BS: The Irish Peace Process

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Apr 09 - 06:27 PM

Dion was also attempting to intimidate when he posted to Lox:
"You don't speak for republicans lox, best to remember that. "

Mick, no one has defended the retaining of weapons by Loyalists.
We are all in favour of decommissioning.
The point being made was that witholding weapons and using them is much worse than witholding them but not using them.
Will you agree that point?

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: MartinRyan
Date: 07 Apr 09 - 06:10 PM

Big Mick

Your "two ways" defence of GuestDion's posting is at best disingenuous, at worst grossly offensive. Pity.

Regards

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Big Mick
Date: 07 Apr 09 - 05:21 PM

Yes, Dave, that is one of the comments I am referring to. I am leaving it as an example of the kind of stuff that will not be tolerated. It actually can be taken two ways, though. There were many examples of assassination both ways. There is plenty of evidence of the old RUC and British Army turning their heads when the assassination of Republicans was happening. So the comment might have gone either way, and have been a question, such as, "how would you like your kids to have to face this?".

And one more reminder to all. You are allowed one identity ON MUDCAT, and no anonymous posting on this thread or any other.

As to your comment, DeG, dissident is the key word. And to be more correct, and not (IMO) play to emotions and generalizations, you should have said "RIRA sympathizer.

Finally, quit the digression, please. I have laid down the rules, which are the rules of this forum. If you want further discussion of the moderation, you may PM me, or email me at Mick at Mudcat dot org. But any further comments should address the topic at hand. Others will be deleted.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 07 Apr 09 - 05:10 PM

Mick,


If there is anything posted further that even resembles a threat or intimidation, real or implied, as opposed to vociferous stating of position, it will be deleted and further steps taken to insure that the poster is not allowed back.

I would rather close down all debate of these issues, near to my viewpoint though they may be, than to allow any sort of threat.

Do you not find Guest, Dions words to Keith - Ie

It's better than an OBE. One Behind the Ear.

DO YOU HAVE KIDS ?

Somewhat of a threat? It may or may not have bene meant that way but I am VERY glad I have not had a disident IRA sympathiser using those phrases to me.

Cheers

Dave

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Big Mick
Date: 07 Apr 09 - 11:50 AM

You know, you boyo's are so damned used to twisting the truth, that you cannot even see when you are doing it. No where was I defending the dissidents use of force. I have said many times that I support the peace process, mainly because the people of the North support it. Further, you attempt to twist my words. My comments about the legally constituted law enforcement groups in the North OF Ireland is directed at the Loyalists. I find the idea that decommissioning of arms, placing them beyond use to be a criteria for the Republicans embracing the peace process, but not applying the same to the Loyalists, to be bigoted and hypocritical. It is a simple concept, sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Your defending the Loyalists right to keep weapons while insisting the Republicans decommission theirs is proof of your bigotry.

Do not take my lack of response heretofore as any kind of sign. I was simply away for a few days.

Mick

I will give one last warning here. And in this, I am wearing my moderators hat. If there is anything posted further that even resembles a threat or intimidation, real or implied, as opposed to vociferous stating of position, it will be deleted and further steps taken to insure that the poster is not allowed back. It does not matter which side of the ideological debate you are on. WE WILL NOT ALLOW MUDCAT TO BE USED FOR THESE PURPOSES!!! Feel free to debate, with passion, anger, facts, propaganda ..... whatever. Those are the free exchanges of positions, ideologies, and points of view that are welcomed and encouraged. I am watching this one closely. Do not think that because I am ideologically aligned in the debate that I will not enforce this uniformly. These posts above, while I was gone, came very close to the line. I would rather close down all debate of these issues, near to my viewpoint though they may be, than to allow any sort of threat.

Do not push this one.

also, using multiple identities is NOT allowed on Mudcat. Your posts will be deleted until you begin to use consistent identities. They can be a nom de pleume, but it must be consistent. That means a consistent identity in all threads, Beth/Kenny.

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Ireland
Date: 04 Apr 09 - 10:19 PM

I will never defend Willie Frazer and his supporters but I can understand how they can be the way they are,and that they are just as much victims as anyone is in the land. He has family murdered, some say under suspicious circumstances. He has said that he has no problem with the ordinary Catholic and that he would support them if contacted, do not know how much of that was tongue in cheek though.

"as you will recall, those burned out of their homes en masse in the early days of the troubles; in addition the civil rights protestors who were attacked for demanding what we all now take for granted."

This was not specific to the Catholic community, the Falls had Catholics and the Shankill Protestants who mourned their neighbours getting burnt out of their homes. The "ghettoizing" of those areas by the terrorists groups led to the hard lined attitudes.

After all it does no ones cause any good to have so-called antagonists living peacefully together. The CRM had Protestant members also we need to remember these important details.

"remember "I Ran Away"?" Also remember the border campaign leading up to the 1960's, we are all living under the legacy of one act or another do we let it destroy us or take the real chance of peace and run with it.

I will concede to certain things that contributed to our turmoil but hands have to go up on both sides to enable this peace to grow, honesty is more than just called for it is the bedrock to build the peace on and it cannot be cracked by half truth's from either side.

You cannot say it was solely the loyalists actions that brought about the "troubles", too simplistic and a half truth, the border campaign started why? No murder gangs were running the streets then (in no way am I justifying the murdering scum you talk about) but they were not to blame for starting that failed IRA campaign.

Do we really need to argue the whole bs all over again,our problems stemmed from those who were too easy to be lead by half truth and those who were only too willing to spout those half truths and lead us, and that applies to both sides.

In all your writings on N.Ireland not once have you examined the Republics role and the reason why is known only to you. Suffice for me to say that no one talks about Ireland without having some knowledge of both sides of the borders involvement.

Basically I do not want to go tit for tat and what I am saying is the fault is not all one sided if your a fair minded person you will see there are no innocents and that some people have a reason for the views they had (I am not referring to terrorists acts). Not that they were good enough reasons by to-days standards but is that not the case in all history.

For instance during partition the general opinion was the republic for Catholics and the North for Protestants, a reasonable opinion at that time.

Only problem was that thought was carried out off it's time and built upon by bigots taking advantage of the prejudices carried out by the establishments (Catholic Church)of the Republic. I will not go into the hardships placed upon protestant and mixed marriages etc as I said they were used to stir hatred among the ignorant.

'we need to defend our communities' and our only crime was loyalty and other bs excuses for being in existence. They were seen for what they were excuses.I see very few reports on them because of that nonsense everyone saw through it,these asswipes destroyed communities and only protected their loyalty to the £.

Did you look at the early Panorama reports in the link not much siding with loyalists and that set the trend, I am not really getting your objections and connection to the media etc. Let the fault lie where it truly belongs at the feet of those who carried out terrorists acts and those who lead them. I do not know who was worse those who were easily led or those who done the leading.

"for example the fatal ambush by SAS of PIRA at Loughgall" it was "fatal" ambush that misled me, sorry I am used to the whinge by some at IRA being shot by military.

I am not going to deny the Gov did not use propaganda but question if it was to prolong the troubles,that was an unwanted side effect,too much pain was being caused to want the crap to continue.

What made it hard for the average mainland Briton was that they simply did not want to know, any voting was vetoed by the Unionist block vote, which kept that idiot Paisley in power far far too long.

Hindsight is wonderful, but we should have had Stormont up and running long long ago it would have neutralised that unionist block voting.

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Nickhere
Date: 04 Apr 09 - 07:05 PM

Irelalnd, I tend to agree with "What I say is that we all in N.Ireland have had our lives shaped by prejudices and now we have a chance to shake these prejudices off and that is a threat to dissidents"

It does show the tensions are still under the surface, ready to flare up quickly. If you want to see the worst of that world, check out this site (I believe we've had some trolls from the past from that site, so feel free to have a look but be wary not to 'draw them on us')

"FAIR"

It is fairly one-sided as I'm sure you'll agree!

There are some on both sides who would like to see the conflict go on for many reasons, including genuine belief in the 'cause' (whatever side they're on); as a cover for more criminal activity; as a defence mechanism - afterall people who've been killers for years have made many enemies and their best chance of staying alive remains the paramilitary structure that protects them.

As long as the current peaceful situation remains there's some hope of a peaceful future. It might take several generations for the bitterness and memories to subside - as they have down south, as the generation involved in the Civil War finally die out and their grandchildren forget or at least feel it less strongly.

But peace must be built on foundations of fairness, inclusiveness and equality as I'm sure you'll agree, or things will end up back where they were.

I still think peace etc., could have been had 35 years ago or more had the political will and simple humanity existed to provide it.

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Nickhere
Date: 04 Apr 09 - 06:51 PM

Thanks for your response Ireland. But also let ME clear up[ a few points too! Namely,

"The media covering of the IRA's decommissioning was more news worthy than loyalists for the simple reason no IRA no need for any loyalist groups to "defend" their community against them"

Though I accept you put the term 'defend' in commas, bear in mind that to begin with it was catholic communities that needed defending from loyalists - as you will recall, those burned out of their homes en masse in the early days of the troubles; in addition the civil rights protestors who were attacked for demanding what we all now take for granted. The IRA was moribund at the time - remember "I Ran Away"?

There was no need for loyalists to defend anything, just a real need for them to be fair and treat their fellow countrymen as human beings. Rather than do this, many decided to attack them instead. Peace could have been had way back then had some people been willing to give the steam off their pee (sorry about the expression, it's just the best metaphor to hand). One can't have it both ways - try to suppress a large part of the population and yet expect a peaceful existence. I'm not trying to excuse the violence that followed BTW, just partly to explain some of it and secondly to state the logic of it.

In my opinion it is this loyalist line that 'we need to defend our communities' that needed to be addressed in the media over the last 30 years. Instead it went practically unchallenged by a media and body politic that was more interested in defeating the IRA than in seeking genuine justice and peace. Both media and body politic IMHO are as guilty of what followed as the actual gunmen.

""fatal ambush by SAS of PIRA at Loughgall" would you prefer that the IRA had bulldosed the gate and slaughtered those inside the police station?"

I dunno how you get that from what I was saying. But let me clarify anyway. No, of course not, I was just saying that to me the ambush was a clear military action by the SAS, and as such couldn't be classified as murder of the kind more frequently carried out by loyalist groups.

Regarding the so-called Republican propaganda machine, yes of course republicans had their propaganda and occasionally their efforts at hyperbole would unmask this rather more clearly as when in one issue of IPRN they described loyalist killers 'intent on wiping out the whole family' rushing past the young daughter in the hallway t shoot her father and brother. But surely if they were intent on wiping out the family...??

But another side of this coin can be found in Liz Curtis' study on the media coverage of Northern Ireland "Truth the first casualty" , the efforts of the FRU and Colin Wallace to put out disinformation etc., Also check out "War and Words: The Northern Ireland Media Reader" edited by Bill Rolston and David Miller. The British government was also VERY active in this area, and thus IMHO helped prolong the conflict as I said above by making it difficult for the average voting mainland Briton to get any real handle on what was happening.

Book links -

War & Words


Sorry, can't find link for Curtis book yet


In answer to your last question, Yes.

BTW - happy to hear your brother survived.

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Ireland
Date: 04 Apr 09 - 02:57 PM

""The British Army admitted that they could not defeat the IRA. Furthermore they describe the IRA as "a professional, dedicated, highly skilled and resilient force", while loyalist paramilitaries and other republican groups are described as "little more than a collection of gangsters"."

Have people not been saying that wrt loyalists and in particular the present various IRA groups. So are you not stating the obvious?

WRT the statement do not hold all British Army commanders to that statement,wrt the IRA, we have to remember people do get carried away with a bit of melodramatic prose which others would not agree with.

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Ireland
Date: 04 Apr 09 - 11:03 AM

First let me clear one thing up, I did not make it clear that my brother survived, I am sorry for that,he did loose many friends though. Please excuse my error.

I will try to deal with the funding issues and hopefully you will see I have no truck with either side, I see warts and all.

This link will show how close to real trouble N.Ireland has been, and maybe give an indication to the "maturity" shown by the loyalists leaders. These idiots were shooting at PSNI just over a year ago for goodness sake.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2007/jul/29/uk.northernireland

One point though, the Gov was stuck between a rock and a hard place, people in Belfast,both sides,needed their areas refurbished, in all senses of the word.The nat\rep side was getting this help, the union\loyalist was but not at the same rate. This was causing problems among the hardliners, to settle that down more funding had to be released, no matter if loyalists held weapons or not.

As I said before, the holding on of weapons has little to do with wanting to attack the IRA's, or it would have happened by now, it is to keep power within it own organisation.

When we get more normalised as a society people will drift out of the loyalist groups, as there will be no need for them to be there, eventually the weapons will be left to rust.

I still say they deserve some recognition for the restraint they have shown, considering the show of willingness to use weapons as little as over a year ago. (news report)

Most importantly you have to remember that SF\IRA have praised the loyalists, they see no real risk to peace, if there was they would have retaliated by now.

"But they still have their arms and the story is hardly covered by the media - quite unlike the situation that obtained up to the PIRA decommissioning."

The media covering of the IRA's decommissioning was more news worthy than loyalists for the simple reason no IRA no need for any loyalist groups to "defend" their community against them.

In real terms peace was never the gift of the loyalists to give, it was the IRA's and that loyalists holding onto their weapons,as it has been shown, did not affect the peace in any way.

"Added to that, I hope you also accept your statement that the vast majority of the IRA's victims were Catholic will knock on the head frequent loyalist claims that the IRA were sectarian. It's an odd form of sectarianism to 'kill your own'"

I must say your statement implies I am some sort of loyalist terrorist supporter. I never inferred the murders were sectarian,I pointed out the IRA and their supporters or apologists do not have a foot to stand on when they whinge about catholic murders, as they were the responsible for the highest proportion of them.

Placing a name on these murders make them no less vile, killing for sectarian reasons or for the "cause" makes no difference to the victims or their families. So lets look at the murders as a human rights issue and the IRA denied more people of the basic human right, to life, than all the rest combined.

Also what has been shown over the years violence will never achieve a United Ireland.

"The security forces were well-known for being sectarian up to recent times,"

Again we have this sectarian label, I wonder who it was that put the loyalists and nat\rep terrorists behind bars, and believe me they went after the loyalist with more zeal.

You fail to mention the deaths caused by collusion of the Gardi and the IRA, would all Gards be IRA sympathisers?

Lets look at this in context of fighting a war,after all that is what the IRA call's the last 30 or more years. Name me a country that has not deployed double agents, infiltrators, used shady elements to carryout some acts against their enemy?

A bit of childishness is being displayed on this issue the IRA used dirty trick but faced with their own medicine they cry foul.

I am not defending the use of such tactics but can understand it, if we look at the IRA's involvement during WW2 they adopted the my enemy of my enemy is my friend,so they assisted the Nazi's during the war and after it.

Would the use of loyalist terrorists,who hate the IRA, be so wrong, and given the IRA's claims of being an army why whinge at having such tactics used against them?

If we use the same reasoning as you," It's an odd form of sectarianism to 'kill your own'", over the years would the Catholic Chief Constable's and senior policemen be implicit in sectarian killings? Who has the moral high ground? neither is my answer.

"fatal ambush by SAS of PIRA at Loughgall" would you prefer that the IRA had bulldosed the gate and slaughtered those inside the police station?

Just as the IRA saw the security forces as the enemy and exercised a ruthless murder campaign against them, do they have any right to expect different treatment and if so why? Are they not soldiers in an active army.

At least the were given some chance to defend themselves, a well known ex terrorist walks the shopping mall where he slaughtered an off duty soldier in front of his family, calmly walked away to take his family to the park. That is known fact, I will not name the terrorist.

"The loyalist Shankill Butchers" why do you put the label loyalist, is it an attempt to justify the IRA's existence or are you saying all people who hold the opposite view to IRA supproters are in support of the likes of the butchers?

These peoples actions were reviled by all right thinking people in N.Ireland on both sides, they are no ones heroes. They took advantage of the times to commit their murders, I hope they roast in hell.

We can give counters to every atrocity we care to mention that's the very nature of N.Ireland politics there is no winners in such debates, all that happens is people dig in to their deep held prejudices and justify them in their own minds.

You want to talk about propaganda, the IRA had the best propaganda machine ever, the BBC, follow this link http://news.bbc.co.uk/panorama/hi/front_page/newsid_7968000/7968671.stm

Look through the videos and tell me no propaganda was at work by nat\rep. Especially the women claiming there was no IRA nor weapons in the Divis Flats and that the Gov. was using the IRA as an excuse to attack poor catholics.

The best video is the initial one it shows Ian Paisley in his early days with his American accent, listen to the tone of the reporter, the IRA's cause has been well and truly represented in the media.

"Loyalists like to make out their violence is only ever a 'response' to republican violence."

Do we not have ex rep\nat terrorists basically making the same excuse, neither side as I said before has the moral high ground and in making such assertions it gives an insight to how you view terrorist in N.Ireland.

Gusty Spence the man arrested for the Malvern Murders was to give an abject apology, not that it justifies his murders, but he saw the errors of his ways. Go here for an account of that time
http://www.sharedtroubles.net/storydetail.php?story_id=1046

What I say is that we all in N.Ireland have had our lives shaped by prejudices and now we have a chance to shake these prejudices off and that is a threat to dissidents.

Can I ask have you ever setfoot in N.Ireland or lived here?

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Lox
Date: 04 Apr 09 - 10:33 AM

Wow - some pretty snidy comments being thrown around here.

Who cares about the ordinary working Irish man?

Sounds like some are more interested in their ego and sense of self importance.

Some are just plain wrong.

Pira aren't elected yet Dion.

And you certainly aren't.

Till then they and you have no mandate.


Just so happens by the way that I am a Collins man and not a Dev man.

But Dion, they lived in a different reality. There is no comparison between the quality of life then and the quality of life now.

The economic problems happening in Ireland today are part of a global recession. We aren't being sucked dry by "the Brits" the way we were back then.

Our problems aren't the result of an occupation any more.

Politically, the issues we face are to do with finding solutions to differences between loyalists and republicans.

But now you're going on about "freestaters", are you trying to whip up another civil war amongst your own?


The Irish civil war was the most shameful event in our history.

Enough blood was spilt then to last for the duration of Irish history past and Irish history to come.


Irish culture is made great by thinkers and peaceful men.

People like Oscar Wilde, Brendan Behan, Dan O'Connell, Yeats, Joyce, O'Connor, etc etc etc.


It is also made great by our history of never invading another country, making slaves of another nation and being known all over the world as both the best of hosts and the best of guests.

When we go abroad, to rugby matches, football matches or just to wedding holidays or to find work, we are remembered afterwards as warm genuine fun and often wise.

We have a great tradition of music, art, and literature.

Our heros, Pearce, Connolly et al are known in Ireland and all over the world as great heroes because they sacrificed themselves first, by leading from the front. They were not bullies and they did not put the lives of ordinary people at risk and that is why they were heroes.

They also had a clearly recognizable enemy.

Again, circumstances are Completely different today.



Dion, the world is full of different people with different priorities and points of view.

People either learn to find solutions to their problems by communicating or they continue an eternal cycle of killing death and misery.

Pira sentences the children of Ireland to a life of grief and fear by keeping the violence going.

Bullets in ankles, in knees and OBE's as you call them, are trademarks a type of thinking that has nothing to do with the culture of sweet beautiful Ireland.

The kind of justice of which you speak is on a par with the kind of justice meted out by lynch mobs in the southern states of the USA before civil rights put an end to it.

And I though the IRA were defenders of civil rights!!!


I have children Dion, and they like me will be proud to be Irish and will want our Island one day to be a Peaceful republic.

And despite the obstacles placed in our way, by the likes of Pira as much as anyone else - Our Day Will Come!

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Apr 09 - 06:01 AM

Guest Dion omits to mention a few other celebrated instances of "justice" IRA style post GFA:

- Robert McCartney was found guilty and executed for what Guest Dion? Making a casual remark that somebody's girlfriend took exception to, unfortunately the company was IRA and the sentence was death with the whole neighbourhood told in no uncertain terms to keep their mouths shut - many in the neighbourhood had children didn't they Guest Dion, were they used as incentive for the degree of co-operation required?

- Paul Quinn was accused and found guilty in absentia of dipping into some sort of cross-border scam that was deemed to be the preserve of the local PIRA, or members of their families. Lured to a meeting with friends whose own lives were under threat if they didn't co-operate, justice was meted out by, what was it nine men with iron bars, who literally battered Paul Quinn to death breaking every single bone in his body.

Great "justice" system you've got there Guest Dion. How it is that the entire population of Ireland haven't risen up and shopped the whole bloody lot of you I'll never know. Collectively they're a waste of space that use up far too much oxygen that could be better used by others.

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Nickhere
Date: 03 Apr 09 - 09:59 PM

Correction - that should have been McGurk's Bar, of course

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Nickhere
Date: 03 Apr 09 - 09:48 PM

Well Ireland, I AM sorry to hear about your loss, of course that makes the issue personal for you.

But I'll try and deal with some of the points you made. Firstly, I don't know if the comment was aimed at me, but I was certainly not suggesting that loyalists hanging onto their weapons was beneficial to anyone, rather the opposite.

(2) Yes, there was some talk of withholding funding from loyalist groups that had broken their own proclaimed ceasefire by engaging in murder and racketeering etc., But they still have their arms and the story is hardly covered by the media - quite unlike the situation that obtained up to the PIRA decommissioning.

(3) Stats - The PIRA killed mainly catholics? Maybe. The UVF and UDA certainly did, as the vast majority of their victims were killed for sectarian reasons - i.e simply because they were catholic. By contrast 132 or so of republican victims (i.e killed by one of the various republican paramilitaries) were killed because they were protestant alone. These figures have been carefully researched (not by me) and published for anyone who wants to check them. The book is called "An Index of Deaths in the Northern Ireland Conflict 1969 - 1993" Obviously it doesn't include the last few killed after that date, but otherwise it's pretty comprehensive. It includes religion, political affiliation (if any / if known), date and place and manner of death, group responsible etc., for each victim.

Added to that, I hope you also accept your statement that the vast majority of the IRA's victims were Catholic will knock on the head frequent loyalist claims that the IRA were sectarian. It's an odd form of sectarianism to 'kill your own'

(4) Lumping loyalist murders in with security forces is not that far-fetched. The security forces were well-known for being sectarian up to recent times, and the issue of collusion is no longer a theory. Obviously not all killings by security forces can be described as loyalist murders - for example the fatal ambush by SAS of PIRA at Loughgall - but there are many other cases where the issue is far less clear.

(5) "There is no dirtier trick than...." Woah! Don't get me started here!!! There are lots of dirty tricks, for example killing people with thousands of razor cuts (The loyalist Shankill Butchers), slaughtering innocent people enjoying a drink in a bar (The Droppin' Well Pub bomb - planted by loyalists), incinerating scores of innocent shoppers (Dublin and Monaghan) etc., etc., Neither side are saints here.

But for me the worst dirty trick was all the propaganda, the distortion of the truth - from both sides, but the British side had far greater resources and power - that kept people at each other's throats the last 30 years. The British Tabloid papers with their total disregard for objectivity and hate-stoking rhetoric, MPs that did not care or want to resolve what was happening. Some of the papers and politicians south of the border were not much better either.

(6) By the way, in case you are getting me wrong here, I'm not trying to say that violence is the way forward or that I would like to see more of it. I originally just wanted to comment on the idea - not mine, but introduced by someone else - that loyalists were being 'restrained' and 'showing maturity' (I'm not quoting, I'm paraphrasing) by not using their guns - guns which in my opinion they shouldn't have if they are as committed to peace and democracy as is being claimed here. As has been pointed out the vast majority of republicans have given up their guns and shown their commitment to the political / democratic route, unlike most of their loyalist counterparts. Loyalists like to make out their violence is only ever a 'response' to republican violence. But the IRA was practically moribund when the Malvern street murders happened in 1966 or the Shankill Butchers were at work in their early days. Neither were the civil rights protestors asking for independence at the start - just to be treated as equal citizens of the northern statelet, for which crime they were met with loyalist baseball bats, bricks as well as police batons.

But just to reiterate - I'm not condoning the dissident republicans either.

(7) Earlier Irish history... don't get me started!

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Ireland
Date: 03 Apr 09 - 08:48 PM

You're now applying a hierarchy to republicanism unless your from the six counties you will never know our struggle.

So much for a United Ireland,here we see an example of the type of great thinkers that kept the nonsense going down the years.

1% thats all of the population that supports the political wing of the dissidents,who exactly are they talking for.

Just as the bullet will not keep N.Ireland British it will never make it United, people are shooting themselves in their own feet here.

Wake up to it.

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Ireland
Date: 03 Apr 09 - 06:58 PM

"It's better than an OBE. One Behind the Ear."

Are you prepared to abide by the same kind of law if you cross the line? Say not having a car license,what would it be a broken arm or leg, what would your tariffs be?

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 03 Apr 09 - 06:55 PM

I find the veiled threats that Dion is making quite appaling and hope that the moderators act accordingly. Even if they do sympathise.

DeG

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Ireland
Date: 03 Apr 09 - 06:47 PM

No one is defending private armies of any kind especially loyalist, the claim that there has been no calling for their disarming is a complete falsehood.Sanctions have been taken against loyalist because they did not disarm, lets get the real story here.

We have various political talkshows and there has never been a time that disarming of loyalist has not been called for,no political argument concerning the various groups could have been held without the condemnation of loyalists for not disarming.

The internal power struggle within the loyalist groups is the more reasonable reason for them holding onto arms and of course those who deal drugs along with wanting to screw more concessions from the government like SF\IRA did.

To give the idea that loyalist holding onto arms is beneficial to anyone in the greater community is absolutely pathetic and dishonest no one in Ireland wants loyalists to have weapons.

We have to acknowledge that their refusal to use the weapons deserves some recognition even their old adversary the IRA has applauded the loyalists for their restraint and what do we read here, shows how some people want to play the old what about them card.

"But there are reliable figures that demonstrate that all republican paramilitaries between them have been responsible for about 1,700 deaths, while Loyalists have been responsible for about 800. The security forces have been responsible for the remainder (about 1,000) but you must remember that includes the RUC and UDR both of which at times housed loyalists able to kill under cloak of legality, plus the issue of collusion of course."

To paraphrase Mick,what utter bollocks. Not to the figures but this lumping the loyalist murders in with the security forces as if they were hand in hand.

Words like dirty tricks and collusion have been used during the fight against the IRA, there is no bigger dirty trick than slaughtering twins in their mothers womb, remember Omagh,no dirtier trick than blocking all exits in a hotel and pouring petrol all over the place to roast their victims to death, my brother being a victim of such tricks, remember La Mon.

As for the stats, what has been glossed over is, out off the 1700 IRA\rep slayings the vast majority of those slain were Catholics,the IRA murdered the very people they say they were protecting.

Now look at what is happening with the dissidents,they are oppressing the very community they come from,and what do we read here, why has the loyalists not decommissioned?

Could this be due to the fact that loyalist are not getting involved that there is a need to implicate them any way people can in order to justify their own ignorance and bigotry.

AS for the stats read them here make up your own mind:
http://www.wesleyjohnston.com/users/ireland/past/troubles/troubles_stats.html#statusperpetrator


I will not comment on the one sided history lesson, suffice to say come on who are you trying to fool.

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Nickhere
Date: 03 Apr 09 - 03:14 PM

Teribus, it depends on what you mean by ceasefire. There have been a string of murders plus some violent feuding between loyalist gangs that has quietened down over the last few years if you'll recall the TV and news of about 2004 / 5. Now even at that time there wasn't much call in the media for loyalists to disarm. It seemed once republicans had decommissioned no-one else was expected really to follow suite. The implication is that republicans alone have been responsible for the mess and once their guns were silent, that was that. the stats tell a different story. In media reports and headlines republicans have at times been accused of being responsible for almost the total of the north's death toll. At best they were accused of little over half of it. But there are reliable figures that demonstrate that all republican paramilitaries between them have been responsible for about 1,700 deaths, while Loyalists have been responsible for about 800. The security forces have been responsible for the remainder (about 1,000) but you must remember that includes the RUC and UDR both of which at times housed loyalists able to kill under cloak of legality, plus the issue of collusion of course.

It also seems to be regularly forgotten that it was unionists - not republicans - who introduced the gun into 20th cent Ireland. They staged an armed coup d'etat in 1912 which didn't become an actual bloodbath because the British government backed down in the face of the threat and British army officers threatened mutiny if obliged to quell any rebellion. And what were they objecting to? Home Rule as part of the Empiah, not even independence.

Republicans saw how the gun could be effective and formed the IVF - the forerunner to the IRA - in 1913. They were accused of getting help from Britain's enemy - Germany - during WW1 but ironically it had been Austria - Germany's main ally - that had supplied the UVF's guns in 1912.

My point stands - Loyalists who hang onto their guns - just as dissident republicans - do so in the expectation of using them at some point: why else would you keep them except as 'insurance' (or perhaps to enforce the UVF's and UDA's drug dealing). If they were committed to peace they'd have consigned the guns to he dust bin when the main body of republicans did. Instead it seems to be the case with loyalists 'first in, last out'

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: GUEST,Keith A o Hertford
Date: 03 Apr 09 - 02:33 PM

I hope the mods leave Dion's contribution in place.
It shows what nice people they are.
Some people in Republican areas have had bullets fired through their knee and ankle joints in the last few days.
Dion approves of that.
If the likes of him ever gain power, people will look back on British rule as golden days.

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: GUEST,lox
Date: 03 Apr 09 - 01:17 PM

No, not the whole community.

They spoke for themselves at the ballot box and their chosen representatives have spoken for them on TV.


But lets examine this in a bit more depth.

I'm Irish, from the republic of Ireland, born in the Combe in Dublin, and my parents were both republicans.

I personally think that Ireland should be united.


So ... I'm Irish ... and I believe in a united Ireland.

That would make me ... erm ... an Irish republican.

I speak for myself.

So I certainly speak for one.

Which is as many as any other unelected representative speaks for.

So I speak for them as much as you or RIRA do Dion.

Best to remember that.

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 03 Apr 09 - 09:51 AM

Well put as ever Lox.
Dave gnomo and I both wrote to our MPs on the issue of Loyalist weapons some time ago at the request of contributors to a discussion here.

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: GUEST,lox
Date: 03 Apr 09 - 09:41 AM

How is it not hypocritical for loyalists to demand that nationalists disarm and then not to do so themselves?

The difference between Pira in 1972 and Rira today is that Pira had the sympathy of many republicans and the understanding of many republican sympathizers so they were able to Infer a sense of legitimacy. The other difference was that as a result of the old systems, loyalists effectively had a monopoly on local government and public services which meant that republicans were effectively unrepresented, except by impotent politicians and terrorists.

Today the context is radically different. Republicans are represented proportionately in government and much better in public services while the employment demographic has also improved drastically.

Republicans today don't have sympathy with Rira any more than most Brits have sympathy for the BNP.

Rira don't represent republicans in the north, they represent themselves.

There are shitbags in ebery community and they will use the history of the troubkes as an excuse to indulge their perversions.

The best way to keep the rest of safe is to make sure that none of them, natonalist or loyalist, have guns.

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Ireland
Date: 02 Apr 09 - 10:24 PM

The amount of inaccuracies that Mick has put down here shows his own bigotry.

If instead of listening to secondhand tainted news, you got it first hand that bigotry might not exist.

The holding of weapons by loyalists are not a threat, if you had seen the rally or been there in Belfast when both sides of the divide basically had a love fest to ensure everyone that no loyalist retaliations would occur,you would realise that.

Loyalist do not want to take on any republican group, simply because they would get their heads handed to them from all sides of the communities here,they will not nor do not seem to have the will to fight. They did not get rid off the hardliners for no reason I am talking mad dog,Shoukri etc.

You make mention of LEGALLY CONSTITUTED police force and army, again you show an ignorance of the subject you comment on.

No one wants the army on the streets of N.Ireland, not legally constituted nor private or dissident, people who know what goes on here would know that. Look at he uproar when Orde wanted the special forces brought in according to you those objecting would not have a foot to stand on,LEGALLY CONSTITUTED and all that.


As for loyalist provocation do please mention a few, try to link them to the murders, try to link them to the recent rioting and try to link them to the idiotic hijacking,burnings,and the great act of making an innocent man drive his bus loaded with explosives to a police station. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/1627502.stm

Once you do all that Mick, explain why the dissidents are causing all the trouble mainly in nat\rep areas of Belfast.

Is it because the LEGALLY CONSTITUTED police force you cite arrested Duffy and others who they charged with the murder of the policeman and the soldiers,some do not want to abide by the law and again they are the people your defending .

BTW that LEGALLY CONSTITUTED Army,RIR,had a home coming parade,at which Duffy was in charge of a section of those involved in a counter demonstration, that is known dissidents and ex IRA worked hand in hand that day joking and laughing with each other not much sign of a split there.

Would such double standards not justify the loyalists,in their eyes, holding onto their weapons. Simply put there was no gulf between the various IRA's on that day, see any hypocrisy here.

Let me point out another, HolyCross, we have quite rightly the condemnation of the Holycross "demonstration" by loyalist's. But little uproar at the leaving of a hijacked vehicle at the gates of the same school.

Mick your defending or making excuse's for the very people who are revisiting the "troubles" on their own community, god help us if these fellows you hold in some esteem try the same with the union\loyalist community.

The truth about us is nothing to do with simplistic English imperialism bs, it is pure hypocrisy and self interest from all sides and the willingness of idiots to be easily lead from the first time anyone stepped foot on Ireland until now.

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 02 Apr 09 - 04:37 PM

Can you not see that you are becoming an apolgist yourself, Mick? There is NO excuse for the Republican return to gun barrel politics. Isn't it about time these thugs allowed the LEGALY CONSTITUTED (your words not mine) government of Northern Ireland govern in peace?

Surely you are not saying that the fact that some Loyalists hold weapons is a reason for a return to the shootings and bombings. Are you? If not, why mention it at all? Particularly seeing as the allegedly armed Loyalists have not, as has been pointed out, used those weapons to damage the LEGALY CONSTITUTED police force? What are the dissident Republicans hoping to achieve? Goad the Loyalists into retaliation? Well, it doesn't seem to be working does it. If it does then, and only then, will the Loyalaists be equaly wrong; but as yet the only ones doing ANY harm to the peace process with their store of guns are those allegedy on the Republican side. And the only apologists for those seem to be from the other side of the Atlantic.

Sorry, Mick. I usualy admire your words and you have, as you know, swayed my opinion on occasion. But this is hypocracy and bigotry indeed.

DeG

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: MartinRyan
Date: 02 Apr 09 - 03:23 AM

protagonist/antagonist

There's a pair of them in it! Or, as we Irish say - "Ayther will do!"

Regards

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Apr 09 - 03:12 AM

protagonists?

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 02 Apr 09 - 03:05 AM

I am so tired of the bullshit about the loyalist weapons decomissioning. Start with years of broken promises, violence against protestants that outnumbers violence by Loyalists, repeated attempts like this by Republicans determined to destroy the peace process because they know it represents the end of a status quo which works in their favor, and a Press that refuses to recognize that it is the Loyalist side that is holding the cease fire in the face of repeated provocation. Add in that there was never an agreement to decommission at a specific time by the loyalists.

These are not my words, but Mick's.
I merely transposed the antagonists.

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: MartinRyan
Date: 02 Apr 09 - 02:38 AM

lox
__________________________________________________________________
"It survives because of the underlying refusal of a significant proportion of Irish people (and of the diaspora) to accept that anything other than violence will achieve Irish "unity" (me)

"It survives because of long term collective psychological damage caused by generations of violence and murder." (you)
___________________________________________________

Quite.

Regards

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Teribus
Date: 02 Apr 09 - 01:17 AM

Couldn't agree more Big Mick, so when Duffy & Co are brought before the courts there will be no witness intimidation. And the murderers of Robert McCartney and Paul Quinn will likewise be turned in to allow the LEGALLY CONSTITUTED police force to hold those that violate the law responsible for their actions. For some reason I don't think any of that is ging to happen. Duffy will be condemned on forensic evidence the murderers of Paul Quinn and Robert mcCartney will walk free, odd in the latter case as the PIRA offered to shoot them, so they must be known. As you say Big Mick - Hipocrisy and bigotry.

Lox IIRC the "split" in Republican ranks occurred in 1998. At that time the PIRA had neither handed in their weapons or put them beyond use. The man who leads the RIRA was a PIRA Quarter Master the materials for the Omagh bomb came from PIRA stocks as do the rest of the RIRA and CIRA arms.

As to the arguement that Republican groups holding a ceasefire count while the dissidents can be discounted as being representative. Exactly the same could have been said about the PIRA back in 1972.

And by all means Big Mick go back and pull some of my old posts and find one where I condone, support or attempt to justify any Loyalist, or indeed any paramilitary group in Ireland. Go even further try and find a single post of mine where I condone, support or attempt to justify the actions of any terrorist group.

As for "Time for you to take your meddling, unwanted interference, and hypocrisy, and go home." Whether you like it or not the area of the island of Ireland known as Northern Ireland IS PART of the United Kingdom of Great Brtain and Northern Ireland, by the will and desire of the majority of the people of that province. Don't you dare presume to tell me where I can and where I cannot go within the borders of my own country. And it is you and the likes of you across there in the USA who Stan Rogers described as "kindred in nothing but name" should take your own advice and "take your meddling, unwanted interference, and hypocrisy, and go home."

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Big Mick
Date: 01 Apr 09 - 09:06 PM

Very weak response from a hypocritical apologist who conveniently ignored the central point. If the Loyalists really were buying into the Peace process, they would decommission there arms, put them beyond reach (as the Republicans have), and allow the LEGALLY CONSTITUTED police force and army to hold those that violate the law responsible for their actions.

Hypocrisy and bigotry.

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Lox
Date: 01 Apr 09 - 07:24 PM

"They didn't exist until they broke away from the main body of republicans who are still abiding by the ceasefire they signed up to."


To be a bit more accurate, the above should say;

these groups didn't form until after the republicans agreed up to a ceasefire.

Saying they broke away suggests division amongst republicans - which is not there as republicans are united in their position that they are not associated with these thugs.

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Lox
Date: 01 Apr 09 - 06:41 PM

"It survives because of the underlying refusal of a significant proportion of Irish people (and of the diaspora) to accept that anything other than violence will achieve Irish "unity""

It survives because of long term collective psychological damage caused by generations of violence and murder.

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Lox
Date: 01 Apr 09 - 06:13 PM

The "dissident republican groups" didn't sign up to a cease fire.

They didn't exist until they broke away from the main body of republicans who are still abiding by the ceasefire they signed up to.

In terms of legitimate representation, the republicans are still adhering to the ceasefire.

The dissidents are not representative of republicans - sinn fein are - how do we know? republicans voted for them.

The dissidents represent themselves.

The republicans have decommissioned their arms.

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Teribus
Date: 01 Apr 09 - 05:20 PM

The "Loyalist" groups are on and holding to a "ceasefire" (FACT)

The dissident Republican Groups are not" (FACT)

Don't think you actually addressed that in your tirade there Big Mick.

Now come on break with tradition admit it what is stated above there is perfectly true. Or do we have to wait until "the dissident groups are just that and they are small in number" get one of their 300lb car bombs to go off - last successful one was Omagh wasn't it?? And then Big Mick you'll still find excuses for them?

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: MartinRyan
Date: 01 Apr 09 - 02:12 PM

It's very simple, if rather depressing, really. Violent Irish nationalism runs on a cycle of about 25 - 30 years i.e. is generational. It survives because of the underlying refusal of a significant proportion of Irish people (and of the diaspora) to accept that anything other than violence will achieve Irish "unity". Mere "peace" is no substitute for them. The centenary of 1916 may distort the sequence somewhat.

Mar aon le sin, ar ndóigh, tá baint idir an dearcadh céanna agus dearcadh na nGael ar a dteanga féin. Caitheann mór chuid daoine (droch-) Gaeilge mar sórt suaitheantas - ní mór dóibh é a úsáid chun bheith Gaelach, dar leo féin. Fhad is a leanann na "triobóidí", leanfaidh an "Gaeilge". Ar ndóigh, is fiú níos mó ná sin í.

I despair.

Regards

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Big Mick
Date: 01 Apr 09 - 12:45 PM

Don't make me go back and pull up your posts about the IRA decommissioning of arms. Secondarily, peace came because of the committment of Republicans to the process, in spite of Loyalist provocations that are too numerous to list. Thirdly, the dissident groups are just that and they are small in number.

Finally, your post and subsequent justification post show you for what you are. There is no need of arms on the part of the Loyalists if they buy into the peace process. They would leave the capture and punishment of the dissidents to the legally constituted police force and the army. You are a hypocrite. You criticize the Republicans for wanting to remain armed to protect their constituencies, and seek to justify the same acts by the Loyalists. It is people like you that have subverted the peace process for years.

I have listened to people of good will continually play the blame game on both sides. Embracing of it is why this is an intractable struggle. The simple fact is that this is all rooted in British Imperialism and colonialism. The Republicans have determined that they had to take the necessary steps to break the cycle. They have decommissioned arms, and embraced the peace process. Time for you to take your meddling, unwanted interference, and hypocrisy, and go home. And time for the Loyalist groups to decommission, and quit preaching a doctrine of hate. The people of the north of Ireland, all the people, deserve that. Fight - yes, but at the ballot box.

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Teribus
Date: 01 Apr 09 - 12:29 PM

Big Mick can you point to anything in my last post that was not true.

If it is true then a plain statement of the truth cannot be described as being hypocritical can it.

But just so as you have the whole picture:

"If loyalists can argue they are hanging onto their guns because they fear a resurgent IRA then dissident republicans could argue they are hanging onto theirs in the event of a resurgent crooked security force. But then neither of them would be committed to peaceful political means which seem to be the only long-term way out for N.I" - Nickhere

My response to Nickhere:

"Big difference in your comparison Nickhere:

- The "Loyalist" groups are on and holding to a "ceasefire" (FACT)

- The dissident Republican Groups are not" (FACT)

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Big Mick
Date: 01 Apr 09 - 10:34 AM

What a load of bollocks!! You are apologists, and hypocritical in your alibi'ing the Loyalist thugs. There is NO justification for their holding on to their arms, other than they expect to use them at some point. Your biases and hypocrisy show you for what you are.

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 01 Apr 09 - 05:57 AM

""Rather 'generous' of those loyalists, eh? But if they were really committed to the political process they wouldn't HAVE any guns to make such 'magnanimous' gestures with, would they?""

The point of my comment Nick, was that as little as five years ago, the response WOULD have been instant, and LETHAL.

In this instance, the people with guns (the only ones capable of immediate retaliation) DID NOT USE THEM.

Whether they should HAVE those guns is an entirely separate matter.

The dissidents have guns also, and USED them to great effect, as far as hitting their victims is concerned, but their actions were a TOTAL failure in terms of the response they hoped to provoke.

Which side then deserves credit for their commitment to the peace process?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Teribus
Date: 01 Apr 09 - 01:14 AM

Big difference in your comparison Nickhere:

- The "Loyalist" groups are on and holding to a "ceasefire"

- The dissident Republican Groups are not

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Nickhere
Date: 31 Mar 09 - 07:31 PM

"Loyalists making it very clear that the guns will NOT be used in retaliation, and that they, like the Republicans, are committed to the political process.

Peace
Don T"

Rather 'generous' of those loyalists, eh? But if they were really committed to the political process they wouldn't HAVE any guns to make such 'magnanimous' gestures with, would they?
There was a lot of hullabaloo about republicans decommissioning over the last years, yet we still have two loyalist groups (certainly one at least whatever rumblings the other made) holding onto their arsenals, despite a string of murders - still unsolved, over the same time frame, and no real pressure for them to disarm. If loyalists can argue they are hanging onto their guns because they fear a resurgent IRA then dissident republicans could argue they are hanging onto theirs in the event of a resurgent crooked security force. But then neither of them would be committed to peaceful political means which seem to be the only long-term way out for N.I

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: GUEST,lox
Date: 24 Mar 09 - 08:59 AM

no

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Sawzaw
Date: 24 Mar 09 - 12:12 AM

Irish Peace Process?

Isn't that an Oxymoron like Military Intelligence? ;D

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: DougR
Date: 23 Mar 09 - 02:09 PM

Thank you Mick. I am unabashedly contrite. You scold almost as skillfully as you insult.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Big Mick
Date: 23 Mar 09 - 01:52 PM

An economy poisoned by your heroes, a couple of wars started by your heroes, and trying to restore confidence to the American public after it was so heavily damaged by your heroes, Doug. But don't worry, Douggie lad, he is up to it.

Now let's stop trying to hijack threads, Doug. That is commonly called trolling, and you just did that. Start another if you feel the need, but leave this one to the topic. There's a nice old boy!!!

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: DougR
Date: 23 Mar 09 - 01:48 PM

It's too bad Obama is occupied with things like a poisoned economy, a couple of wars, and scheduling TV appearances and town hall meetings. If not, he could probably settle all the "troubles" with a single speech at high noon in Belfast.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Mar 09 - 05:42 AM

One of the men being held in connection with the murder of the policeman is on hunger strike.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/7957033.stm

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 Mar 09 - 05:13 AM

The policeman was just a policeman answering a call for help.
Why did he have to die?
The soldiers were not part of an occupying army.
There are no army patrols in N.I. even now.
They would gave been away to Afghanistan in a few hours.

There are baracks all over this and every other country.
Why did these young sappers have to die?

Subject: RE: BS: The Irish Peace Process
From: The Sandman
Date: 22 Mar 09 - 06:22 PM

Jamie,you are misinformed,certain sections of the loyalist community want them there.
the problem lies in trying to persuade both communities in the north that they can peacably coexist,as people do south of the border,
progress was being made,but killing British soldiers is only counter productive,which is why Adams and Mcguinness and the Republican leadership have condemned the killings.