OSF not alone at Narrow Water

Ogra Sinn Fein have not yet told us about their exciting weekend but seemingly they were not alone when the went to the scene of the Narrow Water ambush. The Newsletter reports that the 30 OSF members were met by a group of protesters including Willie Frazer and Jim Wells.

Mr. Wells said “I was actually quite surprised and shocked they (the members of Sinn Fein Youth) went ahead with the tour. They were commemorating and gloating over the biggest loss of human life in Northern Ireland until Omagh. It seemed they were determined to go ahead and cause the maximum possible offence. I would like to know how they had a guide who appeared extremely knowledgeable of the Narrow Water massacre? If that person is so knowledgeable, he clearly has information that would be useful to the police”

  • cut the bull

    Thankfully willy didnt bring his saracen along as the young shinners may have thoght they were in for a replay.

  • Turgon please

    News Letter

    News Letter

    News Letter

    NEWS LETTER!!!!

  • J O’Donovan

    Did Frazer et al pay OSF for the tour?

  • Tony

    Willie Frazer has lost relatives to the parent body of the scum who polluted the area around Narrow Water yesterday. This visit is another reason that Sinn Fein / IRA are totally unfit for government.

  • Mark McGregor

    I hear the OSF gathering in Newcastle was targeted with a bomb scare.

  • cut the bull

    Tony the leadership of both Unioist politicalparties are happy enough to work and govern Sinn Féin.
    I was surprised a few weeks ago to see Michael Copeland among a Fair protest at the Laganside court with Willy when a Basque was facing an extrdition hearing.
    Willy and Mick were complaining that this man was terrorist and those supporting him were republican scum and Sinn Féin was linked to international terrorism and were unfit for government. Yet Mick shared power as MLA with SF before he lost his seat and he continues to work with SF within Belfast City council.Michael also shares platforms with SF at several meetings in East Belfast.
    There seems to be large contradiction within Unionism on this issue.

  • cut the bull

    Jim Wells also seems comfortable enough with working alongside Sinn Féin both in Stormont and Down Council. The Shinners must be fit enough to govern if he’s governing with them.

  • pasty

    Maybe the smell of a £ is to appealing to Jim. He is obviously being paid to be a Cuncilor and MLA and there must be some sort of reward for him to do the somersaults in moral beliefs that he is standing firm on – which of course are totally contradictory!

  • Billy

    Great to see the usual inconsistency from Frazer.

    He and his organisation continue to commemorate “loyalist” sectarian murderer (and Glenanne gang member) Robert McConnell as an innocent victim.

    He continues to defend Billy Wright.

    He was refused PSNI permission to own a handgun because of his links to “loyalist” terrorists. When his appeal was dismissed in the High Court – the Judge was more than satisfied with the evidence provided by the PSNI in support of their refusal.

    Best of all was his statement (on BBC radio) that they (the “loyalist” terrorists freed under the GFA) should never have been locked up in the first place.

    Personally, I have no time for OSF and disagree with this trip to Narrow Water.

    However, it is just sickening when a blatent hypocrite like Frazer protests about it. Somehow if a group of “loyalists” visited the site of the Miami Showband massacre, I don’t think that Frazer or his organisation would be too interested in protesting about it.

    I’m truly sorry for what happened to Frazer’s family. However, there are thousands of grieving relatives on both sides of this community.

    It doesn’t give any of them immunity from criticism when they make blatently hypocritical statements in the public arena.

    Until such time as Frazer is prepared to speak out against “loyalist” terrorism also, he will clearly and rightly be regarded as a very bitter and extremely hypocritical man.

    Those that defend his stance are equally hypocritical. You either condemn ALL terrorism or you don’t – it’s that simple.

  • OC

    ‘You either condemn ALL terrorism or you don’t – it’s that simple.’

    Posted by Billy on Jan 11, 2009 @ 10:33 PM

    And if one doesn’t?

  • Billy

    OC

    In Frazer’s case – he condemns Republican terrorists but has stated (a matter of public record) that the “loyalist” terrorists freed under the GFA should not “have been locked up in the first place”.

    So, clearly, he doesn’t have a problem with terrorism per se – only when it comes from Republicans.

    I can fully understand why Unionists have a credibility problem with someone who would defend the IRA or INLA yet criticises the UDA or UVF.

    However, there are so many Unionists on here who feel that Nationalists should ignore the blatent double standards and hypocrisy of Frazer towards “Loyalist” terrorism.

    Why – because of what happened to his family? That’s terrible but it doesn’t give anyone the right to be a hypocrite in the public arena without being held to account.

    Like I said, there are unfortunately thousands of grieving relatives in this community. Frazer has no right to be accepted as a special case.

    I have massive disagreements with David Vance’s views for instance. However, he has always and does always condemn ALL terrorists either Republican or “Loyalist”. Therefore, I have no problem respecting (and agreeing with) his condemnation of Republican terrorism as he is totally consistent and would react exactly the same to “Loyalist” terrorism.

    Why should Nationalists/Catholics have any respect for Frazer when he thinks “loyalist” terrorists should not have been locked up (for slaughtering innocent Catholic women and Children)and commemorates a sectarian murderer and “loyalist” terrorist – Robert McConnell?

    I respect anyone who condemns ANY and ALL Terrorism irrespective of the perpetrator (as I do).

    I’m afraid that hypocrites like Frazer who blatently ignore terrorism from one side while condemning it from another deserve nothing more than to be exposed – which is hardly difficult.

    To be fair, I think most Unionists can see through Frazer – have you seen his election results? – laughable or perhaps pitiful.

  • Realist

    “Until such time as Frazer is prepared to speak out against “loyalist” terrorism also, he will clearly and rightly be regarded as a very bitter and extremely hypocritical man”

    Billy,

    I totally agree.

    “To be fair, I think most Unionists can see through Frazer – have you seen his election results? – laughable or perhaps pitiful”

    I totally agree.

    Why,then, does a relative nonentity like Frazer exercise the minds of so many republicans?

    Is it because he doesn’t fear them?

  • dunreavynomore

    realist

    but does he?? exercise the minds of so many republicans, I mean. A few young sinn feiners maybe but most republicans that I know laugh at Willie and a lot actually question his sanity. Republicans have nothing to fear from Willie and I know of no republican who is afraid of him.

  • darth rumsfeld

    … and that would be because they have all the guns!
    Oh, sorry, the ones they didn’t hand in to themselves- like that semtex that everyone’s pretending not to notice from a couple of weeks ago.
    And sure who needs guns when there’s loads of willing helpers like the Quinn conspirators?

    Funny how all the chuckies on this thread seem to be saying on the one hand “He’s an irrelevant nutter” and on the other devoting all their time to unpicking his opinions and denouncing him. Could it just be that… truth hurts?
    Forza Willie!

  • cut the bull

    The problem I see with Fair is that the politicians willy brings speak at protests, say one thing at the protest and then go on to contradict what they have said.They continually say Sinn Féin are not fit to sit in Govrnment and when the protest is over they go back to Stormont and or their local council and govern with those they have deemed not fit to be there.
    I believe these politicians are being two faced and Willy not challenging them on thier duplicite stance is actually doing a great disservice to those involved with fair

  • up Down

    willie and big jim with there UDA bully boys trying to grap at girls as young as 15, yeah well done

  • Billy

    Realist

    I can only speak for myself – a moderate Nationalist.

    Frankly, Frazer himself doesn’t annoy me. I believe that he is a terrible public speaker and, allied with the fact that he is so easily exposed as a hypocrite on “loyalist” terrorism, he actually does the Unionist case more harm than good when he comes on TV or Radio and spouts off.

    As I said, in all fairness, I think that a lot of Unionists also feel this way hence his pitiful election results.

    The reason I feel compelled to expose Frazer is because a number of Unionist posters here hold him up as some of great example of someone to be admired.

    I’m afraid that, while I sympathise with his loss, I won’t admire someone who so blatently defends “loyalist” terrorists while pretending to be some sort of concerned citizen worried about the well-being of all.

    IMO Republicans don’t “fear” Frazer – most Nationalists that I know find him laughable.

    However, when certain posters come on here praising Frazer to the skies and then condemn Republicans, Nationalists and Catholics in general, it is nesessary to expose him (and by extension) them for their hypocrisy.

  • peter

    Good to see Educated Irish youth who dont use the bbc and uvf willie as bible like the stoop loving brit’s who are the terrorists of the world ..Tiocfaidh ar la end british terrorist occupatiion of North East Ireland

  • Swift

    @Billy

    The reason I feel compelled to expose Frazer is because a number of Unionist posters here hold him up as some of great example of someone to be admired.

    I’m afraid that, while I sympathise with his loss, I won’t admire someone who so blatently defends “loyalist” terrorists while pretending to be some sort of concerned citizen worried about the well-being of all.

    I think the problem with this is that you, or at least many nationalists at the mention of Frazer’s name, are creating a straw man of “admiration”. I believe that the unionists you speak of are, more often, not admiring him so much as agreeing with (or perhaps admiring) what he says.

    Therefore, for the purpose of the particular argument in the particular thread, bringing up all kinds of data to demonstrate that he is a hypocrite is most often an invalid contribution to the debate. Specifically, to get all hoighty toighty about it, it is what is known in Latin as an Ad Hominem Tu Quoque fallacy.
    http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem-tu-quoque.html
    A particular type of the more general Ad hominem fallacy.

    Or in slugger terms it is played the man (Frazer) rather than the ball (what Frazer specifically says or does that is the topic of the debate in question).

  • Billy

    Swift

    OK, lets look at what Frazer specifically says.

    1. They (the “Loyalist” terrorists released under the GFA) should never have been locked up in the first place. Do you agree with this?

    2. Robert McConnell was an innocent victim. Robert McConnell has been named by other “loyalist” terrorists, RUC personnel and British Army Personnel as a known “loyalist” terrorist and member of the Glenanne gang who was
    involved in many murders of innocent Catholics.

    Does this meet your classification of an innocent victim?

    Does Frazer (and those Unionists who support him) expect to be allowed to pontificate in Public about Republicans/Nationalists/Catholics without his other public utterances displaying his blatent hypocrisy on “loyalist” terrorism being brought up?

    There is a difference between “playing the man” because you don’t like what they say and exposing them as a blatent hypocrite whose position is totally inconsistent.

    If Frazer were to speak out against “loyalist” terrorism then one would have to respect his consistency.

    However, as long as he continues to speak out against Republican terrorism but making statements defending “loyalist” terrorist prisoners etc, he will be viewed rightly as a hypocrite and exposed as such.