web analytics

Terrorists Talk Shop

By ATWadmin On January 18th, 2007

What a farce!  Gerry Adams, who says he isn’t part of an illegal terrorist organisation (ahem) is meeting those who are members of illegal terrorist organisations to pledge that the Provo strategy of ‘supporting’ the PSNI and the British criminal justice system is in reality a step towards…….what was that cobblers he came out with?………oh yes, that’s it: ‘A peaceful way to achieve political change, equality, justice and ultimately Irish freedom.’

In another plunge still further into the progressive abyss of delusion he states that ‘armed struggle was never a republican principle. It was an option of last resort in the absence of any other alternative.’  Correct me if I’m wrong, but I never knew that the political wing of the IRA had been a proscribed political party.  I must have missed that one!  May I remind this alpha-scumbag that of the 3523 people killed during the troubles, 1798 of them were civilians.  Oh yes, plus a horse.  Kidnapping and butchering Shergar was crucial in the drive for ‘Irish’ unity as Shergar had neighed opposition to an all-Ireland anschluss on numerous occasions whilst chewing on his hay.

What I can’t fathom is how the IRA have a strategy to deliver this anschluss, with or without support for the PSNI and irrespective of whether that support is real or not.  The only way in which Northern Ireland’s annexation can take place is by fulfilling the essential constitutionally legal criteria (some of which isn’t even included adequately in the Belfast Agreement) on the back of a referendum in both Northern Ireland and the Republic.  When it comes to winning support in Northern Ireland (let’s forget about the ambivalence in the South) there is an insurmountable bloc called the British majority.  How pray does Gerry and his cronies hope to get around that one!?

Adams’s meeting should be seen as nothing more than one terrorist hob-nobbing with other terrorists.  If they are wanted men in the United Kingdom, Adams is breaking the law if he meets them on British soil and does not disclose their whereabouts to the police.  I don’t suppose that little fact crossed the minds of the MSM.

57 Responses to “Terrorists Talk Shop”

  1. Scusi, but what’s MSM? (I assume you don’t mean methylsulfonylmethane).

  2. "Kidnapping and butchering Shergar was crucial in the drive for ‘Irish’ unity as Shergar had neighed opposition to an all-Ireland anschluss on numerous occasions whilst chewing on his hay."

    That’s a lie! It’s is well known that Shergar was solid on the national question.

    Why is "Irish" in quotation marks?

  3. Reg

    It’s in inverted commas because there is no such thing as Irish unity. The majority in NI are British first and foremost with a separate right to self-determination.

    MSM = mainstream media.

  4. ‘A peaceful way to achieve political change, equality, justice and ultimately Irish freedom.’

    (what from, the EU? I thought they’d only just signed up…)

    ‘It was an option of last resort in the absence of any other alternative’.

    So will that be the EU dislikers methods to get us out of Europe when push comes to shove? Violence is obviously effective.

  5. If, as we are told, the Provos have given up organised crime, how come the ARA is still raking in a fortune of Provo cash?

    (Of course closing the ARA wasn’t a consession to the Provos to get them to support law and order)

    The only time Ireiand has ever been united was when it was part of Britian (in the political sense) before then and after 1921 it has consisted of autonous waring provisnces and tribes. As anyone who knows the story of Culhallan and the Tain knows full well.

  6. >>Kidnapping and butchering Shergar was crucial in the drive for ‘Irish’ unity as Shergar had neighed opposition to an all-Ireland anschluss on numerous occasions whilst chewing on his hay.<<

    LOL. In good form today, Andrew!

    >>after 1921 it has consisted of autonous waring provisnces and tribes.<<

    NRG, it’s definitely more accurate to say that after 1921 the British ruled province of Ireland has consisted of autonous waring tribes!

  7. "The only time Ireiand has ever been united was when it was part of Britian (in the political sense)"

    Now that’s a silly argument.

    "before then and after 1921 it has consisted of autonous waring provisnces and tribes. As anyone who knows the story of Culhallan and the Tain knows full well."

    Again a somewhat silly argument. I doubt there were any centralised nation states at the time of the Tain outside of the Roman Empire!

    Are you going to say next that Cu Chullain was a proto-loyalist? 😉

  8. In fairness to Cu Chullain, when he wasnt playing hurling with Shergar and having that silly Oirish name, he was defending Ulster Protestantism in Ireland (before it was invented). Some lad that.

    It also has to be said that Ulster horses have always been very separate from Irish horses. Completely indistinguishable in may ways.

  9. I love the predictability of Nationalists when their little green misty-eyed myth of an ancient all-island Gaelic idyll is questioned. Heavens forbid truth should get in the way of propaganda.

    Cracks me up every time.

    So can someone please give me any evidence that other than when part of the Britain that Ireland was ever a single nation?

  10. Dan, was Sheger also of the equus ulstericus breed?

    What was that bit in the Tain about horses of the Uladh always turning to the left!

  11. NRG, you’ve been accused of introducing a "silly argument" and you haven’t even reacted to the accusation.
    Why?

  12. The charmingly predictable Cunningham avoids the question by enticing me down an irrelevant tangent.

    That Ireland was never a nation is not a silly arguement. If it was you would have responded with something sensible.

    The gerographical landmass of the Ireland of Ireland has never been a natural single political or social entity. (Doesn’t mean we can’t get along though).

    Care for a second go at answering the question?

  13. Loyalism is so deluded that I fully expect to see a mural one of these days with Cu Chullain wearing a bowler hat and sash, marching hand in hand with Broxi Bear.

  14. >>Cunningham avoids the question by enticing me down an irrelevant tangent.<<

    >>That Ireland was never a nation is not a silly arguement. If it was you would have responded with something sensible.<<

    LOL, you’re precious! First of all, it wasn’t me who said your argument was silly.

    Second, why should anyone reply with something sensible to something silly?

    Third, the response was not avoiding the question, The objection taht your argument is silly (REG, 2:38) was a response to your question, but one that you didn’t take up.

    I’ll make it easy for you: As there were "no centralised nation states at the time of the Tain outside of the Roman Empire", the statement that Ireland – or Germany or Poland for that matter – was not united then is irrelevant for a political discussion on a United Ireland, unless you want to say that none of those countries, or even Britain or France, has a right to be united either!

  15. Ireland was only ever united under British rule. That’s a fact whether people choose to accept it or not.

  16. Actually Andrew I’ll stake you one better. Ireland was often united because of British rule. One can look at Britain’s execution of the leaders of the 1916 rebellion which united a population until that point arguably detached from supporting an armed rebellion. Indeed, British misrule in Ireland over the centuries ranging from neglect to persecution often resulted in securing the resolve of the Irish people for their freedom and for establishing their nation.

  17. ‘Indeed, British misrule in Ireland over the centuries ranging from neglect to persecution often resulted in securing the resolve of the Irish people for their freedom and for establishing their nation.’

    Please remember to include that the persecution was often in response to brutal attempts to rid the island of its Protestant population – such as the efforts by Cromwell. This romantic republican notion that Britain picked on the Irish like a school bully is fatuous garbage. Admittedly the potato famine was exacerbated by neglect, though again the ruling classes in London had little time for anyone not of the aristocracy, whether they were Irish, English or other.

  18. Also, remember that big, bad Britain was the destination of CHOICE for so many Irish after independence.

  19. Andrew: I agree with your contention on the famine being more neglect (but at such a tragic level) that probably had a component of class invovled. I don’t think that you can discredit Cromwell with attempts to rid the island of its Protestant population since he is infamous for his efforts to rid it of its Catholic population (I know there exists an argument that there were mutual atrocities during those times). Perhaps that was a typo?

    I don’t think a serious historian would credit the argument that there was a pervasive attempt to rid Ireland of its Protestant population throughout its history. Indeed, many of the most famous Irish nationalists were in fact protestant. And one only has to read Swift, Thackery and other British writers to recognize the injustices done to the Irish population over the years.

    If I were to claim that the history of the United States did not include periods of shameful acts, such as slavery and the treatment of the Indians, I would be a fool. I don’t think you would be so foolish as to seriously think that Britain (a nation I hold in the highest regard) ruled Ireland with an even hand over the course of history.

    As for Britain being a destination for Irish people even after 1921, well it wasn’t for the weather. Ireland’s abject poverty forced millions to seek employment elesewhere, and Britain was the easiest location.

  20. That’s what I meant. The intevention by Cromwell against Catholicism was a direct result of Catholics attempting to brutalise Protestants in so many parts of the island.

    No country has a clean sheet when it comes to history – be it the UK, the USA OR the Irish Republic. The difference is that only the last of these three has a population that continues to live history – albeit its own particular version of it.

  21. Thanks Cunningham you have confirmed that "A nation once again" is a lie and that there is no such thing as an ancient land of Erin. All myths.

    And that there is no reason that the island or Ireland should be a single political entitiy other the agressive wish of a majority to colonise the entirity of a landmass.

    Actually the last bit is not quite true any more. Most people in the Republic I know have long since

  22. Andrew: You are giving Cromwell too much credit. Besides, it wan’t only during that period that the oppression took place.
    I doubt the people of Ireland dwell any more in history that the people of the UK or the US. We are all effected by it, and doomed to repeat it when we ignore it as the saying goes.

  23. >>No country has a clean sheet when it comes to history – be it the UK, the USA OR the Irish Republic.<<

    Agreed.

    However, you seem to have an amazing ability to underplay the negative aspects of your nations history.

    >>Admittedly the potato famine was exacerbated by neglect, though again the ruling classes in London had little time for anyone not of the aristocracy, whether they were Irish, English or other.<<

    Thats not an excuse Andrew. I cant believe that you dont see the deaths of 500,000 UK citizens as being anything more then a massive blight on UK history, and that includes those in the Irish administration.

  24. …grown past the need to force their culture and nationaltiy on their neighbours or to force them out by the use of terror.

    Now if we could get the bloodlusty Republican rump and the Loyalist backwoodsmen to grow up this could all work out just fine.

  25. >>I doubt the people of Ireland dwell any more in history that the people of the UK or the US. <<

    Agreed Mahons, but what will get people on edge is the denial of history.

  26. NRG: Um. It is a Nation once again. Hardly a surprise to anyone at this point. You seem to have an urgnet need to belittle that fact that doesn’t make any sense. Surely the vast majority of people in the UK even recognize the separate national identity of the Irish nation and acknowledge its history and traditions. Occupation does not end nationality.

  27. >>Actually the last bit is not quite true any more. Most people in the Republic I know have long since grown past the need to force their culture and nationaltiy on their neighbours or to force them out by the use of terror. <<

    There is no great rush in the ROI for a UI. A lot of people, if they were honest about it, dread the instability it might bring

  28. >>There is no great rush in the ROI for a UI<<

    Thats not to say they dont aspire to it… theres a difference.

  29. aaah, the last resort – the famine, a little whine about ancient history. Famine was horrible, so were the highland clearances, as was the ethnic cleansing of Protestants from Cork, the massacre of Huguenots, the Crusades, slavery, the creation of the USA.

    Did you the Romans crucified people and masacred defeated popualtions? Surely by their own logic no Irish Nationalist could have any truck with anything that comes from Rome (but I digress)

    The Irish famine was exacerbated by both absentee landlords and the Catholic Church which pressured people to stay in the parish so they could be controlled by the priest. Elsewhere in Europe people were moving to cities and modern farming methods being introduced, in Ireland land was over-worked to feed a local peasant population. Often against the advice and wishes of the demonised landlords. If not for the Catholic Church Ireland would have more closely followed English and Scottish economic, industrial, agricultural and social development. eg the enclosure movement.

    Famines happened elsewhere in Eastern Europe during the hungry forties. They are not so celebated becasue there weren’t so many people saved by migration – and who funded much of the migration and thus saved lives and enabled this strange revision of history? Well that would be those pesky English landlords!

  30. Kloot – agreed on points above.

    Mahoons – you still haven’t grasped that there is no such thing as an (all island) Irish nation, it all greenwash mytholgy . Hence the Republican rush to destroy and discredit the West Brit identity and the distinct Ulster identitiy.

  31. ‘you seem to have an amazing ability to underplay the negative aspects of your nations history.’

    Ditto a large slice of Irish nationalism.

    I will be more open about British negligence the day someone in your country offers sincere and formal apologies for the disgusting acts of terrorism committed against my people, and ceases pursuing – in word and deed – the constitutional goal which has driven that same terrorism in periodic spasms since the 1920s.

    Like the (hopefully) DUP, I don’t jump first.

  32. NRG,

    It was only 150 years ago, hardly ancient history.

    My point about the famine is that amazing ability to down play the famine itself and the effect on the mindset of the Irish people as a result of it an other such neglect. The famine had a massive impact on the Irish psyche. It can still be felt in Irish culture to this day. If you want to understand Irish nationalism you need to look at the roots of it.

  33. NRG: I would suggest something that you could grasp, but Mr. Vance tries to run a clean website.

    I know you don’t favor a fully united Ireland. You aren’t alone. There are many who agree with you, although not with the same prejudices. However, the historical claim for a fully united Ireland is not a myth, it is a claim that one can oppose but not one that can be claimed has never existed.

    As for the famine, I think it was raised by Andrew (hardly a card-carrying Republican) in discussing British misrule. Andrew of the opinion that it was primarily neglect or negligence as opposed to deliberate, which I agreed to.

  34. >>Ditto a large slice of Irish nationalism. <<

    Agreed.. ive no problem admitting to the faults of my fellow nationals.

    >>I will be more open about British negligence the day someone in your country offers sincere and formal apologies for the disgusting acts of terrorism committed against my people, and ceases pursuing – in word and deed – the constitutional goal which has driven that same terrorism in periodic spasms since the 1920s.<<

    Andrew,

    The absolute majority of Irish citizens were against the violence inflicted in its name. It is not correct to expect the ROI to apologise for the IRA movement. Yes, there were many aiding that movement, but it was in no way official or otherwise government policy to aid terrorists.

  35. >>Andrew of the opinion that it was primarily neglect or negligence as opposed to deliberate, which I agreed to.<<

    Yes it was primarily neglect, but it doesnt mean that those on the tail end of it felt any better as a result.

    Perception is every thing, and often differs from reality. Remember, the Irish catholics were in the most a working class uneducated people. Try tell them that it was socio economic issues that caused the problems.

  36. Kloot: Breath in. Breath Out. I never said the cause made any difference to the victims.

  37. "The intevention by Cromwell against Catholicism was a direct result of Catholics attempting to brutalise Protestants in so many parts of the island."

    Nothing to do with the Anglo-Norman Confederates’ support for the Royalist cause in the English Civil War then?

    "Mahoons – you still haven’t grasped that there is no such thing as an (all island) Irish nation, it all greenwash mytholgy ."

    NRG,

    Your attempt to suggest that the Irish nation has never existed is very funny. The fact that the Gaels never had a centralised state back in the mists of time is fairly irrelevant to the argument as to whether they were a distinct nation.

    In fact, the post-Gaelic history of Ireland (despite or, as Mahons suggests, because of British rule) where people of Gaelic, Anglo-Norman, New English and, at certain stages, Ulster-Scots backgrounds have ALL considered themselves part of a distinct Irish nation is testament to its existence and the strength of its existence in difficult circumstances.

  38. >>I never said the cause made any difference to the victims.<<

    that comment wasnt directed at anyone in particular Mahons 🙂

    Look, my view on this is that there is a massive inability across the UK and ireland for people to understand and see other view points. Everyone sees history through different glasses. I dont subscribe to the rebel song version of British rule in Ireland.

    I do however think the British governments completely underestimated the effect on the mindset of the Irish of this neglect. It fostered nationalism. It created the conditions which eventually led to the conflict in the 20s. That conflict could have been avoided if moderate nationalists had of been engaged with.

  39. Mahoons – My goodness, someone who disagrees with you and you can’t browbeat so you resort to type – a desire to violence and accusations of bigotry (love to see the evidence of that). We know your type well.

    Kloot – good point. taken.

    Reg – good of you to speak on behalf of everyone, ever, as Republicans are wont to do. As I would fit into some of those groups, I can assure you are wrong.

    You guys are REALLY scared of the simple truth that there is, and never has been, such a social entity of an all island Irish nation.

    Here’s the really upsetting bit guys, there never will be one either.

    Thanks for the banter – I’m off home now.

  40. NRG – Don’t you mean you are off to the Home now?

    I type poorly. As to reverting to type I am not sure what you mean. Believe me browbeating you isn’t that much fun. In a battle of wits you are unarmed. As for your bigotry, well I let you expose yourself with your own words.

  41. I know I’m late , but Ireland "a" nation ? Since when ? LOL

  42. LOL, mahons.

    You’re in good form tonight and obviously slowing recovering from that protracted hangover since your trip to Ireland, which saw you strangely irritable with some ATWers (Good Guys) and even given to halucinations about the content of history books in far-off lands (it was that, btw, not your whore-baiting that I took exception to).

    BTW. I heard the tragic story of a compatriot of yours (well almost, she came from CA) who died last wkend of water intoxication (!) after a water-drinking competition . Did you ever think of that as an alternative – in smaller doses of couse. Just think of the money you’d save.)

  43. Madradin: I was expecting a disturbance in the Force and was surprised when you didn’t ring in on this topic to assist your some of your lesser equipped comrades who were hell bent on nation denial (the next conference in Tehran?). In any event, even you aren’t claiming Ireland isn’t a nation, right?

  44. Cunningham: I try not to be irritable, but I respectfully suggest the perception of my irritability grows when I differ in opinion. When I share the opinion of some who have found me irritable, all of a sudden I am rehabilitated. No matter, those who frequent these debates should know not to take it too personally.

    Some woman died of water intoxication? Was she drinking Coors?

    I myself could not imagine the impact on the domestic beer industry of my switching off beer. Frankly, it is my patriotic duty to keep so many of those workers employed.

  45. >>Was she drinking Coors?<<

    Bud lite ?

  46. Kloot – Drinking Coors Light is known in the States as making love in a canoe – It is f–king close to water.

  47. Mahons – Ireland has at least two nations on it 🙂
    This is old ground we have gone over many times.

    Been a busy day here – storms raging etc.

  48. Mad – no one was arguing that the island didn’t have two nations upon it (we of course disagree as to the right of each).
    Sorry about your bad weather. It finally got cold in New York, but still no snow.

  49. >>Ireland has at least two nations on it<<

    The Kerrymen and the rest of us.

  50. Cunningham: Ouch. My poor ancestors.

  51. <Q>no one was arguing that the island didn’t have two nations upon it </Q>

    "Have" Mahons?

    There still isn’t a single nation on this Island, despite the arrogance of the claims of that blethers read out in 1916 🙂

  52. Mad: Relax. I meant "has". No need to work yourself up the way you did in 2005 when Ireland defeated England 19-13 in Rugby.

  53. As a lawyer you realise that conceding these things is dangerous – best get clarification. Have I told you the story about De Valera’s delightful nit-picking?

    Shame this was talked out before I came back online – How about we discuss the Molly issue ?

  54. I presume you are referring to another thread and not the Molly Maguires.

  55. Indeed !

  56. Andy,
    The long term plan is to send in an army of de-programmers, to challenge the Brit-Brainwashing within Unionism; and if that don’t work we can always beat you on your bottoms with the Catholic Herald.

  57. Thanks MR

    I love the way those guy fall back to screaming "bigotry" when they run out of arguments.

    Odd, given my general admiration for our neighbours in the South, but anyway.