeway (which they lost). At the time, where the might of Vicorias Empire was approaching it's height, 67% of the personnel serving in the British Army were Roman Catholic Irishmen who showed no desire whatsoever to alter the staus quo.

1867 The Fenian rising planned for March is delayed (due to leaves on the tracks?), but then you know how infuriating it is to spend weeks planning and plotting and then have it all come to naught. The arrest of the leaders in Manchester lead to an attempted rescue of Tomas Kelly, in which a policeman was killed, three irishmen - Allen, Larkin and O'Brien - The Manchester Martyrs (poor dears, how sweet) paid the price for this - So did the policeman you tosser.

1869 ' The Amnesty Association is formed after reports that fenian prisoners were being persecuted in prison - Ah well, how terrible, too bad, never mind.

"Teribus, I could go on and on but I hope the above will dispel ther notion that republicianism died after 1798 and was not reborn until 1916." I bet you could, but then I never suggested that.

Throughout the length and breadth of the world I dare say you could find, "one act of republicianism, either by word or deed in every year after '98 and many more in the years previous." All of which amounted to absolutely nothing.

"The idea of one (u)nited Ireland did not start in 1798 and has not ended to date. Pax Britannia my arse." On review I suppose the phrase "Croppy Lie Down" would reflect the state of affairs more accurately - not many historians would agree with you - you don't seem to be able to tell your arse from your elbow. As stated in my previous posting "Pax Britannia" was a clearly defined time in the history of the world that any historian could identify - you can refuse to recognise this all you want, absolutely no skin of my nose.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Jimmy C
Date: 08 Oct 05 - 08:25 AM

Of course we also had a thing often referred to as a famine, as did the rest of Europe which you bastards seem to forget.

I agree, it did affect the rest of Europe, but their goivernments had the decency to make sure their people were fed befor thay EXPOTED FOOD>

1846 - this is a real beauty - Despite the famine, large quantities of grain are exported to pay rents of absentee landlords, - how does that little items grab you ?. With incredible surprise as what was commonly referred to as the great hunger did not manifest itself until 1847 and lasted until 1851.

During which time many Irish who stayed in the country had to build walls just to get food, walls that were unnecessary and useless, One of which can be seen on the Mourne Mountains today. Asking starving people to work before they qualiofied for relief was stupid. There are also roads going nowhere ?



1848 - John Mitchell begins publishing the rebel newspaper : United Irishman". Was this paper banned, if that was when he started, when did he ever complete his task?
The United Irishman is still being published and issued, in some places under a dofferent name but it is still in circulation.

My response was to indicate that although there were no large scale interuptions of tranquility, the notion and dream of a united Ireland still lived on, as long as we have even 2 people to keep the dream alive it will never die.

Resorting to calling us bastards by the way says a lot about your thoughts on the Irish.

Slan agat

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST
Date: 08 Oct 05 - 08:36 AM

Strange how the further you live from Europe the more 'patriotic' you become.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,Beachcomber
Date: 09 Oct 05 - 08:43 AM

Ah Dvis, many thanks for that confirmation.
I did not know that Teribus was an "ex-tommie" but reading back on his common usage of barrack room language, I did suspect it. We are well aware of the consequences of the rapine and murder of his ilk in the many ex-member countries of the one-time Empire, not just in Ireland .These, sadly, are probably the "bastards" to which he refers and, many of them did seek to free their country also.
He is well read on this subject, mind you, and obviously has more time on his hands than most. However, he might with benefit, broaden his reading field . Not everything factual about any conflict is written by the supporters of either side. Is it?

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Tirghra
Date: 09 Oct 05 - 08:55 AM

He writes what he does because he feels he needs to defend the country he served. It's difficult to insult the agency you worked for for years without feeling like you're insulting yourself. So, much cleaner to defend the acts of that institution through well-placed dates. As you've said earlier though, Beachcomber, any argument can be supported as there are enough "facts" out there for all of us. Let him cling to the shreds of the disappearing empire, it's probably all he's got.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Oct 05 - 09:29 AM

Well done teribus, one thing they can't hack is the truth and you are both well informed and reasoned. Always more palatable to the reader than an emotion laden hissy fit.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: GUEST,Merseybeat
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 06:19 PM

Two strangers are told by the Provo's to go somewhere in the Irish Republic to view illegal weapons on Provo terms, with Provo appointed "independent" witnesses, namely the two clergy (like that's supposed to make a difference?) Who then tell us, "Yes, we think that's all their weapons because they told us so" • McGuinness was quoted as saying just before this wonderful government and media sponsored IRA "miracle" that they (republicans) are not interested in quelling Unionist fears and questions or instilling trust (funny that, and Unionists are supposed to be the people they are making peace with, along with the government) They are only interested in international opinion. Interpretated as; taking the pressure of the Shinners, creating the illusion of peacemakers, a gesture for more concessions (worked a treat – immediate disbanding of the RIR home battalions, release of the Shankill mass murderer – Sean Kelly despite the evidence of his involvement in terrorist activities, dismantling of border posts despite "dissident" threat, closure of police stations, and the biggy – Troops Out Hain threatening water charges if the Unionists don't get it sorted, as if they aren't going bring them in anyway!) and a ploy or tactic to turn the attention onto the "intransigent" Unionists. • Quite possibly, if any weapons were in fact "decommissioned" (we only have the say so of the three amigos, the two clergy and the Provo's who everyday Joe do not know or will ever likely get to know) These weapons were likely to be old ones. Now the crunch, there are 1,800 unsolved murders in Northern Ireland, most of which were carried out by the IRA, bang goes the evidence and any possibility of justice being served and the real victims and their families getting closure. • So why no photo's for which all the governments agreed were needed to move the process forward? People say, sure photos prove nothing, right? Wrong, symbolism in Ireland, north and south is important, very important, it cannot be underestimated. A photo of these "weapons" being "decommissioned" (even IF it wasn't all of them) would be the clearest indication possible for any sceptic including the public at large that it was truly over, it like the words, "our war is over" would not only mean the end of the "Provisional militant movement" but also the beginning of real peace. That's why they won't do it, that's why Unionism will NEVER trust these fuckers. • They haven't given any indication or "promise" that they are disbanding or that they are likely too nor have they shown any remorse, regret or sorrow for the lives and property they have destroyed. "They haven't gone away you know" • They demand that we should be thankful that they are not murdering people and destroying property (on that scale) any more and that the whole thing was Unionism's fault anyhow and that we owe them for stopping. • Gerry very recently said, "They need to reach out to Unionism" that they, "need Unionist consent not assent" They then do the opposite, the appeasement process is a con, a shambles and its hurting Unionism particularly the working classes and those that live in interfaces. So what has this "process" brought us I hear you say? • The consent principle? What good is consent when there is virtually nothing left to consent too? Should we not have had this God given democratic right anyhow? • Articles 2 and 3 dumped? Firstly, aside from the fact that they should not have been there in the first place, they have just been re-written, Dublin still lays claim to our country. • Nationalist/Republican acceptance of Northern Ireland and its place within the United Kingdom? This one's a biggy and is worth looking at in more depth. Nationalism in general have realised that they are not going to force Unionism into a united (sic) Ireland, force failed, the armed struggle failed. The "out breeding theory" proved to be fictitious as confirmed by the last census. So what is their new game I hear you say? Their trick is to make Northern Ireland greener on the ground even though its pink on the political map, which they realise, is unlikely to change for the foreseeable future. What do I mean by this? Well, anything overtly British is systematically being diluted and erased behind the mask of equality and parity of esteem. Bang goes the flying of the Union Flag, the National anthem, emasculate and sterilise the police force and all it's trappings, that which had great success against Irish terrorism, disband the Royal Irish (HS), take away all physical signs of the border, demand the withdrawal of all mainland based troops, demand bi-lingual signage and public sector services, change names (de-Anglicisation) of towns/cities/streets (Londonderry's a classic), demanding the failed Euro (for the wrong reasons – e.g. the illusion we have all the same currency), demands for all-island economic harmonisation (what a can of worms), emasculation of the judiciary, to name but a few. They hide behind the "minority rights" within the state they refuse to recognise when it suits their agenda. And then shout from the roof tops about how a minority Unionist rump is dictating against the majority and its "national self-determination" in the imaginary state they aspire too. In short it is an INSIDIOUS LITTLE PLOT BY IRISH NATIONALIST IRRENTISTS. • On the Northern Ireland football team recently Killyleagh wanted to honour it's sporting hero "King" David Healy by naming a sports field after him. Apparently the Sinn Fein lap dogs, the Stoopies, are kicking up stink because it wouldn't be "neutral" taken to mean, he's a player of a team for a country they will only superficially recognise (this is after a successful and ongoing Football For All Campaign and the game that is universal and cross community). For God's sake they cant even bring themselves to call the country by the correct name (the North? Where's that? The North Pole? Besides geographically speaking that is incorrect as Donegal which is in the "north" is not in the country that they are set out to destroy! Mind you we call Northern Ireland Ulster which although is not totally incorrect since NI is in the province of Ulster it isn't all 9 counties these muppets go on about, its also ironic that the county system they ramble on about so much was introduced to Ireland by an English monarch, Elizabeth I oh the irony) Imagine if, for one minute the Stoopies or the Provo's in suits wanted to name a sports field after say a garlic star (don't start about that all inclusive "sporting" body, the GAA – that's another subject for another day) in a predominately Unionist town but the Unionists (aside from the fact that it's the GAA) refused on "neutrality" grounds, there would be massed protests, visits from American "observers", gangs of rampaging press, all claiming Unionist bigotry and an infringement of Nationalist rights, parity of esteem and equality, etc, etc, the double standards and hypocrisy is astounding. • We also now have a foreign country having its say in UK internal affairs through an expanding, unaccountable executive (starting of course from the Anglo-Irish Agreement and culminating in the 1998 terrorist charter) • We have mass murderers running free, unrepentant and feeling justified for what they have done. • An emasculated police service (who can act against militant Loyalism but not against militant Nationalism) which is powerless and also employs "legal" discrimination tactics in it's recruitment process to the detriment of all us "non-Catholics" (whether you think your one or not) • As mentioned, the disbandment of the proud Royal Irish Regiment Home Service. • The demands for MORE police reforms (i.e. terrorists allowed to join and a minister for policing so they can control it) BEFORE they'll even support and recognise law and order, in this country they only superficially recognise. • On the runs about to be pardoned without justice being served, Enniskillen murderer being one of them (that includes the 3 eco tourists of Columbia and all the other international ops) • They waste money on the promotion and white elephant of the Irish language (I have no problem with it per say, just that its been used and flogged to death by the Provo's as if it's an extension to their "struggle") • Demands for speaking rights for Northern Ireland Westminster MP's in the Irish Dail, further promoting and encouraging interference and increasing the confusion over the constitutional reality of the country. • An unaccountable Parades Commission (a.k.a. PC = Prod Control) that beats Orangeism when Loyalists riot and object AND when Nationalists object and riot, a see who can threaten the most game usually Protestant and Unionist culture and image suffering the greatest. • Attempted destruction of Orange culture. Split and harm the organisation (I know they fell for the bait) they knew Orangeism was the last institution that united Protestants of all classes, creeds and political opinion – historically the cement within Protestantism/Unionism/Loyalism. Break this and they know they are onto a winner and its no accident Portadown was chosen to start it all being the birthplace of Orangeism. A side effect and a bonus for them is bringing "Ulster's loyal citizens" into conflict with the very government and Crown they are loyal too! Jackpot. They may have given up their overt terror campaign (since 9/11) but their covert, low intensity one continues unabated. They grind the Unionist/Loyalist community down until they become defeatist, apathetic (we see the low election turn out within the Unionist community during elections and issues relating to poverty and social deprivation particularly in Protestant working class areas, for which I accept our inept political "leaders" have been too pre-occupied to deal with) They split and intimidate Unionism who also have no support, sympathy or allies in the GB government, certainly not the Irish one nor in international circles. They spilt the Orange Order whilst degrading our community and its legitimate culture and traditions labelling us sectarian, bigoted and stuck in a time warp (this is not helped by our so-called self-styled defenders) They have ethnically cleansed (no other words for it) both past and present, vulnerable working class Protestant areas like Londonderry City side (last post – the Fountain estate) New Barnsley, White City, Tigers Bay, Suffolk, Upper Ardoyne (Glenbyrn and Ardoyne itself) Cluan Place (still standing, just) Lower Oldpark, the border areas and rural areas all around Northern Ireland, the latest victims being the destruction of the Torrens area in North Belfast, all this while the police stand back and watch. They then dress it up as demographic change or "vandals and thugs" tokenism and whataboutery. Also of course is the ongoing campaign of destruction against Orange Halls all around the Province, there was at least two attacks this week and many go unreported or excused. When the tables are turned its labelled "catholic pogroms" ethnic cleansing, bigotry and sectarianism with the help of the pro-Nationalist press in Northern Ireland (vandalism when Prods, Orange Halls and Churches are attacked but sectarianism when "Catholics" Nationalists, GAA halls and Catholic Churches are attacked) Alongside public attacks against Unionism and the big bad "Unionist" terrorists who launch sectarian offensives against the "Catholic" community and of how Unionist political leaders stand idly by not uttering a word (even if they have condemned it, which they always do) and of how the Unionist community stand idly by!! HYPOCRISY. Criminality is a huge issue, it perverts what little democracy we have left in our country. I am CERTAINLY not excusing the scum that give Loyalism a bad name, but the Provo's by FAR have the biggest empire and pose the greatest threat, they own a multi-million pound private empire. We talk about the Provo's getting money off the nethandrals of the Irish-American variety but we forget about their "legit" businesses, the smuggling, the piracy, robberies, etc. Slab and Co. has a lot of fingers in a lot of pie's and it's going to take a lot more than one scoop by the Assets Recovery Agency as noted on last nights news to sort that little problem out. We also say that the banks are watched all over the world…..but are they? What about the banks that they own? If recent media reports are correct (investigating the Northern Bank Heist, also heard about this previous to that report) they were trying to open up a bank in Bulgaria just after it joined the EU. They were also trying to do business deals trying to shift the money. Because Bulgaria is quite a poor country that had joined the EU they have not fully harmonised all their laws and have not got any anti money laundering laws passed yet which is why it was an ideal country for the Provo's to set up a "legit" bank. Even if this turns out to be untrue (stranger things have happened) these cretins have friends and allies under every rock and in every hole on this planet, there are ways and means. Instead of working for a (dis) united Oirland how about promoting and working for a more plural, diverse Northern Ireland with its own regional Northern Irish/Ulster identity within the United Kingdom (whether it's a constitutional monarchy or a republic) with accountable, friendly co-operation with our southern Republic of Ireland neighbours? Now there's a wild suggestion, eh?

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: dianavan
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 06:49 PM

Would you mind breaking this into paragraphs so that I can read it?

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 13 Oct 05 - 07:08 PM

Picking up on just a couple of comments:

1. The famine.

Teribus,
There is plenty of evidence that, during that time, the English landlords did extract their rents, regardless of the fact that the Irish were starving, and nit picking about which year it started does not alter that.

2. The subject of unsolved murders.

Merseybeat,
Unsolved means that the miscreants are unknown, or that their involvement cannot be proved. You may state as an opinion that you believe the IRA were responsible, but you cannot possibly justify stating it as a fact, since those responsible are presumed innocent until proven guilty by a court of law.

I am not pro IRA in the least, but I detest the idea of slinging mud as an alternative to debate.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Divis Sweeney
Date: 14 Oct 05 - 03:39 AM

Dear Merseybeat
I am usually one of the first to reply to a post which I feel is factually wrong. Sorry I don't have the two weeks required to address your post.

Subject: RE: BS: I.R.A. Decommissioning
From: Albaman
Date: 14 Oct 05 - 06:31 AM

oh the tunnel vision of todays critics! Is there anywhere on this planet where there is not a war happening due to the mis-interpretation of one book!! cath, proddie, hindu, moslem,jew,islamics, unorthodox, orthodox, middle o the roadies, lefties, righties,. if the bloody roman who wrote the book could forsee what the outcome was I.m sure he would have burned it.