The loyalist terrorist organisations continue to ply their trade without any condemnation from politicians.
This is just the latest example of their continued criminality

lvf murder of Lisa Dorrian
uda murder of Stephen Nelson
uvf extortion in Donegall Pass
uda punishment attack in Bangor last week
uvf punishment shooting the day after election
uvf-lvf taxi feud in West Belfast
Mo courtney , Jim Gray

Also today we have the Orange Order threatening a long hot summer over charges brought against members for playing the sash outside St. Matthew's church in Short Strand.More charges are expected to follow,after illegal OO parades in the same area.

No doubt the loyalist terrorists will be on the streets causing chaos,in support of the brethren

"The loyalist terrorist organisations continue to ply their trade without any condemnation from politicians"

This is just rubbish. For example on the taxi feud - (source BBC NI news website)

"North Belfast DUP MP Nigel Dodds condemned the shooting.

"This vicious attack could easily have resulted in death or serious injury," he said.

Patrols stepped up

"It is bad enough that people's livelihoods, businesses and property are being destroyed. But someone will lose their life unless this all stops.

"The community want it stopped.

"I will continue to press government to ensure the police and security forces have whatever resources are needed at the present time to combat this violence."

No comments on
the punishment shootings or extortion or drug gangs in the uda,uvf & lvf

No comment from Peter Robinson about the uvf shooting of a teenager

No comment from Sylvia Hermon about the uda shooting in Bangor

No comment from Sammy Wilson about the murder of Stephen Nelson

Pasley's refusal to offer support to Raymond Mc Cord,who has been under a uvf death threat for the last number of years

What group was involved today ?

Tra g

The statement is one example.

Here are a few more:
Trimble complaining that no sanctions were taken against the UDA after the IMC report (source westminster bulletin)
"There is a weakness: the IMC cannot sanction organisations without political representation. That omission is particularly glaring with regard to the Ulster Defence Association, which is a major offender in terms of continuing violence."

Chris McGimpsey on punishment beatings (UUP website)
"The scourge of punishment beatings and paramilitarism is one of the most important issues affecting the people of West Belfast...The people of West Belfast expect their representatives to endeavour to confront those behind punishment beatings by words and by deeds."

This link is about a parliamentary report on paramilitary intimidation with a range of Unionists quoted in it

hyperlink

Paisley on the danger of paramilitarism
"It is a day when the Government must cease to deal with politics, and deal with crime and paramilitaries. Until crime and paramilitaries are dealt with, we cannot have a proper democracy in Northern Ireland."

The DUP policy paper pledge on intimidation (they also endorsed the work of anti-drugs groups)
"All crime is undesirable but there is something particularly repugnant about attacks
on the elderly or crimes which are motivated by sectarian or racial hatred.
Tougher sentences should be put on a statutory basis for attacks which are
perpetrated on older people. This can never be the whole solution to this problem
but it is an important element of it. In relation to hate crimes it is proper that society
treats them differently from crimes which lack such a motivation.
We therefore favour statutory provisions concerning the sentencing of these offences."

Jim Rodgers on a debate in the NI forum were the UUP and DUP endorsed the FAIT's anti-violence charter
"I assure Mr McCarthy that the Ulster Unionist Party condemns violence unreservedly, no matter where it comes from. My party does not have an army at its side. We do not have guns or explosives. I want the Alliance Party to know exactly where we stand. Regardless of where violence comes from, it is wrong. We believe in the democratic process"

Trimble on beatings
"Northern Ireland First Minister David Trimble as made a fresh appeal for community and political leaders on all sides in Northern Ireland to condemn paramilitary "housekeeping".

Jim Rodgers on LVF bomb attacks (Source east belfast Observer)
"“I have no doubt that a loyalist paramilitary organisation was responsible,” he said. “I would appeal to them to refrain from carrying out illegal acts such as this as they are only bringing hardship to their own community.”
He urged anyone with any information about the incident to contact the police. "

Wrong again. The DUP has not refused to support Raymond McCord, a delegation met him a few days ago.

fd

The term 'lip service' springs to mind

Lip service? None of those named have direct links to the paramilitary groups alleged to be involved. What else can they do? Offer to shoot them?

I think fair_deal has given a pretty good answer to the charge.

How can anyone possibly prove condemnation is any more or less than "lip service"? How does one "measure" whether the word of the politician is listened to?

Would it be harder or easier to accuse, say, Gerry Adams of paying "lip service" to so-called "punishment" attacks when the relationship between his party and a paramilitary group is closer than that of the UUP and (currently) the DUP to loyalist groups.

Gonzo, the closeness of SF to the IRA does nothing more than make things slightly more inconvenient for Adams. Adams is forced to make excuses (or take sides). That will change if the IRA "disbands". When that happens, SF will be able to say "there's nothing we can do about that kneecapping, our mates disbanded" and condemn it just like the unionists do.

The arms-length distance between unionism and paramilitarism is very convenient; it enables them to give support to the paramilitaries out of the corner of their mouths while maintaining a public air of separation. Unfortunately, not all of us are as easily convinced as fair_deal is, who seems to think that the odd muttering coming from unionists about nasty people is enough to wipe out memories of Ulster Resistance, Third Force, McCrea's dance with Billy Wright, the Paisley-UDA coalition strike in 1978 and the other paramilitary-operated strike in 1974.

All the people he quoted have also been quoted as making statements or being involved in actions which could be described as ambiguous at best when it came to paramilitarism. For example, David "loyalist commission" Trimble, the chap who wagged his finger at the police at Drumcree, condemned the shooting of Michael McGoldrick as people "taking the law into their own hands" as though it was some sort of vigilante action rather than a cold-blooded sectarian killing.

Was it Chris McGimpsey standing with the crowds of baying loyalists at the apartments at Sandy Row (or was that Michael?). Jim Rodgers is a UUP Belfast City Councillor, one of those who voted Hugh Smyth (UVF-linked) into power as Lord Mayor of Belfast in 1994. The UUP in Belfast City Council have a long and fruitful relationship with loyalist paramilitaries, even recently as they accept independent UDA councillors into their council group.

If unionist politicians are serious about combatting loyalist paramilitarism then there's one simple thing they can do - act to take down the paramilitary flags and paramilitary murals in the neighbourhoods where their votes come from. Where are the calls from unionists for new legislation to be brought in to ensure this is legal, or for resources to be given to the police or DOE to clean this kind of thing up ?

This is very good news and I hope the intended victim is safe.

The damage that such groups are doing to their communities and our economy should not be underestimated.

Comrade Stalin makes some valid points.

But I'm curious. Are you (to paraphrase) saying the relationship between Sinn Fein and the IRA is shifting towards something comparable to the relationship between unionist parties and loyalist paramilitaries?

I wonder how that would pan out. If SF denounce IRA activity, what would that mean? Would it have the 'water off a duck's back' (ie zero) effect that unionist condemnation of loyalist paramilitary activity has?

were the loyalists insulted by not being considered by the psni leader to have the capabilities to carry out the bsnk robbery.
was Hugh Orde dissmissing them as amateurs
as far as i can remember the UDA is supposed to by the norths largest paramilitary group ,I hope they dont develope an even larger inferiority complex and start retaliating to show that they are a disciplined military force and start holding up every credit union,post office and bank in pradisin ullstare

More loyalist shootings last night

any word from peter robinson

Can members of the uup defend their sitting on the loyalist commission after todays events.

uff member of the commission sentanced today.

Chairman of the commission appeared as a charactor witness ??

Still no cross over between those elected and those in balaclavas ???

Fair point Andy re: the member of the LC who went down today.
Why did Fr. Andy Donegan from Holy Cross provide character witness for Cunningham too?
Personally I'm happy to see any of these people go to jail.

It's an interesting case - he was jailed according to UTV for 30 months for giving a press conference where "he called for the Red Hand Defenders to abandon their arms in the wake of Catholic postal worker Daniel McColgan`s murder." That was in early 2002.

And as Redpaul points out, a RC priest was a character witness.

What surely could have serious implications for the media however - the Prosecution QC:

"He said that the police investigation began after the Panorama presenter alleged that Cunningham was the man behind the mask, claiming that the BBC had voice analysis equipment to compare his voice with other recordings when he spoke on behalf of the UPRG."

and I'll repeat redpaul's closing comment :

"Personally I'm happy to see any of these people go to jail."

And should elected unionist reps. continue to work with those who extort,drug run and shoot teenagers

"But I'm curious. Are you (to paraphrase) saying the relationship between Sinn Fein and the IRA is shifting towards something comparable to the relationship between unionist parties and loyalist paramilitaries?"

Gonzo, yes I believe definitely. If the IRA issue a statement saying that they have disbanded, then it won't be easy to accuse SF of links to paramilitarism without serious evidence in the way that it is now.

I don't seriously believe that the IRA criminal enteprise that presently exists is going to disappear overnight. I certainly don't think that Sinn Fein politicians are likewise going to turn on their old pals and have the police round them up if there is any hint of trouble from them. "disband" is just a word, like "decommission". You can't actually prove in any meaningful way that it has taken place when it comes to an illegal organization. Ironically, you could say that the IRA will go on existing in a disbanded state. :)

"I wonder how that would pan out. If SF denounce IRA activity, what would that mean? Would it have the 'water off a duck's back' (ie zero) effect that unionist condemnation of loyalist paramilitary activity has?"

Yes I definitely think so.

In that scenario I can see bodies like the ceasefire monitoring body being asked to define whether or not the IRA really has disbanded, or whether SF are still linked to shady people. The fun and games hasn't even started yet.

Andy, I always thought the Loyalist Commission was an organization intended to provide a legitimate front for loyalist paramilitarism, and that loyalists - their only loyalty being crime - have no interest in creating the circumstances within which they will no longer exist. The politicians and clergymen who sat on that body should hang their heads in shame.

davros

So the fact that one paramilitary organisation makes a statement against another paramilitary organisation makes it less of a crime

Cunninghams uda friends have continued their sectarian campaign and continue to shoot members of their own community

Im curious about the defending of a loyalist godfather.

Does this mean that those implicated in the death of Bert Mc Cartney are less guilty because of the media investigation

interesting !!

Please don't twist what I wrote Andy.
I approve of terrorists being jailed - as i pointed out. But the case has interesting points.

Surely it endangers members of the media?

Does investigative journalism not always carry the risk of retribution.

The media has often named members of organisations who have been responsible for actions carried out during the troubles.

How does this case differ

andy - in the past journalists have risked jail rather than be seen to be cooperating with the security forces- remember the struggles about access to unused film footage ? - in this case a journalist appears to have volunteered information. Now in the past journalists have argued that being forced to cooperate would endanger them - so a journalist volunteering information would surely be significant?

The police did there own independent analysis of the voice within the two clips.

Yes - but according to UTV it was the panorama journalist who pointed them in the right direction. That's bound to have repercussions.

There have been many investigative programs over the years which have finished by stating that their information would be passed to the relevant authorities.

I still don't see what makes a terrorist like Cunningham different than those named in other programs.

Those suspected of carying out the Omagh bombing were named on numerous television programs and i dont believe anyone involved in the production or making of these television specials had any problems in passing on the relevant information

I recall Roger Cook doing doing a program here about loyalist extortion on building sites.

All information was passed on to the police and charges followed

Repercussions..

"I still don't see what makes a terrorist like Cunningham different than those named in other programs."

Still misrepresenting my posts ?
Where have I said this ? I haven't.
Discussion over .

Tra g

Another example for you. Condemnation of the sectarian attacks in North belfast last night (source BBC NI website)

"Condemning the attacks, DUP assembly member Nelson McCausland said people should have the right to live in their homes without fear.

"It's clear that since a number of attacks took place in one area on the same night, this was an orchestrated campaign and it's totally unacceptable," he said.

"As well as hurting the families attacked, these attacks damage the entire community and are to be deplored."

Good to see MrMcCausland condemning these sectarian attacks

It's no coincidence afterraids on senior members of the uda and uprg yesterday,
the response by the terrorists is to attack innocent catholics

Hopefully McCausland will call for the police to go into these areas and carry out arrest and search operations

Roger Cook, now *there* was a journalist. We could definitely do with getting him over here for a few special seasons of the Cook Report.

Andy, unionist politicians are a lot more careful about their words when they are condemning activities that appear to have been carried out by loyalists, and McCausland's utterances today are no exception. Note that he is careful not to describe the actions as being the work of any particular organization or set of political beliefs. All he does is say "this is bad, it should stop".

The same politicians are noticeably more strident when they are condemning republicans. McCausland's words resemble the words from Sinn Fein following some dissident attack or other, where Sinn Fein always stop just short of actually condemning the organization for their actions.

I don't want to hear people claiming to be democratic peaceful politicians coming on TV with this mealy-mouthed crap saying that they "deplore" things. This guy is an MLA, I want to hear that he is meeting the police to discuss the attacks; that he is meeting the NIO security minister to talk about increased security measures; I want to hear him say that anybody with any information on the attacks should pass it on to the police immediately.

Does anyone else here the goal posts moving?

First it was claimed Unionism didn't condemn loyalist actions now the problem is their choice of words.

'Any particular organisation" - How's about this - the attack occurred in an area were three different loyalist paramilitary groups exist - UDA, UVF and LVF. So it isn't always possible to directly ascribe blame within hours to one particular organisation? He does describe them as orchestrated so he is clearly implying an organisation was involved.

"Set of political beliefs" - So sectarian attacks are motivated by political beliefs? Are they not motivated by sectarianism?

The DUP is a full participant in policing structures of Northern Ireland. The DUP, UUP, Alliance and SDLP are all full participants in policing structures in Northern Ireland, their support for policing and co-operation is well-known and self-evident.

CS

A little reminder of a few earlier quotes

Jim Rodgers on LVF bomb attacks (Source east belfast Observer)
"“I have no doubt that a loyalist paramilitary organisation was responsible,” he said. “I would appeal to them to refrain from carrying out illegal acts such as this as they are only bringing hardship to their own community.”
He urged anyone with any information about the incident to contact the police.

Trimble complaining that no sanctions were taken against the UDA after the IMC report (source westminster bulletin)
"There is a weakness: the IMC cannot sanction organisations without political representation. That omission is particularly glaring with regard to the Ulster Defence Association, which is a major offender in terms of continuing violence."