Meeting loyalist paramilitaries
A DUP delegation has held meetings with the leaderships of the loyalist paramilitaries. In a statement from the DUP Peter Robinson he said:“These meetings represent an opportunity to engage and discuss the process of transition from paramilitary organisations to people playing a full part in a peaceful and democratic Northern Ireland with violence and criminality being firmly a thing of the past. “
One might regard trying to stop these organisations as laudable; however, to my mind the next sentence betrays Robinson’s error:
“The response from both the UDA and the UVF/RHC has been positive and there was a commitment to an ongoing engagement.”
The idea of a positive response from the loyalist terrorists is utterly specious. They continue to hold onto their weapons and have repeatedly refused to give them up. The problem with the DUP approach exists at several levels.
Firstly there is a simple moral argument: these groups and those individuals with whom the DUP members were discussing have been involved in some of the most unpleasant terrorist murders in Northern Ireland. They are also involved in ongoing criminality and murders such as, it would seem, Thomas Devlin, possibly Lisa Dorrian etc. They continue to exert a malevolent and destructive influence on mainly working class Protestant areas: the same areas which frequently vote DUP (but very rarely for the representatives of loyalist terrorists). As such to entreat with the persecutors of their constituents seems extremely inappropriate.
The DUP will of course claim that these people (the working class Protestants) will benefit from the ending of loyalist paramilitarism. That may well be true and may be an honest position but it exposes a large flaw in their moral argument, and it becomes very difficult for the DUP to criticise the likes of John Hume indulging in discussions with SF, in the aftermath of some of the worst terrorist atrocities of the troubles. It also as Jim Allister has noted undermines the line which needs to be kept to on SF and policing and justice.
The next reason why it is a foolish plan from the DUP is the simple fact that the strategy (entreating with loyalist paramilitaries) has been shown on numerous occasions to be utterly useless: Mo Mowlam went to talk to them, all manner of people with good or bad motives have engaged with them yet as I noted above the paramilitaries continue to indulge in criminal activities: not merely the criminal activity of being in loyalist criminal organisations but also in numerous organised crimes. Discussions with these groups will inevitably centre on what will persuade them to go away. Essentially these groups require some sort of carrot or Danegeld to buy them off and then they may consider starting to do what the rest of us have always done: obey the law; the law which bans owning weapons, the law which bans being in illegal organisations, killing people, robbing people, dealing drugs, etc. etc. They have also repeatedly said that they will not give up “The people’s guns” and similar nauseatingly evil statements: nauseating especially when the “people” they claim to support and help, the working class unionist population, have always been those who most frequently suffered at the muzzles of “The People’s Guns.”
Sadly the DUP is going down the well travelled and utterly ineffective path with these people. All they will do is undermine the very thing most people want; that these people are stopped, preferably by arrest and ideally held accountable for the very large numbers of crimes they have committed. Margaret Ritchie has shown one of the few ways forward in this: stopping their money. The DUP would, I fear, be far better employed in meeting with the police and indeed the Secretary of State and encouraging a much more muscular and aggressive policing response to loyalist criminality. Loyalist paramilitaries have always been utterly useless and as I have discussed earlier it is long past time to stop appeasing them. The only meetings which the leaders of loyalist paramilitarism should be holding are: firstly with the PSNI serious crime squad, then hopefully with their lawyers and ideally many years thereafter with their probation officers.
“[i]nIreland or ulster unionism (bullshit term as its not ulster) was formed on the basis of [u]armed threat[/u] against the duly constituted government by the protestant population, the very definition of terrorism as you spout it.”[/i]
Nonscence. Those in Ulster of Unionist persuation were not guranteed that their religious and civil freedom would remain intact if and when home rule was passed. It was the British government who were breaking the law, not the Ulster Unionists.
“[i]When you use the police to terrorize the population then they are terrorists uniform or not. ruc, bspecials and any of the other alphabet killers of protestant infamy are terrorists and there is simply no justification for calling them anything else. the ruc was the moral equivalent of the uda “[/i]
Steve, will you grow up about the police, RUC, B-specials, etc, etc. They weren’t created to help Republican rebels destroy the country they got paid to protect. Comprende?
Steve I really don’t follow you here, but I think you are getting Bloody Sunday which took place in 1972 mixed up with the street riots and I ran away sorta stuff that took place in 1969 before the IRA split.
UMH
they protected the Catholic population by killing them and burning their property? Geez I am Glad the RCMP weren’t as effective at protecting me!!!
Same Old
Same symptoms
‘It was the British government who were breaking the law, not the Ulster Unionists.’
So illegally importing weapons isn’t illeagl?
Also please elaborate as to exactly what law the British were breaking if they had of recognised the democratic will of the people of ireland?
“Nonscence. Those in Ulster of Unionist persuation were not guranteed that their religious and civil freedom would remain intact if and when home rule was passed. It was the British government who were breaking the law, not the Ulster Unionists”
Idiot, total idiot.
One really needs to look at the facts. Fact one, the IRA in what ever form handed in a significant amount of weapons. Fact two, the IRA haven’t bombed nor shot anyone in quite a while. Fact three, loyalist paramilitaries haven’t handed in a thing, not even a bloody butter knife. As much as I don’t like Republicanism, they certainly have done what was asked of them, that last part about the big boss men in charge of the IRA is just a smoke screen to save face with their electorate.
“It was the pope who gave your island over to those who you would class as your enemies for 800 years, yet you failed to see your spiritual masters (Rome) as having anything to do with your downfall”.
800 years and counting….
England the enemy who sent the banished Scot to do HIS masters bidding.
why do people bother keep responding to UMH? We seem to get the same from Sam Graham. They do nothing but rant about how bad catholics are. They talk utter balls and never debate the subject.
To be fair to UMH this time he has disagreed with robinson’s stance meaning he has actually refered to the subject in question for once. Not that I agree with him.
Catholics hate protestants, protestants hate catholics we have all heard it on here before. Sam Graham where did your original post come from? It is totally unrelated to the subject in question.
Back to the question as I don’t want to be a hypocrite. I will not get tied up in the hypocrisy of the DUP as I am sure many laughed when they saws this news story. This is a positive move by Robinson if as well as discussing common community problems with loyalism, he has laid down the law and made it clear criminality must stop. Guns must be handed over or the reaction to any non action will be a public endorsement from the DUP for the PSNI to become heavy handed with these loyalist thugs who choose to remain as drug dealers and other criminals. I say fair play to any unionists who turn their backs on criminality and actually try to help their communities. It is not much to expect but if it happens, it is positive. Will there be any puclic statements telling loyalists to decommission or else from Robinson? I don’t think so though I hope he does. Maybe they should be a problem for a policing and justice minister? If we ever get one, that is.
“Protestants have never voted in large numbers for Catholic killers, attended their funerals, marched on the streets for them, and name me the last Protestant minister who openly compared a UVF/UFF terrorist to a saint in heaven, numbered with angels etc as their Roman Priest counterparts have done on myriad occasions.
Could you also explain why Bobby Sands died clutching the Rosary Beads sent over by the Pope especially for their acclaimed son of the Church whose sole accomplishment was to murder Protestants and starve himself to death by suicide”?
There’s a few things I’d like to say here Sam so indulge me for a wee while. I’m not really into that angels, saints mumbo jumbo but, regarding all that Priestly stuff I’ve never heard any RC Priest compare any dead IRA member to such beings. Now, maybe I’m wrong on this point but I’d be obliged if you would post some credible links, [mind you I said credible, not that howl’in at the moon stuff], to verify your accusations?
Regarding attendance at Catholic killers funerals. Just who were those thousands who attended the funerals of Brian Robinson, Basher Bates, Billy Wright, John Gregg, Trevor King, Joe Bratty, Snowy Elder etc?, surely they can’t all have been Papists?. And who was it that conducted the funeral services for UDR /UVF Catholic killers Horace Boyle & Weslley Somerville? Oh, while were at it, just how many “respectable Unionist” politicians paid respects at the house of, and attended the funeral of, sectarian death squad leader John Bingham? And, if the Unionist electorate are so fine and morally upstanding, why weren’t these “respectable” Unionist leaders punished by their morally devout electorate for attending the funeral of / commiserating the death of a dead UVF Catholic killing gang leader?
I also have never heard of Bobby Sands actually murdering Protestants. Some verifiable links to these accusations would also be welcome. Regarding that Rosary Beads stuff I can’t answer, I suggest that you contact a rich old man in Rome.
Facts are indeed facts Sammy my boyo, and you seem to be largely devoid of them.
It was the pope who gave your island over to those who you would class as your enemies for 800 years, yet you failed to see your spiritual masters (Rome) as having anything to do with your downfall”
I could not help responding to this. UMH, who in hell cares what a pope has advised 800 years ago other than a Vatican historian? It plays as much part in my thinking as another pope’s support for king billy. Some relevant dicussion please I am sure if you try hard enough you will be able to read a sentence and respond to it rather than your usual anti-catholic rants.
Interesting article from Turgon.
Is there any reason why the DUP should not not only meet with the policing authorities and English ministers to demand tougher action against Loyalist terrorists who refuse to decommission, but also meet with said terrorists (or their representatives) and demand that they give up their weapons and their parasitic activities?
Why must it be one or the other? Or, as it has been for far too long, neither?
Wow. as someone who has spent most of his life in the States let me break it to all of you bigots on here. The vast majority of people who know anything about Northern ireland are all sympathetic to the Catholic population. Any objective historian or observer can easily see the murderous discrimination against Catholics in Northern Ireland since the time of cromwell. Trying to blame everything on the Catholic community because of the excesses of the PIRA doesn’t change hundrends of years of history.
There are plenty of places in this world were different religions live together just fine. (see, Republic of Ireland). But the ulster protestants did not want to lose their rung in the social ladder and thus forcibly kept the Catholics down at the bottom. That is why the troubles broke out.
Who did Bobby Sands murder???
[i]“UMH, who in hell cares what a pope has advised 800 years ago other than a Vatican historian?”[/i]
That’s exactly the problem pfhl. The failure to understand or expose the real trouble maker on this isle, only serves to blame others for all the problems.
As for Bobby Sands clutching Rosary Beads sent over by the Pope, I think it was a crucifix. There could have been beads attached, but the Pope got crucifixs made up for the hunger strikers to show his support in the suicide.
“The Pope got crucifixs made up for the hunger strikers to show his support in the suicide”
Am unaware of this one UMH, could you post credible links for verification please?
u.m.h.
what do you think of the unionist politicians and what they have done for ulster in the last 30 years?
do you think that the british governments we have had during the conflict have protected and served the people of ulster well?