37th anniversary of Claudy bombing

Yesterday marked the 37th anniversary of the Claudy bombing in which nine people were murdered when three bombs were exploded in the small village. Mary Hamilton one of the local UUP councillors commented:

“Although it will be 37 years since this happened, I can still see clearly and vividly the images of the destruction and carnage. When you see scenes like that, you can never forget.

I was one of the lucky ones who escaped with my life, but many of my friends and people I knew died that day – and still it seems we are no closer to justice.

I knew the Eakin family, and it is just so sad that on this anniversary they will not be around to remember their daughter Kathryn – but I suppose Billy and Merle are with her now.

My only fear is that many more relatives of the victims of Claudy will also go to their graves without ever seeing anyone brought before the courts for this atrocity. It is just a very, very sad situation. A lot of the relatives feel very helpless and frustrated with the various investigations.” William Hosuton who has liaised extensively with the victims’ families said:

“Time has been a great healer for some of the relatives, but for many others another year has now gone past without any justice or answers.

Whatever the reasons for the lack of progress in the police investigation and the delay in the Police Ombudsman’s publication of their report, the continuing lack of progress does nothing to help the relatives of the dead and those who were injured to achieve justice.

Perhaps it is now time for Martin McGuinness, who was effectively the commander of the Derry brigade of the IRA at the time, to follow his own advice given to others and provide as much information as he can to the PSNI in order that those who still carry the scars of that fateful Monday may find some comfort and see some, if not all, of those responsible convicted for the crimes they carried out in Claudy.”

Of course despite a number of previous arrests and an apparent confession there have never been any prosecutions and the IRA have even yet to admit responsibility. The PSNI’s Historical Enquiries Team has previously investigated the murders but according to the News Letter refused to comment on the investigation into the Claudy bombing.

However, apparently the Police Ombudsman is preparing a report into the murderers and a spokesperson said:

“The Ombudsman investigation is now complete and we are in the process of preparing a public report,”

  • Drumlins Rock

    Brit, dont feed the halfwit, not worth it, I was glad that some of the earlier posts were trying to find some common ground, then this wee prick came along with his provo worship, maybe the post has got some people thinking and who knows what will ocme of it.
    Think I will let it go now, unless some useful comments are added.

  • Brian MacAodh

    Provos= resurrection of the “Cult of the Gun”

    The cult had all but died out before the reactions of Protestant extremism and British repression breathed it new life

  • Brit Wit

    Read Frank Kidson.
    This thread was set up to demonise Republicans and to make out that the British death squads and their Loyalist proxies were innocents.

    The McMahon murders from the Belfast pogroms were mentioned. Orange scum were saying then it was reaction too, to violence in Cork.

    Orangeism is a vile creed. It – and British cynicism – is at the root of all the violence.

    There can and should be no common ground between the forces of rightousness and those who vote for Paisley by day and commit sectarian atrocities by night – and who have limited vocabs such as “prick”, “Fenian”, “Taig” etc.

  • sinless

    Drumlins Rock: You are a sad case. How many tattoos have you? Here is another source for you to check the Orangies’ war crimes
    http://fenian32.blogspot.com/2005_08_14_archive.html

    Mention was made here of so called Nazi war crimes. The Italians still hold Nazis to account but no Italians have ever been held to account fir their peace keeping roles in Absynnia and Libya. D/o the Brits, Yanks, Soviets and other war mongers.

    Off thread a little but that is Unionism’s KKK culture in its broadest context.

    Still, the Orangies must hate the changing times as there are less opportunities to rape and beat up Catholic grannies, or incinerate Catholic kids. Lest we forget and all that.

    The guilt is overwhelmingly on the side of the Brits and their local stooges, the hateful Orange vermin. Nothing will ever change that.

  • RepublicanStones

    “The Loyalists thought they were fighting a just war to preserve their nation, which they were forced into by the Republicans campaign. They thought they justified in “returning the serve”. ”

    Returning their own serve were they? Your grasp of the chronology of events surrounding the most recent incarnation of the conflict between Britain and Ireland commonly referred to as the ‘Troubles’ is emabarassing.

  • Elliot Mitcham

    And what have we learned today boys and girls? If there’s someone worse than you, you can do what you like.

  • Cushy Glenn

    I’m shocked
    Five pages of whataboutery and no sign of Bob Magowan!!

  • Brit

    “Returning their own serve were they? Your grasp of the chronology of events surrounding the most recent incarnation of the conflict between Britain and Ireland commonly referred to as the ‘Troubles’ is emabarassing.”

    The phrase was used by David Ervine who joined the UVF after Bloody Friday and claimed that this was why he did it.

    I dont claim to be an expert on the history of the troubles let alone the chronology of tit-for-tat communal violence with which it kicked off. However, the issue is one of causation not chronology. The UVF and UDA experienced a surge of volunteers and support following the start of the IRA campaign.

    Furthermore had the IRA surrendered in, say, the late 70s or 80s, it is highly likely that loyalists would have stopped their murderous activities shortly thereafter. Conversely, had the loyalists stopped at that time (admittedly a pretty unrealistic hypothetical scenario) the IRA would have continued to wage what it called a war against what is saw as the occupying British Army and wider Crown forces (post men and elderly workmen who did a job for the RUC)

    The point of my original post was not that this meant that the loyalists actions were in any way justified, or that Republicanism should take the principal blame for them . It was to challenge the views of one of the posters here (whos name I forget) which saw loyalists as “sectarian murder gangs (TM)” but Republicans has real humans, with complex motives etc.

    One can contextualise any acts of evil. The Nazis had misplaced fears of what the Jews and Bolsheviks would do to them. Child abusers may have been abused etc.

    It is clearly one-sided and blinkered, if not pure sectarian bigotry, to humanise and contextualise the Republicans but not to extend the same approach to Loyalists.

    In my view both should be condemned without excuse or justification.

  • kensei

    Furthermore had the IRA surrendered in, say, the late 70s or 80s, it is highly likely that loyalists would have stopped their murderous activities shortly thereafter.

    Except, you know, they are mostly still in business while the PIRA is not. Anmd they started before. And this kind of “loyalist violence” is reactive attitude might just seriously get on the goat of a lot of people. Including me.

  • kensei

    Drumlin

    If we work on that persumption, by continuing to use the “car bomb as a tactic” its shown the IRA put a low value on civilian casualities, which maybe in someways is more repugnant, remember the targets were rarely Military in these cases, but soft commercial/government targets, targets which in themselves are illegal under rules of war, and of no real “strategic” value, which surely made the risks way beyond any possible “benefit” to the cause.

    Basically all modern militaries put a cheap value on civilian lives. Both teh US and British Armies will happily accept “collateral damage” if they can get a target of strategic importance or protect their own men. Yes, they weigh it up. But let’s not kid ourselves.

    If anything, the more modern no warning, kill as many people as possible bombing should place the IRA campaign in some kind of context. Typically targetting civilians was high counter prodcutive to the IRA in any case.

    But, basically, so what? General policy or no people are still as dead.

  • Brit

    This is what they said.

    “After after having received confirmation and guarantees in relation to Northern Ireland’s constitutional position within the United Kingdom, as well as other assurances, and, in the belief that the democratically expressed wishes of the greater number of people in Northern Ireland will be respected and upheld, the CLMC will universally cease all operational hostilities as from 12 midnight on Thursday 13 October 1994.

    The permanence of our ceasefire will be completely dependent upon the continued cessation of all nationalist/republican violence, the sole responsibility for a return to war lies with them.”

    It followed shortly after the IRA’s surrender.

    Doesnt mean the people from those organisations have disappeared or become peaceable anti-sectarians, that sectarian violence has gone, that these yobs are not into drug dealing and organised crime. But the UVF and UDA are clearly not still in business in the sense that they were.

  • michael

    “ut the UVF and UDA are clearly not still in business in the sense that they were. ”

    A nuance that probably gave comfort in the final moments to those they murdered since the old closing down sale.

  • Brit

    “Basically all modern militaries put a cheap value on civilian lives” Kensei

    Is this an attempt to minimise the responsibilty and evil of the IRA?

    Assuming there are reasonable grounds for believing that you are fighting a Just War there are three possible approaches.

    1. Pacifist. That way lies surrendering to the Nazis.

    2. Fighting according to the Rules of War – jus in bello. That means you dont target civillians and you take reasonable measures to try prevent their deaths. It also means that you use force which is proportionate to your legitimate military objectives. Simple concepts in theory not so easy to put into practice (see the Americans in Iraq or Israelis in Gaza / Lebannon). The minimum rule, and that which in practice is the only one which has been complied with in any just war, is the first. You dont target non-combatants. Even this is arguably suject to what is called the supreme emergency doctrine (in very extreme cases) which has been used to justify early allied bomging of Germany and US nukes in Japan.

    3. Fighting outside the Rules of War. That could range from deliberate murder of civillians to complete disgregard for civillians deaths and taking no, or insufficient steps to prevent them.

    Although it makes no difference to the victim, the difference between deaths resulting from 2 and from 3 is huge in moral and legal terms. Otherwise the actions of Nazi commandants in death camps who oversaw deliberate murder of innocent familes women and children in cold blood would be equivalent to those of, say, Yugoslav partisans fighting the Nazi occupiers and accidentily killing some local civillians.

    Given that the IRA’s “war” was not a Just War all deaths resulting were a result of immoral and illegal conduct, even to the extent that they had complied with the Rules of War (which they did not).

  • Brit

    “A nuance that probably gave comfort in the final moments to those they murdered since the old closing down sale.”

    And of course no IRA men have been involved in any killings since the IRAs surrender.

  • kensei

    Brit

    But the UVF and UDA are clearly not still in business in the sense that they were.

    Given that people were killed quite near me long after 1994, nevermind a llt he other people killed, go to hell.

    Is this an attempt to minimise the responsibilty and evil of the IRA?

    No, dealing on in a specific point. The contention is that the IRA deliberately targetted civilians as a general policy. The fact that civilians were killed doesn’t prove that contention on their own, and can’t. So people suggets they think life is cheap. But basically, that is the nature of war so a weak argument, and the same peole will typically defend huge casulaties in Iraq or Afanghanistan to the hilt.

    It is not a justifictaion of anything. It is what it is.

  • kensei

    Brit

    The IRA is a much more disciplined organisation. So comapratively few, and the IRA remained on active ceasefire since 1996, which was not true of the loyalists.

  • michael

    “And of course no IRA men have been involved in any killings since the IRAs surrender. ”

    Ofc they have.
    You seem to be mistaking me for someone who would apologise for the IRA.

    I like the ‘surrender’ bit though, calculated to cause the maximum emotional response in certain posters.

  • Brit

    the IRA’s “war” was not Just. They were operating in a liberal democracy (not a perfect one by any menas) and had other avenues to try to acheive their objective. An objective that the majority in the 6 counties objected to. The injustice of their “war” was compounded by the fact that it was clear to the leadership, a long time prior to their surrender, that they were not going to acheive their objectives – but kept on killing.

    Accordingly, every death which they caused was immoral, evil and illegal, even if they had only ever targetted British Army members whilst on duty.

    However the methods used included deliberate murder of civillians and numerous incidents of absolute negligence as to the loss of civililan life. Their definition of legitimate target basically included any Protestant who had the gall to work as part of the state to which he was a citizen/subject. This is way outside the scope of the Rules of War.

    Republicans also bear a limited level of responsibility for all sorts of sectarian violence by third parties. which was sparked and fuelled by their ongoing campaign.

    There is no comparision with deaths caused by an army fighting a Just War broadly in keeping with the Rules of War, which never targetted inviduals and the actions of the “volunteers”.

  • Brit

    “I like the ‘surrender’ bit though, calculated to cause the maximum emotional response in certain posters.”

    Yes deliberately so. Those posters are supporters of, of apologists for, an anti-democratic, muderous, sectarian, reactionary movement who they have the gall to think of as progressives, democrats, liberators and honourable freedom fighters. Sinn Fein / IRA abaondoned the basic precepts of physical force Republicanism and accepted that NI is and will remain British until the majority say otherwise. They have become constitutional democratic Nationalists and implicitly recognised that their murderous campaign had been futile. A surrender.

    The scum of CIRA AND RIRA are the only ones true to the tradition and they have not surrendered (liberating Eire with pizza boy attacks).

  • michael

    “They were operating in a liberal democracy”

    Uhmmmm, no.

    You can’t draw ever decreasing circles around a geographical area until you get the demographic you want backed up with the threat of violence and then start talking about democracy.

    Then create an polical system that ignored demographics when you felt like it (as in Derry) for purely sectarian reasons, and expect people not to laugh when its describe it as a liberal democracy.

    If partition taught us one thing, it’s that if you don’t get what you want, regardless of the mandate you have, you grab a gun and demand it.

  • Brit

    Michael, I dont say the Catholics/Irish Nationlists didnt have greviances. I know about the gerrymandering and I understand (if not accept) the arguments about the arbitrary nature of partition and the in-built Unionst majority.

    None of that justifies the IRAs recourse to murder when a peaceful civil rights campaign, if maintained (with a bit of defensive violence against loyalist mobs to protect Catholics) could have dealt with some of these issues. Even if it did it does not excuse the murder of civillians.

    I think its too late for anyone on the Nationalist side, including IRA/SF, to argue that the principle of consent is wrong given the overwhelming backing they gave to the GFA. We all now accept the basic de facto Unionist argument that the majority in NI decide its fate.

  • sinless

    Derifwood: The British anmd their American masters are NOT accountable. It is actually written into international law by the Yanks.

    You wouldn’t know about Alegeria, where the French pigs complained about the FLN’s bike and pram bombs but had no such qualms about their own bigger ones. Shades of Hamburg, Dresden, Dublin and Monaghan.

    The first car bomb was not a car bomb. It was a horse and cart bomb, planted in Wall Street in the 21920s. American draft resisters also used the car bomb before the Provos. This goes to shpw the Encyl. Brit is like most things British: tarnished.

    Hey, two more days and it is the anniversary of internment when British SS interned Catholic men and boys (and one non practicing Prod). So much for the civil rights of the Catholics they came to shit on two years earlier.

  • Itwas SammyMcNally whatdoneit

    Brit,

    I dont think you get the partition thing – the republican point of view, which I share, is that the country was threatened into accepting home rule for only 26 counties by the boul Winnie and that is NO basis to establish Norn Iron’s legitimacy.

    Under the GFA those who resisted the failed British policy of criminalistion are now in power
    and have swapped their violent campaign for abolition of the Orange militias and getting their prisoners out of jail, recognition by the British that they no strategic interest in Norn Iron and that the constitutional future of norn Iron is a matter for the people of the island of Ireland – exercised seperately and a constitutional role for the Irish government.

    The British, to be fair to them have treated republicans like statesmen which is largely how they have behaved since assuming power. Trying to pretend, in view of the constitutional and security changes the Britsih have made in direct response to the PIRA campaign, that they are/were criminals is patent nonsense, although many including myself would not agree with their methods.

  • Brit

    “the republican point of view, which I share, is that the country was threatened into accepting home rule for only 26 counties by the boul Winnie and that is NO basis to establish Norn Iron’s legitimacy.”

    Well you shouldnt have voted for the GFA which confirmed that it is for the people of NI to determine their constitutional status and by default to remain part of the UK. The mainland Brits didnt have a strategic interest for decades and the vote in the Republic is just an irrelevant gimmick to keep Nationalists happy.

    All the “concessions” to which you refer could have been obtained much much earlier had the IRA surrendered earlier.

    “the constitutional and security changes the Britsih have made in direct response to the PIRA campaign” what, internment and British Army patrols all over the place?

  • Brit

    “British SS”

    No no dear boy WE were fighting AGAINST the SS. I recall that this was “Ireland’s opportunity” to do something or other?

    So kensei is mainstream SF

    Sinless is hardcore RIRA/CIRA

    Where does Republican Stones fit into the picture?

  • sinless

    British SS: = behave like the SS. Too many examples from the occupied 6 cos to go into it. Though the Waffen SS did show bravery on occasion.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7799610.stm

    Seems a few more of “our boys” are coming form from Afghan in boxes. A few Micks included in the roll call. More fool them.

    Like Claudy and Dresden, lest we forget.

    Good thing Prince Harry scrapped through. Otherwise, waht would all the high class slappers do for a Hun aping dick?

  • Itwas SammyMcNally whatdoneit

    Brit,

    there was only going to be peace once the Englezes accepted the legitimacy of the Republican struggle and designed a government structure to allow them power (which they did after the failure of their criminalistaion policy) and it took the Englezes decades to abolish the UDR and RUC and to agree to let the prisoners out. They can be very stubborn in foreign afairs you know – have a look at Iraq and the current muddle in Afghansiatan for more examples.

    The GFA requires the consent of the people of ROI to change Norn Iron’s constitutiolnal posititon and this is an important principle but also stops some oportunistic quasi-Unionist feckers (PoshBoyDC?) on the Tory right trying to turn back the clock.

    The Englezes have made their peace (GFA)with violent republicans and treat them as principled statesmen with whom they can do business – Unionism needs to stop trying to re-write history and do the same.

  • michael

    “Michael, I dont say the Catholics/Irish Nationlists didnt have greviances”

    No, you ignored them by describing N.Ireland as a liberal democracy.

    It wasn’t, it was, as a British Minister who was stationed here once described it, suffering under a ‘low grade form of tyranny’.

  • Brit

    Sinless – I suppose on reflection you’re right, the British Army / intelligence services were very much like the SS (although obviously lacking the bravery of the German version).

    You really are an unreconstructed Republican aren’t you? Do you think the Real / Continuitiy boys are going to liberate Ireland from the British yoke soon?

    You f@ckin imbecile.

  • kensei

    Brit

    So kensei is mainstream SF

    I speak for no one but myself.

  • Brit

    Sammy, you seem relatively decent for Republican (in the SF sense), but your version of reality is very far from the truth.

    The IRA surrendered. They accepted the futility of trying to bomb the Prods into a UI and accepted the basically Unionist golden rule of “consent”. How does the vote in the RoI stop Cameron from trying to turn the clock back (as if he would waste his energy on such a vote loser)? The people in NI decide. They remain British unless they decide otherwise.

    The fact that some murderous b@stards got out of prison early is one of the hardest bits of the GFA to stomach. The GFA is to be celebrated despite, not because of, that aspect. If you think its a great victory for Republicanism your failing to understand the nature of the IRAs surrender.

  • Sean

    Brit

    You lost the arguement quit now while you are behind

    nIreland may be described NOW as a liberal democracy it was never a liberal democracy for atleast its first 80 years of existance

    and yes the secret police really were alive and living in nIreland, SS or KGB or Stasi what ever paralel you wish to use it is applicable

  • kensei

    Brit

    The people in NI decide. They remain British unless they decide otherwise.

    No, NI remains under British sovereignty. I am Irish. Nothing else. If in the event of a United Ireland people wnat to be totally British and have th ePassport to back it up, not my business.

  • Brit

    Sean and Michael,

    Was it a perfect liberal democracy? no. Was it a society in which Catholics were discriminated against? Yes. Where Catholics prevented from fully realising / expressing their cultural identity? Yes. Where Catholics, or some of them, alienated from the state and the forces of law and order? Yes. Was there a degree of gerrymandering? Yes.

    Were the Catholics treated like the Jews in occupied Europe? No. where they treated like the inhabitants of occupied Europe? No. were they treated like the Blacks in S Africa? No. Where they treated like the Blacks in the US south? No

    They had the vote. They had newspapers. They had the right to assembly and marches. There were nationalist MPs. There was a well off Catholic middle class, represented in Universities and professions. Class divisions were mauch more salient than ethnic/national ones to explain wealth etc. M

    Campagin against the status quo. Demand full rights. Civil disobediance. Put candidates up. Bring legal challenges. Fine but dont blow up remembrance services.

    It was nothing like Nazi Germany or the totalitarian states of the USSR and Eastern Germany so all of those analogies are preposterous.

  • sinless

    Brit: You don’t get it. The Prods and their Brit gunmen denied the Irish in the 6 cos their human rights. They were on the ropes until Littlejohn, Jackson, Gordon Kerr, the UVF/Paisleyites started their dirty tricks jobs in 1969 and they pulled the Provos in.

    I would die happy if Kerr, his wife and all belonging to them were publicly hanged in Talbot St, Dublin.

    The Provos just did not stick the boot in hard enough when the time was right. CIRA and RIRA: also duped.

  • Brit

    “No, NI remains under British sovereignty. I am Irish. Nothing else. If in the event of a United Ireland people wnat to be totally British and have th ePassport to back it up, not my business.”

    OK NI remains part of Britain. Of course your Irishness is the glory of he bi-national state. You can be Irish and the guy in the next street or town can be British. And no one needs to get hurt. That is the essence of progressive unionism.

    But ultimately that can only go so far and NI has to be either part of Britain or Ireland. The IRA have conceded that it will be the fomer until the majority say otherwise. They have become Catholic de facto Unionists.

  • Itwas SammyMcNally whatdoneit

    Brit,

    you are not too bad yourself for an imperialist-engleze-running-dog.

    The Englezes negotiated with Grizzly and Marty and Co and if you listen to the voice of the right wing in Britian ie the Torygraph they tell us the Englezes surrnendered to the IRA. But the GFA was no republican victory just as it was not a surrender, just a series of incremental moves in the right direction and a recogniton by the Englezes that they got the partition settlement and its aftermath badly wrong.

    re. ” How does the vote in the RoI stop Cameron from trying to turn the clock back”

    Well for example, post GFA, he cant deicde to pretend Norn Iron is as British as Kent and try to politically integrate it with Britian without ROI consent.

  • Elliot Mitcham

    sinless

    You’re delusional. There was no way PIRA was going achieve victory with most of the population dead against them, an inability to secure any kind of electoral mandate through Sinn Fein and an embarrassing level of penetration by the security services.

  • Brian MacAodh

    “The Provos just did not stick the boot in hard enough when the time was right. CIRA and RIRA: also duped.”

    When was that? When was the time right? Their high water mark was shortly after Stormont fell, they had widespread support even throughout the ROI–was that the right time? Cuz then Twomey and those other idiots started more “offensive” operations (sticking the boot you could say) that proved offensive to most of their sympathizers. And what happened-within 2 years they were no longer an insurgency, just a terrorist group.

    The Provos said they were defenders of the community. I’m not sure how bombing pubs in England defended the Catholics in Belfast

  • Itwas SammyMcNally whatdoneit

    Brian,

    it is probably the case that the only reason the Englezes came to the negotiating table is that the Provos flattened London’s finiancial centre -and it could be argued that it would probably have been a lot better for everyone if they had thought of that little trick a lot earlier.

  • Brit

    “Provos flattened London’s finiancial centre”

    Like f@ck did they. Killed and injured a few Brits (always good for a laugh) but there was no appreciable econcomic effect on the British economy either in in the Financial Services / markets or more generally. Did the Warrington bombing also help force the Brits to the table?

    The Englezes came to the table because they IRA gave up the Armalite. Indeed they had been waiting at the table for the IRA to surrender for decades.

  • Itwas SammyMcNally whatdoneit

    Brit,

    whats to laugh about? – innocent people died.

    ” Indeed they had been waiting at the table for the IRA to surrender for decades. ”

    Well why didnt they issue a statement saying they were ready for peace and tell everyone that they would abolish the RUC and the UDR let all the prisoners out and design a form of government to suit the insurgents and treat the insurgency leaders as statesmen and they had got their criminalisation policy all wrong?

    They didnt becuase they wanted to go down the road to nowhere (just as the Provos did) and it took the flattening of London’s financial centre to encourage the Englezes along the road to peace.

    I dont know what Warrington and the blowing up of dustbins has to do with the blowing up banks etc which I referring to.

    Unless you say something really interesting/annoying I might just let you have the last word on this.

  • Brian MacAodh

    The flattening, twice in a year at one point, of the Financial district was their most effective tactic in years. One civliian death (I think) and billions of pounds in damages. Not to mention billions more effect on the economy. That, coupled with the massive amount of meny spent on containing the PIRA, helped the provos get much better terms then they would have.

  • Brit

    I understand why SF supporters have to rationalise that the violence helped get them a great deal and acheived something. To do otherwise would be to admit what they deep down know to be true, that their actions were futile and immoral.

  • Sean

    Brit

    Were the Catholics treated like the Jews in occupied Europe? No.
    YES they were rounded up indisriminantly and imprisoned for the crime of being fecking fenians—- ever heard of internment. Are you sorry the brits never got around to the “final solution”

    were they treated like the Blacks in S Africa? No. YES they were forced to live in their ghettoes locked away from society ever heard of the Falls Road Curfew?

    Where they treated like the Blacks in the US south? No YES if you mean indescriminantly murdered by bigots for being catholics or in the case of more than a fair few prods looking like catholics

    Or do you mean set upon by the supposed forces of law and order for staging peaceful demonstrations to demand their civil rights? If I even have to explain this to you I give up but 2 words that should invoke outrage in everyone

    Bloody Sunday

    Take off the blinders the republicans did not start the violence, they merely got tired of being its only victims

  • sinless

    Brian: The Bomb Britan bit has already been answered. It brought the Brits to the negotiating table.

    Brian and Elliot: The answer is implicit in Brian’s post. Of course, having Joe Cahill and others handing over ship fulls of weapons didn’t help.

    The Provos were and are essentially a Belfast and Derry controlled group. Ironic given how Derry was rat infested. What most of them wanted was a more radical SDLP/Wee Joe Devlin and that is what they got. Only Adams and a handfull of others come from traditional Republican families.

    Imagine if Bomber Harris had have been in charge of the Provos (not as a spy). Plenty of bombs would have flowed. But – ironic when looking at the Skin the Goat thread – the Provos would not fight in the South. Just how many of them were Free State agents?

    The key to understanding the Provos is in their genesis. A motley crew who hijacked the civil rights movement and let the Brits off the hook. The Brits played the long game, aided and abetted by Joe Cahill, Martin McG, Grizzly, Denis D, Stakeknife and others.

    The 1969-71 activities of the Littlejohns and the UVF deserve especial scrutity in this regard.

    Turgon prefers the politics of the handiest atrocity such as Claudy. Lets’ think of the Claudia, the weapons to the Jackal, Dublin and Monaghan.

  • sinless

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/foyle_and_west/8189508.stm

    A new anniversary. UVF human garbage wanted for killing 92 year old Brit “war hero”. I guess some of ye will be painting this animal’s face onto your Lambegs. He did after all kill a father of 14. Right up the OO’s street, one would imagine.

  • kensei

    Brit

    OK NI remains part of Britain. Of course your Irishness is the glory of he bi-national state. You can be Irish and the guy in the next street or town can be British. And no one needs to get hurt. That is the essence of progressive unionism.

    It has nothing to do with Unionism. The acknowledgement of the fact that I am Irish, and not British, not both, and have a perpetual right to that and the citizenship that goes with it had to be absolutely trailed out of Unionism at every
    opportunity.

    I don’t need nor desire your condescending attitude fo “Progressive Unionism”.

    But ultimately that can only go so far and NI has to be either part of Britain or Ireland. The IRA have conceded that it will be the fomer until the majority say otherwise. They have become Catholic de facto Unionists.

    Actually if you treally wanted you could work out complex sovereignty arrangements. But anyway, no, Unionism is support for the Union. I 100% oppose the Union, and am quite happy to see all politicla ends to get it done. But I don’t want to see violence, unless circumstance change so much that it is compelled. Highly unlikely but not impossible – an overturnign of a democractic vote by force would surely fall under this. So, givent he practicalities, 50%+1 is the only way. As agreed. Do not confuse pragmatism for principle. Or indeed, supporting somethign for er, totally opposing something.

  • Itwas SammyMcNally whatdoneit

    Brit,

    you little fecker – you tempted be back again.

    I understand Unionists have to pretend that Republican violence since partition has simply been a criminal conspiracy. To do otherwise would be to admit what they deep down know to be true, that the partition settlement was only arrived at becuase the Englezes gave in to a Unionist terrorist conspiracy supported in part by their own army and the Conservative Party and that the GFA is a recognition of the legitimacy of the insurgency that resisted that settlement.

  • Itwas SammyMcNally whatdoneit

    Brit,

    you little fecker – you tempted be back again.

    I understand Unionists have to pretend that Republican violence since partition has simply been a criminal conspiracy. To do otherwise would be to admit what they deep down know to be true, that the partition settlement was only arrived at becuase the Englezes gave in to a Unionist terrorist conspiracy supported in part by their own army and the Conservative Party and that the GFA is a recognition of the legitimacy of the insurgency that resisted that settlement.

  • Dave

    Sammy, Keynesians have a mantra about the government paying half the people to dig holes and the other half to fill them back in. It isn’t that anything useful is accomplished directly in the apparent insanity but rather that the benefit to the economy comes indirectly. So, according to Keynesian theory, bombing buildings would promote reinvestment and create employment, thereby boosting the British economy rather than harming it. Perhaps their handlers were Keynesians? 😉

  • Itwas SammyMcNally whatdoneit

    Dave,

    recent financial events have shown that quoting those who subscribe to Economic theory is about as useful in trying to explain human activity as quoting tracts from the pages of the old testament or from the pages of Witchcraft monthly.

  • Dread Cthulhu

    IwSMsdi: “The Englezes negotiated with Grizzly and Marty and Co and if you listen to the voice of the right wing in Britian ie the Torygraph they tell us the Englezes surrnendered to the IRA. But the GFA was no republican victory just as it was not a surrender, just a series of incremental moves in the right direction and a recogniton by the Englezes that they got the partition settlement and its aftermath badly wrong.”

    Sure… but the partition bought the Irish Free State — nobody had the stones to grasp the nettle that was the Ulster Protestants, not the British nor the Irish. So, in the way of all politics, they punted. Both sides. They left the door open to re-visit the question, but, with the death of Collins and the rise of Devalera, who was left to even try to grasp the nettle?

    Hell, Dev was offered the North, free and clear, a couple times and said “no,” iirc.

  • Big Maggie

    Sammy,

    “…about as useful in trying to explain human activity as quoting tracts from the pages of the old testament or from the pages of Witchcraft monthly. ”

    That’s terribly witty :^)

    On the money too….

  • Yeah it is a great and nice article looking forward to have such article it is so useful. It is very interesting article and quite impressive and more informative and looking forward to read such article.[url=http://printomatic.com.au/car_graphics.html]Car Decals[/url]

  • sinless

    9th August rings a big bell. John McGuffin, the only Protestant who was interned on that day, wrote a book, The Guinea Pigs. Relevant when the British Nazi government tooday 9th August 2009, stands accused of torture yet again.
    Lest we forget.