B Specials
gregory
> (gregory) wrote:
>
> ><kevin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> In article <1do6jhe.74jhag1x44dczN@[212.56.111.155]>,
> >> gre...@justinian.idps.co.uk (gregory) wrote:
> >> > <kevin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> > > Come now, what kind of cosmos would it be without a proper purgatory
> >> > > for the souls of departed INLA and White Supremacists?
>
> >> > You forgot the Orange Order they are into that Christisan Identity
> >> > nutcase shite as well.
>
> >> I stand corrected. You're right, of course, and the B Specials as well.
>
> >The latter still recruit and exist and have officially sponsored
> >shooting ranges.
>
> "Sponsored"? Do you mean paid, or endorsed?
Subsidised and tolerated and ignored. The B-Specials were a depraved
protestant murder gang who preyed on defensless catholics and who have
perpetrated very many sickening atrocities in their sorrowful history.
They are and were the scum of the earth. Are you defending them? Would
that not be an outrageous position to take if you are?
>
> >Their firearms issue (the records thereof) were
> >destroyed by the Junta in it's last days. They are still given public
> >buildings to train in with their guns.
>
> You mean that a legal gun club, holding legal weapons, is allowed
> to rent a basement in a council leisure centre one day a week (or
> is it per month?). Who is this meant to shock?
Colonel Michael Dewar makes no meaniful distinction to the re-organised
B-Specials and the Orange Volunteers or indeed the UVF or UPV in his
book "The British Army in Northern Ireland". I think Gavin has a copy
and might confirm that the British security forces regard any
militaristic armed protestant political grouping as a terror cadre
albeit not one necessarilly or continuously hostile to the state.
The gun club in question is unquestionably the "B-Specials" themselves.
They are not an opera society. Might I suggest that David Trimble
regards the IRA as a legal gun club thus alleviating his own concerns?
Legal guns equate with "protestant" guns here in the north as the
supremacist nature of this state frowns on the disloyal catholic class
having access to weapons. It makes them to difficult to persecute.
>
> >Puts decommissioning in a
> >different perspective doesn't it?
>
> Doesn't the GFA distinguish between legally and illegally held
> weapons already? Do you want to go for a rewrite?
Does it matter? The B-Specials are a deranged political and a openly
paramilitary organisation and they voted resoundingly against the GFA at
their last annual conference in Newcastle. They were the psychopathic
stormtroopers of the protestant state with a reputation for outrage and
bestial atrocity. They made the Black and Tans look like social workers.
>
> David
>
>
> Born to be mild.
Not really that "mild" one would have thought a civilised perspective at
the notion of B-Specials running around with guns and being allowed
official local government premises would have induced the mildly right
thinking to express outrage. It is the old prods with guns good and
taigs with guns bad scenario. It is the root mentality of Ulster
protestantism.
One of the basic demands of the civil rights movement in the late 60s
was the disbandment of the B-Specials because they were a protestant
murder gang responsible for the most sickening atrocities imaginable. I
think the Oxford History of Ireland regards them as being utterly
violent and beyond control.
Unionists started this recent war, unionists and their disgusting and
sectarian politics and institutions brought all this down on our heads,
something admitted frankly on the NG by Ger Cunningham who is not a
provo groupie. If unionism has a future it needs to put the supremacist
anti catholic armed gangs and secret armies behind it. Unionism created
the PIRA not the catholics. Unionism can uncreate the PIRA by becoming
civilised.
--
Gregory
Peter Bowman
assembly.
gregory wrote in message <1doamov.f1kbvm9dh36oN@[212.56.111.172]>...
gregory
> You mean that a legal gun club, holding legal weapons, is allowed
> > to rent a basement in a council leisure centre one day a week (or
> > is it per month?). Who is this meant to shock?
> >
> > >Puts decommissioning in a
> > >different perspective doesn't it?
> >
> > Doesn't the GFA distinguish between legally and illegally held
> > weapons already? Do you want to go for a rewrite?
>
> I'm sorry, perhaps I don't understand. Are you saying that groups like the B
> Specials and the INLA should own firearms? Or, are you trying to draw some
> kind of (unlikely) qualitative distinction between the two?
>
> Kevin McCabe
I think he is saying that prod psychos are OK as gun owners but that he
does not want the IRA to "become" a series of regional gun clubs the way
the B Specials and Orange faction terrorists became gun clubs. I think
that is what he is saying. The B Specials voted against the GFA at their
Ard Fheis in Newcastle by the way.
--
Gregory
gregory
> Sinn Fein/IRA still have their weapoins and they are allowed seats in the
> assembly.
SF have no guns you silly sausage. The B-Specials do.
--
Gregory
Peter Bowman
gregory wrote in message <1doaufq.h2ao3ahlhvfcN@[212.56.111.6]>...
decommisioning (as if).
gregory
He represents SF with the decommissioning body. Get your facts right.
--
Gregory
Harry Merrick
> Sinn Fein/IRA still have their weapoins and they are allowed seats in the
> assembly.
>
Certainly, they are indeed allowed their seats in the Assembly, but NOT on the
Executive of that Assembly, until such times as their PIRA colleagues decide
to at least give up *some* of their huge arsenal of weaponry!
This was most clearly explained by Trimble on the TV this morning, where he
gave chapter and verse of the GFA to explain it.
The same deal applies to the various Loyalist Paramilitaries and their
Political offshoots too, of course!
--
Harry.
---
"Those Who Dwell In The Past Have No Life In The Future."
(Anon)
---
ICQ# 2546277
Harry Merrick
> gregory wrote in message <1doaufq.h2ao3ahlhvfcN@[212.56.111.6]>...
>
> >
> >
> >SF have no guns you silly sausage. The B-Specials do.
>
Hah! LOL! You're the silly old sausage on this one! The B-Specials were
disbanded many years ago, they don't exist!
Peter Bowman
Harry Merrick wrote in message <36E2A4AB...@agencies.dnet.co.uk>...
>Peter Bowman wrote:
>
>> Sinn Fein/IRA still have their weapoins and they are allowed seats in the
>> assembly.
>>
>
>Certainly, they are indeed allowed their seats in the Assembly, but NOT on
the
>Executive of that Assembly, until such times as their PIRA colleagues
decide
>to at least give up *some* of their huge arsenal of weaponry!
>
>This was most clearly explained by Trimble on the TV this morning, where he
>gave chapter and verse of the GFA to explain it.
>
>The same deal applies to the various Loyalist Paramilitaries and their
>Political offshoots too, of course!
>--
Only the loyalists have already begun.
Harry Merrick
> <kevin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >
........."SNIP"..............
> I think he is saying that prod psychos are OK as gun owners
Oh? So you are now implying that *all* Protestants are psycho's, is that right? -
Really, Greig, do grow up!
> but that he
> does not want the IRA to "become" a series of regional gun clubs the way
> the B Specials and Orange faction terrorists became gun clubs. I think
> that is what he is saying.
I think your definitely wrong there. *ALL* Gun Clubs are controlled by the new
Westminster Laws on holding weapons. So, no matter what you may want us all to
believe, Gun Clubs are not allowed hand guns, nor high caliber rifles either.
Meaning, that your scare mongering just will not wash on this one!
> The B Specials voted against the GFA at their
> Ard Fheis in Newcastle by the way.
Oh, I see! The B-Specials are a new group invented by Greig as a possible way to
wind up everyone in the rest of the world to think that the RUC has spawned
another secret squad?
For everyones information, therefor, let me put the record straight. Many years
ago there was indeed a force of volunteers known as the "B-Specials" and they were
indeed formed to curtail the activities of the IRA at the time. This they did very
effectively, but only at the cost of insulting just about every Catholic in
Northern Ireland. As a result of this, and due to democratic protest by the
Nationalist community, they were eventually disbanded completely, and have not
been in any sort of existence since. Why the Nationalist community never thought
of democratic protests before or since defeats me! In a supposedly Protestant
Ulster, their wish was heeded. Greig, of course, is trolling as usual.
>
>
> --
> Gregory
Harry Merrick
> Peter Bowman <Bung...@Hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Sinn Fein/IRA still have their weapoins and they are allowed seats in the
> > assembly.
>
> SF have no guns you silly sausage. The B-Specials do.
>
> --
> Gregory
At Last! Greig's half a brain has taken leave of what remained of his senses!
What B-Specials? Who are they?
Harry Merrick
Danielle Ni Dhighe
>Sinn Fein/IRA still have their weapoins and they are allowed seats in the
>assembly.
Sinn Fein has no weapons. The IRA does. Yes, there are links between the
two, but they are not one organization.
**************************************************************************
Danielle Ni Dhighe * morr...@morrigan.net * http://www.morrigan.net/
"Life is either a daring adventure or nothing." - Helen Keller
**************************************************************************
Danielle Ni Dhighe
>Only the loyalists have already begun.
Yes, but now some of those groups are threatening to break ceasefire.
Danielle Ni Dhighe
>Martin Maginness used to be an oul provo and now he represents the RA in the
>decommisioning (as if).
His name is McGuinness.
Danielle Ni Dhighe
>This was most clearly explained by Trimble on the TV this morning, where he
>gave chapter and verse of the GFA to explain it.
Maybe the GFA According to Trimble, but according to the real GFA,
decommissioning is not a precondition.
Harry Merrick
> "Peter Bowman" <Bung...@Hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Martin Maginness used to be an oul provo and now he represents the RA in the
> >decommisioning (as if).
>
> His name is McGuinness.
>
> **************************************************************************
> Danielle Ni Dhighe * morr...@morrigan.net * http://www.morrigan.net/
> "Life is either a daring adventure or nothing." - Helen Keller
> **************************************************************************
You are quite right, but still the same Clan in fact.
Harry Merrick
> Harry Merrick <merr...@agencies.dnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >This was most clearly explained by Trimble on the TV this morning, where he
> >gave chapter and verse of the GFA to explain it.
>
> Maybe the GFA According to Trimble, but according to the real GFA,
> decommissioning is not a precondition.
>
Oh really? Since when were there two or even three GFA's? - I am surprised at
your supremacist attitude. I am sure that you will find that Trimble has quoted
from the correct version! He is hardly likely *not* to on Nation Wide TV! - I am
quite certain also, that Republicans have made a complete Pigs Ear out of what
they thought they were signing by not fully understanding it. They are now
frantically trying to find a way out without loosing face! - And *that* is
really why the PIRA are refusing to de-commission, no other reason!
Brendan Heading
<Bung...@Hotmail.com> writes
>Only the loyalists have already begun.
Do you honestly believe that the commencement of decommissioning by the
LVF means that they are completely committed to peaceful means,
especially when security sources indicated the possibility of strong
connections between the LVF and the two recently banned loyalist
groupings ?
--
Brendan Heading, Belfast, Northern Ireland
ICQ # 24010538
Experience is the salt of wisdom.
Brendan Heading
<morr...@morrigan.net> writes
>"Peter Bowman" <Bung...@Hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Sinn Fein/IRA still have their weapoins and they are allowed seats in the
>>assembly.
>
>Sinn Fein has no weapons. The IRA does. Yes, there are links between the
>two, but they are not one organization.
The British government has no weapons. The British Army does. Yes, there
are links between those two, but they are not one organization.
Danielle Ni Dhighe
>>Sinn Fein has no weapons. The IRA does. Yes, there are links between the
>>two, but they are not one organization.
>
>The British government has no weapons. The British Army does. Yes, there
>are links between those two, but they are not one organization.
The British Army is part of the British government. The IRA is not part of
SF. Surely you can do better than that, Bren.
Brendan Heading
<morr...@morrigan.net> writes
>>The British government has no weapons. The British Army does. Yes, there
>>are links between those two, but they are not one organization.
>
>The British Army is part of the British government. The IRA is not part of
>SF. Surely you can do better than that, Bren.
The IRA is part of the republican movement. SF is part of the republican
movement.
Surely *you* can do better than that.
Danielle Ni Dhighe
>>The British Army is part of the British government. The IRA is not part of
>>SF. Surely you can do better than that, Bren.
>
>The IRA is part of the republican movement. SF is part of the republican
>movement.
Ah, but that is like saying Joe Doyle and Paddy O'Neill are part of the same
movement, therefore Joe controls Paddy. My analogy is entirely different, but
obviously too subtle for some.
Chris Hedley
morr...@morrigan.net (Danielle Ni Dhighe) writes:
> The British Army is part of the British government.
...?!
Chris.
Brendan Heading
<morr...@morrigan.net> writes
>>The IRA is part of the republican movement. SF is part of the republican
>>movement.
>
>Ah, but that is like saying Joe Doyle and Paddy O'Neill are part of the same
>movement, therefore Joe controls Paddy. My analogy is entirely different, but
>obviously too subtle for some.
So you're denying for example that the two organizations influence each
other at all ?
Peter Bowman
Chris Hedley wrote in message <7buu9s$805$3...@teabag.demon.co.uk>...
>In article <36e2f678...@news.nwlink.com>,
> morr...@morrigan.net (Danielle Ni Dhighe) writes:
>> The British Army is part of the British government.
>
black.
Danielle Ni Dhighe
>> The British Army is part of the British government.
>
> ...?!
Too complex for ya?
Danielle Ni Dhighe
>IRA and Sinn Fein are like black and white onyl the IRA are very fond of the
>black.
They're part of the same movement and share the same goals, but it is still
dishonest to say that SF and the IRA are one and the same.
Batterburger Liberation Front
> "Peter Bowman" <Bung...@Hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Martin Maginness used to be an oul provo and now he represents the RA in the
> >decommisioning (as if).
>
> His name is McGuinness.
and corrections to the second part of the statement?
Batterburger Liberation Front
> The British Army is part of the British government.
Duh!
Brendan Heading
<Bung...@Hotmail.com> writes
>> morr...@morrigan.net (Danielle Ni Dhighe) writes:
>>> The British Army is part of the British government.
>>
>IRA and Sinn Fein are like black and white onyl the IRA are very fond of the
>black.
Did you find this out whilst trying to sing at the Rosetta ? Alan D Red
(reads this group) used to sing there too...
gregory
> In article <36e2d3a...@news.nwlink.com>, Danielle Ni Dhighe
> <morr...@morrigan.net> writes
> >"Peter Bowman" <Bung...@Hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>Sinn Fein/IRA still have their weapoins and they are allowed seats in the
> >>assembly.
> >
> >Sinn Fein has no weapons. The IRA does. Yes, there are links between the
> >two, but they are not one organization.
>
> The British government has no weapons. The British Army does. Yes, there
> are links between those two, but they are not one organization.
>
> ?
The Brit Army takes *orders* from HMG. The IRA does not take orders from
SF.
--
Gregory
gregory
> In article <36e2f678...@news.nwlink.com>,
> morr...@morrigan.net (Danielle Ni Dhighe) writes:
> > The British Army is part of the British government.
>
> ...?!
>
> Chris.
Military arm in theory. The IRA is not the military arm of SF. The IRA
does not take orders.
--
Gregory
Jerry Desmond
says...
>
>In article <36e30530...@news.nwlink.com>, Danielle Ni
>Dhighe <morr...@morrigan.net> writes
>>Brendan says:
>>>The IRA is part of the republican movement. SF is part of the
>>>republicanmovement.
>>
>>Ah, but that is like saying Joe Doyle and Paddy O'Neill are
>>part of the same movement, therefore Joe controls Paddy.
>So you're denying for example that the two organizations
>influence each other at all ?
>--
>Brendan Heading, Belfast, Northern Ireland
The various elements of the Republican movement are like
the various churches encompassed under "Christianity".
Presbyterians, Church of Ireland, Methodists all have a lot of
common values, goals, beliefs and the like, but no one church
controls the others. Influence? Maybe, but not control. Same
with the various elements of Republicanism. The IRA is not Sinn
Fein, and Sinn Fein is not the IRA, and neither of them is
either the INLA or the 32 County Soverignty Committee.
Slainte, Jerry
gregory
> In article <36e30530...@news.nwlink.com>, Danielle Ni Dhighe
> <morr...@morrigan.net> writes
> >>The IRA is part of the republican movement. SF is part of the republican
> >>movement.
> >
> >Ah, but that is like saying Joe Doyle and Paddy O'Neill are part of the
> >same movement, therefore Joe controls Paddy. My analogy is entirely
> >different, but obviously too subtle for some.
>
> So you're denying for example that the two organizations influence each
> other at all ?
Influence? How ungeneric, I am influenced by Lou Reed and Iggy Pop and
my hormones.
--
Gregory
gregory
> In article <cu7M$tACiw...@dnet.co.uk>, b.he...@dnet.co.uk
> says...
> >
> >In article <36e30530...@news.nwlink.com>, Danielle Ni
> >Dhighe <morr...@morrigan.net> writes
>
> >>Brendan says:
> >>>The IRA is part of the republican movement. SF is part of the
> >>>republicanmovement.
> >>
> >>Ah, but that is like saying Joe Doyle and Paddy O'Neill are
> >>part of the same movement, therefore Joe controls Paddy.
>
> >So you're denying for example that the two organizations
> >influence each other at all ?
> >--
> >Brendan Heading, Belfast, Northern Ireland
>
>
> The various elements of the Republican movement are like
> the various churches encompassed under "Christianity".
> Presbyterians, Church of Ireland, Methodists all have a lot of
> common values, goals, beliefs and the like, but no one church
> controls the others. Influence? Maybe, but not control. Same
> with the various elements of Republicanism. The IRA is not Sinn
> Fein, and Sinn Fein is not the IRA, and neither of them is
> either the INLA or the 32 County Soverignty Committee.
>
> Slainte, Jerry
>
Good post Jerry. Very neatly encapsulated and succinct.
--
Gregory
gregory
> "Peter Bowman" <Bung...@Hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >IRA and Sinn Fein are like black and white onyl the IRA are very fond of the
> >black.
>
> They're part of the same movement and share the same goals, but it is still
> dishonest to say that SF and the IRA are one and the same.
>
> **************************************************************************
> Danielle Ni Dhighe * morr...@morrigan.net * http://www.morrigan.net/
> "Life is either a daring adventure or nothing." - Helen Keller
> **************************************************************************
The Unionists formed their own IRA in the late Sixties when the bona
fide IRA was abolishing itself. They need "IRA" violence to add tension
prior to the pogroms they were planning.
Oddly enough RIRA and CIRA formed for almost similar reasons as the bona
fide IRA were not playing the game. It is a funny old world is it not
Danielle?
The IRA were everywhere even when they didn't really exist. There are
vampires in the woods sort of thing. Anyway to reply to your post,
dishonest or possibly very stupid.
I hear you are letting any unreconstructed taig trash join your list
these days. Brendan will be accusing you of running a hotbed of
incipient defenderism soon.
--
Gregory
Gearóid Mac Cuinneagáin
>Brendan Heading <b.he...@dnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>>Sinn Fein has no weapons. The IRA does. Yes, there are links between the
>>>two, but they are not one organization.
>>
>>The British government has no weapons. The British Army does. Yes, there
>>are links between those two, but they are not one organization.
>
>The British Army is part of the British government. The IRA is not part of
>SF. Surely you can do better than that, Bren.
Who do the IRA read a statement to SF conferences telling them what to
do then?
--
An Cuinneagánach
abardubh at wwa dot com
Read the Damn FAQ at http://www.muc.de/~cpm/irish-faq
Jeff Drabble
Hedley) wrote:
>In article <36e2f678...@news.nwlink.com>,
> morr...@morrigan.net (Danielle Ni Dhighe) writes:
>> The British Army is part of the British government.
>
> ...?!
>
>Chris.
You're leaking again, Hedley. Now just jolly well stop it!
Jeff Drabble
Harry Merrick
> "Peter Bowman" <Bung...@Hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >IRA and Sinn Fein are like black and white onyl the IRA are very fond of the
> >black.
>
> They're part of the same movement and share the same goals, but it is still
> dishonest to say that SF and the IRA are one and the same.
>
> **
What? Even though Gerry Adams and McGuinness are both on the PIRA Army Council?
(Or certainly were at one time).
Come On!
Also, the British Army are not "part" of the British government at all! Where on
earth do you get that idea from? The BA is part of the United Kingdom defence
forces, it is directed by whatever Government happens to be in power, it is
certainly not part of that Government. The Irish Army is part of the State of the
Republic of Ireland, it too is not "part" of whatever Government is in power in
Dail Eeriann. Your terminology is flawed.
gregory
What? The IRA tell Sinn Fein what *they* want and what *they* are going
to do. Such is our circumstances that not being allied to a military is
to court oblivion.
There are no generic links and each organisation has a separate
leadership and might not have the same prospectus or immediate
interests.
Everything is a compromise and the IRA speech usually states it's bottom
line. All the better for SF delegates to count chickens before doing
something stupid. It is called power. The IRA have lots of power.
--
Gregory
gregory
> The B Specials were legal, the INLA were not.
There is absolutely no difference between the B-Specials and any other
type of ultra supremacist militia be it in Serbia or Croatia or in
Budapest. The B-Specials made the Black and Tans look like social
workers.
The B-Specials shot up catholic hospitals, murdered war heroes and
murdered catholic children deliberately and were merely armed
brownshirts from day one until the present.
They were a shower of filth without any honour or merit. They were a
protestant murder gang designed for baby killing and atrocity. That is
what they did and that is what they were.
--
Gregory
gregory
> the specials didn't attract the enthusiastic
> recreational killers in the same way as the INLA.
>
> David
Recreational killing and perverted barbarity was their speciality, you
clearly have not a clue what you are talking about. The B Specials
killed like militant prods always kill and that has to involve sexual
sociopathy, looting, drunken outrage and the deliberate and remorseless
killing of catholic women and children on the basis of the catholic
faith.
Therefore it will come as no surprise to find even Stormont wondering
what to do with the utterly depraved criminal maniacs they had
unleashed. Even prior sexual crime was no hindrance to membership. The B
Specials were just brownshirt scum who were required to implement
atrocities on largely disarmed catholics. That is good history. That is
what they were like.
--
Gregory
Peter Bowman
Joanna Prescott wrote in message <36e5a0bc...@news.demon.co.uk>...
>On Mon, 08 Mar 1999 08:49:57 GMT, jef...@iconz.co.nz (Jeff Drabble)
>wrote:
>
>>On 7 Mar 1999 22:23:56 GMT, cbh@REMOVE_THIS.teabag.demon.co.uk (Chris
>>Hedley) wrote:
>>
>>>In article <36e2f678...@news.nwlink.com>,
>>> morr...@morrigan.net (Danielle Ni Dhighe) writes:
>>>
>>>
>>>Chris.
>>
>>You're leaking again, Hedley. Now just jolly well stop it!
>>
>
>Joanna
>
Your da's an arse, john
Peter Bowman
Gearóid Mac Cuinneagáin wrote in message
<36ea42ac...@news.newsguy.com>...
>Danielle Ni Dhighe wrote:
>
>>Brendan Heading <b.he...@dnet.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>>Sinn Fein has no weapons. The IRA does. Yes, there are links between
the
>>>>two, but they are not one organization.
>>>
>>>The British government has no weapons. The British Army does. Yes, there
>>>are links between those two, but they are not one organization.
>>
>>The British Army is part of the British government. The IRA is not part
of
>>SF. Surely you can do better than that, Bren.
>
>Who do the IRA read a statement to SF conferences telling them what to
>do then?
>
Chris Hedley
joa...@lotos-land.demon.co.uk (Joanna Prescott) writes:
> On Mon, 08 Mar 1999 08:49:57 GMT, jef...@iconz.co.nz (Jeff Drabble)
> wrote:
>>You're leaking again, Hedley. Now just jolly well stop it!
>>
> He can't help it, poor chap. Someone removed his teabag.
Oh hah bloody hah. Look, it was an accident alright, so just leave me
alone you pair of bastards! :)
Chris.
Brendan Heading
<j...@ccnet.com> writes
> The various elements of the Republican movement are like
>the various churches encompassed under "Christianity".
>Presbyterians, Church of Ireland, Methodists all have a lot of
>common values, goals, beliefs and the like, but no one church
>controls the others.
I don't know a lot about the intricate details of Protestant
denominations but I don't think a lot of practicing Protestants round
here would be delighted to hear you suggest they all have the same
"goals, beliefs and the like".
In any case, members from the Presbyterian church don't go to jail for a
while and then turn up a bit later on in the Methodist church. Members
of the Methodists don't wholly and completely support (and reaffirm so
every year) the capacity of the Presbyterian church to run their parish
bazaar.
Members of the Presbyterian Church do not tell members of the Methodist
church who may stand for election :
=============
"Although Sinn Fein began to develop a separate existence from the IRA
there was no doubt about who was the senior partner in the arrangement.
Even in matters of electoral strategy the IRA could have the last say.
This was illustrated by the choice of Sinn Fein candidate for an Area D
by-election to Belfast City Council. The episode also reveals that
Adam's authority in the movement is not as autocratic as has been
suggested. On the morning before the SF meeting to select a candidate,
the Belfast Brigade held their own circus and decided they wanted Alex
Maskey, a young hardliner. Adams was disappointed and suggested his own
choice, Sean Keenan, but reluctantly agreed to nominate Maskey that
evening. Maskey's other rival was Patrick Wilson. According to one of
those present, both were told that if they were nominated they should
decline :
'So Sean Keenan was nominated and he said "I'm sorry, I'm too busy and
the kid's just started school". Patrick Wilson was nominated and he said
"I'm just out of jail and I'm too young yet to take on that role.". Then
somebody in the IRA got up and said "I nominate Alex Maskey" and
somebody said "I second it" and all the IRA men clapped Alex in'
Adams had previously been thwarted at the Assembly elections when the
Brigade staff again insisted on Maskey over his choice, Tom Cahill, who
they regarded as too much of a crony. "
==================
From Bishop and Mallie, "The Provisional IRA", page 382-383.
> Influence? Maybe, but not control.
It depends how far you stretch the meaning of the word "influence". But
think about it : you'll never catch Sinn Fein publically running against
an IRA policy for example; and indeed, IRA statements in recent days
indicate support for SF's current strategy, bolstering SF within the
broader RM.
> Same
>with the various elements of Republicanism. The IRA is not Sinn
>Fein, and Sinn Fein is not the IRA,
Never tried to claim this, myself. However to claim that there isn't a
strong degree of interdependence and inter-influence would be wrong.
> and neither of them is
>either the INLA or the 32 County Soverignty Committee.
I agree with this.
--
Brendan Heading, Belfast, Northern Ireland
Danielle Ni Dhighe
>What? Even though Gerry Adams and McGuinness are both on the PIRA Army Council?
>(Or certainly were at one time).
Rumors like that have gone around in the past. It's certainly true that
McGuinness was once the OC of the Derry Brigade and Adams was an officer in
the Belfast Brigade. That's why the IRA has so much respect for them.
gregory
> "Peter Bowman" <Bung...@Hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Martin Maginness used to be an oul provo and now he represents the RA in the
> >decommisioning (as if).
>
> His name is McGuinness.
>
> **************************************************************************
> Danielle Ni Dhighe * morr...@morrigan.net * http://www.morrigan.net/
> "Life is either a daring adventure or nothing." - Helen Keller
> **************************************************************************
I am killfiling Bowman as a service to the newsgroup. Why bother
replying to mind numbing shite? It is just clogging up the real theatre
of operations which is Ger and Brendie Poo's last stand. Well scramble
for the leaky life boats really.
--
Gregory
Peter Bowman
Batterburger Liberation Front wrote in message
<1999030900...@p72.sligo1.tinet.ie>...
>Peter Bowman <Bung...@Hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>> What about last years St paddys day?
>
>
>
lol
>--
>kfuz...@tinet.ie
Batterburger Liberation Front
> What about last years St paddys day?
I was pissed out of my fuckin head.
David Halliwell
(gregory) wrote:
>David Halliwell <d.r.ha...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> (gregory) wrote:
>> ><kevin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> I stand corrected. You're right, of course, and the B Specials as well.
>> >The latter still recruit and exist and have officially sponsored
>> >shooting ranges.
>> "Sponsored"? Do you mean paid, or endorsed?
>Subsidised and tolerated and ignored.
Tell us about the subsidy. So far as I know the B-specials
have been able to rent a basement in a council building. Is
that any more of a subsidy than letting the felons' club book
a spot in the Falls Road leisure centre for a game of five a
side. Or do you mean something a bit more subsidised than
that?
>The B-Specials were a depraved
>protestant murder gang who preyed on defensless catholics and who have
>perpetrated very many sickening atrocities in their sorrowful history.
The B-specials were kept at a strength of 20,000 part timers
for 50 years. You could draw a line round any spot of land
containing 20,000 men and say that the locals have
perpetrated very many sickening atrocities in that time.
I do not concede that they were a depraved murder gang. Quite
apart from anything else, only a tiny proportion of them could
possibly have committed murder - there just weren't the bodies
to implicate 20,000+ people.
In fact, that has to be a bit of a problem for you. If the B-specials
were a 'depraved protestant murder gang', then the numbers
certainly say that the IRA were even more definitely a 'depraved
Catholic murder gang', since even their fans say they did 130
purely sectarian murders, and the much more numerous B-specials
did far fewer than that.
The Catholic community certainly have a number of legitimate
greivances against many of the members of the B-specials, but
nowhere near a majority, who were simply doing an honest job
for their country. Of course, that in itself is enough to earn them
the hatred of the republican movement, but you can't expect the
rest of us to buy into that, can you?
>They are and were the scum of the earth. Are you defending them? Would
>that not be an outrageous position to take if you are?
I disagree with your position entirely.
>> >Their firearms issue (the records thereof) were
>> >destroyed by the Junta in it's last days. They are still given public
>> >buildings to train in with their guns.
>> You mean that a legal gun club, holding legal weapons, is allowed
>> to rent a basement in a council leisure centre one day a week (or
>> is it per month?). Who is this meant to shock?
>Colonel Michael Dewar makes no meaniful distinction to the re-organised
>B-Specials
Is your term "re-organised B-specials" a republican code word
for an organisation more usually known by a different name?
What did Micky Dewar actually say?
>and the Orange Volunteers or indeed the UVF or UPV in his
>book "The British Army in Northern Ireland". I think Gavin has a copy
>and might confirm that the British security forces regard any
>militaristic armed protestant political grouping as a terror cadre
>albeit not one necessarilly or continuously hostile to the state.
An analysis that went out of date - insofar as it was ever accurate
or relevant - in 1970.
>The gun club in question is unquestionably the "B-Specials" themselves.
>They are not an opera society.
So far as I know they have never claimed to be anything other than
B-specials. The B-specials were disbanded, not banned.
>Might I suggest that David Trimble
>regards the IRA as a legal gun club thus alleviating his own concerns?
Hey, no problem. Just hand over the guns with a 'ballistic history'
(that's your term for "used in a terrorist act" isn't it?), return the
stolen guns, and guns with automatic action or large calibre, and
register the others. Then once something is done about the bomb
kits, mortars and rockets, I'm sure Trimble will be much happier. And
that'll represent a lot of progress towards equality too.
>Legal guns equate with "protestant" guns here in the north as the
>supremacist nature of this state frowns on the disloyal catholic class
>having access to weapons. It makes them to difficult to persecute.
Shhh. You'll attract the gun nuts. What next - "An armed society
is a polite society"? There's plenty of Catholic farmers with shotguns
and maybe hunting rifles (you did complain about shotguns recently?
- or was that a letter I saw in the Irish News?). So far as I know
there isn't evidence for discrimination in the issuing of gun
licenses here. But it's easy to test. Get a few people together
without criminal records and apply to form a properly regulated
gun club. Maybe you could get some CESA people involved?
>> >Puts decommissioning in a
>> >different perspective doesn't it?
>> Doesn't the GFA distinguish between legally and illegally held
>> weapons already? Do you want to go for a rewrite?
>Does it matter? The B-Specials are a deranged political and a openly
>paramilitary organisation and they voted resoundingly against the GFA at
>their last annual conference in Newcastle.
They evidently saw the looming problem of decomissioning, and
resented prisoner releases. (Have you got the text of the resolution,
by the way?) I was a bit more optimistic back then.
> They were the psychopathic
>stormtroopers of the protestant state with a reputation for outrage and
>bestial atrocity. They made the Black and Tans look like social workers.
And so might the Old boys of a number of schools. 20,000 armed part
timers are bound to cause quite a lot of offense in 50 years. Your
problem though is the complete absence of the mass graves your
rhetoric demands.
>Not really that "mild" one would have thought a civilised perspective at
>the notion of B-Specials running around with guns and being allowed
>official local government premises would have induced the mildly right
>thinking to express outrage. It is the old prods with guns good and
>taigs with guns bad scenario. It is the root mentality of Ulster
>protestantism.
Well be specific then. What have you got against any of the members
of the club. Does it include even one killer? Who have you got any
evidence against (evidence is a big thing, for you, isn't it?). Are
there any members in particular you regard as a danger to anyone.
Have any of the guns in the club got a 'ballistic history'?
>One of the basic demands of the civil rights movement in the late 60s
>was the disbandment of the B-Specials because they were a protestant
>murder gang responsible for the most sickening atrocities imaginable. I
>think the Oxford History of Ireland regards them as being utterly
>violent and beyond control.
Where are the mass graves? Remember, 20,000 members,
50 years - 1 million man years. Not so many bodies in that
context. The IRA have sustained a higher hit rate in their
own community since the ceasefire, isn't that so?
>Unionists started this recent war, unionists and their disgusting and
>sectarian politics and institutions brought all this down on our heads,
>something admitted frankly on the NG by Ger Cunningham who is not a
>provo groupie. If unionism has a future it needs to put the supremacist
>anti catholic armed gangs and secret armies behind it. Unionism created
>the PIRA not the catholics. Unionism can uncreate the PIRA by becoming
>civilised.
So far as I know, you have nothing against any member of
the club apart from your own tribalism. They are each
innocent until proven guilty. (100% proof is demanded by
JC for instance - I'll accept "beyond reasonable doubt", so
do you want to make a case?)
David
Born to be mild.
gregory
> On Sun, 7 Mar 1999 12:24:01 +0000, gre...@justinian.idps.co.uk
> (gregory) wrote:
>
> >David Halliwell <d.r.ha...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
> >> (gregory) wrote:
>
> >> ><kevin...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> I stand corrected. You're right, of course, and the B Specials as well.
>
> >> >The latter still recruit and exist and have officially sponsored
> >> >shooting ranges.
>
> >> "Sponsored"? Do you mean paid, or endorsed?
>
> >Subsidised and tolerated and ignored.
>
> Tell us about the subsidy. So far as I know the B-specials
> have been able to rent a basement in a council building. Is
> that any more of a subsidy than letting the felons' club book
> a spot in the Falls Road leisure centre for a game of five a
> side. Or do you mean something a bit more subsidised than
> that?
We are talking about a place for the B-Specials to play and train with
their guns. They were not banned as you say. A lot of people wrongly
think they were. Their weapons issue records were destroyed by the
Protestant Junta in it's last days.
>
> >The B-Specials were a depraved
> >protestant murder gang who preyed on defensless catholics and who have
> >perpetrated very many sickening atrocities in their sorrowful history.
>
> The B-specials were kept at a strength of 20,000 part timers
> for 50 years. You could draw a line round any spot of land
> containing 20,000 men and say that the locals have
> perpetrated very many sickening atrocities in that time.
Catholics never really indulged in the sickening shit protestants
indulged in as policy. Castration, mutilation of pregnant women and the
entire gamut of medieval barbarity that was first nature to agitated
prods including their police. Catholics were attacked when the Union was
in no danger in the 20s and 35 and 69.
>
> I do not concede that they were a depraved murder gang. Quite
> apart from anything else, only a tiny proportion of them could
> possibly have committed murder - there just weren't the bodies
> to implicate 20,000+ people.
Well they machined gunned hospitals, looted every bar that was going and
excelled at mutilation killings even removing entire brains from
catholic skulls as a hideous tableau and warning to other catholics and
of course child killing.
About 4,500 to 5,000 catholics were shot or bombed or burnt in the 20s a
great many killed and the catholics were peaceful when attacked. At
least 30,000 of them were being fed by the Americans and many of these
were living on open ground. The Protestants were being regularly
compared to the Turks.
>
> In fact, that has to be a bit of a problem for you. If the B-specials
> were a 'depraved protestant murder gang', then the numbers
> certainly say that the IRA were even more definitely a 'depraved
> Catholic murder gang', since even their fans say they did 130
> purely sectarian murders, and the much more numerous B-specials
> did far fewer than that.
Thousands of innocent catholics were wounded or injured by B-Special
lead actions. If they will murder war heroes and machine gun hospitals
and convents then they are not nice guys in my book. Catholics were
rounded up for slave labour even in East Belfast. The B-Specials looted
bars with a ferocity the Black and Tans might never hope to get away
with.
>
> The Catholic community certainly have a number of legitimate
> greivances against many of the members of the B-specials, but
> nowhere near a majority, who were simply doing an honest job
> for their country. Of course, that in itself is enough to earn them
> the hatred of the republican movement, but you can't expect the
> rest of us to buy into that, can you?
>
> >They are and were the scum of the earth. Are you defending them? Would
> >that not be an outrageous position to take if you are?
>
> I disagree with your position entirely.
Most unionists do they are very fond of praising mono religioned murder
gangs. They mutilated and machined gunned hospitals and convents and did
all the evil shit the Germans were accused of in the first world war but
the B-Specials really did do it. Battering babies against walls and
murdering children in front of their mothers. You name it and the
B-Specials were prepared to do it.
Usually drunk of course as was their habit. The first prod specials were
disbanded by the prods themselves for looting prod property after they'd
finished looting the catholic stuff. Those very first specials were
formed SOLELY for the *official* ethnic cleansing of catholics by the
UUP. The specials formed months later were not much different to the
first.
>
> >> >Their firearms issue (the records thereof) were
> >> >destroyed by the Junta in it's last days. They are still given public
> >> >buildings to train in with their guns.
>
> >> You mean that a legal gun club, holding legal weapons, is allowed
> >> to rent a basement in a council leisure centre one day a week (or
> >> is it per month?). Who is this meant to shock?
>
> >Colonel Michael Dewar makes no meaniful distinction to the re-organised
> >B-Specials
>
> Is your term "re-organised B-specials" a republican code word
> for an organisation more usually known by a different name?
> What did Micky Dewar actually say?
He compares them to the UVF, UDA and Red Hand Commando he pointedly
makes no distinction whatsoever. This on page 24 of the 1997 edition of
"The British Army in Northern Ireland" published by Arms and Armour.
ISBN1-85409-453-X. He regards them as a loyalist paramilitary no
different to the others he mentions. He makes that perfectly clear.
Gavin has a copy and will confirm that.
--
Gregory
Q-ball
Harry Merrick wrote in message <36E2A4AB...@agencies.dnet.co.uk>...
>Peter Bowman wrote:
>
>> Sinn Fein/IRA still have their weapoins and they are allowed seats in the
>> assembly.
>>
>
the
>Executive of that Assembly, until such times as their PIRA colleagues
decide
>to at least give up *some* of their huge arsenal of weaponry!
>
>This was most clearly explained by Trimble on the TV this morning, where he
>gave chapter and verse of the GFA to explain it.
>
>The same deal applies to the various Loyalist Paramilitaries and their
>Political offshoots too, of course!
>--
>Harry.
>---
>
>"Those Who Dwell In The Past Have No Life In The Future."
> (Anon)
>---
>
>ICQ# 2546277
>
>
Fantastic! you mean the RUC and the RIR have to give up their weapons too?
Dave Moore
There be no comparision at all between a bunch of terrorists and the
legitimate forces of law and order. Would you ask the Garda to give up it's
weapons?
Regards,
Dave
The Legions of the Black Moon - the unofficial Bal-Sagoth homepage
http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Alley/5885/index.html
==================================================================
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law - Aleister Crowley
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Tim Ireland
Harry Merrick <merr...@agencies.dnet.co.uk> wrote in article
<36E39748...@agencies.dnet.co.uk>...
> Danielle Ni Dhighe wrote:
>
> > "Peter Bowman" <Bung...@Hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >IRA and Sinn Fein are like black and white onyl the IRA are very fond
of the
> > >black.
> >
> > They're part of the same movement and share the same goals, but it is
still
> > dishonest to say that SF and the IRA are one and the same.
> >
> > **
>
> What? Even though Gerry Adams and McGuinness are both on the PIRA Army
Council?
> (Or certainly were at one time).
>
> Come On!
>
> Also, the British Army are not "part" of the British government at all!
Where on
> earth do you get that idea from? The BA is part of the United Kingdom
defence
> forces, it is directed by whatever Government happens to be in power, it
is
> certainly not part of that Government. The Irish Army is part of the
State of the
> Republic of Ireland, it too is not "part" of whatever Government is in
power in
> Dail Eeriann. Your terminology is flawed.
> --
> Harry.
> ---
>
> "Those Who Dwell In The Past Have No Life In The Future."
> (Anon)
> ---
>
> ICQ# 2546277
No it doesn't take a seat in the Common's but it is controlled by HMG, it
also has it own Representative in Government who of cause is the Defence
Minister, who on behalf the of the Government liason with the Different
branches of the British defence forces, and then reports to Parliament and
the British People on the state of the Defence forces and what they are up
to, the Government of the day sets the agenda for the British armforces.
As the Government controlls the Armforces, and the Armforces cannot act
without prior Government consent, e.g The British armforces cannot declare
war, only the British Government can, so there for they are instrument and
intrical part of the British Government.
Tim
Tim Ireland
Brendan Heading <b.he...@dnet.co.uk> wrote in article
<FPkaHSA7...@dnet.co.uk>...
> In article <7bv8om$bgb$1...@news.ncal.verio.com>, Jerry Desmond
> <j...@ccnet.com> writes
>
> > The various elements of the Republican movement are like
> >the various churches encompassed under "Christianity".
> >Presbyterians, Church of Ireland, Methodists all have a lot of
> >common values, goals, beliefs and the like, but no one church
> >controls the others.
>
> I don't know a lot about the intricate details of Protestant
> denominations but I don't think a lot of practicing Protestants round
> here would be delighted to hear you suggest they all have the same
> "goals, beliefs and the like".
> --
> Brendan Heading, Belfast, Northern Ireland
> ICQ # 24010538
>
> Experience is the salt of wisdom.
]
But they do have the same Goal, that is salvation and life eternity.
Tim
Q-ball
Dave Moore wrote in message <7c5t5g$kcs$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...<Snipped>
>> Fantastic! you mean the RUC and the RIR have to give up their weapons
too?
>>
>>
>
>There be no comparision at all between a bunch of terrorists and the
>legitimate forces of law and order. Would you ask the Garda to give up it's
>weapons?
>
>Regards,
>Dave
>
>The Legions of the Black Moon - the unofficial Bal-Sagoth homepage
> http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Alley/5885/index.html
>==================================================================
>Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law - Aleister Crowley
>
>-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
>http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
I,m afraid there is depending on your experience; and yes I would: no police
force should be armed in a true democracy.
Gearóid Mac Cuinneagáin
>There be no comparision at all between a bunch of terrorists and the
>legitimate forces of law and order. Would you ask the Garda to give up it's
>weapons?
The Gardaí aren't armed.
SamsonX
Gearóid Mac Cuinneagáin wrote in message <36ea975b...@news.newsguy.com>...
>Dave Moore wrote:
>
>>There be no comparision at all between a bunch of terrorists and the
>>legitimate forces of law and order. Would you ask the Garda to give up it's
>>weapons?
>
>The Gardaí aren't armed.
>
Ever ?
SamsonX
gregory
> Fantastic! you mean the RUC and the RIR have to give up their weapons too?
Prods and guns are like tea and buns. They just love them.
--
Gregory
Gearóid Mac Cuinneagáin
Not the uniforms. Detective & Special Branch are.
chuckie65.freeserve.co.uk
> Dave Moore wrote:
>
> >There be no comparision at all between a bunch of terrorists and the
> >legitimate forces of law and order. Would you ask the Garda to give up it's
> >weapons?
>
> The Gardaí aren't armed.
The new Ulster police will be civilian as well according to the Irish Premier.
Gavin Bailey
wrote:
>>Ever ?
>
>Not the uniforms. Detective & Special Branch are.
Saw a uniform with an Uzi once.
Gavin Bailey
--
A historian - Somebody who thinks Subbuteo was a Mongol Khan
Gavin Bailey
(gregory) wrote:
>> Is your term "re-organised B-specials" a republican code word
>> for an organisation more usually known by a different name?
>> What did Micky Dewar actually say?
>
>He compares them to the UVF, UDA and Red Hand Commando he pointedly
>makes no distinction whatsoever. This on page 24 of the 1997 edition of
>"The British Army in Northern Ireland" published by Arms and Armour.
>ISBN1-85409-453-X. He regards them as a loyalist paramilitary no
>different to the others he mentions. He makes that perfectly clear.
>Gavin has a copy and will confirm that.
Page 24 to 27 deals with the reformation of the UVF under Spence and
his bloodthirsty cohorts (beginning of Chapter 2 "The Civil Rights
Movement"). He does identify a "B Specials Association" with other
loyalist paramilitary groups on page 24.
The following quotes are the only mentions Dewar gives to the B
Specials themselves -
Pages 20-21
"Even by 1961 only 12% of the RUC was Catholic and the notorious B
Specials were exclusively Protestant. "
"The B Specials, on the other hand, were the only category of the
original A, B and C Categories Ulster Special Constabulary whose role
was to augment the full-time police force during periods of tension.
Wheras Special Constabulary on the mainland were usually recruited to
help the full-time police force in functions such as traffic control,
the Specials in Ulster were specifically intended to be for the
maintainance of law and order when extra numbers were required. They
were permitted to keep firearms at home for this purpose. Over the
years they acquired a reputation for brutality and sectarianism."
Pages 97-99
"In 1920 Lloyd George approved the reform of the rump of the UVF as
the Ulster Special Constabulary, categorised into the A, B and C
Specials. The Specials were permitted to carry arms even when off
duty and in plain clothes, a privilege which lasted until the
dissolution of the B Specials in 1969 and the formation of the UDR."
I came across Spender's original notice of the formation of the USC
the other day. He was getting tired of the British Army trying to
disarm his UVF cohorts at the time.
Giraldus Conynghame
>On Wed, 10 Mar 1999 17:28:27 GMT, Ger@r.d (Gearóid Mac Cuinneagáin)
>wrote:
>
>>>Ever ?
>>
>>Not the uniforms. Detective & Special Branch are.
>
>Saw a uniform with an Uzi once.
Walking a beat, or for a particular Op?
--
Some Irish Guy
Giraldus Conynghame
>the Irish Premier
Ah, memories of the early 80s & georgian teapots...
Gregory
> He compares them to the UVF, UDA and Red Hand Commando he pointedly
> >makes no distinction whatsoever. This on page 24 of the 1997 edition of
> >"The British Army in Northern Ireland" published by Arms and Armour.
> >ISBN1-85409-453-X. He regards them as a loyalist paramilitary no
> >different to the others he mentions. He makes that perfectly clear.
> >Gavin has a copy and will confirm that.
>
> Page 24 to 27 deals with the reformation of the UVF under Spence and
> his bloodthirsty cohorts (beginning of Chapter 2 "The Civil Rights
> Movement"). He does identify a "B Specials Association" with other
> loyalist paramilitary groups on page 24.
They voted against the GFA at their last annual conference. They run gun
clubs and still practice and recruit quite legally.
--
Gregory
Gregory
> I came across Spender's original notice of the formation of the USC
> the other day. He was getting tired of the British Army trying to
> disarm his UVF cohorts at the time.
>
> Gavin Bailey
> --
I tracked their old guns down. They ended up in East Africa. They never
left Ulster during WWI.
--
Gregory
Gregory
> the Specials in Ulster were specifically intended to be for the
> maintainance of law and order when extra numbers were required. They
> were permitted to keep firearms at home for this purpose. Over the
> years they acquired a reputation for brutality and sectarianism."
Putting it mildly.
--
Gregory
chuckie65.freeserve.co.uk
On Wed, 10 Mar 1999 13:47:31 +0000, Dave Moore wrote
(in message <7c5t5g$kcs$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>):
>>> Peter Bowman wrote:
>>>
>>>> Sinn Fein/IRA still have their weapoins and they are allowed seats in
>>>> the assembly.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Certainly, they are indeed allowed their seats in the Assembly, but NOT
>>> on
>> the
>>> Executive of that Assembly, until such times as their PIRA colleagues
>> decide
>>> to at least give up *some* of their huge arsenal of weaponry!
>>>
>>> This was most clearly explained by Trimble on the TV this morning, where
>>> he gave chapter and verse of the GFA to explain it.
>>>
>>> The same deal applies to the various Loyalist Paramilitaries and their
>>> "Those Who Dwell In The Past Have No Life In The Future." (Anon) ---
>>>
>>> ICQ# 2546277
>>>
>>>
>>
>> too?
>>
>>
>
> legitimate forces of law and order. Would you ask the Garda to give up it's
> weapons?
>
You can't expect kaffliks to do without the IRA if prods have B-Specials and
UDR or RIR or RUC or whatever. Prods need to realise that them having guns is
just as much a "no no" as kaffliks having guns. These things require absolute
parity or else one side ends up the loser. Kaffliks are not having any of that
any more. They don't feel like losers.
Gregory
Gregorian teapots, that was me Ger.
--
Gregory
Harry Merrick
> Harry Merrick wrote in message <36E2A4AB...@agencies.dnet.co.uk>...
> >Peter Bowman wrote:
> >
> >> Sinn Fein/IRA still have their weapoins and they are allowed seats in the
> >> assembly.
> >>
> >
> >Certainly, they are indeed allowed their seats in the Assembly, but NOT on
> the
> >Executive of that Assembly, until such times as their PIRA colleagues
> decide
> >to at least give up *some* of their huge arsenal of weaponry!
> >
> >This was most clearly explained by Trimble on the TV this morning, where he
> >gave chapter and verse of the GFA to explain it.
> >
> >The same deal applies to the various Loyalist Paramilitaries and their
> >Political offshoots too, of course!
> >--
> >Harry.
> >---
> >
> >"Those Who Dwell In The Past Have No Life In The Future."
> > (Anon)
> >---
> >
> >ICQ# 2546277
> >
> >
>
> Fantastic! you mean the RUC and the RIR have to give up their weapons too?
DUHHH!!! - As if you didn't already know, the RUC are a legitimate Crown Force
and are legally entitled to carry arms, though they don't want them in fact.
They have to carry them, however, as self defence against your Republican/Sinn
Féin/PIRA murderous thugs who keep shooting at them!
As for the RIR? - Do you mean the British Army? - As far as I know, they too are
a section of the forces of the Crown, and therefor are allowed to carry arms,
regardless of any ceasefire or anything else. An army without arms would be a
great help defending the country!
Harry Merrick
> Q-ball <q...@trust.none.com> wrote:
>
> > Fantastic! you mean the RUC and the RIR have to give up their weapons too?
>
> Prods and guns are like tea and buns. They just love them.
>
> --
> Gregory
MMmm! So, it would appear, do certain Catholics, namely, Republicans!
Harry Merrick
> Harry Merrick <merr...@agencies.dnet.co.uk> wrote in article
> <36E39748...@agencies.dnet.co.uk>...
> > Danielle Ni Dhighe wrote:
> >
> > > "Peter Bowman" <Bung...@Hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> >
.................."SNIP"...........
> No it doesn't take a seat in the Common's but it is controlled by HMG, it
> also has it own Representative in Government who of cause is the Defence
> Minister,
....Who gives directions to the War Office, who instructs the Army, Navy, or
Air force, to act in what ever way the Government of the day directs. I never
said that that was not the case. But the Forces of *any* country, especially a
democratic country, are *not* part of the Government!! They are a tool at
best, and are fully responsible for the protection of that countries citizens,
directed by Parliament.
> who on behalf the of the Government liason with the Different
> branches of the British defence forces, and then reports to Parliament and
> the British People on the state of the Defence forces and what they are up
> to, the Government of the day sets the agenda for the British armforces.
> As the Government controlls the Armforces, and the Armforces cannot act
> without prior Government consent, e.g The British armforces cannot declare
> war, only the British Government can, so there for they are instrument and
> intrical part of the British Government.
A tool! I agree! But still *not* a part of the Government!
>
> Tim
All of which argument only supports what I have always said, Nationalists and
Republicans should NOT blame the RUC and the British Army for the
carryings-ons within Northern Ireland, or even Ireland as a whole! They should
only blame those who gave the orders, and those orders all came from the
British Government of the day!
Harry Merrick
> Dave Moore wrote in message <7c5t5g$kcs$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
> >In article <36e6...@royan.d-n-a.net>,
> > "Q-ball" <q...@trust.none.com> wrote:
> >>
> <Snipped>
>
> >> Fantastic! you mean the RUC and the RIR have to give up their weapons
> too?
> >>
> >>
> >
> >There be no comparision at all between a bunch of terrorists and the
> >legitimate forces of law and order. Would you ask the Garda to give up it's
> >weapons?
> >
> >Regards,
> >Dave
> >
> >The Legions of the Black Moon - the unofficial Bal-Sagoth homepage
> > http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Alley/5885/index.html
> >==================================================================
> >Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law - Aleister Crowley
> >
> >-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> >http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
>
> I,m afraid there is depending on your experience; and yes I would: no police
> force should be armed in a true democracy.
Oh I quite agree! But there should be no armed terrorists in a true democracy
either! Chicken or egg?
Harry Merrick
> Dave Moore wrote:
>
> >There be no comparision at all between a bunch of terrorists and the
> >legitimate forces of law and order. Would you ask the Garda to give up it's
> >weapons?
>
> The Gardaí aren't armed.
>
> --
> An Cuinneagánach
> abardubh at wwa dot com
> Read the Damn FAQ at http://www.muc.de/~cpm/irish-faq
Oh no? I suggest that you look into the Garda Special Security Task Force,
stationed at Dublin Castle, before being so definite if I was you!
Harry Merrick
> On Wed, 10 Mar 1999 13:47:31 +0000, Dave Moore wrote
> (in message <7c5t5g$kcs$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>):
> >
> > In article <36e6...@royan.d-n-a.net>, "Q-ball" <q...@trust.none.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Harry Merrick wrote in message <36E2A4AB...@agencies.dnet.co.uk>...
> >>> Peter Bowman wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Sinn Fein/IRA still have their weapoins and they are allowed seats in
> >>>> the assembly.
> >>>>
> >
..............."SNIP"...................
>
> >>
> >> Fantastic! you mean the RUC and the RIR have to give up their weapons
> >> too?
> >>
> >>
> >
> > There be no comparision at all between a bunch of terrorists and the
> > legitimate forces of law and order. Would you ask the Garda to give up it's
> > weapons?
> >
> > Regards, Dave
>
> You can't expect kaffliks to do without the IRA
The IRA is an illegal force of terrorists, with no legal rights to arms. Similarly,
the UVF, RHU, LVF, etc., on the Loyalist side. The RUC and the British Army, being
perfectly legitimate forces of the Crown, are naturally, legally allowed to have
arms. When the GFA is allowed to come into it's own and things settle down, and
provided that decommissioning becomes a fact, *then*, and only then, the RUC will
be able to safely disarm, and the British Army will go home, thank goodness!
> if prods have B-Specials and
The B- Specials have been demolished many years ago, and don't enter the picture at
all now.
>
> UDR or RIR or RUC or whatever. Prods need to realise that them having guns is
> just as much a "no no" as kaffliks having guns.
They already do, in fact. All the Prod terror groups have said that once the PIRA
and all the small Republican breakaways start to decommission, they will do so too.
And they will too! Nobody wants all this carry on who has a grain of sense at all!
> These things require absolute
> parity or else one side ends up the loser. Kaffliks are not having any of that
> any more. They don't feel like losers.
I think that you have a rather strange idea as to what is happening here. Only a
very small percentage of either community carries arms, the vast majority on all
sides want a peaceful settlement. There will be no winners and no losers. The GFA
is the skeleton upon which we all have to build.
Tim Ireland
Dave Moore <mango...@my-dejanews.com> wrote in article
<7c5t5g$kcs$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
> In article <36e6...@royan.d-n-a.net>,
> "Q-ball" <q...@trust.none.com> wrote:
> >
> > Harry Merrick wrote in message
<36E2A4AB...@agencies.dnet.co.uk>...
> > >Peter Bowman wrote:
> > >
> > >> Sinn Fein/IRA still have their weapoins and they are allowed seats
in the
> > >> assembly.
> > >>
> > >
> > >Certainly, they are indeed allowed their seats in the Assembly, but
NOT on
> > the
> > >Executive of that Assembly, until such times as their PIRA colleagues
> > decide
> > >to at least give up *some* of their huge arsenal of weaponry!
> > >
> > >This was most clearly explained by Trimble on the TV this morning,
where he
> > >gave chapter and verse of the GFA to explain it.
> > >
> > >The same deal applies to the various Loyalist Paramilitaries and their
> > >Political offshoots too, of course!
> > >--
> > >Harry.
> > >---
> > >
> > >"Those Who Dwell In The Past Have No Life In The Future."
> > > (Anon)
> > >---
> > >
> > >ICQ# 2546277
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Fantastic! you mean the RUC and the RIR have to give up their weapons
too?
> >
> >
>
> There be no comparision at all between a bunch of terrorists and the
> legitimate forces of law and order. Would you ask the Garda to give up
it's
> weapons?
>
> Regards,
> Dave
Yes even the Special branch and detective divisions.
If they where committing murders like the RUC/UDR and the British army and
contributing to the CONTINUANCE of the war.
TIM
Harry Merrick
>
..............."SNIP"..................
>
> > There be no comparision at all between a bunch of terrorists and the
> > legitimate forces of law and order. Would you ask the Garda to give up
> it's
> > weapons?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Dave
>
> Yes even the Special branch and detective divisions.
>
> If they where committing murders like the RUC/UDR and the British army and
> contributing to the CONTINUANCE of the war.
> TIM
Well, as it happens, both the Garda Special branch and detective divisions have
in fact been guilty of all those errors of judgment in the past. They are still
there!
Having said that, regardless of what the RUC/UDR/BA may or may not have done in
the past, they are definitely NOT doing it in the present. Also, they would not
ever have been put into situations were they *would* have done those thing were
it not for the activities of Republicanism and the IRA/PIRA over the years. You
forget, the vast majority of citizens within Northern Ireland are *innocent*
civilians, both Catholic and Protestant. They want *nothing* to do with violent
protest of any kind and never have done. These people *HAVE* to be protected
from the Mad Dogs of extremism on all sides, and perfectly rightly expect and
deserve that protection. That is the *only* reason that the BA has a presence
here, and the *only* reason that the RUC is armed and is such a large force.
The Republican Movement is almost entirely to blame for all the wrongs that
have occurred over many years. Thanks to them and their sectarianism, the
Orange Order has now descended to an equal low level of moral fortitude, and is
equally as evil in every way. Wrong + wrong can *never* = right, no matter
what!
Both organisations should be rooted out, disbanded, and cast into the dustbin
of mutually learnt and discarded experiences!
Q-ball
Harry Merrick wrote in message <36E9971F...@agencies.dnet.co.uk>...
>Q-ball wrote:
>
>> Dave Moore wrote in message <7c5t5g$kcs$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...>> <Snipped>
>>
>> >> Fantastic! you mean the RUC and the RIR have to give up their weapons
>> too?
>> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >legitimate forces of law and order. Would you ask the Garda to give up
it's
>> >weapons?
>> >
>> >Regards,
>> >Dave
>> >
>> > http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Alley/5885/index.html
>> >==================================================================
>> >Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law - Aleister Crowley
>> >
>> >-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
>> >http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
>>
>> I,m afraid there is depending on your experience; and yes I would: no
police
>> force should be armed in a true democracy.
>
>Oh I quite agree! But there should be no armed terrorists in a true
democracy
>either! Chicken or egg?
>
>
>Harry.
>---
>
>"Those Who Dwell In The Past Have No Life In The Future."
> (Anon)
>---
>
>ICQ# 2546277
>
>
Pot or Kettle?
Regards
Q-ball
Tim Ireland
Harry Merrick <merr...@agencies.dnet.co.uk> wrote in article
<36EBABE6...@agencies.dnet.co.uk>...
> Tim Ireland wrote:
>
> >
>
> ..............."SNIP"..................
>
> >
> > > There be no comparision at all between a bunch of terrorists and the
> > > legitimate forces of law and order. Would you ask the Garda to give
up
> > it's
> > > weapons?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Dave
> >
> > Yes even the Special branch and detective divisions.
> >
> > If they where committing murders like the RUC/UDR and the British army
and
> > contributing to the CONTINUANCE of the war.
> > TIM
>
> Well, as it happens, both the Garda Special branch and detective
divisions have
> in fact been guilty of all those errors of judgment in the past. They are
still
> there!
I would hardly call the MURDERS the Brit army and the RUC/UDR have
committed has errors of judgements.
>
> Having said that, regardless of what the RUC/UDR/BA may or may not have
done in
> the past, they are definitely NOT doing it in the present. Also, they
would not
> ever have been put into situations were they *would* have done those
thing were
> it not for the activities of Republicanism and the IRA/PIRA over the
years.
Which where in retaliation to discrimination and intimidation conducted by
the RUC/UDR/BA.
>You
> forget, the vast majority of citizens within Northern Ireland are
*innocent*
> civilians, both Catholic and Protestant. They want *nothing* to do with
violent
> protest of any kind and never have done.
I totally agree with you here.
These people *HAVE* to be protected
> from the Mad Dogs of extremism on all sides, and perfectly rightly expect
and
> deserve that protection.
I agree with you here, but that protection must be equal and with out
political biase.
>That is the *only* reason that the BA has a presence
> here, and the *only* reason that the RUC is armed and is such a large
force.
The Brit army has no right to be there, and the RUC is armed in a large
force simply because it is the result of there ongoing persecution of the
Nationalist communty.
> The Republican Movement is almost entirely to blame for all the wrongs
that
> have occurred over many years. Thanks to them and their sectarianism, the
> Orange Order has now descended to an equal low level of moral fortitude,
and is
> equally as evil in every way. Wrong + wrong can *never* = right, no
matter
> what!
You have to be joking!
>
> Both organisations should be rooted out, disbanded, and cast into the
dustbin
> of mutually learnt and discarded experiences!
Harry I was starting to think you where reasonable, but I was wrong, your
statement that the Republicans is almost entirely to blame for the wrongs
including the sectarianism, is a load of crap.
>
> --
> Harry.
What Political grouping has systematicly murdered there victims based
solely on there religious beliefs?.
Tim
Batterburger Liberation Front
>Both organisations should be rooted out, disbanded, and cast into the
>dustbin of mutually learnt and discarded experiences!
> Harry.
Well Harry what can I say to a statement like that!
