Time to change the goal posts for loyalists

The loyalist paramilitaries seem to have decommissioned at least some of their weapons. The UVF have allegedly disposed of all of theirs’ and the UDA are supposed to be going to follow suit by next year. This was something which was quite widely welcomed, though I am inclined to Stephen Farry’s view: “These are only words from the UDA. People are entitled to be sceptical of yet more promises, but little delivery to date. The ever elastic timetable for decommissioning is to be further stretched to accommodate the continued procrastination.”
The problem is that although the loyalists may be giving up their weapons they are fairly clearly still involved in massive criminality. There seems absolutely no indication that they have given up protection rackets, prostitution rings, drug dealing etc. etc. They remain a blight on Northern Irish society and continue to hold large segments of the working class unionist community in thraldom. They remain a major cause of poverty and instability in these areas and indeed further afield.

Most obviously despite not using weapons they still seem to be involved in murder. Lisa Dorrian was probably not murdered with a gun but she is just as dead; Thomas Devlin was certainly not murdered with a gun but he is just as dead. Kevin McDaid was assaulted and died (I will avoid the use of the term murder until after the trial ends) again without the use of firearms. It seems clear that loyalist paramilitary organisations are not going to become “old boys clubs”, not that that would be acceptable either; far too much blood has been spilled by them before and after the ceasefires and far too much generalised criminality has gone on for that ever to be acceptable.

I have almost no doubt that our cephalopod Secretary of State will claim plaudits for the decommissioning and will go on to give yet more concessions to these criminals. The opposite is actually what should happen.

Now should be the time to move the goal posts on these people and demand that not only should they give up all their weapons but also that they go out of business entirely and do so very quickly: their only remaining corporate act would be to provide the poor Dorrian family with their daughter’s remains.

This may sound like a barmy idea: surely if we push them now they will not decommission. Well maybe but if that is the case all the forces of law and order need to be brought to bear on them; the police need to pursue them to destruction and if they resist the army might also be needed.

To anyone who might suggest that this is unfair and reneging on our side of the agreement let us remember that these people are criminals. If I possess weapons illegally and have committed crimes I do not get a free pass and indeed privileges for giving up my weapons: the only privileges I would receive would be for good behaviour in gaol.

Loyalists have been remarkably adept at spinning out the process and gaining concession after concession for little return: well what is sauce for the goose is also sauce for the gander and it is high time decent people demanded a great deal more from the loyalists than whatever weapons they choose to admit to owning in exchange for the ludicrous concept of not perusing these thugs with full the rigour of the law.

For loyalists to give up their weapons 10 years ago would not have been adequate to compensate for their involvement in about 1,000 people’s deaths and countless injuries. To do so now is no more acceptable. We should act to demand more now before the loyalists get a sniff of further rewards. These people need to be boxed further and further into a corner until their power is completely destroyed: to let up after supposed decommissioning would be an insult to the memory of all their victims.

  • Guest

    Turgon,

    I disagree.
    There is no space for an old boys clubs because the vast majority are young men mislead by others.I reject that most of them being criminals means the full rigour of the law should be applied.Many of them ,to their own minds, where but defending their community, and no matter how I as a Republican would disagree with their motives, I believe that an effort to give up weapons signals a maturing in the organisation that is to be welcomed and nurtured.Irvine lives!

  • Guest

    Ervine even.

  • Cahal

    I’m sure if the shit hits the fan, the brits will throw a few more rifles their way.

  • fin

    Perhaps its time to recognise one of the other many elephants in the room, the connection between unionist terrorists and unionist politicans and the British state. Everyone knows that connections exist so perhaps its time for external bodies, the Irish and US governments to publically bring pressure to bear on the HMG to ask for the guns and intelligence files to be returned. Decommissioning would happen fairly quickly if HMG and the DUP knew they were to be publically asked to account for the weapons connected to Nelson and Ulster Resistance.

    But as you rightly point out you don’t need a South African AK-47 or Browning pistol to kill, you can do it with a boot or a knife, so when unionist terrorists commit crimes why not treat unionist politicans and HMG (and indeed the PSNI) in the same manner as SF are treated when republicans are suspected of involvment in murder, again I suspect a fairly instant end to activities.

    Interesting point about concession after concession to working class unionists, didn’t you use that arguement for nationalists a few days ago.

    Finally can we drop the Loyalist Unionist rubbish, a Unionist is a Unionist even when they’re misbehaving.

  • Scaramoosh

    They know too much….

  • riddle me this

    They will decommission or at least decommission a suitable amount to convince. But this whole process is all about money. Pounds. The whole process is being built upon funding for their areas. The fallings out are already occurring because of money.Promises have been made and money is changing hands. It can be officially denied because the money is being filtered through a third party of so called businessmen. Therefore the government can quite legitimately stand up and say they have not paid for arms. Not directly.

    The figure is approx 6 million for the five areas. The squabbling is already happening. The power struggle for the gold is ripping apart the areas.

  • Comrade Stalin

    Kevin McDaid was assaulted and died (I will avoid the use of the term murder until after the trial ends) again without the use of firearms.

    You’re missing the point, Turgon. The real problem is not that the loyalists exist, or their guns, but the political cover they are provided by unionist politicians.

    In the case of Kevin McDaid the first to speak on the matter, McQuillian, suggested that the murder was somehow justified by provocation. It took your leader, Jim Allister, nearly a week to say anything in condemnation of it. It took him less than 24 hours in the other, similar case, of Paul Quinn. Why did it take him so long ? Is it because with loyalists he needs to check all the facts first ?

    You can’t post long speeches about how bad loyalists are without properly addressing the preferential treatment they receive from the unionist political class. The fact that this continues to go undiscussed makes many of us suspicious that unionist plans to keep loyalism on side, just in case it needs to overthrow the state, or indeed HM Government, one more time.

  • barnshee

    The appearance of a decomission may be carried out

    Some guns will be retained (as has happened on the republican side).

    The present process is simply a lull– the end (of the lull) will come when the “dissidents” manage their first “spectacular”

  • fin

    CS, less preferential treatment and more keeping them isolated from nationalists, unionist politicans control loyalists aka working class unionists by instilling in them a fear of nationalists, if loyalists are rejected by their politicans they might start thinking for themselves, they might lose their fear of nationalism, they might even think that a united Ireland would offer them a better life.

    Unionist politicans can’t allow that possibility to happen, but confusion is settling in among the working class, ‘smash Sinn Fein’ no longer works as a slogan, the fear of nationalists in positions of power that the Tuviban, UUP and DUP try to instill is failing as nationalists gain the positions and shock, horror, the sky doesn’t fall down.

    The devolution of P&J is therefore not something they look forward to because once a nationalist holds the ministry and again the world doesn’t end, the fear in the working class will recede even further.

  • BadEddie

    Crimanal gangs giving up all their weapons? Not likely.

  • Prionsa Eoghann

    Fin

    Very well put! Hey guess what a potential visit from the pope, and no one gets run over by his popemobile for being a Prod(I’ve heard worse taken for gospel)

    Tovarich

    >>You can’t post long speeches about how bad loyalists are without properly addressing the preferential treatment they receive from the unionist political class.<< Yep this is the essential bit. Sadly no matter how mant times Turgon gets taken to task on this he has yet(as far as I know) to give a satisfactory account. A case of the truth will set you free but bugger ye electorally.

  • Greenflag

    ‘Time to change the goal posts for loyalists’

    No it’s not -it’s past time . It’s time to change their game if they can and try ‘politics ‘. And the same applies to eirigi and other dissidents repulican or loyalist .

    These people have nothing to offer with their guns and ‘principles ‘ Maybe both sets of extremists can get together at a joint convention and work out a new ‘united ‘ policy based on a fair repartition of Northern Ireland?

    In the interest of keeping fatalities to a minimum at any such convention it might be advisable for attendees to leave their weapons at home . On the other hand -no -better not go there -theres been far too much of that already 🙁

  • Glensman

    They way I see it the police have already come out and said they know where most of the arms are. But they wont seize them because then they would have to investigate their origin. Never mind Ulster resistance or SA, how many of these arms are issued service weapons or went missing from army/police bases.

    If they are decommissioned their origin wont be investigated that is worth MILLIONS to the administration and DUP!

    If I was a Loyalist I’d be holding out for a lot more than 7 million…

  • The Balancer of men

    “These people need to be boxed further and further into a corner until their power is completely destroyed” – as opposed to nationalist terrorists.

    Why not give them seats in stormont, its a good job unionists have moral standards, imagine they acted like alot of nationalists and voted these gunmen into government.

    “to let up after supposed decommissioning would be an insult to the memory of all their victims.”

    we are *all*, for example Vol Brian Robinson is a victim, because he was a UVF Volunteer does not diminish that, so please stop trying to create a hierarchy of victims as gerry would say.

    Remind me what was Paul Quinn killed with again ?

  • Driftwood

    Just how much of this is related to politics/religion, and how much to ‘normal’ gang warfare.
    http://www.independent.ie/national-news/gang-war-is-a-family-busi-ness-in-limerick-city-488315.html

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/30/ireland

    Many urban working class areas across Ireland, the UK and throughout the world have this culture. I recently walked through Tooting at 1.00 am-Horrors!

    We’re really not that different.

  • joeCanuck

    no matter how mant times Turgon gets taken to task on this he has yet(as far as I know) to give a satisfactory account

    To be fair, Prince,
    Turgon has always been consistent with his condemnation of political violence and criminality from every source.
    It is others who have equivocated.

  • Comrade Stalin

    fin,

    CS, less preferential treatment and more keeping them isolated from nationalists, unionist politicans control loyalists aka working class unionists by instilling in them a fear of nationalists, if loyalists are rejected by their politicans they might start thinking for themselves, they might lose their fear of nationalism, they might even think that a united Ireland would offer them a better life.

    Republicans are going to have to get past this idea that unionism is something the Protestant masses are brainwashed into believing by a couple of evil politicians at the top holding all the strings. This is very similar to the old unionist line, that Catholics never had a problem with Orange parades until Sinn Fein stoked up all the tensions. It’s wrong in both cases.

    Leadership, on the other hand, is a different matter. It does take real leadership and courage to say, yes, unionism did, at times, rely on the threat of violence to get what it wanted. For a long time they had the full backing of a State which meant that they didn’t have to rely on it as often as republicans did, but as soon as that was taken away loyalist paramilitaries came more to the fore and were used on many occasions by leading unionists to force their will.

    Unionist politicans can’t allow that possibility to happen, but confusion is settling in among the working class, ‘smash Sinn Fein’ no longer works as a slogan, the fear of nationalists in positions of power that the Tuviban, UUP and DUP try to instill is failing as nationalists gain the positions and shock, horror, the sky doesn’t fall down.

    Well, it sort of does. Not in the “sell out” sort of a way, but in the screwing up the education system sort of a way. At least, though, Ruane’s incompetence is entirely cross-community in its impact.

    The devolution of P&J is therefore not something they look forward to because once a nationalist holds the ministry and again the world doesn’t end, the fear in the working class will recede even further.

    I think a lot of them are only opposed to justice devolution because Sinn Fein want it. If Sinn Fein was still not supporting the police and indicated that they were opposed to it, Jim Allister and all the rest would be out there arguing for it tooth and nail.

    Balancer:

    Why not give them seats in stormont, its a good job unionists have moral standards, imagine they acted like alot of nationalists and voted these gunmen into government.

    So who elected Hugh Smyth as Lord Mayor of Belfast in 1993 then ?

    Which election candidate during the European elections had the logistical assistance of a known leading UVF figure ?

    Who agreed to the “top up” system for the Forum elections designed to give loyalists a seat at the all party talks, knowing that they could not receive seats via the ballot box alone ?

    Who held talks with Billy Wright and wagged his finger at police lines during Drumcree 96 ?

    Who organized the 1977 strike with the armed support of the UDA ?

    Who elected the people who did all of the above ?

  • Prionsa Eoghann

    Joe

    >>Turgon has always been consistent with his condemnation of political violence and criminality from every source.<< With respect that is not what I am on about. It is the as yet unrecognised elephant in the room that Unionists pretend isn't there. The elephant of course being the all too convenient relationship between the death squads and mainstream politicians. All too often quick to excuse slow to condemn etc. It is not Turgon who does this, it is his failure to acknowledge that people he has voted for and supported politically had these relationships. Murky stuff!

  • johnny

    comrade

    “they could not receive seats via the ballot box alone ?”

    i couldnt have put it better myself

    ponce eunuch

    “The elephant of course being the all too convenient relationship between the death squads and mainstream politicians.”

    sinn fein/ira is old news, we have known that for years……what rock have you been living under ?

  • Prionsa Eoghann

    johnny/wee boabby/eunuch, is that you?

    Look pal stop stalking me, you have a serious case of sock puppet blues. Try formulating an argument to support your position then ariculate it in such a way that might lessen your dependence on mentioning tadgers at every turn.

  • Reader

    Comrade Stalin: Who held talks with Billy Wright
    That could do with a bit of context, couldn’t it? Tell us what you think the talks were about. You can do the same for the Hume Adams talks too if you want a bit of balance.
    Mind you – that business of the finger wagging was way out of order. Isn’t there a law against that sort of thing? Do you want one?

  • Comrade Stalin

    Reader:

    That could do with a bit of context, couldn’t it? Tell us what you think the talks were about. You can do the same for the Hume Adams talks too if you want a bit of balance.

    Reader, what the talks were about, or the finger wagging itself, is not really the issue. The fact that the UUP presented itself as the party of law and order which would not talk to terrorists, while its leader was behaving as above, is the hypocrisy I’m highlighting.

    I don’t mind if unionist politicians want to maintain a relationship with loyalist paramilitaries, and try to stop the police from doing their duty. But I expect them not to lie about it.

  • fin

    CS, thats a tad unfair as I didn’t say brainwashed, I said they used fear to control. For example the White House and Downing Street didn’t brainwash their electorates to justify wars in Iraq and Afganistan they used fear. Similar to the aftermath of that affair I think that in the not too distant future unionists will question their leaders as more and more of the events they warned (and warn) against happen and the world doesn’t end. In the event of a united Ireland do you think history will be kind to unionist politicans? or will people ask what all the fuss about?

    In the here and now people like Turgon and the reat of the Jimhadists cannot put forward a decent arguement against Sinn Fein been in power apart from muttering the wrongness of terrorists in Stormont, why, because the bogeyman IRA terrorist in power isn’t actually any different to the honest decent lawabiding unionist in power, so why the 90 year wait?

    Don’t let Sinn Fein top the poll for Europe, well they did, and whats happened? so whats the fear?

    Don’t let the South have any involvment in NI, well they have, N/S bodies, the GFA, StAA’s, the President even comes for visits and walkarounds? has the world ended? so why the fear

    Next will come P&J, there will at some stage be a nationalist minister, likely a SF one at some stage, will the world end I don’t think so? so why the Tuvibans fear?

    I, and most nationalists don’t believe unionists are brainwashed by their politicans, if we did we wouldn’t have bothered with the GFA, its because we know (and see, and hear) that unionist politicans lie to their electorate and instill fear in them for the future, a future of nationalists sharing power that we support the GFA. Because every ‘concession’ as Turgon and the other hardliners call the creation of a normal society chips away at the falsehoods.

  • Greenflag

    Comrade Stalin ,

    ‘ But I expect them not to lie about it.’

    You expect politicians not to lie ? Unionist politicians have been ‘lying’ with some success I might add since before the NI State was established . They got away with it until circa the mid 1960’s when the ‘lie’ became too much to swallow not for the Irish mind you but for Her Majesty’s Government .

    Politicians on ALL sides are prone to spinning the truth and frequently outright lying in order to remain in power or attain power . The UUP are no different in this respect from the DUP , SF , FF , the Tories or the Labour Party .

    You surprise me CS .

    I’m not condoning ‘lying ‘ amongst politicians but trying to find one who has not even white lied his or her ‘position’ would be like trying to find an Israeli in downtown Riyadh .

    Sometimes what’s perceived as barefaced hypocrisy i.e lying is just politicians changing their previous stance on some policy in the light of changing circumstances .

    I’d be more worried in the longer about the utterly principled absolutely truthful politician of unimpeachable morality than I would be about the usual shifty eyed double dealing politician of popular lore . The former is much more likely to prove a tyrant . The latter will usually be ousted when they break the 11th commandment

  • Reader

    Comrade Stalin: The fact that the UUP presented itself as the party of law and order which would not talk to terrorists, while its leader was behaving as above, is the hypocrisy I’m highlighting.
    Great; hypocrisy. It’s all very well to point out hypocrisy – and there has been a lot. Fill yer boots. But remember that there are Americans who read this, and they might well have thought you were hinting at something much more sinister.
    As for the finger-wagging – I suppose it was as well to point that out. We all know that police officers lined up facing a load of potential rioters always behave impeccably, and finger wagging at them is quite uncalled for.

  • Brit

    “Republicans are going to have to get past this idea that unionism is something the Protestant masses are brainwashed into believing by a couple of evil politicians at the top holding all the strings.” CS

    This is a point I have been making on here, in various ways, for some time.

    As to the subject matter of the thread of course Loyalist terrorists should be required to decommission their weapons although I don’t think there is any realistic threat to the Loyalist ceasefire. The criminality and violence, whether sectarian and equal opportunties thuggery, which is engage in by those who were members of the terrorist groups should be dealt with by the law. As someone else said criminal gangs and violence, including ethnic and racist violence, is something that happens thoughout much of the world.

    Whilst we are ojn the topic of loyalists I would be interested to hear people’s views of David Ervine, particularly nationalists and Republicans. From an English perspective he was one of the few NI politicians, perhaps the only one, who came across with warthm, integrity and intelligence. He certainly represented an image of Unionism/Loyalism which is very far removed from the stereotype of intransigent sectarianism which is the perception, over here, of much NI and particularly Unionist politics. A human face for those seen as violent bigots in bowler hats waving Union jacks.

    That said I know he was a volunteer for the UVF, an organisation which committed many many descpicable acts of murder. Furthermore the other politicians in the PUP seem to lack both his intelligence and decency.

  • Brit

    “For example the White House and Downing Street didn’t brainwash their electorates to justify wars in Iraq and Afganistan they used fear.”
    Off Topic but the White House and Downing Street (and the secret services agencies and governments of most states in the world) genuinely thought that there was a real risk that Saddam was developing weapons on mass destruction. Given his past history and his response to the attempts by the world community to send in inspectors this was a wholly rationale and reasonable conclusion to come to.
    The fact that we now know that it was wrong does not mean that it was some big lie nor that it was an unreasonable conclusion.

  • fin

    Brit, as I told CS, thats not what nationalist think, they think (know) that unionists are controlled by fear.

    So did you get a warm feeling when Ervine stated in Stormont that he regretted not killing more nationalists during the troubles?

    Re Iraq,

    “By March 2003, Hans Blix had found no stockpiles of WMD and had made significant progress toward resolving open issues of disarmament noting “proactive” but not always the “immediate” Iraqi cooperation as called for by UN Security Council Resolution 1441.”

    “the Senate Intelligence Committee found in 2008 that his administration “misrepresented the intelligence and the threat from Iraq””

    Also worth remembering that Rumsfeld removed the CIA from intelligence gathering because they weren’t ‘finding’ the intelligence he wanted and established another organisation with no pedigree who did ‘find’ the intelligence he wanted. Go figure!

    as I said controlled by fear

  • Brit

    “Brit, as I told CS, thats not what nationalist think, they think (know) that unionists are controlled by fear.”

    Presumably you think this is a misplaced fear based on sectarianism and ignorance? Which would dissolve away in the utopia of a united emerald isle in which the unionsts/prods would embrace their Irishness?

    There is lots to criticise about Unionism now and historically but the bottom line is that the Unionst / Protestant people have a valid and legitimate claim to a British identity which is not Irish, or at least not irish in the same sense as Catholics/nationalists in NI or the Republic understand it. It is not some flawed or transient identity caused by irrational fear whipped up by Unionist politicos. You have to live with it and it will still be there when and if there is a UI.

    “So did you get a warm feeling when Ervine stated in Stormont that he regretted not killing more nationalists during the troubles?”

    I must say this shocked me. Do you have a link / evidence?

    As for Iraq, I don’t really want to get off topic but would say there is a major difference between spinning in order to convey a message which you believe to be the “truth” and spinning in order to convey an outright lie. The former is what happened (and it is normal procedure for all political communications). The latter in this case is a conspiracy theorists fantasy. Interestingly the control through fear didn’t stop masses of people in the UK (and elswhere) marching against the Iraq war.

  • Sean

    Brit is back spinning circles in his utopian clouded mind about how great unionism and the brits are.

    Brit it is simple the unionists are entitled to any identity they want what they werent entitled to was a gerrymandered nIreland statelet where they could rule by majority, fear and intimidation

  • Brit

    Sean,

    I suggest that you focus your political energies on remorse for the ethnic cleansing of the native Canadians keep your particularly ill informed and outdated observations on Northern Ireland to yourself.

  • Turgon

    Brit,
    fin is correct about Ervine.

    Ervine sort of “apologised” for the barbarity and murders of the loyalists but it was the same sort apology as the IRA’s: essentially it was awful that the UVF “had” to kill people etc.

    The reality is that Ervine was an unrepentant apologist for murderers. Following the ceasefires he made many warm remarks but did nothing to help the victims of the loyalist murderers either pre or post ceasefire. In addition he refused to distance himself from them when they murdered people post ceasefire. He did very little to help in ensuring loyalist decommissioning and nothing constructive to end criminality.

    Yes he was more affable than most of the tattooed thugs and was fond of big words. However, he was still a terrorist.

    Actually his popularity had waned even within loyalist circles. His now near saintly status is due to his death. Had he not died it is very likely the PUP would have lost irs East Belfast assembly seat.

    There are links on all this but to be honest I could not be bothered wasting the time finding them on someone whom most of us think was simply another terrorist godfather.

  • Sean

    Brit

    Ethnic cleansing? What are you on about?

    The only thing close to ethnic cleansing occured in eastern Canada when the english and french were firmly in charge in the 15th, 16th and 17th century.

    While Canada’s record is far from perfect it is many times better than most countries that were colonized by european countries.

    We have a sizable and growing population of first nations people

  • Mike

    Brit

    I was certainly no fan of Ervine’s (for example I found his “we’re all guilty” spiel pretty rich given that we weren’t all terrorist bombers) but he didn’t quite say what fin has said he did.

    “As a Unionist, I have no particular desire to appreciate or venerate the Republican dead – some of my colleagues and I might like to have added to their ranks. As members of the DUP slid about the “Armagh desert” with rolled- up manifestos determined to destroy the Republican movement, there were those of us who tried to do exactly that, more efficiently. I am sorry to say that we did not have as much success as I would like to have been able to report. However…”

    http://www.niassembly.gov.uk/record/reports/010410b.htm

  • Brit

    Sean you descendants of settlers are all the same arent you.

  • Sean

    You got caught by your own ignorance. suck it up and move on

  • Brit

    Thanks for the info.

    I would interpret Ervine, in that statement, as talking about the killing of IRA members and other armed Republicans rather than nationalists. Although I’m not saying I agree with the sentiment expressed it wounds like Fin is doing a bit of that spinning himself!

  • Sean

    Unionist terrorists did not specialize in killing republicans at all, their real specialty was in killing people that “looked catholic” or had the bad luck to be walking down the street alone.

  • fin

    Brit, ergo, all republicans are terrorists, and therefore it it right to kill republicans?

    But lets be honest, its hardly the most outrageous statment by a unionist, personal favourites are

    “these people breed like rabbits and multiply like vermin”

    AND

    “Taxpayers money would be better spent on an incinerator and burning the whole lot of them. The priests should be thrown in and burned as well”

    But a fellow unionist says it best – even if he invokes Godwins Law

    The contempt for established authority; the crude and unthinking intolerance; the emphasis upon monster processions and rallies; the appeal to a perverted from of patriotism each and every one of those things has its parallel in the rise of the Nazi’s to power. A minority movement was able, in the end to work its will simply because most people were too apathetic or too intimidated to speak out. History must not be allowed to repeat itself.”

    -Northern Premier, Terrence O’Neill speaking about Paisleyism in June 1969.

  • Mike

    fin

    As I’m sure you’re aware, the speaker in relation to the second quote (and the first?) was expelled from the DUP.

    Feck, there’s another lot I thought I would never be even semi standing up for…

  • fin

    Mike, indeed and he was re-elected as an independent, and didn’t do too bad in the Westminister elections either, I don’t believe he was expelled by the UVF however.
    The relationship can’t have soured too much as senior DUP figures went to his election agents funeral a couple of years later, his election agent been the UVF leader Bingham of Dublin/Monaghan bombing fame

  • Brit

    ergo, all republicans are terrorists, and therefore it it right to kill republicans”

    All Sinn Fein type Republicans were supporters of terrorism pre-ceasefire, although not actual terrorists. There is big difference – like the difference between voting BNP and engaging in acts of racist violence.

    Futhermore, catholic does not equal nationalist does not equal Republican does not equal active IRA man/woman. Talking about the Republican dead, in the context of Ervine’s quotes seemed to mean those volunteers who had given their lives.

    But it was not right to kill or attack purely political republicans nor would I condone even an attack on an active IRA unit without a civillian in sight unless there was no alternative means of stopping them or if it was in self-defence.

  • Prionsa Eoghann

    >>All Sinn Fein type Republicans were supporters of terrorism pre-ceasefire<< Eh I think you will find that most of these guys were against the excesses of the RUC/UDR/BA?security services/alphabet soup Unionist terrorists. Re-Ervine he was seen as someone who spoke out against the use of working class Unionists in the guise of the alphabet soup guise eg.UVF/UDA/UFF/RHC etc. By mainstream Unionist politicians to do their dirty work. Speaking of which the great Turgon has spoken yet remained silent on this, should I infer the obvious?

  • Brit

    “Eh I think you will find that most of these guys were against the excesses of the RUC/UDR/BA?security services/alphabet soup Unionist terrorists.”

    PE, I’ve got to say that is the mostimpressive display of 100% pure, undiluted and unadulterated, whataboutery that I’ve seen on here – and that says something.

    No doubt Sinn Fein supporters were against the “excesses” and crimes of the various organisations you mention. But clearly and uncontroversially they were supporters of the IRA’s campaign (hence supporting and voting for their political wing, and many doing a lot more practically to help the IRA).