UDA stands down.. the UFF..

The BBC report that the UDA have issued what Jackie McDonald claimed would be a “significant statement” and, although the detail remains to be seen, it seems that they are saying they will stand down the UFF.. at midnight tonight. And they’ve claimed that “UFF weapons were being put beyond use, but stressed that this does not mean they will be decommissioned.” ANYhoo.. Apparently, “The Ulster Defence Association is committed to achieving a society where violence and weaponry are ghosts of the past.” In response to which, I’ll quote Ian Paisley Snr – “it will only come when rigorous law enforcement takes place..” Adds According to this report, “The Taoiseach Bertie Ahern has [already] warmly welcomed the statement describing it as a significant step.”Update The BBC’s Politics Show included a clip of Jackie McDonald speaking today in which he made clear that he wants to see a UDA-endorsed political representative elected to the Assembly – a point which fits with something he said previously. He also referred to the people he, and the UDA, represent – forgetting that he hasn’t actually been elected.

And he stated, in relation to decommissioning – “They’re not the UDA’s guns. They’re the people’s guns.”

, , , ,

  • iluvni

    what about the PAF, RHC etc? Are these sectarian drug dealing thugs going to take up the slack after the UFF disappears?

    Consign McDonald’s statement to the ‘who gives a fuck’ category.

  • Dawkins

    Whatever way it’s spun and however ineffectual it appears I suppose it’s progress of a kind, and to be welcomed.

  • harry

    are they now totally commit themselves to selling drugs to children?

  • Intelligence Insider

    I think you’ll find that’s a market the provos have already tied up.

  • jaded

    You have to laugh at how the UDA act as if the protestant working-class community and themselves are synonymous. “The people’s guns” indeed.

    I’d like to see the process of verifying how these weapons weren’t decommissioned, but rather put beyond “use” (reach?).

    Standing down the UFF almost seems like non-gesture to me. What was the UFF doing in the past few years anyway? Gathering “intelligence” on republicans?

    Apologies for being such a critical asshole btw, I suppose the statement is to be welcomed…

  • June 76

    A spokesman for the UFF, Billy Shootspatrick said, “This is a terrible blow, not just for the lads but for their families as well. Layoffs this close to Christmas are always doubly difficult. But some of us saw this coming when we went on short time a few years back and since then a lot of new business has gone to the migrant workers when they started killing each other. I was going to buy the child his first hand gun this Christmas but now I’ll have to watch the pennies. I can’t even give him mine ‘cos it has to be put beyond use! If I didn’t have my other job in the RIR I don’t know what I’d do.”

  • harry


    i live in a well known south armagh town, i have never seen any drugs being sold by the provos

    bad and all as they are.

    shit, i must be going to the wrong bars, shit, i must get myself down to that well known shinner hang out and score myself some dope.

    so, do you think Chuclke McG uses his postion to make contact with leaders of well known drug growing countries??

    when is the first official vist of the columbian leader to stormont???

    i think, intelligence insider, you are the one on drugs

  • Former Intelligence Insider

    As if anyone listens or cares about what the uda drug dealers actually think…
    sure all the latest shooting were carried out by the Mars joint Loyalist Liberation Movement…

  • Former Intelligence Insider

    so the UDA don`t sell or peddle drugs. Aren`t the major importers, suppliers and distrubuters of drugs!!!!
    Yeah and I saw four flying pigs last night!

  • Intelligence Insider

    FII, I think you will find that ALL paramiltaries in Northern Ireland are involved in the drugs trade. Certainly the UDA are heavily involved in the trade but PIRA are the biggest importer of drugs in the UK.

    And Harry, thanks for reminding us all which paramilitary group in N.I. have a FARCing Columbian connection! FARC are one of the biggest exporters of drugs worldwide with an ANNUAL income from drug trafficking estimated at 1 billion dollars 5 years ago.

    From “Playing the Green Card – Financing the Provisional IRA by John Horgan and Max Taylor”

    “They [the PIRA] attempt to adopt a public stance that they abhor the
    use of drugs … that belies the fact that they have in the past, and
    certainly do at present, derive funding from the drugs trade … the
    Loyalist paramilitary organizations are much more directly involved in
    the straightforward drugs dealing. The IRA tend to be two or three
    steps removed.

    Police and
    dealers say the IRA controls the distribution of drugs to criminals on
    both sides of the border. Narcotics are smuggled into Ireland through
    Dublin and Cork and distributed after prices and quantities are
    agreed at meetings in hotels in Dundalk and Drogheda. The IRA does
    not handle the drugs, but oversees the operation and takes a
    percentage from each deal. In return, it sanctions the dealers’
    activities and moves against their opponents.

  • Ulster’s my homeland

    This is fantastic news as it’s about time all sides involved in N.Ireland’s conflict took the brave step forward towards a lasting peace.

    This is a step in the right direction!

  • picador

    As the UFF is the UDA in another guise this statement is meaningless.

  • Cloughfern Young Conker-Players

    All the usual caveats aside, a step in the right direction. The UDA are clearly tramps (and dangerous tramps at that), but this is progress.

    But, bearing in mind that, “They’re not the UDA’s guns. They’re the people’s guns.” Can I have one Jackie?

  • Shawn

    Inteligence insider
    Any theories on the moon landing or the shooting of JFK. Maybe you could tell us where shergar is

  • Rathcoole Boy

    The UDA don’t represent the majority of protestants in the areas where they operate – not even close to it. If that was the case they’d have several representatives at Stormont.

    The UDP ceased to exist because of poor election results which weren’t even enough to get them one seat in the last PR election they contested.

  • kisdo

    Now I feel all Catholic teenagers can safely dander along any Belfast road they like. Wait at any bus stop they like. Cool.
    Anyway as long as people want drugs…drugs will be supplied.legal or illegal. Drugs are not really “pushed” they are”pulled” by the users. Should be legalised. That way the rich fat cats can legally make more money from all of us. Makes me feel much better that Im not enriching the UDA or the criminals…just the “Entrepreneurs” of the world. The UFF and most of all the other 3letter abbreviations are controlled by Whitehall anyway. Time all you lot woke up. Listen to Alec Jones infowars.com

  • Former Intelligence Insider

    isn`t it strange that for years the uda fought turf wars amongst themselves over drugs….
    their leaders openly flaunted and still too this day do, their ill gotten gains, whilst the majority of law abiding Protestants did things the uda rank and file to this day don`t and never have done.
    Got a job. As to the uda being any different from the uff,do they really believe anyone will swallow that…and as to a sleeping giant being raised. What planet are these criminal drug dealers of the uda on.
    They were never and are not defenders of Protestantism, wouldn`t know one iota about the basis of the reformed faith, have no respect or support.
    They are scum.

    To finish some here can try and whitewash history but facts are facts….everyione in the sec urity forces know it…the uda are up to their necks in drug dealing and criminality and are protected from high!!!!

  • snakebrain

    “Whatever way it’s spun and however ineffectual it appears I suppose it’s progress of a kind, and to be welcomed.”

    I’m loath to give them anything resembling gratitude…About time, is all they really deserve..

  • lib2016

    The loyalist paramilitaries were largely organised and directed by the security forces and financed by drugdealing.

    It is and has been a long established British custom still going on today in Afghanistan.

    The fact remains that the UDA was a legal body right up until 1992 and there were no calls by unionist politicans for that to change during the 70’s and 80’s when those same politicans and their ordinary supporters were happy to use the paramilitaries as ‘muscle’ to enforce political strikes.

    It is always disagreeable cleaning up a mess but let’s remember just whose mess this is.

  • justthoughtidask

    “As the UFF is the UDA in another guise this statement is meaningless.”

    Picador’s comment above is all that needs saying, really.

    The real interest is in why the BBC, whose journalists know the truth of this only too well, have bigged it up so much.

  • Turgon

    Today at church we had an act of remembrance. The names of those members of the congregation who were killed in the First and Second World Wars were read out, the last post was played and poppy wreaths were laid before the two lists of names, prayers were said.

    What has this to do with the UDA statement?

    Nothing; and that is the whole point.

    I have said it before but will repeat; it is nauseating the way the UDA try to appropriate the memory of brave men and women who died in the two world wars. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the two world wars (especially the First) it does not detract from the honour and respect due to those who died in those conflicts. The UDA on the other hand are due no respect and are devoid of honour just as they are and always were devoid of morality or political purpose.

    To try to compare the actions of brave people with the UDA is utterly revolting. The UDA are a group of drug dealers, pimps, criminals and thugs as well as betimes murderers. What honour is due to the people who murdered people in Sean Graham’s bookmakers shop, the Rising Sun bar, the Heights Bar in Loughlinisland? (and before any cheerleaders try to tell me the Heights bar was the UVF let us remember that they are all one group of thugs and killers, remember the so called Combined Loyalist Military Command). Even on the rare occasions when the loyalists managed to murder IRA members these were no heroic acts; they involved shooting people in their homes. A carbon copy of the murderers of the IRA.

    When any loyalist cheerleader comes on this web site extolling the virtues of the alphabet soup of criminals we should remember the extent of their heroism: “Trick or Treat”; “Yaba daba doo any Taig will do”. Those two statements neatly sum up the qualities of loyalist paramilitaries and those who cheerlead for them.

  • lib2016


    You might have had a point twenty years ago when the UDA were a legal body supported and used by your community’s political leaders. Now you’re just a sad dupe who has allowed our British masters to criminalise their tools now that they are no longer needed.

    As for yet another tedious reference to the dead of bygone wars? It should be remembered that the same army is involved in at least two deeply repugnant wars at this very moment and the people involved are as noble or ignoble as anyone else in any other war.

    Do try and live in the present and forget this strange idea that there is such a thing as a ‘good war’ with one side of goodies against another side of baddies. Wars are all dirty filthy tragedies fought by people who have allowed themselves to be brutalised into killing their neighbours.

  • Turgon

    lib 2016,
    I had hoped to ignore your post as my business here is with the loyalist murderers not the republican ones. However, since you insist on beginning an argument which will merely detract from the relevant issue here which is the practically universal contempt which the loyalist thugs are held in:

    I suggest to you that your problem is that there are unionist posters who abhor what the loyalist thugs did. Just as there are nationalist and republican posters who abhor everything which the IRA did supposedly “in their name”. You would like to tar me with the cheerleader’s brush with which you tar yourself with your sycophantic worship of the leadership of the republican movement and all the works of that band of sectarian murderers. It must gravely distress you that there are people of all sides on here who oppose one another sharply yet oppose murder much more.

    So wars are dirty tragedies fought by etc.

    Well my father in law never fired a shot in anger in the Second World War. He did spend three and a half years in a Japanese prisoner of war camp. He did not return a brutalised man. He returned that which he left: a quiet, humble, godly, South Fermanagh farmer and he never killed anyone let alone any of his neighbours.

    You of course lib would like to lower everyone into the gutter along with yourself and support the murderers of Marie Wilson and the rest of the Enniskillen dead. Oh yes they were remembering the war so it was fine to blow them up.

    Maybe I am a dupe lib, you are clearly in a position to tell. I would, however, rather be a dupe than a sycophantic cheerleader for murderers as that is assuredly precisely what you are.

  • lib2016


    The problem with your position is that I’m a pacifist. In my eyes the Enniskillen Massacre was as wrong and cruel as the Dresden bombing, or Blair’s illegal war in Iraq. No less wrongheaded but all done by decent men who thought that they were doing the right thing.

    I ask why good men, and there are good men on all sides, do evil but you want to play games and pretend that the loyalists had no support. I saw them on the streets marching in their thousands when it looked as if they could win. Didn’t hear much condemnation, though.

  • Turgon

    Well lib let us see.
    “In my eyes the Enniskillen Massacre was as wrong”

    Compare with
    “As for Enniskillen itself – the nationalist population was under attack from the British Army and the community which backed them. They fought back and when there is violence innocent people get hurt….end of story.”

    Fancy denying you made the second post? You have previously tried to tell me that it was me who provoked you into it when it was actually Dewi though the “provocation” was his condemning Enniskillen.

    Yes lib 2016 I guess there is some weasel way by which those two statements can be reconciled but no honest or honourable way. You are the sort of pacifist who is so opposed to killing that they cheerlead for the killers and leap on their bandwagon. A pacifist indeed.

    By all means stay on this thread lib, your posts merely detract from what should be being discussed here: namely the revolting behaviour of loyalist terrorists. I am sure some loyalist cheerleaders are delighted the thread has been moved off their friends’ behaviour. Still giving cover for loyalist killers must come easily for one so keen to give cover to republican ones.

  • joeCanuck

    Has the dancing in the streets in the “loyalist” communities started yet?
    Thought not.

  • lib2016


    Sorry – I don’t agree with the thesis that everybody who uses violence is evil. If you think that makes me an apologist for evil you should try a get a course on joined up thinking.

  • joeCanuck

    The corollary is true, lib.
    Some people who use violence are evil.

  • Turgon

    lib 2016,
    “I don’t agree with the thesis that everybody who uses violence is evil.”

    Well since you clearly think those who committed the Enniskillen bombing were far from evil and clearly, whatever you may claim; you other posts demonstrate that that act was far from evil in your book. I guess that chimes with Douglas Derring’s murder, the Shankill fish shop, Darkley, Kingsmill, Teebane. No none of them were evil acts nor were they committed by evil men in the special moral universe inhabited by you and the IRA, lib.

    I must admit of all the cheerleaders you are the most persistent and the most accepting of whatever your heroes Martin and Gerry tell you to think.

    Indeed lib I am sure my thinking is not joined up. I have never metaphorically sat at the feet of those experts in joined up thinking like Gerry Adams who tells us that it was the moral responsibility of people other than the republican movement to find a way for the IRA to stop killing people. You on the other hand have done their course so well I expect you have a PhD in the subject. A sort of doctorate of cheerleading. Indeed taken together all your posts are your doctoral thesis with this one being the finest:

    “As for Enniskillen itself – the nationalist population was under attack from the British Army and the community which backed them. They fought back and when there is violence innocent people get hurt….end of story.”

  • lib2016


    True, but the man who casts the first stone etc. It seems to me that to allow ourselves to casually dismiss large numbers of people as evil is part of the brutalisation which allows us to use force in the first place.

    Part of the whole religion thing and an outdated way of thinking about people.

    BTW I’ve scraped the blood from the walls after killings off and by representives of both communities. It was the same colour for both and the same heartache.

  • joeCanuck

    Well, just for the record, I would never casually or otherwise dismiss large numbers of people as evil. That is why I used the word “some”.
    But also for the record, I do believe that the people who carried out the Enniskillen massacre, on a day of remembrance of all days, are evil.

  • lib2016


    I’ve enjoyed the friendship of retired (as far as I know) paramilitaries from both the UVF and IRA. All were inclined to zealotry but otherwise nice people to be with.

  • Mekong

    I also believe the people who sanctioned the massacre of thousands of working class Irish men in Flanders and who carried out the terrorist attack on Dresden and other cities are evil and should not be being commemorated today.

  • joeCanuck

    I don’t disagree with the first part of your assertion, Mekong.
    But we are not commemorating the “leaders” today; we are simply remembering the many young men (for the most part) who did what they felt was right, or perhaps were just carefree youngsters.
    I, for one, do not honour any of the heartless bastards who sent those youngsters “over the top” to almost certain death. But I cannot forget the sacrifices made by the rank and file.

  • Mekong

    The word sacrafice is immotive and suggests that these men died willingly for King and country, absolute shite, the ruling classes conscripted or bluffed many men into the ranks to be slaughtered in their European power games. Most Irish men joined in an attempt to escape starvation and feed their families or under the misguided notion of defending the rights of small nations, the late Roger Casement noted ‘that promissary note payable only after death’. The unjustness of these conflicts is masked in the pomp and cermony of the ruling classes who have preside over them and exonerate their actions, you who are complicate in this do likewise.

  • joeCanuck

    I think you meant “complicit” Mekong.
    I have already said I do not honour the leaders in WW1. If you feel the need to call my honour into disrepute, well, what more can I say.

  • Mekong

    God forbid I would doubt your honour Joe, I do not know you. Yet I ask those who are willing to participate in these annual cermonies for British service personnel were is the questions about were there lives (‘sacrafice’) worth it. Or should there not be one question asked in all this coverage of the those sent them there and their motivations. By continuing this unquestioning procession the real terrorists get away in the smoke.

  • joeCanuck

    but otherwise nice people to be with.

    I completely understand, lib.
    I believe it for a fact that some erstwhile world leaders were also dog lovers.

  • joeCanuck

    British Service personnel

    When I lived in Ireland, I mainly remembered the Irish, and now that I live in Canada, I mainly remember the Canadians.
    But, yes, I do remember the young British folk, and, though it may surprise you, I also remember the young Germans who were needlessly sacrificed (I have no problem with that word) also.

  • Turgon

    Unfortunately this thread has been side tracked into a discussion about the rights and wrongs of the World Wars. If my initial post contributed to that I am sorry; I merely tried to present the difference between the UDA and any real army; a difference the UDA try desperately and at every point to confuse.

    The rights and wrongs of the World Wars is a reasonable topic for discussion at another time. Our business here is to discuss loyalist criminals.

    To confuse loyalist criminals with any army is to play into the hands of the loyalist terrorists. They repeatedly try to conflate their sordid campaign and behaviour with that of the Allies during the First and Second World War; armies which many members of the unionist (and indeed nationalist) community hold in high regard. Armies which contained many of their kith and kin. The alphabet soup of loyalist killers were nothing like the allies in the Second World War. At the risk of invoking Godwin’s law, however, if one wishes to liken the loyalist terrorists to anyone in the Second World War they were more akin to the Nazi SS. They like the loyalists specialised in heroic actions against unarmed civilians chosen for their perceived differentness. Clearly the scale of the loyalists murders was different but the hatred and bigotry and especially the cowardice bare some similarities.

    For the UDA to tell us that they will “stand down” the UFF and then hold it up as a good thing is pathetic. This pseudo military terminology simply means that when they sell drugs, pimp unfortunate women, wreck children’s life chances, terrorise the elderly and blight the lives of working class Protestant communities they will do this either as the UDA or as simply an unnamed pack of criminals. So their guns are “beyond use” are they? It did not take guns to murder so many of their recent victims.

    No doubt soon some do-gooders will propose that the CTI should get their money back. To that they need the resounding statements of two old unionist sound bites which are particularly prescient at this point: “Not an inch” and “No surrender”. For assuredly with the UDA and their ilk if you give them an inch they will take a mile and whatever their warped view of the Crown they are much more fond of the Half-crown.

  • Mekong

    As I have said Joe I do not doubt your integrity or honour, but from Canada you may not witness the unquestioning embelishment of the First World War in particular that goes on at this time of year by the British media. I come from a part of Irealnd that has suffered heavily from the British military in years gone by, so forgive me if I struggle to emphasise with the pro Britiish cermonies here. Of course every soldier, from all sides, in every war should be remembered and is by thie families. But were British cermonies stray into the unquestioning glorification of war presided over by the ruling elites who presided over the slaughter, I feel it is time for questions.

  • Mekong

    Apologises ’emphasise’ should read ’empathise’

  • joeCanuck

    I, of course, being so far away, really know nothing about that.
    I appreciate your understanding that there is nothing wrong about families, and others, remembering their loved ones.

  • Mekong

    No doubt Turgon and apologies for the side track, however when will the questions be asked of the British Government who nurtured it,fed with information, weapons and regularly assisted this bastion of loyalism and drug dealing empire since its inception, banning it only in 1992.

  • Turgon

    I have little doubt there was some collusion. Some may have been pure bigotry and sectarianism, some from a perverted wish to allow some evil to prevent other greater evil; I do not know. It was completely morally wrong as it was completely foolish.

    The amount, I also have no doubt was limited and at a fairly low level; not that that excuses any of it. However, had it been rife the alphabet soup would have killed many more IRA members and not simply the large number of random Catholics they did kill.

    In terms of proscribing the UDA I would agree 1992 was far too late.

    In terms of asking questions; the problem is that is that if questioning begins whataboutery is entirely reasonable and there are lots and lots of questions lots and lots of people could reasonably be asked.

  • Billy Pilgrim


    Serious question: what is “evil”?

    It’s a religious concept, is it not?

    I’ve always struggled with the idea that two people could commit identical acts, but perhaps only one of them is “evil”.

    Eg: the proof that Osama Bin Laden is “evil” is that he ordered the 9/11 atrocities, resulting in the deaths of c. 2,500 people. Ok. No argument here. Yet Churchill ordered Dresden and Truman ordered Hiroshima and Nagasaki, each resulting in dozens of 9/11s (in terms of bodycount). But Churchill and Truman are regarded as “good”.

    To my eyes, there is no distinction that is rooted in fundamental principles. The distinction is that we, in the west, agree with Churchill’s and Truman’s objectives but not Bin Laden’s – but clearly these are earthly, political, subjective distinctions, not fundamental ones. Our objection to 9/11 is case-specific, not fundamental, just as our approval of Hiroshima is case-specific, not fundamental. (By and large most of us are against the nuking of cities most of the time.)

    Most people don’t really think mass murder is “evil” per se – indeed it’s sometimes argued that it’s “good”. But we all certainly think it’s “evil” when it happens to us.

    I’m guilty of it myself. For example, I feel a searing sense of moral repugnance at the Bloody Sunday massacre, yet I honestly can bring myself to care about the British soldiers killed at Narrow Water. It’s a moral failing on my part, and I’m willing to admit to it.

    But I think it’s worth remembering, as we remember “our dead” (whomever they may be), that those in the armed forces (whether regular or irregular) are first and foremost, trained killers. Many have died, and they signed up knowing that death was a possibility, but none signed up so they could die. It was not their job to die, and the brave boys of the 36th Ulster weren’t sent to the Somme in order to “lay down their lives”, or some other poetic conceit. It was their job to kill.

    It’s worth bearing that in mind when watching the undoubtedly impressive ceremony at Whitehall today. And it’s certainly worth bearing in mind when using religious terminology like “good” and “evil”.

  • Diluted Orange

    So the UDA leadership announces that the guise under which they apparently didn’t commit so many of their atrocities under, the UFF, is to cease to exist?! So let me get this right – the UFF had no connection to the UDA but even in it’s final moments that completely separate organisation has chosen to release its ‘decommissioning’ statement through the UDA!

    Pull the other one Jackie – saying, “They’re not the UDA’s guns” is as convincing as the standard line of denial from Gerry Adams over the years about the IRA and SF not being one and the same thing.

    I’m glad that this ‘event’ has not been given the glorious fanfare of news coverage that the UDA would have liked, they don’t deserve it. Additionally, timing this announcement to coincide with Rememberance Sunday is nauseating in the extreme. Does this bunch of neanderthals really think they deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as the war heroes of yester year? Never mind the rival thugs in the UVF who love to make sure their ‘1916 – ‘ banner (disgracefully trying to link the present incarnation of drug-dealers and scumbags with the battalions that fought and died at the Somme) is on view for all to see during the 12th.

    [i]Loyal[/i]ist paramilitaries disgust me. They make me feel ashamed to call myself a Protestant and a Unionist. A famous politician once said about Unionists in general, (I forget off the top of my head exactly who it was), “their loyalty is not to the crown but to the half-crown”. These guys sure do live up to that stereotype. We all know that the only reason they have decided to call it a day now is because Margaret Ritchie reiterated that she would withdraw their funding in the next 60 days. They are so transparent – when the carrot of a few million quid was dangled in front of them they couldn’t resist. How galling it must be for them to dance to the tune of a Nationalist assembly member. But then again they’re probably too thick and/or too consumed with greed to appreciate the irony.

    Incidentally does the sentence, “They’re the people’s guns” have any relevance? – after all the weapons were no doubt bought with taxpayers money?

  • Comrade Stalin

    I can’t really forgive the loyalist paramilitaries for believing that they speak for the people. Unionist politicians are very nice to them, and at times step forward to defend their interests, like William McCrea did for Billy Wright. On other occasions, the unionist community has en masse swung behind the leadership of the loyalist paramilitaries when they used thuggery to force their will, as they did in 1974 during the UWC strike, and as they attempted to do again a few years later with Paisley (who failed to raise the necessary support).

    I think a lot of unionists begrudgingly don’t offer up stiff resistance to loyalist paramilitaries, finding their existence to be unpleasant but “understandable”. In this respect, they’re pretty much the same as the nationalists who didn’t resist the IRA despite having their lives interfered with and their places of work blown up, and indeed being blown up or shot themselves “by mistake”. It can’t have failed to cross the minds of nationalists that the IRA’s actions provided the pretext for the deployment of troops into their neighbourhoods, or indeed the loyalist sectarian assassination campaign.

    Let’s face it, no unionist has ever run an election campaign with eliminating loyalist paramilitarism on their election manifesto. The people telling us that unionism is clean and wants nothing to do with them need to explain why that is.

  • On an aside, I can’t actually believe that the UDA had the bare-faced cheek to have a remembrance parade through Tiger’s Bay this morning. I hope they were remembering Dean Clarke (a 16 year old victim of ‘war’ who will never appear on any monument) and the part they played in his death. Bastards.

  • tweedledee

    Is there such a person as someone who is all evil or all good? We are all capable of being good or evil, of committing good acts or evil acts. All murder, that is, the taking of another person’s life without their consent in the basic definition, is an evil act. At the time of perpetrating the evil act, the ‘good’ person becomes an ‘evil’ person. Necessary evil is a term that is sometimes used to describe such actions when we feel they serve some higher purpose or cause. I don’t see why there should be so much apparent confusion about it.

    As for the UDA, as pointed out they remained legal until 1992, despite clearly being involved in murder. I vaguely recall at one point when some nationalists, SDLP probably, were berating British politicians to proscribe them, the excuse that there were too many in the UDA to proscribe it was trotted out. Didn’t the UDA at one point claim they had something in the order of 60,000 to 100,000 members?

    Turning to Turgon’s point that the collusion was low level, and had it been higher or better organised the loyalist paramilitaries would have killed many more IRA than they did. That assumes killing IRA was the purpose of the collusion in the first place.

  • willowfield

    Shame on the “UDA” for hijacking Remembrance Sunday with their self-important announcement.

    “Standing down” an illegal organisation going by one name, but retaining the same illegal organisation using another name. Wow.

    The police should be instructed to move in on them. Zero tolerance policy – hound them; arrest them for every minor misdemeanour.

  • Rapunsel

    Jackie McDonald?

    What a pathetic wanker . The “peoples guns” don’t make me sick. Mind you , with leaderhip like his the UDA/UPRG won;t go too far politically , unfortunately some loyalist communities will continue to suffer.

    The uDA hardly need guns to continue their thuggery and violence. As far as I can see, empty meaningless words

  • cut the bull

    UDA Unlimited. Drugs. Available

    UFF Ulster’s. Fallicious. Freaks

    Enough said

  • Matalan

    “I have little doubt there was some collusion. Some may have been pure bigotry and sectarianism, some from a perverted wish to allow some evil to prevent other greater evil; I do not know. It was completely morally wrong as it was completely foolish.

    The amount, I also have no doubt was limited and at a fairly low level; not that that excuses any of it.”

    Mark Haddock, Brian Nelson, William Stobie I dont think any of these can be considered low level. Haddock alone was implicated in 15 murders by the ombudsman while working as an informant.
    In fact it makes you wonder did loyalists ever carry out a single act of violence that wasn’t orchastrated either directly or indirectly by the state. Also the definition of collusion as defined by Judge Cory is not just assisting a terrorist by providing information but failing to properly investigate or bring those responsible to justice in the aftermath.

  • Dawkins

    Just heard Suzanne Breen’s contribution to Talk Back.

    She reminded us that Ulster Defence Association is a misnomer. They actually went on the offensive long before the IRA became active again.

    They’re terrorists plain and simple and should be treated as the bottom feeders they are.

  • willowfield

    Suzanne Breen’s confusing the “UVF” and the “UDA”. The “UDA” was formed after the Provos.

  • Dawkins


    No doubt you’re right. Was it the UVF she was referring to, formed in 1966? Those courageous chaps who murdered a barman because he had refused to serve the drunken fucks was a Roman Catholic?

    But here’s the funny thing. Having read your post I at once googled “UDA”, only to find this site. Yep, fishes of all description, and fish supplies. Here’s a quote from their range:

    “Turbo Snails, Underworld, Vecton, Visitherm, Waterlife, Whisper.”

    So when I referred to “our” UDA as “bottom feeders” I wasn’t a million miles away from the truth :0)

  • If the UDA’s guns are the people’s guns, I want to put first claim in on a Minigun (if they have one). I always wanted to that stunt that Arnie does at the Cyberdine Systems laboratory in Terminator 2.

  • Dread Cthulhu

    Sammy Morse: “If the UDA’s guns are the people’s guns, I want to put first claim in on a Minigun (if they have one). I always wanted to that stunt that Arnie does at the Cyberdine Systems laboratory in Terminator 2. ”


    That’s just a collection of thoughts I wish I didn’t own — the UFF with a minigun and, then, Sammy with a minigun…

    Just make sure you have a couple of medics handy… the only multi-barrelled, man-portable (well, two man portable) weapon is the XM214 minigun, weighing it at 85 lbs. The Six-Pak consisted of the XM214, the ammunition package, and the power module, and the ammunition module consisted of two 500 round cassettes mounted to a holding rack. Linked ammunition was fed through a flexible chute to the gun; when the first cassette was empty, ammunition would then feed from the second cassette, tripping a visible signal that a new cassette needed to be added to the rack. The power module contained a 24 volt nickel-cadmium battery, a 0.8 horsepower motor, and solid state electronic controls.

  • Dude, you know waaaay too much about miniguns.

    Sammy with a minigun…

    I thought you were one of those pro-gun, Robert A Heinlein reading, libertarian types who used lines like “I’m intensely relaxed about married gay couples with closets full of assault rifles”?

    Although, obviously not the UDA.

  • Dread Cthulhu

    Sammy Morse: “I thought you were one of those pro-gun, Robert A Heinlein reading, libertarian types who used lines like “I’m intensely relaxed about married gay couples with closets full of assault rifles”? ”

    Oh, I am… but even *I* have a sense of proportion, not to mention a healthy sense of self-preservation. That minigun can be used for logging and urban renewal, assuming that no one important (i.e. with a pulse) is down-range when you decide you need some timber. Now, if you wanted to play with it from a pintle-mount or tripod, with plenty of safe down-range territory and under adult supervision, by all means, play on.

    As for Heinlein…

    Political tags – such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth – are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire.
    Robert A. Heinlein

  • I actually thought Robert Heinlein was a good author, he had some interesting, if completely unworkable, ideas. I was lucky enough to have read Starship Troopers before I saw the abomination of a movie and I kinda liked the idea of people having to earn their vote as I’ve always saw the main flaw of democracy being that every muppet gets a say.

  • Dread Cthulhu

    Heinlein gets a bad rap mainly because he presents such dangerous notions as a need for folks to be personally responsible, self-reliant, etc.

    The movie entitled “Starship Troopers” was, in essence, some Hollywood liberal weenie’s “reaction” to the novel “Starship Troopers.”

    Hell, we’re lucky the poncing little twit didn’t write up a treatment sympathetic to the Bugs.

  • Billy Pilgrim


    “The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire.”

    I’m sorry, but who doesn’t believe that some sort of “control” is necessary?

    For example, who is against the idea that society should infringe, in draconian fashion, on the individual’s right to murder?

    Heinlein’s little phrase is rhetorically appealing but ultimately, intellectually vacuous. Clearly our disputes are not over the fact of societal/state/legal control, but over the extent of it.

    And clearly, no meaningful truth can be conveyed in a single, neat sentence.

  • Dread Cthulhu

    Billy Pilgrim: “I’m sorry, but who doesn’t believe that some sort of “control” is necessary? ”

    Ah, but we’re not talking about reasonable limits, we’re talking honest control. Y’know, police cameras every 15 feet, watching the guilty and the innocent, with little real utility with regard to law enforcement. We’re talking the disarmament of law-abiding citizens to the benefit of armed thugs. A controlling nanny-state that wants to regulate what we eat, what and where we can and can’t smoke and interfere with the minutiae of our lives.

    Billy Pilgrim: “For example, who is against the idea that society should infringe, in draconian fashion, on the individual’s right to murder?”

    Please, is that the best you can do, Billy? Do not confuse societal standards that arise almost universally, from enlightened self-interest if nothing else, with an unwarranted intrusion into one’s life.

    Billy Pilgrim: “Clearly our disputes are not over the fact of societal/state/legal control, but over the extent of it. ”

    Only because you allow yourself to be ensnared in the trappings and table-settings. The state should exist to serve the people, not the other way about. The UK’s nanny-state does little to serve the individual, instead substituting a socialistic pablum that imposes control upon the population — the cameras, the disarmament of the law-abiding to the ultimate benefit of the criminal, the payment of monies to criminals for injuries incurred in the course of their crimes, etc.

  • Stiofán de Buit


    The question is, at what point do ‘reasonable limits’ stop being reasonable and become ‘honest control’. You have one view of where that point lies, I have another, and in truth, on the scale from total anarchy to total control, we’re probably not that far apart.

    Everyone’s view on where that point lies is different and it’s why all-or-nothing statements like Heinlein’s are, quite frankly, nothing more than meaningless sound-bites.

  • Dread Cthulhu

    SdB: “Everyone’s view on where that point lies is different and it’s why all-or-nothing statements like Heinlein’s are, quite frankly, nothing more than meaningless sound-bites.”

    On the contrary, it is necessary to present the “all or nothing” position to shake-up the serfs and make them think — wake them up, get them to poke their heads out of their gopher holes and take a look around.

    For example, were you to poll Americans, I fear most would subscribe to the notion that the monies removed from their pay-check in witholding tax is “the government’s money,” which, frankly, is drivel. That money is earned by the worker and extracted from the worker by the government. Witholding schemes have allowed government to grow far beyond the point of diminishing returns because it lessens the sting of paying tax.

    A touch of hyperbole and a dash of the dramatic is needed to slap the serfs out of their lethargy and make them realize just how badly they’ve been bamboozled.

  • Richard Walsh


    Republican Sinn Féin has warned that, despite a recent statement from the UDA, Nationalists remain at risk from Loyalist death squads. Richard Walsh, Publicity Officer, stated that: “The recent statement from the UDA regarding its future intentions clearly emanates from Provo calls for complete collaboration with the British forces of occupation. Their efforts to promote the RUC have led a section of the Loyalist community to believe that the maintenance of their death squads is not currently necessary.

    “However, the retention of weaponry under UDA/UFF control demonstrates that these British-backed death squads can be reactivated as and when deemed necessary by their masters. Hence Nationalists inevitably remain at risk. Indeed two of our members in County Armagh were informed as recently as three months ago that their lives were under threat from an unspecified Loyalist organisation.”

    He added that the interests of all the Irish people would best be protected through the adoption of the ÉIRE NUA proposals within the context of a free Ireland.

    He said that “We in Republican Sinn Féin will not seek to dissociate ourselves from the ideals of the 1916 Proclamation, namely the ‘right of the Irish people to the ownership of Ireland, and to the unfettered control of Irish destinies, to be sovereign and indefeasible.’ Present-day Unionists must come to realise that their interests are best served through a federation of the four Irish Provinces, free from all foreign interference. Republican Sinn Féin’s ÉIRE NUA programme provides for maximum decentralisation of power to local communities.”

  • Concerned Loyalist

    I haven’t had an opportunity to comment on the Remembrance Sunday statement read out by Colin Halliday, which was then followed up on by Jackie McDonald.
    I thought it was carefully worded, progressive and looking to the future without forgetting the sacrifice of the men and women who fought and died in the conflict to protect our community from the scourge of violent Republican bigotry.
    I don’t want this to be viewed as a defiant glorification of the UFF so I’ll leave it there, my thoughts on the need for Loyalism to have an organised cutting edge in response to Republican attacks is well known and I don’t need to elaborate.
    I’m 22 years of age now and I’m sick to the back teeth of it all now, i.e. the blind hatred and sectarianism. Currently at University I have more Roman Catholic mates on my football team than Prod mates. Their personalities relate more to mine than some of the other dour bastards on our side from both backgrounds – I’m not going to choose boring Prods/Taigs to hang about with and go out drinking with over Prods/Taigs who are a better laugh.
    Basically what I’m saying is this through all the waffle. Take the UDA’s standing down of their “cutting edge” as a sign that our community might not feel entirely comfortable with the whole situation; we are deeply concerned with the brutal murder of Paul Quinn and the attempted murders of serving PSNI officers, but we are confident enough in the future that we don’t need the Ulster Freedom Fighters to fight the IRA. Surely this should be viewed as a stepping stone to a true and lasting peace.
    Maybe one day in the future I’ll be able to go to my footie mates’ homes in the Poleglass and Glen Road areas of West Belfast or Newry City without feeling my heart pounding because of my faith…surely that’s not much to ask, is it?

  • Concerned Loyalist

    Methinks you’re talking through your hole! I apologise for the crudeness but it’s what is needed for this Walter Mitty. Name names of your ex-paramilitary pals to prove me wrong. I have no doubt a brainwashed bigot like yourself counts ex-Provos as their muckers, but to say you’re mates with ex-Uvfers is stretching the truth beyond credibility because no Loyalist worth his salt would want anything to do with a sectarian extremist like you…

  • Concerned Loyalist

    My 1:55am post was in response to this rubbish:


    I’ve enjoyed the friendship of retired (as far as I know) paramilitaries from both the UVF and IRA. All were inclined to zealotry but otherwise nice people to be with.

    Posted by lib2016 on Nov 11, 2007 @ 08:20 PM

  • RepublicanStones

    concerned loyalist, remind me how the uff fought the IRA? is targeting ipeople because of their religion fighting your enemy? and those unionists who claim the loyalist violencce was only ever eactionary can cut the bull as well, it is documented fact that unionists/loyalists started the ‘troubles’. you cannot argue against fact. remeber bombay st, remember the taunts of I Ran Away, regarding the absence of the IRA to protect nationalist homes from colonist/loyalist/unionist attacks. oh and the irish have a right to claim that republican violence was reactionary, after all we didn’t pick the fight with you, it was the other way round, as you would know if you were in any way educated.

  • RepublicanStones

    ‘Death Squads’ are defined as pro-govt groups who engage in ‘extra-judicial’ killings of people they define as enemies of the state. In Northern Ireland there are many people, esp British and their allies, who reject the idea that there are ‘death squads’ in Northern Ireland, and certainly not like those in Latin America.To refer to ‘death squads’ in North of Ireland is seen as evidence that the speaker is biased against Britain and Ulster Protestants. The fact is that the Loyalist gangs fit the definition to a tee. the media has called world attention to the use of such state terror in many contemporary Third World countries,in Northern Ireland the perception of collaboration between government and terror groups does not exist because the British govt has a system of direct control, through its military and intelligence services, of the Loyalist paramilitaries who direct the murder against the civilian natives.