British Army flies the UVF flag
Fin
"Whitewolf" <r...@eirefirst.com> wrote in message
news:fo1tiv8uahnairgle...@4ax.com...
> British Army flies UVF flag
>
> Sinn Féin councillor Pat McGinn has accused the British Army of glorifying
> loyalist violence after it was discovered that a UVF flag was hoisted on a
> stanchion supporting a military spy camera at one of the North's largest
> British Army bases in Bessbrook in South Armagh.
>
> According to McGinn, "the UVF flag appeared on the British Army base in
> Bessbrook. It is attached to one of the stanchions used to support spy
> cameras at the base and it must be stressed that this flag is in such a
> position that the only people who could have erected it were those inside
> the base".
>
> McGinn called on NIO Security Minister Jane Kennedy to "publicly explain
why
> this flag has been erected and by who and why it has not been removed.
>
> "We have known for many years that the British state forces have shared
> information, weapons and membership with unionist paramilitaries. It is,
> however, unusual for such a public display of collusion to be put on
> display."
>
>
Does anyone actually remember what the Ulster 36th Division was, or are you
just pandering to Republican Propaganda?
Fin
Whitewolf
Oh, that's alright then... Silly me thinking it was wrong for police that
are allegedly there for the "whole community" to fly the banner of murdering
loyalist terrorists... What happened did they get their flags mixed up?
Ray
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to
have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin
Email: ray-AT-eirefirst.com
Website: http://www.eirefirst.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Falcon
news:fo1tiv8uahnairgle...@4ax.com...
> British Army flies UVF flag
>
> Sinn Féin councillor Pat McGinn has accused the British Army of glorifying
> loyalist violence after it was discovered that a UVF flag was hoisted on a
> stanchion supporting a military spy camera at one of the North's largest
McGinn, Sinn Féin/IRA and the Republican News are pathological liars.
-------
Falcon:
fide, sed cui vide. (L)
Fin
Well considering all UVF flags have been banned, except that of the Ulster
36th Division then it could only be that flag that was flying.
Now please explain to me why such a flag, is the flag of murdering scum? did
you support Hitler and the Nazi's?
Fin
Fin
"Féachadóir" <Féach@d.óir> wrote in message
news:117tiv4g82scqsrjq...@4ax.com...
> Scríobh "Fin" <Blu...@hotmail.com>:
> >Well considering all UVF flags have been banned, except that of the
Ulster
> >36th Division then it could only be that flag that was flying.
>
The Ulster 36th division flag is a legal flag to fly, and should be
celebrated, not outlawed because it has been bastardised by the current crop
of UVF, my own opinion are that all paramilitary should be hunted down and
taken out, no matter which side they are on.
>
> >Now please explain to me why such a flag, is the flag of murdering scum?
did
> >you support Hitler and the Nazi's?
>
> Wrong war
>
So it was LOL!
Fin
Whitewolf
>
>"Féachadóir" <Féach@d.óir> wrote in message
>news:117tiv4g82scqsrjq...@4ax.com...
>> Scríobh "Fin" <Blu...@hotmail.com>:
>> >Well considering all UVF flags have been banned, except that of the
>Ulster
>> >36th Division then it could only be that flag that was flying.
>>
>> Assuming that the flag was flying legally.
>
>The Ulster 36th division flag is a legal flag to fly, and should be
>celebrated, not outlawed because it has been bastardised by the current crop
>of UVF, my own opinion are that all paramilitary should be hunted down and
>taken out, no matter which side they are on.
>
Do you want to bother with trials and evidence and all that "innocent until
proven guilty" stuff or does that just get in the way?
Chesney Christ
>>The Ulster 36th division flag is a legal flag to fly, and should be
>>celebrated, not outlawed because it has been bastardised by the current crop
>>of UVF, my own opinion are that all paramilitary should be hunted down and
>>taken out, no matter which side they are on.
>
>Do you want to bother with trials and evidence and all that "innocent until
>proven guilty" stuff or does that just get in the way?
If it's a choice, I'd rather beat the fuck out of them with a baseball
bat, shave all their hair off and drive iron spikes through their legs.
Isn't that the sort of thing you usually support ?
--
"Jokes mentioning ducks were considered particularly funny." - cnn.com
Chesney Christ
>> Assuming that the flag was flying legally.
>
>The Ulster 36th division flag is a legal flag to fly, and should be
>celebrated, not outlawed because it has been bastardised by the current crop
>of UVF,
They were a group of people who were originally established by unionist
politicians to thwart democracy. Not much to celebrate about there, and
they went over the top during WW1 for political reasons (as did the
Irish Volunteers).
Chesney Christ
>
>Oh, that's alright then... Silly me thinking it was wrong for police that
>are allegedly there for the "whole community"
Ray hasn't figured out the difference between the army and the police.
It's obviously a slow news day.
Whitewolf
<thegreat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>A certain Whitewolf, of soc.culture.irish "fame", writes :
>
>>
>>Oh, that's alright then... Silly me thinking it was wrong for police that
>>are allegedly there for the "whole community"
>
>Ray hasn't figured out the difference between the army and the police.
>It's obviously a slow news day.
<slaps self hard about the head> Quiet right there Brendan, seems I posted
it early this morning when my body was awake and moving just waiting for my
brain to catch up...
Whitewolf
Never said I support it Brendan, I said I understand it and I said Iwish it
would stop.. And I do. As I do wish the recent nationalist youth attack
on the PSNI over a stolen car was stopped and condemned also...
I find it odd that one day I read about the PSNI warning
Nationalist/Republican leaders/members about information they have recieved
that show that certain dissidents or Loyalists are out to kill them and then
I read the next day about 100 "nationalist" youth battering and injuring
what may well be the very same police officers...
Personally, If I were in a position to influence anything (which I'm not
BTW), I'd condemn such attacks on the PSNI and even thank them from time to
time for the job they've done when for instance above, when they may well
have saved someone's life by warning them about threats against them...
There you have it...
Nik
Not necessarily. Can you confirm that this was, in fact, the case?
>Now please explain to me why such a flag, is the flag of murdering scum? did
>you support Hitler and the Nazi's?
It would seem that the UDA in the Stiles area do...
Nik
Nik
>"Féachadóir" <Féach@d.óir> wrote in message
>news:117tiv4g82scqsrjq...@4ax.com...
>> Scríobh "Fin" <Blu...@hotmail.com>:
>> >Well considering all UVF flags have been banned, except that of the
>Ulster
>> >36th Division then it could only be that flag that was flying.
>>
>> Assuming that the flag was flying legally.
>
>The Ulster 36th division flag is a legal flag to fly, and should be
>celebrated, not outlawed because it has been bastardised by the current crop
>of UVF, my own opinion are that all paramilitary should be hunted down and
>taken out, no matter which side they are on.
How would you determine, reliably, who was and wasn't a member of a
paramilitary group?
Nik
Nik
DOT com> wrote:
What was Steven's writing his report about again?
30 years of systemic collusion between the British Army Force Research
Unit and the Loyalist Assasins perchance...and the lies that went
along with it....
Pot calling the kettle black....
Nik
Falcon
news:qeduiv4l1mn6dko62...@4ax.com...
Stevens has never alleged that 30 years of systemic collusion took place.
You may love to, rather ineptly, jump on the bandwagon of accusation and
innuendo Nick, but you only do so to excuse the PIRA's terrorist campaign
and divert attention from your people's criminal activities and terrorist
agenda. In doing so YOU help perpetuate sectarian hatred and mistrust. YOU
contribute to the mutual resentment which encourages sectarian conflict
every bit as much as your disgusting criminal 'party' and it's seditious,
inflammatory publications. Let's not fucking pussy foot about any more
Nick. Accept YOUR part in it - YOUR responsibility for sectarian
resentment. End the lie about wanting peace and reconciliation.
Nik
>Scríobh "Fin" <Blu...@hotmail.com>:
>>
>>"Féachadóir" <Féach@d.óir> wrote in message
>>news:117tiv4g82scqsrjq...@4ax.com...
>>> Scríobh "Fin" <Blu...@hotmail.com>:
>>> >Well considering all UVF flags have been banned, except that of the Ulster
>>> >36th Division then it could only be that flag that was flying.
>>>
>>> Assuming that the flag was flying legally.
>>
>>The Ulster 36th division flag is a legal flag to fly,
>
>Indeed. But why are you assuming the flag was that of the 36th, and
>not one of all those other ones that have been banned?
>
>>and should be
>>celebrated, not outlawed because it has been bastardised by the current crop
>
>The "current crop" are about the only ones who fly it, usually with
>charming initials like "KAT" emblazoned on it.
>
>Did you know that in the dictionary under futility, it says "see
>NITB"?
>
>So d'you think have Armagh two more games left in them? Will Donegal
>make it past Galway on the second attempt? Have Kerry any worries at
>all?
C'mon the Kingdom!!
Nik
Nik
DOT com> wrote:
Whatever other people involved in the Republican movement might hold
onto as a motivation, I want to assure you that I, personally, am
genuine in my support of the peace process.
So is Gerry Adams, I reckon...and the vast majority of the rest of
Sinn Fein.
The mere fact that there hasn't been any large scale response to the
continual provocative actions undertaken by the UDA/UFF should
demonstrate that to you.
Given that I think you're a member/past member of the British
Securocracy, I'm sure you have access to verify that last claim.
Within the party there will be a few malcontents who remained with the
party but who disagree but these would be few in number.
That, is my honest appraisal.
Nik
Fin
Didn't the British Government at one time have a list of people who had been
monitored for months? I think this is probably a good way of establishing
who is and who isn't paramilitary.
David C Jones
nikyboy......you would not know honesty if it hit you square in the face for
gods sake, you lie all the time, just like your hero adams and the rest of
the scum.
>
> Nik
Chesney Christ
>30 years of systemic collusion between the British Army Force Research
>Unit and the Loyalist Assasins perchance...and the lies that went
>along with it....
>
>Pot calling the kettle black....
But what of the pot and the kettle. They both seem rather black from
where I'm standing, although one is better at admitting it.
Chesney Christ
>Didn't the British Government at one time have a list of people who had been
>monitored for months? I think this is probably a good way of establishing
>who is and who isn't paramilitary.
Freddie Scapatticci may have a view on that one.
Nik
I can see that there's no point in debating with you. I don't want to
put you in my killfile as I wish to debate with exactly the likes of
yourself but since you've revealed the degree of your unreasonableness
I have no option.
Good bye.
ploink
Nik
Falcon
Then show your commitment by doing more than issuing meaningless platitudes
on the one hand and spreading Sinn Féin/IRA propaganda on the other. If you
genuinely want peace and reconciliation, why can't you see that, by it's
very nature, the republican propaganda campaign inflames your opposition to
greater resistance to change and increases the level of mistrust?
> So is Gerry Adams, I reckon...and the vast majority of the rest of
> Sinn Fein.
Then why does AP/RN exclusively report in such a partisan and unbalanced
manner? Why do they concentrate exclusively on the alleged past misdeeds of
their opposition, whilst brushing their own misdeeds under the carpet. Why
do they continually report on loyalist violence and criminality, but not on
republican violence and criminality, and why do they continue to print
downright lies on slow news-days to try to convince their readers that the
police, army and the State are anti-Catholic? The SDLP, a largely Catholic
party with unashamedly nationalistic aspirations don't do that Nik. They
don't see the need to exaggerate and lie, so why do Sinn Féin/IRA do it?
> The mere fact that there hasn't been any large scale response to the
> continual provocative actions undertaken by the UDA/UFF should
> demonstrate that to you.
>
> Given that I think you're a member/past member of the British
> Securocracy, I'm sure you have access to verify that last claim.
What I can verify is that the claim that a British Army unit flew a
Loyalist Paramilitary emblem at Bessbrook is a lie, but I don't expect you
to believe me. And let's face it, you don't, do you?
Alan Smaill
> On Tue, 5 Aug 2003 20:54:26 +0100, Chesney Christ
> <thegreat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>A certain Nik, of soc.culture.irish "fame", writes :
>>>30 years of systemic collusion between the British Army Force Research
>>>Unit and the Loyalist Assasins perchance...and the lies that went
>>>along with it....
>>>
>>>Pot calling the kettle black....
>>
>>But what of the pot and the kettle. They both seem rather black from
>>where I'm standing, although one is better at admitting it.
>
> You think that the British are better at admitting that they were
> involved in Terrorism in N Ireland?
I do.
Don't you?
--
Alan Smaill
School of Informatics tel: 44-131-650-2710
University of Edinburgh
Falcon
news:9vk0jv4evn9eanmk7...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 01:27:22 +0100, Alan Smaill <sma...@inf.ed.ac.uk>
> wrote:
>
> >Conor Booze O Brien <conor...@hatemail.com> writes:
> >> You think that the British are better at admitting that they were
> >> involved in Terrorism in N Ireland?
> >
> >I do.
> >
> When did the British State start admitting its Terrorism in N Ireland?
You just changed the question.
You really mustn't do that Martin.
Naughty boy.
Spoken to any newspapers recently?
michael adams
> "Conor Booze O Brien" <conor...@hatemail.com> wrote in message
> news:9vk0jv4evn9eanmk7...@4ax.com...
> > On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 01:27:22 +0100, Alan Smaill <sma...@inf.ed.ac.uk>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >Conor Booze O Brien <conor...@hatemail.com> writes:
>
> > >> You think that the British are better at admitting that they were
> > >> involved in Terrorism in N Ireland?
> > >
> > >I do.
> > >
> > When did the British State start admitting its Terrorism in N Ireland?
>
> You just changed the question.
> You really mustn't do that Martin.
> Naughty boy.
>
> Spoken to any newspapers recently?
>
> -------
> Falcon:
> fide, sed cui vide. (L)
>
>
start selected quote:
My part in the dirty war
Martin Ingram
Wednesday April 16, 2003
The Guardian
In my six years in the FRU, I never received advice or
instructions from anyone outside the unit. It is true
that ministers - and prime ministers - received regular
intelligence briefings. *But to conclude that a minister
is involved in an illegal act because he or she reads a
military intelligence source report - a sanitised version
of the handler's contact form - shows a misunderstanding
of the situation.*
:end quote
Bit of a bad choice on your part there, wouldn't you say
lamebrain?
With you, it never really ever seems to get much better,
does it?
Oh dear! Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear !
michael adams
...
Falcon
news:457feaaa.0308...@posting.google.com...
> "Falcon" <falcon AT nym DOT irishgroups DOT com> wrote in message news:FIKTAU0U37839.4327314815@Gilgamesh-frog.org...
>
> > "Conor Booze O Brien" <conor...@hatemail.com> wrote in message
> > news:9vk0jv4evn9eanmk7...@4ax.com...
>
>
> > > On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 01:27:22 +0100, Alan Smaill <sma...@inf.ed.ac.uk>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >Conor Booze O Brien <conor...@hatemail.com> writes:
> >
> > > >> You think that the British are better at admitting that they were
> > > >> involved in Terrorism in N Ireland?
> > > >
> > > >I do.
> > > >
> > > When did the British State start admitting its Terrorism in N Ireland?
> >
>
> > You just changed the question.
> > You really mustn't do that Martin.
> > Naughty boy.
> >
> > Spoken to any newspapers recently?
>
> start selected quote:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/j5ba
>
> My part in the dirty war
>
> Martin Ingram
> Wednesday April 16, 2003
> The Guardian
>
>
> In my six years in the FRU, I never received advice or
> instructions from anyone outside the unit. It is true
> that ministers - and prime ministers - received regular
> intelligence briefings. *But to conclude that a minister
> is involved in an illegal act because he or she reads a
> military intelligence source report - a sanitised version
> of the handler's contact form - shows a misunderstanding
> of the situation.*
>
> :end quote
>
>
> Bit of a bad choice on your part there, wouldn't you say
> lamebrain?
You know what? I think you think you've made some sort of point there
Michael. Exactly what you think it is escapes me for the moment. So what is
your point exactly? We know the Sunday Herald, for example, quoted Ingram
as an 'intelligence source' when it "exposed" Steak-Knife, in spite of the
obvious flaws in his claims, his total lack of knowledge of Intelligence
Corps operations since his discharge, and the poor souls unfortunate
personality defects. Tell me, do you regard Ingram as some sort of
authority on intelligence matters?
If so, why?
Nik
DOT com> wrote:
I get where you're coming from but to me, it seems, that you're
<biblical reference>ignoring the log in your own eye...</biblical
reference>
>> So is Gerry Adams, I reckon...and the vast majority of the rest of
>> Sinn Fein.
>
>Then why does AP/RN exclusively report in such a partisan and unbalanced
>manner? Why do they concentrate exclusively on the alleged past misdeeds of
>their opposition, whilst brushing their own misdeeds under the carpet. Why
>do they continually report on loyalist violence and criminality, but not on
>republican violence and criminality, and why do they continue to print
>downright lies on slow news-days to try to convince their readers that the
>police, army and the State are anti-Catholic?
Because its true. You can't seriously tell me that its not. The same
attitudes that meant, during the 80s for example, that the RUC was
90%+ Protestant by religion and most likely Unionist by politics is
still there, its just hidden better.
> The SDLP, a largely Catholic
>party with unashamedly nationalistic aspirations don't do that Nik.
Tell me, are the death threats against the SDLP from Loyalists for
real or not?
> They
>don't see the need to exaggerate and lie, so why do Sinn Féin/IRA do it?
It could have something to do with their different constituencies
being subject to relatively different levels of treatment at the hands
of the British Securocrats...the SDLP are propped up by the British
Government...whilst John Hume (as I understand it), did a lot of good
work on the GFA, I'm looking forward to the SDLP slipping more and
more behind Sinn Fein in the Stormont Elections.
>> The mere fact that there hasn't been any large scale response to the
>> continual provocative actions undertaken by the UDA/UFF should
>> demonstrate that to you.
>>
>> Given that I think you're a member/past member of the British
>> Securocracy, I'm sure you have access to verify that last claim.
>
>What I can verify is that the claim that a British Army unit flew a
>Loyalist Paramilitary emblem at Bessbrook is a lie, but I don't expect you
>to believe me. And let's face it, you don't, do you?
That is another matter. I've seen a picture of that flag but I don't
know enough about UVF emblems to say either way. However, I have just
asked you quite a serious question. I will repeat it to give you
another chance to answer it.
The mere fact that there hasn't been any large scale response, from
the PIRA, to the continual provocative actions undertaken by the
UDA/UFF should demonstrate that the Provos are serious about giving
peace a chance. You know that the Loyalists are trying to provoke an
armed response from the Provos but an armed response is not
forthcoming...the Provos don't want a shooting match....thats the way
I see it at least.
Nik
Falcon
news:u6m1jvs1s6equlq09...@4ax.com...
> On 6 Aug 2003 10:24:44 +0200, Falcon <falcon AT nym DOT irishgroups
> DOT com> wrote:
>
> >"Conor Ingram O Brien" <conor...@hatemail.com> wrote in message
> >news:9vk0jv4evn9eanmk7...@4ax.com...
> >> On Wed, 06 Aug 2003 01:27:22 +0100, Alan Smaill <sma...@inf.ed.ac.uk>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Conor Ingram O Brien <conor...@hatemail.com> writes:
> >
> >> >> You think that the British are better at admitting that they were
> >> >> involved in Terrorism in N Ireland?
> >> >
> >> >I do.
> >> >
> >> When did the British State start admitting its Terrorism in N Ireland?
> >
> >You just changed the question.
>
>
>
> "the British are better at admitting that they were
> involved in Terrorism in N Ireland?"
>
>
> When did they do it?
Your question, later modified to define "the British" as "the British
State", asks Alan to accept that the State has been involved in Terrorism.
As you know, this is simply not true. Individuals have been arrested,
charged and convicted of offences which include those normally categorised
as terrorist crimes, and as you also know, this has happened on many
occasions in the past. Indeed the State continues to investigate
allegations of criminal behaviour and will continue to bring offenders to
account. The State has always prosecuted and convicted offenders in this
way, unlike their opponents who continue to evade responsibility, lie about
their own involvement, and prosecute their criminal terrorist agenda with
hypocritical vigour.
Falcon
> On 6 Aug 2003 01:44:23 +0200, Falcon <falcon AT nym DOT irishgroups
> DOT com> wrote:
> >Then show your commitment by doing more than issuing meaningless platitudes
> >on the one hand and spreading Sinn Féin/IRA propaganda on the other. If you
> >genuinely want peace and reconciliation, why can't you see that, by it's
> >very nature, the republican propaganda campaign inflames your opposition to
> >greater resistance to change and increases the level of mistrust?
>
> I get where you're coming from but to me, it seems, that you're
> <biblical reference>ignoring the log in your own eye...</biblical
> reference>
I wasn't aware that I was spreading Loyalist propaganda Nick; I seem to
spend most of my time (God only knows why) reading and responding to Sinn
Féin sponsored anti-British propaganda. Nor was I aware that the British
Government was engaged in a weekly propaganda offensive of printing serious
unsupported allegations against the IRA, or the republican movement in
general, in the press.
[..]
> >Then why does AP/RN exclusively report in such a partisan and unbalanced
> >manner? Why do they concentrate exclusively on the alleged past misdeeds of
> >their opposition, whilst brushing their own misdeeds under the carpet. Why
> >do they continually report on loyalist violence and criminality, but not on
> >republican violence and criminality, and why do they continue to print
> >downright lies on slow news-days to try to convince their readers that the
> >police, army and the State are anti-Catholic?
>
> Because its true. You can't seriously tell me that its not. The same
> attitudes that meant, during the 80s for example, that the RUC was
> 90%+ Protestant by religion and most likely Unionist by politics is
> still there, its just hidden better.
The facts don't back you up at all Nick. For example, Sinn Fein makes loud
complaining noises about the supposed unacceptability and alleged bias of
the police when dealing with Catholics. (Not, you'll notice, 'nationalists'
or 'republicans', but Catholics.) Would it therefore surprise you to learn
that the majority of complaints received by the Police Ombudsman come from
Protestants? Would it surprise you to learn that, contrary to the
widespread and almost total dissatisfaction and mistrust in the police
alleged by Sinn Féin, independent research on behalf of the Policing Board
indicates that 58% of Catholics surveyed believe that the police treat
them equally as well as Protestants? Would it surprise you to learn that
70% of Catholics expressed confidence in ordinary day to day policing, with
66% expressing confidence in the police’s provision of a public order
policing service?
> > The SDLP, a largely Catholic
> >party with unashamedly nationalistic aspirations don't do that Nik.
>
> Tell me, are the death threats against the SDLP from Loyalists for
> real or not?
I would assume that as the police normally inform potential targets of
threats against them, the threats are real and credible. So what's your
point? Threats haven't forced the SDLP down the propaganda route employed
by Sinn Féin, so doesn't that rather reinforce my point?
> > They
> >don't see the need to exaggerate and lie, so why do Sinn Féin/IRA do it?
>
> It could have something to do with their different constituencies
> being subject to relatively different levels of treatment at the hands
> of the British Securocrats...the SDLP are propped up by the British
> Government...whilst John Hume (as I understand it), did a lot of good
> work on the GFA, I'm looking forward to the SDLP slipping more and
> more behind Sinn Fein in the Stormont Elections.
The SDLP are propped up by British 'securocrats'? That's a pretty amazing
claim to make. Are you serious? What leads you to believe that?
> >> The mere fact that there hasn't been any large scale response to the
> >> continual provocative actions undertaken by the UDA/UFF should
> >> demonstrate that to you.
> >>
> >> Given that I think you're a member/past member of the British
> >> Securocracy, I'm sure you have access to verify that last claim.
> >
> >What I can verify is that the claim that a British Army unit flew a
> >Loyalist Paramilitary emblem at Bessbrook is a lie, but I don't expect you
> >to believe me. And let's face it, you don't, do you?
>
> That is another matter. I've seen a picture of that flag but I don't
> know enough about UVF emblems to say either way. However, I have just
> asked you quite a serious question. I will repeat it to give you
> another chance to answer it.
This is the allegation which started the thread. If you have it, then post
it here. If you've seen it, give us the source so that we can see it. Let's
all see it.
> The mere fact that there hasn't been any large scale response, from
> the PIRA, to the continual provocative actions undertaken by the
> UDA/UFF should demonstrate that the Provos are serious about giving
> peace a chance. You know that the Loyalists are trying to provoke an
> armed response from the Provos but an armed response is not
> forthcoming...the Provos don't want a shooting match....thats the way
> I see it at least.
I agree that Sinn Féin/IRA, (assuming that we can still think of the PIRA
as a single homogenous organisation), doesn't want to be seen to return to
attacking the police, the army, or economic and business targets in
Northern Ireland or the rest of the UK. However their refusal to end their
involvement in organised crime, intelligence gathering, targeting, training
and weapons procurement, not to mention paramilitary punishment beatings
(which are, as you know, on the increase), undermines that so-called
commitment.
Nigel Morris
You stupid taigs!!
"Falcon" <falcon AT nym DOT irishgroups DOT com> wrote in message
news:9LU4J2RX3783...@Gilgamesh-frog.org...
Paul
nigelr...@ozemail.com.au says...
> You stupid taigs!!
British swine like you have no business on an Irish group.
Paul...
--
plinehan__AT__yahoo__DOT__com
C++ Builder 5 SP1, Interbase 6.0.1.6 IBX 5.04
p.s. just lacerated a tendon in left hand, so pls
excuse typos and tricky abbrevs - TIA.
Chesney Christ
>> You stupid taigs!!
>
>British swine
It's funny when someone follows up a bigoted remark with another bigoted
remark.
Whitewolf
<thegreat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>A certain Paul, of soc.culture.irish "fame", writes :
>
>>> You stupid taigs!!
>>
>>British swine
>
>It's funny when someone follows up a bigoted remark with another bigoted
>remark.
"Fight fire with fire"? or treat other people as they treat you?
Chesney Christ
>>It's funny when someone follows up a bigoted remark with another bigoted
>>remark.
>
>"Fight fire with fire"? or treat other people as they treat you?
Hypocrisy is a better known word in some circles.
bro
"Chesney Christ" <thegreat...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:IvXgaECX9UM$Ew...@ntlworld.com...
> A certain Paul, of soc.culture.irish "fame", writes :
>
> >> You stupid taigs!!
> >
> >British swine
>
> It's funny when someone follows up a bigoted remark with another bigoted
> remark.
not to mention that 'nigel' is posting from australia...
bro
Chesney Christ
>> It's funny when someone follows up a bigoted remark with another bigoted
>> remark.
>
>not to mention that 'nigel' is posting from australia...
Precisely my point.
Nik
DOT com> wrote:
>"Nik" <warre...@yahoo.co.nz> wrote in message
>news:b7m1jv4li9a3cmbc6...@4ax.com...
>> On 6 Aug 2003 01:44:23 +0200, Falcon <falcon AT nym DOT irishgroups
>> DOT com> wrote:
>[...]
>> >Then show your commitment by doing more than issuing meaningless platitudes
>> >on the one hand and spreading Sinn Féin/IRA propaganda on the other. If you
>> >genuinely want peace and reconciliation, why can't you see that, by it's
>> >very nature, the republican propaganda campaign inflames your opposition to
>> >greater resistance to change and increases the level of mistrust?
>>
>> I get where you're coming from but to me, it seems, that you're
>> <biblical reference>ignoring the log in your own eye...</biblical
>> reference>
>
>I wasn't aware that I was spreading Loyalist propaganda Nick; I seem to
>spend most of my time (God only knows why) reading and responding to Sinn
>Féin sponsored anti-British propaganda. Nor was I aware that the British
>Government was engaged in a weekly propaganda offensive of printing serious
>unsupported allegations against the IRA, or the republican movement in
>general, in the press.
>
>[..]
Don't talk crap. The British media has been seriously biased for years
on this matter. Here in New Zealand, for example, the mass media,
fairly much depend on a news feed from Reuters for their news on the
six counties....for instance, few of my countryfolk would realise that
the killings in the six counties over the last 10 years were mostly by
Loyalists...in the large majority....
>> >Then why does AP/RN exclusively report in such a partisan and unbalanced
>> >manner? Why do they concentrate exclusively on the alleged past misdeeds of
>> >their opposition, whilst brushing their own misdeeds under the carpet. Why
>> >do they continually report on loyalist violence and criminality, but not on
>> >republican violence and criminality, and why do they continue to print
>> >downright lies on slow news-days to try to convince their readers that the
>> >police, army and the State are anti-Catholic?
>>
>> Because its true. You can't seriously tell me that its not. The same
>> attitudes that meant, during the 80s for example, that the RUC was
>> 90%+ Protestant by religion and most likely Unionist by politics is
>> still there, its just hidden better.
>
>The facts don't back you up at all Nick. For example, Sinn Fein makes loud
>complaining noises about the supposed unacceptability and alleged bias of
>the police when dealing with Catholics.
Tell me, would a Republican blockade of
Unionists/Loyalists/Protestants *EVER* be able/be tolerated by
PSNI/British Army troops to stand amongst the British Army and PSNI
vehicles as can plainly be seen in the video 'Siege of the Short
Strand'?
Go on tell me...<taps foot impatiently>
>(Not, you'll notice, 'nationalists'
>or 'republicans', but Catholics.)
The term "Catholic" is used in this case because Shinners believe that
that is the category that is important in the eyes of the RUC/PSNI.
Generally, Republicans use the term(s) Republican and/or
Nationalist...and you know it.
> Would it therefore surprise you to learn
>that the majority of complaints received by the Police Ombudsman come from
>Protestants?
Not really. They think that they're more likely to be listened to. I
think you need to rewatch "Siege of the Short Strand" again.
> Would it surprise you to learn that, contrary to the
>widespread and almost total dissatisfaction and mistrust in the police
>alleged by Sinn Féin, independent research on behalf of the Policing Board
>indicates that 58% of Catholics surveyed believe that the police treat
>them equally as well as Protestants?
I don't believe it.
> Would it surprise you to learn that
>70% of Catholics expressed confidence in ordinary day to day policing, with
>66% expressing confidence in the police’s provision of a public order
>policing service?
Yes that would suprise me. Its certainly not what my Northern friends
tell me.
>> > The SDLP, a largely Catholic
>> >party with unashamedly nationalistic aspirations don't do that Nik.
>>
>> Tell me, are the death threats against the SDLP from Loyalists for
>> real or not?
>
>I would assume that as the police normally inform potential targets of
>threats against them, the threats are real and credible.
That, is not a safe assumption.
> So what's your point? Threats haven't forced the SDLP down the propaganda route employed
>by Sinn Féin, so doesn't that rather reinforce my point?
The Stoops are propped up by the British Administration as a means by
which to dilute Nationalist sentiment...
>> > They
>> >don't see the need to exaggerate and lie, so why do Sinn Féin/IRA do it?
>>
>> It could have something to do with their different constituencies
>> being subject to relatively different levels of treatment at the hands
>> of the British Securocrats...the SDLP are propped up by the British
>> Government...whilst John Hume (as I understand it), did a lot of good
>> work on the GFA, I'm looking forward to the SDLP slipping more and
>> more behind Sinn Fein in the Stormont Elections.
>
>The SDLP are propped up by British 'securocrats'? That's a pretty amazing
>claim to make. Are you serious?
Yes.
> What leads you to believe that?
History.
>> >> The mere fact that there hasn't been any large scale response to the
>> >> continual provocative actions undertaken by the UDA/UFF should
>> >> demonstrate that to you.
>> >>
>> >> Given that I think you're a member/past member of the British
>> >> Securocracy, I'm sure you have access to verify that last claim.
>> >
>> >What I can verify is that the claim that a British Army unit flew a
>> >Loyalist Paramilitary emblem at Bessbrook is a lie, but I don't expect you
>> >to believe me. And let's face it, you don't, do you?
>>
>> That is another matter. I've seen a picture of that flag but I don't
>> know enough about UVF emblems to say either way. However, I have just
>> asked you quite a serious question. I will repeat it to give you
>> another chance to answer it.
>
>This is the allegation which started the thread. If you have it, then post
>it here. If you've seen it, give us the source so that we can see it. Let's
>all see it.
I'm waiting on it now. I have seen it but I can't find it at the
moment...annoyingly.
>> The mere fact that there hasn't been any large scale response, from
>> the PIRA, to the continual provocative actions undertaken by the
>> UDA/UFF should demonstrate that the Provos are serious about giving
>> peace a chance. You know that the Loyalists are trying to provoke an
>> armed response from the Provos but an armed response is not
>> forthcoming...the Provos don't want a shooting match....thats the way
>> I see it at least.
>
>I agree that Sinn Féin/IRA, (assuming that we can still think of the PIRA
>as a single homogenous organisation), doesn't want to be seen to return to
>attacking the police, the army, or economic and business targets in
>Northern Ireland or the rest of the UK.
We agree on something, at least.
Nik
Falcon
> On 6 Aug 2003 15:56:15 +0200, Falcon <falcon AT nym DOT irishgroups
> DOT com> wrote:
[..]
> >I wasn't aware that I was spreading Loyalist propaganda Nick; I seem to
> >spend most of my time (God only knows why) reading and responding to Sinn
> >Féin sponsored anti-British propaganda. Nor was I aware that the British
> >Government was engaged in a weekly propaganda offensive of printing serious
> >unsupported allegations against the IRA, or the republican movement in
> >general, in the press.
> >
> >[..]
>
> Don't talk crap. The British media has been seriously biased for years
> on this matter. [..]
. most of it attacking past British policy in Northern Ireland, but
that's not what I said was it? The Government does not control the British
press; Sinn Féin/IRA controls the Republican News. The Government cannot
and does not engage in weekly propaganda offensives; the Sinn Féin/IRA
controled Republican News does.
[..]
> >The facts don't back you up at all Nick. For example, Sinn Fein makes loud
> >complaining noises about the supposed unacceptability and alleged bias of
> >the police when dealing with Catholics.
>
> Tell me, would a Republican blockade of
> Unionists/Loyalists/Protestants *EVER* be able/be tolerated by
> PSNI/British Army troops to stand amongst the British Army and PSNI
> vehicles as can plainly be seen in the video 'Siege of the Short
> Strand'?
You've harped on about this before Nick, and I've published the Police
Ombudsman's report into Sinn Féin's groundless allegations too.
> Go on tell me...<taps foot impatiently>
I've told you more than once.
> >(Not, you'll notice, 'nationalists'
> >or 'republicans', but Catholics.)
>
> The term "Catholic" is used in this case because Shinners believe that
> that is the category that is important in the eyes of the RUC/PSNI.
> Generally, Republicans use the term(s) Republican and/or
> Nationalist...and you know it.
No, Sinn Féin/IRA uses the term Catholic because it wishes to paint a
wholly inaccurate picture of widespread religious oppression, reinforced by
a total failure to report on alleged nationalist or republican offences
against Protestants. Without the image of Catholic repression, Sinn Féin
couldn't exist ... and you know it.
> > Would it therefore surprise you to learn
> >that the majority of complaints received by the Police Ombudsman come from
> >Protestants?
>
> Not really. They think that they're more likely to be listened to. I
> think you need to rewatch "Siege of the Short Strand" again.
No I don't. The video does nothing to back up your fatuous claims about the
Short Strand or your beliefs about why Protestants may lay complaints
before the Police Ombudsman.
> >Would it surprise you to learn that, contrary to the
> >widespread and almost total dissatisfaction and mistrust in the police
> >alleged by Sinn Féin, independent research on behalf of the Policing Board
> >indicates that 58% of Catholics surveyed believe that the police treat
> >them equally as well as Protestants?
>
> I don't believe it.
You mean you don't want to believe it. It doesn't fit the Sinn Féin
propaganda model does it Nick?
> >Would it surprise you to learn that
> >70% of Catholics expressed confidence in ordinary day to day policing, with
> >66% expressing confidence in the police's provision of a public order
> >policing service?
>
> Yes that would suprise me. Its certainly not what my Northern friends
> tell me.
You mean you don't want to believe it. It doesn't fit the Sinn Féin
propaganda model does it Nick?
[..]
> >I would assume that as the police normally inform potential targets of
> >threats against them, the threats are real and credible.
>
> That, is not a safe assumption.
Please don't feel the need to interject unless you have something
constructive to say. That makes no sense at all unless you are attempting
to make a counter-claim.
> > So what's your point? Threats haven't forced the SDLP down the propaganda route employed
> >by Sinn Féin, so doesn't that rather reinforce my point?
>
> The Stoops are propped up by the British Administration as a means by
> which to dilute Nationalist sentiment...
How are the SDLP propped up by the British Administration?
[..]
> >The SDLP are propped up by British 'securocrats'? That's a pretty amazing
> >claim to make. Are you serious?
>
> Yes.
>
> > What leads you to believe that?
>
> History.
Am I the only one who doesn't have a fucking clue where this is going. I'll
ask you again, how have the British Administration "propped up" the SDLP?
> >> >> The mere fact that there hasn't been any large scale response to the
[..] On the subect of the flag...
> >This is the allegation which started the thread. If you have it, then post
> >it here. If you've seen it, give us the source so that we can see it. Let's
> >all see it.
>
> I'm waiting on it now. I have seen it but I can't find it at the
> moment...annoyingly.
How convenient. We're waiting Nick.
<taps foot impatiently>
Let's not forget that this thread started because Sinn Féin/IRA indulged
it's passion for publishing evil-Brit fairy stories about a UVF flag on a
British Army base. Just like their fairy stories about Catholic attitudes
to the police, you and your friends choose to swallow the party bile hook
line and sinker. But you went a stage further Nik, and claimed to have seen
a photograph of the offending flag. Now produce it Nick. Let's all see it.
> >
> >I agree that Sinn Féin/IRA, (assuming that we can still think of the PIRA
> >as a single homogenous organisation), doesn't want to be seen to return to
> >attacking the police, the army, or economic and business targets in
> >Northern Ireland or the rest of the UK.
>
> We agree on something, at least.
I take it that you also agree that their refusal to end their involvement
in organised crime, intelligence gathering, targeting, training and weapons
procurement, not to mention paramilitary punishment beatings (which are, as
you know, on the increase), undermines that so-called commitment to the
peace process.
Nigel Morris
You irish are all mad cunts, you know that?
Just keep on bombing and murdering yourselves, that's OK with me.
I support keeping the army in NI because it infuriates taigs, and that gives
me a lot of pleasure seeing infuriated taigs.
Everyone knows the republic would go bankrupt paying NI's bills - just get
used to living in the UK you filthy Catholic scum.
cheers
Loyal subject of Queen Elizabeth II
"Chesney Christ" <thegreat...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:n$urO6JytWM$Ew...@ntlworld.com...
Whitewolf
<thegreat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>A certain Whitewolf, of soc.culture.irish "fame", writes :
>
>>>It's funny when someone follows up a bigoted remark with another bigoted
>>>remark.
>>
>>"Fight fire with fire"? or treat other people as they treat you?
>
>Hypocrisy is a better known word in some circles.
Those circles don't know what they're talking about...
Chesney Christ
>Loyal subject of Queen Elizabeth II
Oh look, the high IQ brigade has put in an appearance.
Harry Merrick
> On Wed, 6 Aug 2003 20:35:01 +0100, Chesney Christ
> <thegreat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >A certain Whitewolf, of soc.culture.irish "fame", writes :
> >
> >>>It's funny when someone follows up a bigoted remark with another
bigoted
> >>>remark.
> >>
> >>"Fight fire with fire"? or treat other people as they treat
you?
> >
> >Hypocrisy is a better known word in some circles.
>
> Those circles don't know what they're talking about...
LOL! You would certainly be an unsurpassed expert on that, no doubt!
--
Harry Merrick
MarkinBelfast
"> >
> > Wrong war
> >
>
> So it was LOL!
>
>
> Fin
>
>
Hitler fought at Ypres.
Bertie the Bunyip
news:q71viv0r8ms9q9ckt...@4ax.com:
> On 5 Aug 2003 11:06:23 +0200, Falcon <falcon AT nym DOT irishgroups
> DOT com> wrote:
>
>>"Nik" <warre...@yahoo.co.nz> wrote in message
>>news:qeduiv4l1mn6dko62...@4ax.com...
>>> On 4 Aug 2003 19:24:55 +0200, Falcon <falcon AT nym DOT irishgroups
>>> DOT com> wrote:
>>>
>>> >"Whitewolf" <r...@eirefirst.com> wrote in message
No you aren't, Njikky.
you are a liar and i can prove it and you know it.
that's why you don't answer my posts.
Scumbag.
Bertie
Bertie the Bunyip
news:jb60jv4lkige0t1ug...@4ax.com:
Exactly.
Which is why I don't bother.
Bertei
Ed Norton
news:h61vivgkhafrnlcm5...@4ax.com:
> On Tue, 05 Aug 2003 10:22:02 +0100, Féachadóir <Féach@d.óir> wrote:
>
>>Scríobh "Fin" <Blu...@hotmail.com>:
>>>
>>>"Féachadóir" <Féach@d.óir> wrote in message
>>>news:117tiv4g82scqsrjq...@4ax.com...
>>>> Scríobh "Fin" <Blu...@hotmail.com>:
>>>> >Well considering all UVF flags have been banned, except that of
>>>> >the Ulster 36th Division then it could only be that flag that was
>>>> >flying.
>>>>
>>>> Assuming that the flag was flying legally.
>>>
>>>The Ulster 36th division flag is a legal flag to fly,
>>
>>Indeed. But why are you assuming the flag was that of the 36th, and
>>not one of all those other ones that have been banned?
>>
>>>and should be
>>>celebrated, not outlawed because it has been bastardised by the
>>>current crop
>>
>>The "current crop" are about the only ones who fly it, usually with
>>charming initials like "KAT" emblazoned on it.
>>
>>Did you know that in the dictionary under futility, it says "see
>>NITB"?
>>
>>So d'you think have Armagh two more games left in them? Will Donegal
>>make it past Galway on the second attempt? Have Kerry any worries at
>>all?
>
> C'mon the Kingdom!!
>
what an asshole. BTW, you failed to type that in an irish accent, Njikky.
What happened?
bertie
bertie
David H
<thegreat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>A certain Fin, of soc.culture.irish "fame", writes :
>>> Assuming that the flag was flying legally.
>>The Ulster 36th division flag is a legal flag to fly, and should be
>>celebrated, not outlawed because it has been bastardised by the current crop
>>of UVF,
Now I'm confused. What flag was it, for goodness sake? Anyone
got a picture?
>They were a group of people who were originally established by unionist
>politicians to thwart democracy.
That should read 'thwart majoritarianism'
(Cue NornIron: "Yes, yes, of course you're an Alliance bod -
but is that nationalist Alliance, or unionist Alliance?")
>Not much to celebrate about there, and
>they went over the top during WW1 for political reasons (as did the
>Irish Volunteers).
It's difficult to see them being quite so calculating as the IV. Lots
more flag waving, for instance.
But I'm not sure that the IV were _quite_ so calculating as is
often made out, either. They were Home-Rulers, not Republicans,
after all.
David
--
abend
Nik
Such a cogent and intelligent critique of my support for the County
Kerry GAA team....
Nik
Chesney Christ
>>They were a group of people who were originally established by unionist
>>politicians to thwart democracy.
>
>That should read 'thwart majoritarianism'
The unionists weren't interested in thwarting majoritarianism. They
merely wanted majoritarianism of their own.
Bertie the Bunyip
news:9lp9jvor5e5t03ek0...@4ax.com:
So, waht happened? Funny, but of all the irish people in this newsgroup,
you seem to be the only one who types with an oirish accent.
Why is that Nazi boy?
Bertie
Tortello
Much as I find Bertie Annoying, I have to agree with him on this score.
You are a phoney, Nik.
Bertie the Bunyip
Tortello
David H
<thegreat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>A certain David H, of ni.politics "fame", writes :
>
>>>They were a group of people who were originally established by unionist
>>>politicians to thwart democracy.
>>
>>That should read 'thwart majoritarianism'
>
>The unionists weren't interested in thwarting majoritarianism. They
>merely wanted majoritarianism of their own.
This is where John Hume's Afrikaaners analogy comes in.
The Irish News used to occasionally publish very short
snippets with John Hume comparing unionists with
Afrikaaners, from public addresses at various exotic
locations. I thought it was just a bit of name calling,
and wrote JH off as just another Feeney or whatever -
but no. One day, presumably by accident, the Irish News
gave just a leetle too much context. It turns out that JH
had perceived that unionists were driven by insecurity, that
the only safety was seen to be by complete control of
the levers of power.
(Hence "majoritarianism of their own")
Of course they (or 'we', I suppose) were wrong, there was
a better way to preserve our freedom. John has shown us the
way to a secure, peaceful Northern Ireland, if we will only
choose that way.
Thanks John,
David
--
abend
Nik
wrote:
Coming from someone who doesn't post under his/her real name, I'm
hardly going to take any notice.
How is it phoney to support the GAA team that come from my familiy's
ancestral county?
Nik
Chesney Christ
>>The unionists weren't interested in thwarting majoritarianism. They
>>merely wanted majoritarianism of their own.
>
>This is where John Hume's Afrikaaners analogy comes in.
Please don't, the man's as mad as a bicycle.
>gave just a leetle too much context. It turns out that JH
>had perceived that unionists were driven by insecurity, that
>the only safety was seen to be by complete control of
>the levers of power.
I can't argue with this though. What do you think is meant by the term
"disloyal" ?
David H
<thegreat...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>A certain David H, of soc.culture.irish "fame", writes :
>>gave just a leetle too much context. It turns out that JH
>>had perceived that unionists were driven by insecurity, that
>>the only safety was seen to be by complete control of
>>the levers of power.
>I can't argue with this though. What do you think is meant by the term
>"disloyal" ?
I'm going to have to guess at the context for this. I assume
you are referring to the perception that all RCs were intent on
dismantling the state, and selling out NI to the Republic.
I wouldn't regard that categorisation as universal, inevitable,
accurate or particularly reprehensible - in case that's what you
were wondering. But I do think it is why the term 'disloyal' was
sprayed around so much. So much so that it became almost
self-fulfilling.
David H
--
abend
Bogman
"David H" <swe...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:3f413752...@news.individual.net...
: On Fri, 15 Aug 2003 20:01:40 +0100, Chesney Christ
I think that everyone who is not Irish is just as pissed off now about
Ulster as they are about the endless rantings of the BBC against Blair and
the BBC's endless reportage on the Hoon Inquiry.