Wednesday, July 18, 2007
“We want to avoid violence and had informed the PSNI and the Northern Ireland Office in advance”
The Irish News has a report [subs req] which quotes UPRG spokesman Frankie Gallagher on the statement from the UDA I noted yesterday, claiming that, according to the Irish News report, ‘the mainstream UDA did not want to become involved in a feud with its former associates.‘ Such a feud would, of course, have financial and political implications.. and, we can hope, custodial.. The statement doesn’t, however, rule out involvement in such a feud and, as the unnamed “source close to the organisation’s leadership” said to Brian Rowan in yesterday’s report
the wish was to achieve this without violence, but warned the inner council “will stand with their members if they are under threat”.
Frankie Gallagher also claimed that the police, and the NIO, were both informed in advance..
From the Irish News report [subs req]
UPRG spokesman Frankie Gallagher last night said the mainstream UDA did not want to become involved in a feud with its former associates.
“This was an act of non-agression and was a democratic decision taken by UDA members in south east Antrim,” he said.
“This is not about putting people out onto the streets or attacking anyone.
”We want to avoid violence and had informed the PSNI and the Northern Ireland Office in advance of this. [added emphasis]
“We believe that people shouuld be free to make their own choices and should be allowed to live without fear of intimadation.”
So, as I suggested yesterday, the police [and the NIO - Ed] are continuing to talk to those with influence..
And why not? Everyone else is.. [Well, maybe not everyone - Ed]
btw how is that review of the status of specified and other paramilitary organisations going?
Pete Baker @ 02:17 PM
What’s the betting that the ‘mainstream’ UDA wrest control of Rathcoole leaving a rump of Fisher/Shoukri/McClean supporters holed up in Larne, thus giving rise to a dissident ‘East-by-South-East Antrim Brigade’?
Posted by on Jul 18, 2007 @ 03:04 PMI’d give better odds on the last reel of the Godfather, writ small, likely in thick orange crayon and block letters. The “leadership” of the “bad” (read “worse") UDA will all die in tragic “hunting accidents” whilst the leadership of the “good” UDA will be somewhere else, with unimpeachable alibis.
Frankie Gallagher: ““This was an act of non-agression and was a democratic decision taken by UDA members in south east Antrim,” he said. “
No, Frankie, it was an act of extortion—“do wot we tells you too, or suffer the consequences...”
Frankie Gallagher: ““We believe that people shouuld be free to make their own choices and should be allowed to live without fear of intimadation.””
Sure you do, Frankie… that’s why you’ve kept your guns—so your extortion victims can “live without fear of intimadation.””
Posted by on Jul 18, 2007 @ 03:43 PM“No, Frankie, it was an act of extortion—“do wot we tells you too, or suffer the consequences...””
There is a certain dilemma and/or irony, when the “what we tells you” is to “stop extortion”.
Posted by on Jul 18, 2007 @ 03:53 PMIan: “There is a certain dilemma and/or irony, when the “what we tells you” is to “stop extortion”.”
Depends on where your seat is located…
“Do as we say, not as we do” is a staple in some organizations… but I take your point as well.
Hell, I suspect the Shoukri’s biggest sin was getting caught.
Posted by on Jul 18, 2007 @ 05:08 PMIf there appears to be a likiehood that the UDA are all about to assassinate each other as a result of internal feuding would it not be in the best interests of society as a whole to ensure that they have well serviced weapons and sufficient ammunitition to accomplish this most welcome task?
Perhaps it might be necessary to fund this public service via one of Mr Brown’s much vaunted PPI initiatives.
Posted by on Jul 18, 2007 @ 05:28 PMRory: “If there appears to be a likiehood that the UDA are all about to assassinate each other as a result of internal feuding would it not be in the best interests of society as a whole to ensure that they have well serviced weapons and sufficient ammunitition to accomplish this most welcome task? “
In a word, NO!
First of all, some of the weapons they have are ill-suited for an urban environment—a .22 round can cause a fair bit of damage far beyond the aimable range of the round, let alone some of the 7.62X51mm rifles these idiot “stole.”
Second, but related to the first, we’re not talking a corps. of marksmen here, but a bunch of hoods who may or may not know that there is more to shooting that pointing the weapon in the general direction off your target and blazing away. To crib (and expand) a quote from a writer I admire, I don’t fear the bullet with my name on it—its mine and will come for me at the appropriate time and place. I fear the dozens of other rounds, fired seemingly at random by the incompetant, addressed simply “Occupant, to whom it may concern.”
Ideally, these idiots would have no functioning firearms and have to do battle with the nine-irons, where they would be obligated to get close enough to the target to make sure they’re assaulting the individual they intend to, which is still illegal and despicable, but at least they’ll be liable for what they intended to do, rather than innocents getting injured in cases of mistaken identity.
Posted by on Jul 18, 2007 @ 05:58 PMDread Cthulhu
You seem to have more than a passing knowledge of weaponry, yourself.
Posted by on Jul 19, 2007 @ 06:29 AMThe Penguin: “You seem to have more than a passing knowledge of weaponry, yourself. “
I don’t claim any grand insight—just the ability to look up a ballistics table on the web, make a judgement call on the professionalism (or lack thereof) on the part of the UDA and make a reasoned conclusion for the knowledge thus assembled.
Somewhere about the place, I have an old (circa late sixties, early seventies) cartidge box (sans cartridges) that once held 50 .22 short rounds. The warning on the side tells the user that the rounds have the potential to carry a quarter mile. The news reported that US snipers work out to about 1000 yards—the better part of a mile, using a 7.62mm X 51 round.
As I said, no grand insight, simply common sense.
Posted by on Jul 19, 2007 @ 12:36 PMThe Penguin: “You seem to have more than a passing knowledge of weaponry, yourself.”
On the other hand, what is so damning about knowing weapons are more complex than out of which end the bullet comes?
Posted by on Jul 19, 2007 @ 06:26 PM
