Too early David…they should be on board by about midday when the rest of us have a days work done..

There will always be loyalist terrorists in existence as long as militant republicanism continues to grip this country. Fair enough you claim PIRA are gone but they no longer carry the torch of republicanism do they, theres other groups now carrying the conflict on. Its also only a matter of time before the PUL community starts to suffer again because these groups have tried and so far failed to blow up security force members within the PUL community but on 2 occassions the devices were found and in one miraculous case the bomb actually fell of the car and onto the road. So theres a very real threat still there, the only thing contemporary republicans are lacking is a bit of competence but that ‘unfortunately’ will come in time. We all want peace and we all want to move on but can you honestly say your own side are finished? Is a normal society one where bombs are placed under cars or in hotel lobbies?

Of course Jamesy, it’s entirely Republicanism’s fault that the UDA still exists. The troubles were caused by both militant Republicanism and Unionism but your history of posts seems to put all the blame on Republicanism and paints Unionism as the innocent victim.

It’s about time both sides took responsibility.

Well in the case of the UDA it was republicanisms fault, they were set up in 1972 against a string of IRA attacks on the PUL community mostly around the Shankill area of Belfast. They wouldnt have existed if the IRA hadnt existed.

Why should we take the same responsibility as republicans, the majority of NI never wanted a united Ireland, the whole conflict centered around the undemocratic violence being waged by the IRA, it was only them that could make the conflict cease.

So far the IRA have not left the stage, it wont happen either anytime soon.

Jamesy if as you say there is a real threat to the PUL community from dissident republicans (and I don’t disagree with that analysis) then it is up to the security forces to protect them and not a terrorist organization than sells drugs to their children and intimidates and extorts from their community. There is no justification for the existence of the UDA, UVF, UFF etc to “protect” the PUL community. That is the job of the PSNI and the PSNI alone. Dissidents will continue to pose a threat however it does not justify the continued and tolerated existence of a criminal terrorist organization that can hold the an entire city or county(s) to ransom.

Democratic Republicans have done their part so why can’t Loyalists do the same? After all they have the backing of the British Government and it’s entire security apparatus so why do they need their own terrorist organization as well?

Jamesy of the 259 killings attributed to the UDA, 11 were IRA Volunteers and the rest were mainly innocent civilians (mainly catholic) and 3 members of the security forces. Does that sound like a “Defence” association to you?

Jamesy, it’s arguably true that the UDA would not have existed were it not for the Provos. But the Provos would not have existed were it not for the UVF’s campaign of sectarian violence, which began in 1966 (3 years before the Provos came into existence). Funny how you left that bit out of your little history lesson.

The IRA have existed from the 1920′s, the modern day UVF didnt exist until the mid 60′s.

Brian dont be quoting figures to me there as if im a UDA supporter or something, im just telling you why these things exist. There were no good paramilitary groups here on any side, they all murdered innocent people and devastated many more lives. I could quote the figures of the many thousand innocent people murdered and maimed by republicans, it dwarfs anything carried out by loyalists by the way. We only tend to list the dead as victims but you think about each and every bomb, if there were a few killed there were usually dozens more injured, in some cases there were hundreds injured. You keep saying that republicans have ceased when quite clearly they have not, its like trying to say today isnt Monday or the sky isnt blue, why are you blatantly denying something that is happening in front of us? At least I can admit that loyalist groups still exist, I gave you my reasons why they are hesitating to go away, can you not tell me why republicans wont go away?

Red thumbing my post about how long the IRA have existed in comparison to the UVF, its a clear sign that some people on this site dont like hearing the truth. Instead of red thumbing me I challenge any of you to prove me wrong.

Jamesy, I don’t know what sort of history books you’ve been reading but the Ulster Volunteers were founded in 1912 and became the Ulster Volunteer Force in 1913 which was subsequently absorbed into the B-Specials.

Anyway, history and who started it first arguments aside, there still is the question as to why Loyalists have the need for their own personal terrorist army when Republicans have signed up to democracy and more importantly policing? Is it because the “PSNIRA” (as it has become known by Loyalists) is no longer perceived by unionists/Loyalists as their police force now that SF are on the policing board? Is it because they don’t/won’t allow for an equal society? Is it because they are no longer allowed to walk over everyone with impunity?

You claim that the PUL community will suffer as a result of attacks on the security forces yet fail to mention that the dissidents are not adverse to killing Catholic PSNI officers so it’s not like the IRA are deliberately targeting the PUL. This of course is at odds with the targeting of Nationalist residents along parade routes or even more bizarrely the targeting of Eastern Europeans, especially Polish because they are seen to be primarily catholic as well as Muslims.
http://www.irr.org.uk/news/an-assessment-of-racial-violence-in-northern-ireland/ This link will bring you to a report that shows that far from defending the PUL community’s from the IRA, Loyalist paramilitaries are in fact target anyone that they don’t like.

in fact this http://tiny.cc/3mk6gx article sums up the UDA…

“Assistant chief constable Will Kerr said the attacks had a “deeply unpleasant taste of a bit of ethnic cleansing”.

He made the comments during a meeting of the Policing Board on Thursday afternoon.

He said the attacks had also contributed to a 70% rise in hate crime in the city.

It comes after up to 100 masked and armed UDA men laid siege on a housing estate in Larne on Sunday.”

Looks like Bosnia has come to Belfast.

I don’t care either way but while the IRA existed in 1966 when the UVF started their campaign they were certainly not active, decimated by the failure of the border campaign of 56-62. When loyalist groups started openly attacking catholic communities in 1969 while RUC stood by they were swelled in numbers by disaffected young people who felt they had little choice, there are many reasons for the troubles and I am certainly not condoning the subsequent actions of the IRA throughout the troubles but at that stage in 1966 it is true to say that loyalist paramilitaries were more active than the IRA, the IRA were more busy embracing marxism.

Jamesy

The IRA were dead in the North until 1969, when the nationalists communities had enough of gerrymandering, the civil rights marches in Derry and Belfast were attacked by the RUC and the B-Specials. The in one night a unionist mob burned 100′s of nationalists out of their homes in Belfast. The people were defenseless. That is why the IRA came back from the dead.

If the Governments in the north allowed fair a free elections and not tried to fiddle the system and keep nationalists down and as second class citizens. Imagine in Derry 70% nationalists were able to elect 8 representatives and 30% unionists were able to elect 12 repersentitives. This happened all over the north. The whole mess would not have begun in the first place if the government treated everybody equally.

Unionists still today are not complaining their being discriminated against but in reality everybody is being treated equally.

Jamesy, on the one hand you are trying to lump all Republican groups in together, yet on the other you’re trying to insist that no-one gets mixed up between the UVF and UDA, or indeed between the “old” UVF and the “modern” UVF. You can’t have it both ways.

The fact is that there was no active republican violence for most of the 1960s. That ended when the Provos split from the Ofiicial IRA in 1969, in response to 3 years of sectarian loyalist violence, and widespread obstruction of the Civil Rights movement.

And as someone else has already pointed out, if we are to ignore the differences between the Provos and the Old IRA, then surely we also have to ignore the differences between the old UVF and its more recent incarnation. And whether you focus on the old or the new, the formation of the UVF preceded that of the IRA.

Well said Brian. James just doesn’t want to accept that his community were part of the problem. He thinks it’s a one way street. For an obviously educated guy I can’t understand his blinkered view of history in the north. I can only put it down to a blind hatred. As regards the UDA and UVF today, well they’re just operated like a mafia. A scourge on their own communities.

Brian I said the modern day UVF, they have no link to the UVF of 1912, all they share is a name. Are you seriously suggesting I didnt know about the UVF of 1912? I was talking of Gusty Spence and his ‘gang’ who may I add were arrested by the RUC and jailed in the 60′s, Spence never got out until the mid 80′s – you used the argument that there is no need for loyalist groups today as the PSNI can combat republican militants, why then is it being claimed that the provos were set up in responce to Gusty Spence and co when clearly the RUC were on them and took them out of circulation? They UVF were almost non existent at the inception of the provos, they had about 40 members in 1969/70, by the mid 70′s they had thousands and even today they number around the 2000 mark.

What exactly set the provos off? I always thought it was the British army being deployed to NI, are you lads now telling me they started because of 3 UVF killings that took place 3 years before the conflict actually began? Please dont insult mine or your own intelligence here people.

Im not trying to lump all republican groups together, im simply saying there has always been some sort of an IRA since the 1920′s, it still exists today. Its existence and its operations are to try and force a united Ireland, it’ll continue to strive for this regardless what other groups are active or even in existence.

Jamesy, if you thought the deployment of the British Army to NI is it what set the Provos off, you are wrong. What set the Provos off was in fact exactly the same thing that led to the deployment of the British Army to NI – widespread sectarian violence perpetrated over several years by loyalists. Your attempt to characterise this as only 3 killings 3 years previously really says a lot about you. Why is it you thought the British Army were deployed to NI, as a matter of interest?

If the civil unrest of 1969 started the PIRA then why did the conflict continue for 30 years and why did they attack those that were sent here to restore order? The PIRA wanted this conflict, they did everything they could to escalate and prolong it. The place could have been normal again in the early 70′s, sure the old unionist regime here lost its power and nobody was being discriminated against anymore, yet the conflict went on for another 25 years. Thats a clear sign that the provos cared nothing for equality or anything else only a 32 county republic. It was a squalid little campaign waged for selfish ends but you boys are now dressing it up as of it was some sort of noble crusade to save a downtrodden and beleaguered people, the reality is this, the PIRA went on to murder more in its own community than any loyalist group ever did. Some protectors alright.

Keep trying to rewrite history if you want or if it makes it sound better in your own heads. I’ll stick to the actual facts.

Red thumb away now to your hearts are content.

So why did they attack the army then when you have just implied the army were here to protect nationalists and restore order? They identified their enemy as the British army or anybody in a British uniform did they not? If they were set up in the wake of civil unrest in the late 1960′s why are they still murdering people today?

No Jamesy, you responded to my stating of a fact (that the Provos only came into existence in 1969), with the comment that “The IRA have existed from the 1920′s, the modern day UVF didn’t exist until the mid 60′s” (sic). As I said, you are trying to pretend there is no difference between the old IRA and the Provos, while trying to insist that there is a difference between the old UVF and the 1960s reincarnation. As I said, you can’t have it both ways.

Just to reiterate:
1912, original Ulster Volunteers established to oppose a democratic movement campaigning for Home Rule
1913, original IRA established

1966, “new” UVF established to oppose a democratic movement campaigning for Civil Rights
1969, provisional IRA established

See a pattern there?

No-one was being discriminated against in NI as of the early 1970′s?? Now I’ve heard it all!

A pattern? No a coincidence just. What about all the other IRA’s, what did the UVF do to set them up? Why did the border campaign start when no UVF even existed? Why did the current campaign start when there isnt even a soldier on patrol here anymore?

Who was being discriminated then after unionist rule ended?

Are you still trying to tell me the PIRA existed because of the treatment of nationalists and not because they wanted a united Ireland?

I would like you to answer this please because if you say yes im finished here altogether, not wasting my time on here anymore with brainwashed morons.

Coincidence. Right.

Btw I’m very definitely not a supporter of the IRA/Sinn Fein or any of the loony-fringe dissident Republican groups, so I’m not going to try to defend any or all of their actions. I was simply responding to your ludicrous claim that the troubles were all the IRA’s fault and that loyalists are blameless, by pointing out some fairly obvious, incontrovertible historical facts.

Jamesy you have said you are leaving several time in the past yet u still remain, my guess is that you enjoy trying to re-write history to much to leave us buddy

And im not a supporter of loyalist groups either. Im just trying to establish why the conflict started, its odd that the UVF actions in 1966 were to blame for a conflict that didnt start until 1969. The civil unrest of 1969 is what started it but sure everybody here knew that already didnt they. The army were sent to fix the problem then the newly formed IRA turned on them and the whole thing escalated. Who do you think im going to point the finger at? If the army had been left alone they could have fixed the problem, they estimated they would be here 6 months, the republicans made them stay 38 years. Rioting can always be contained, when it shifts to bombs and bullets its a lot harder to stop.

Seosamh do I know you? Never seen you on here before mate.

Dont think so jamesy

Jamesy, the thing is, you can’t just choose to say the conflict started at a time that suits your argument, and ignore everything that happened before then.

Oh and by the way, the UVF planted the first bombs of the troubles – in 1969. Again, that was before the Provos came into existence. But presumably that will somehow be irrelevant in your mind too.

Tell me then in your own words when and why the troubles started.

The relatively recent period of violence known as “The Troubles” started in the mid 60s when loyalists thugs started to use violence to oppose and obstruct the peaceful and democratic civil rights movement.

Of course the wider conflict started many hundreds of years earlier, when the British invaded, cleared and planted. In any case, IMHO we need to move away from arguments based on “he started it”, and more even more so away from farcical claims from one side that they are blameless.

Give up James, you lost again. Im getting embarrassed for you.

You are implying that the republicans are blameless. If the troubles started in the mid 60′s and the state clearly deployed the British army to end it in 1969 then why did republicans attack those that were tasked with trying to end the trouble? Do you think the provos helped or hindered the situation?

I’m not implying they were blameless. They helped to perpetuate the conflict. It was started by and continuously fuelled by loyalist sectarianism, but nonetheless the IRA committed some terrible atrocities too, and therefore they are certainly not blameless. You, however, very clearly stated that you think it was all the IRA’s fault. As I said, that’s a farcical view of events, that anyone with a vague grasp of history knows to be nonsense.

I pinpointed a key period in 1969 when the situation could have been salvaged, it hadnt descended into a war at that stage but the IRA attacked those that were trying to help the situation. I still struggle to understand why some nationalists were making tea for British soldiers and a few months later they were spitting on them and throwing stones at them, what changed in that community in such a short time? I also struggle to understand why the PIRA wanted the army out but the one thing keeping them here was PIRA violence against them.

You are saying that im implying loyalists were blameless, I dont think they were blameless, I dont like loyalist terrorist groups but many on here would say the IRA were a great bunch of lads when in reality they fitted hand and glove with the loyalists. They also need to shoulder most of the blame for prolonging the conflict. Its a lot harder to pick up the pieces after a 30 year conflict than after a few months of civil unrest, thats why we are slow on progress here at the minute, theres a nasty legacy left behind and the conflict left communities farther apart than ever.

The UDA are protected by the PSNI and military intelligence.

Every single one of their key members are working for the police.

The police use them to keep control of Loyalist areas and that having one big ugly beast is better than a fractious multitude. Not that long ago they were also the dirty tricks wing of the army.

You should start writing fiction Seanie, youd get a best seller no problem.

Jamesy, I haven’t seen a single comment on this thread saying or even implying that the IRA were “a great bunch of lads” and/ or that they were blameless. My exchange with you was prompted by your baffling question “why should we take the same blame as Republicans?”. It’s beyond debate that this particular period of violence was started by loyalists, at a time when the only militant Republican group in existence were refusing to get involved in what they saw as a sectarian religious conflict, and the only “threat” to the loyalist/unionist community was that they might have to grant basic civil rights to Catholics. So actually you’re probably right, blame shouldn’t be apportioned equally, as the lion’s share belongs to the loyalists.

As for your comments suggesting that the conflict could have ended sooner if the IRA had not existed, well isn’t that a great statement of the obvious? You could make the same observation about any side of any conflict in history. Eg “World War II would have been over quicker if it wasn’t for the Allies”. A more useful observation is that The Troubles would not have happened at all if the loyalist/unionist community simply treated Catholics/nationalists/republicans equally in the first place.

Not this thread maybe but I was referring to the site in general, theres many that think the PIRA were heroes and 100% justified.

I am obviously not getting through to you am I, you know fine well that the PIRA escalated a situation that the army were trying to manage, the rest is history as they say.

If you want me to accept full responsibility for the troubles then forget it and forget even further interactions between us on this republican love in.

You’re not expected to accept full responsibility James. But as has been outlined above, unionists have to stop thinking they were the only victims in all of this. Only then can real peace and neighbourlyness be achieved.

Full peace cant be achieved until the notion of a united Ireland is buried forever. Proper shared space in recognised which included neutral roads in which nationalists think they can claim ownership of. Things like OTR letters are recinded and any other dodgy dealings with republicans are uncovered and rectified.

Its time to amend the GFA again.

The number of flags increased after the nationalists voted to remove the flag on city hall. Would it not be better to leave the one flag alone and prevent the erection (sorry coudnt think of a better word) of 100′s more?

Alliance also voted to remove the flag and the harassment and treatment of its MLAs and councillors has been disgraceful since. So in your view, the flag should have been kept up to keep 1000s of other flags down? Maybe we could try that with the tricolour, put thousands of Irish flags up and say we’ll take them down if we get tricolours hanging over government and official buildings in the north. Sounds stupid? That’s because it is.

The flying of tri colours in nationalist areas doesnt bother me, I drive through the Bogside on my way to work, its like a shrine to republicanism, do I care? Do I fcuk.

Im making the point that there was no trouble before the flag was removed, a situation was created by supposedly responsible people. Nobody was protesting about the flags presence.

There was no trouble before the flag was removed? Seriously? I don’t think ordinary unionists had a problem with the flags removal, it was more so right wing Loyalism. I object to all markings of territory, whether it be loyalist or republican. It just looks terrible and really lowers the tone. To me it’s like a dog marking its territory with piss.

You should go to north Cyprus . The Turks have a flag carved into a mountain on the Turkish side of the border . Tells the Greeks in the south we are here to stay and we are going nowhere .

Yes Roland there really was no trouble before the flag was removed, I’d have seen through it if there were widespread nationalist protests against it but there was nothing of the sort. SF and SDLP simply tabled a motion to completely remove the flag, the Alliance who held the balance of power opted for designated days. It was doing nobody any harm and a normal situation was once again made into a nightmare. SF say there should be no union flag there at all but they would jump at the chance to put a tri colour up instead, they would do anything to try and annoy the unionists, the unemployed youth and the uneducated of the loyalist community get sucked in constantly because they think SF are winning a major battle when in reality SF are clutching at straws, they are playing the only cards they have, they know as well as I do that the union is safe but the flag protesters in Belfast cant grasp that.

Sure the republicans put a giant tri colour on black mountain in west Belfast, they have made it their own message board this last few years.

I dont know. Her legs are shaved and looks like fake tan. Dont think it would work out between us though. It breaks the heart.