Well done to Sinn Féin for highlighting the real, massive extent of unoinist violence. The secterian and racist nature of this violence remians unreported and uncriticised by unionism.
The excuse of IRA violence no longer exists- time for unionism to get its house in order.

Possible PSNI statement
Loyalist attacks?, what loyalist attacks, sure arnt they on ceasefire.

I suppose Paul Leighton and the PSNI are going to put theses attacks down to feuding neighbours.
Those pesky neighbours!!
P.atten S.till N.ot I.mplemented

The use of the term "Unionist" to describe these thugs is grossly offensive and downright inaccurate. These people are thugs nothing more nothing less.

We are reaping the legacy left to us by our erstwhile Secretary of State, St. Mo of The Maze.

It was she who created the doctrine of "an acceptable level of violence". Paramilitaries on both sides of the divide have been acting with impunity for the best part of a decade because the police have been nuetered for fear of upsetting the political apple-cart.

Patten has been implemented - thats the problem.

"29th June - Loyalist flags erected in mixed Lisburn Road area."

Union Jacks are not "Loyalist flags".

Paramilitarism and the the violent and criminal cultures it nurtures and perptuates needs to be tackled by a pro-active multi-layered approach. This is a greater problem in Unionist communities because of the growth and entrenchment of loyalist paramilitares in the last decade.

However, I just cannot take SF on the issues of violence and crime seriously on almost any level.

Their opposition to sectarianism would have a chance of credible if they managed to admit to the sectarian attacks were Protestants were victims e.g. Fountain estate, last night in Rathfriland and racist attacks in nationalist areas eg last week in Kilrea.

Opposition to violence and crime would be credible if the likes of Alex Maskey didn't make excuses for the sectarian hate mob rioting at Ardoyne on the Twelfth of July, didn't persist in denial about the Northern Bank smuggling et al and the growing dissident attacks were included.

To imply or claim that violence and sectarianism is the preserve of a single community leads us no closer to tackling either. Instead of a serious debate we get a cheap piece of propaganda.

Bootman

"The sectarian and racist nature of this violence remians unreported and uncriticised by unionism"

That is just plain false. I have heard of almost all the events listed through the media. An internet search will provide results for most of them. A number of the attacks have been highlighted on this very site, the feud has received extensive coverage (the press do tend to notice dead bodies), the incidents in Co. Antrim have been covered too.

These events have been consistently condemned by Unionist politicians but Sinn Fein and others continue with the lie they haven't. For example, the DUP MP, DUP and UUP MLAs and councillors have condemned it and called for the attacks in Ahoghill and elsewhere to stop.

They are unionists. They believe in the Union between Britain and this country.
They are operating a unionist agenda (albeit a particularly twisted one).

Unionist politicans would rather complain about people from northern ireland having speaking rights in the irish parliament, or bring down the government because some civil servant leaked documents to a political party (well they were fenians don't you know).

to unionist bloggers, columnists, politicans and the PSNI this violence is unimportant. They have a double standard regarding violence. Murders of catholics are motiveless.

This is why, inspite of their brutality, many nationists look to the IRA for their protection.

'"29th June - Loyalist flags erected in mixed Lisburn Road area."'

'Union Jacks are not "Loyalist flags".'

Exactly, Ginfizz! But you missed the most grievous error in that sentence. It ought to read "hoisted" not "erected".

Such matters are far more important IMO than the litany of murder, naked sectarianism and downright evil that Kelly's dossier reveals.

This claims to be a catalogue of sectarianism but a lot of this is Prod - on - Prod violence and thus not sectarian (not that that makes any diiference to the victim) but it is the claim Sinn Fein is trying to substantiate.

"12th Nationalist residents in Lower Ormeau attacked by stone throwing loyalists taking part in 12th parade."

This one is actually false. The parade doesn't go near the Lower ormeau anymore. In fact the return parade was attacked by youths from Lower Ormeau not Lower ormeau attacked by the parade.

"5th July - Catholic homes on Mountpottinger Road Attacked by loyalist gang."

Would this be when Sinn Fein supporting residents of Short Strand attacked the home of Mr. Robert McCartney's partner and then tried to blaim it on loyalists?

Ginfizz says the Union flags erected in the Lisburn Road area are not loyalist flags. A question for him: who erected them if not loyalist or,more accurately, unionist paramilitaries?
As for the offensiveness or nay of 'unionist' paramilitaries, what's the problem?
The UVF were founded by the founding fathers of the Unionist Party (Carson and Craig) and members of that party sit on the Loyalist Commission, incorporating the UVF, UDA et al - doesn't that make them all part of the problem?

The "But" men of the DUP try to legitimise these attacks every time they open their mouths.

I condemn these attacks "but" if nationalists didnt do this or didnt do that they wouldnt be attacked.

They should come out and say what they really mean, I condemn these attacks "But" if the taigs didnt live here in the first place they wouldnt be attacked.

Truth of the matter is the DUP want nothing more than a responce from the IRA to these attacks. They would then be tripping over themselves to get to a TV camera to talk of ethnic cleansing.

Tir Eoghean Gael

Could you show me the "but" in this statement?

"Last week when the mayor (DUP councillor Tommy Nicholl) unreservedly condemned any and all such attacks, he spoke with the authority of my party and it goes without saying that I too condemn these attacks and call for them to end," Mr Paisley said. (source UTV website)

Tyrone Gael

No answer to my question big lad?

"They are unionists. They believe in the Union between Britain and this country.
They are operating a unionist agenda (albeit a particularly twisted one)"

"loyalist or,more accurately, unionist paramilitaries?"

I await the description of the PIRA, RIRA, CIRA and INLA as 'nationalist paramilitaries'...

Mike

Like most people I know, I don't possess the sheer pig-ignorance to offend my neighbours and friends who are nationalists by attempting to put them in the same group as the thugs of the above listed groups. What a pity the Sinn Feiner posters on here are so bereft of manners that the cannot see the offense they cause with this disgraceful (mis)use of terminology.

I think they're gearing up for an "All Prods are the same" election slogan.

On the terminology: isn't it simply the case that 'loyalist' means 'working class unionist'? Talk about 'unionist paramilitaries' is not wholly wrong then, although it mischeviously suggests that because some paramilitaries are unionists, all unionists somehow support paramiltaries (which is clearly wrong, lest anyone misundersand me!).

'Nationalist paramilitaries' is a bit trickier for although these groups are more or less nationalist, the 'nationalist'/'republican' distinction is not primarily about class, but about different attitudes to violence, so 'nationalist paramilitaries' is rather silly (in this context).

Last week UDA suporters and DUP councillors took part in the Ballymena demonstration together, as they have so often before. Ian Paisley Jun. had previously publicly threatened loyalist violence if a march he disapproved of took place. The Orange Order marches to bands with open paramilitary affiliations.

Both unionist parties court the loyalist vote so assiduously that in their 'courageous' condemnations of violence they cannot even name the groups they claim to condemn. Even Eames 'the voice of the UUP at prayer' in his longdelayed statement felt the need for the usual generous helping of 'What about the IRA?'.

If it walks like a duck.........!

"Ian Paisley Jun. had previously publicly threatened loyalist violence if a march he disapproved of took place."

Dates? Reference?

Lib, seeing as you know so much, perhaps you could answer my question?

If it walks like a duck.........!

It's a goose.

Sensitive folks, some of our unionist friends. They appear to wish that they not be counted along with those unionists of a more paramilitary bent.

The problem for them is, however, that they share common political goals, loyalties, culture, and membership in secretive anti-Catholic organizations.

If those unionists, who disdain their more violent brethren, want to be taken seriously, they could start along the road of re-branding by avoiding any involvement in provocative marches into those areas where they may not be welcomed by the local community, who do not share their jubilation in their annual commemorations of ethnic cleansing through the ages.

Watching sombre Unionist politicians walking side by side with many well known loyalist thugs confuses the impressionable and simple nationalists into thinking that perhaps the said politicians are not so offended by behaviour of the said thugs.

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck.......

Grammaticus

"No answer to my question big lad?"

I take it you are referring to your question about the attack in the mountpottinger area.

I take from your assertion that you witnessed the attack in question and can prove otherwise that it wasnt "unionist" thugs that carried out the attack as claimed. If that is the case then I will take your word for it, but if you wer'nt there then I will deal with the information I am given on this thread.

You could cherry pick everyone of those incidents and try and find and find an alternative motive for the attack that suits your own agenda, feuding neighbours is a good one thats being used at the moment by the PSNI`s Paul Leighton.

I quite enjoyed Danny Morrisons take on the UVFs true intentions... (hope this link works)

hyperlink

"This is why, inspite of their brutality, many nationists look to the IRA for their protection."

Give me one instance where the IRA provided this "protection"?

Veritas (a misnomer surely?)

The only re-branding going on is by SF/IRA and it is a pathetic insidious attempt to brand an entire community, who reject paramilitarism in election after election, with an epithet that is entirely false.

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck.......

Its a grebe.

Hmm sorry all, didn't work for me.

This is the link

edit link/url to fix formatting - mod

the dossier is the truth and nothing but the truth.loyalists are on the rampage and unionists need to get a grip before some dies.Tommy Nicholl said 99.9% of the people in ahoghill were decent.I think its considerbly less.it will be interesting to see what happens in rasharkin on friday night with the arrival of 46 loyalist bands(some with uda and uvf connections) and thousands of supporters hell bent on causing mayhem.Its being organised by aband not even from rasharkin(ballymaconnelly sons of conquers?Epect more attacks on catholics to follow in the next couple of days and the psni's failure to meet the critera of a credible police force

"I take from your assertion that you witnessed the attack in question and can prove otherwise that it wasnt "unionist" thugs"

Sinn Fein made the allegations, it's up to them to provide the evidence, not up to unionists to prove that it wasn't some (non-existant?) "unionist" thugs.

if in the area between ballycastle and carnlough an anti protestant campaign started the police would be crawling all over the place,preventing any such attacks.Thats the difference in the policing.unionists would furious calling for extreme measures and loyalists would resume killing catholics

Daitho, morrison may well be right about loyalist violence having reached the point where it's no longer reactionary, that I won't argue with. But he ignores the fact that because there is no (p?)IRA violence (assuming we accept that assertion) that there is no republican violence, as witnessed from Lurgan to Londonderry in the past week or so alone.

Standard disclaimer: NONE of that excuses the disgraceful attacks in Ahoghill, which should never have happened and the scumbags who did it should be locked up and probably wouldn't be missed.

Morrison may have a point, or he may not. Either way, his argument may sound more rational were he not being such a hypocrite.

reality check - would catholics accept the PSNI 'crawling all over the place', whether to protect them or not, or would the standard busloads from rent-a-mob be shipped in to start a riot?

jo,

The Provisional IRA grew out of the fight to defend the Northern ghettoes, particularly the Short Strand. Instead of repeating 'rhetorical' questions that have been answered time and again why not read a book?

I didn't agree with their tactics, nor did you, but it's too early for revisionism. Too many witnesses still alive. ;-)

Lib:

I'll excuse your patronising tone because of your ;-) but can't resist adding that, in fact, I have been collecting books on most aspects of NI politics since I completed my PhD on an aspect of the political situation here....

Jo, only on "an aspect"?

"loyalist violence ... no longer reactionary"

disgusting, beano

it was never reactionary, an you know it!

Hmm... : "On the terminology: isn't it simply the case that 'loyalist' means 'working class unionist'? "

Not really, although the two often overlap. Loyalism, from what I understand of it at least, seems to be much more ethnically focused. It's very rare to find someone who is rationally loyalist in that their views follow some conscious rational reasoning. They also tend to be much more sectarian. Unfortunate but true. I've tried to understand people who refer to themselves as loyalist, but all I can gain from most as to the basis of their political beliefs is "I'm a Protestant."

There is also the obvious difference that loyalists almost exclusively support the use of violence. Unionists more often support the state as the only entity legally entitled to the use of force.

Brendan:

Yes, an aspect - the generalist political history has been somewhat done to death.

The allegation that people look to the IRA for protection has always intrigued me. I've never met anyone, ever, who has sought protection in this way. The only documented example I can think of is one Bernadette Devlin reecalls from the march in Jan 69 to Derry, near Burntollet, where Derry IRA men challenged one of her fellow marchers who was having a pee in the night!

The St Matthews gun battle in 1970 has been mythologised as a battle defending the Short Strand but IRA snipers shooting Orange men from a Catholic church didnt exactly fit with an image of fighting for unity of Protestant Catholic and Dissenter right from the outset...

Every single post on this thread is an embarrassment.

Fanny wrote:

"Every single post on this thread is an embarrassment."

I concur. Let's embarrass the unionists again, shall we:

JUNE 2005
2nd June - Blast bombs thrown at two homes in Ahorey, Richill in a racist attack on Eastern
European workers.
3rd June - Loyalist feud erupts in violence inside the Belfast court complex.

large chunk of original post unnecessarily repeated. Removed - mod

16th August - St. Mary’s Catholic Church, Ahoghill paint bombed
16th August - Pipe bomb left outside home, Windslow, Carrickfergus

unnecessary repetition of original post removed - mod

Proof if proof were needed that unionism is basically an extremelt nasty racist movement, fuelled by hatred against (usually defenceless) catholics.

Ahh Sinn Fein, those upholders of truth and justice for all. Where would we be without them eh?

Beano
If unionism is simply a belief that Northern Ireland should remain part of the UK, then loyalism is a variant of unionism rather than something distinct (albeit a violent, sectarian strand of unionism)?

Richard wrote:

"Ahh Sinn Fein, those upholders of truth and justice for all. Where would we be without them eh?"

Governed by Paisley and his DUP/TF?

Denny Boy, what does TF stand for?

I wonder how much credence nationalists on this thread would give to a dossier produced by the UVF detailing attacks on protestants?

TF = Third Force

Paisley never (never, never) disbanded them, or did he?

No idea Denny. Are they responsible for any of the incidents alleged in the dossier?

Richard

"No idea Denny. Are they responsible for any of the incidents alleged in the dossier?"

Why not ask Mr Paisley?

The dossier is a timely contribution to the debate about the source of political violence here. In actual fact, the dossier is far from comprehensive- I can think of 4 sectarian attacks by loyalists in Stoneyford village since July, as well as a number of incidents across Lisburn not reported.

Grammaticus
"to brand an entire community, who reject paramilitarism in election after election"

What community would that be? The Chinese community?
It's hardly the nationalist or unionist communities who vote for extremists with links/connections/associaitons with paramilitaries.

This entire thread is a disgrace. I realize that Unionists feel defensive when loyalists are attacked in such a vile manner as Sinn Fein has done with this vicious dossier. (nudge, wink) But, really, can Unionists on this board not even see that by getting so defensive about it, jumping immediately into the whatabouttery game, they just align themselves more closely with their more thuggish Orange Order brethren? It's really no wonder that Sinn Fein has Unionists on the back foot.

It certainly is a shameful dossier but I have to agree with some of the posters on why it only highlights loyalist violence when there's obviously been sectarain attacks on Protestants during the same period, most noticeably in the Fountain.

Any party claiming to be nationalist should be highlighting ALL attacks and not just those emanating from the 'other side'. Is this how low zero-sum politics has sunk in NI where we even now have separate lists detailing sectarian and paramilitary attacks?

We should be calling for solidarity with the families of Craig McCausland and Robert McCartney whatever our religion or political viewpoint; we should take a leaf out of the Protestant churches in Ballymena and actively help our Catholic neighbours who have been the victims of sectarian attacks; likewise Catholics living near the Fountain should show common cause with their Protestant neighbours by offering to help with the clean up operation or house repairs. Even the smallest gestures will get up the noses of the people perpetrating these crimes and may even shame them into stopping momentarily to think about what the hell they are doing.

Jo

I was on the Newtownards Road that night and it was indeed a battle. The Newtownards Road is not a wide road and the attackers crossed it on more than one occasion which is somewhat different from the image given by your use of the word 'sniper'.

If I understand your post correctly you would have preferred the Orangemen to have the same kind of 'victory' that they had previously in Bombay Street and other parts of Belfast but surely you recognise that one doesn't have to be a sectarian bigot to feel otherwise.

[removed - Mod]

Heartening to see SF speak out against the disruption of DPP meetings. Well done.

Moderator,

Could you please remove my remark about jo's degree. Man not ball!

[Hmm.. perhaps you should pause before posting a comment in future, lib - Mod]

I keep asking this, but never get an answer. If people in unionists areas reject paramilitarism then why won't they take down the UVF/UDA flags on their lampposts and why don't they paint over the UVF/UDA murals on their gable-ends ?

''There is also the obvious difference that loyalists almost exclusively support the use of violence. Unionists more often support the state as the only entity legally entitled to the use of force.'

So Unionists support the state whose security apparatus was in collusion with Loyalist sectarian killers of Catholics--so in other words Unionists also support sectarian murders of Catholics by Loyalists they just dont want to get their hands dirty.

Martin: So Unionists support the state whose security apparatus was in collusion with Loyalist sectarian killers of Catholics--so in other words Unionists also support sectarian murders of Catholics by Loyalists they just dont want to get their hands dirty.

Nope - Unionists think the above description of a few bad apples combined with the inevitable downside of infiltration as systematic collusion is biased at best. After all - the Stakeknife infiltration wasn't called collusion, was it?

David H,

with the Stakeknife infiltration and others there was a bizare state of affairs where informers in the IRA were given a free pass to kill members of the British security forces and not face prosecution as in the case of RUC constable David EDDE-(probably spelt wrong).

So in a kind of perverse way the British agents running these informers was conducting the IRAs war against the Northen Ireland state.

so now we have the British security apparatus running the Loyalist sectarian campaign against Nationalists ,and running the IRA s campaign against the Unionists.

To be fair I dont think most Unionists have any idea as to how many bad apples there actually were- I dont think it was just a case of a few bad apples-there were lots of bad apples and collusion saw more widespread than many Unionists would care to believe.

"I keep asking this, but never get an answer. If people in unionists areas reject paramilitarism then why won't they take down the UVF/UDA flags on their lampposts and why don't they paint over the UVF/UDA murals on their gable-ends ?"

Well, speaking from my own experience, I was too shit scared to remove them.
My sister bought an awning to go over the top of her front door and she was told to take it down by the local paramilitary bigwig, cos it was green, and it offended him.She duly obliged, as I would have done.
It's very easy to be brave when you don't live next door to the fuckers.
And people Like mo Mowlam basically announcing that they can operate with impunity, as long as they only kill their co-religionists does not inspire people from within the unionst community to speak out against them.

I am delighted to see that Sinn Fein now sees sectarian violence and thuggery, which may or may not be vaguely politically motivated, as wrong and worthy of being highlighted as they have done.

They are, of course, correct, and their conversion to this viewpoint and genuine concern for the victims of such wanton violence is very welcome.

I know this is a dossier compiled by Sinn Fein and I know they have compiled it because it is politically useful for them to do so, but the fact is that Sinn Fein are not the issue here.

All of the incidents in the dossier were public knowledge before the dossier was published. All the incidents will have received media coverage and will have been logged by police. So the credibility or otherwise of Sinn Fein is actually irrelevant. There's no new information in the dossier and very little of it is actually contentious - what IS new though (and very powerful too) is to see all these incidents catalogued and compiled in one place.

So as I say, Sinn Fein's credibility or lack thereof is actually a red herring. All this information will most likely have simply been picked up from various newspapers.

The issue surely is that loyalist violence still plagues us?

Maybe some of our unionist friends can help us to understand what it is that ails the unionist family to the extent that such horrendous catalogue of symptoms can be compiled?

martin: To be fair I dont think most Unionists have any idea as to how many bad apples there actually were- I dont think it was just a case of a few bad apples-there were lots of bad apples and collusion saw more widespread than many Unionists would care to believe.

I note a considerable easing in the tone of this post over the previous one! Do you accept the following - 1) Most Unionists do not believe in collusion to the extent that you do; and 2) To anyone who supports the union, the British state still looks morally superior to both the loyalist and republican paramilitaries by a massive margin.

DavidH

)" Most Unionists do not believe in collusion to the extent that you do; and 2) To anyone who supports the union, the British state still looks morally superior to both the loyalist and republican paramilitaries by a massive margin."

yes I would accept the 2 points with the qualification that I think Unionists have become more aware of the much greater scale of collusion that existed than they had first believed--I think nowadays there is Certain level of denial in the Unionist community that the forces of the British state didnt exactly play as clean as they would have liked to have believed.
My qualification relates to the ordinary Unionist man/woman on the streets who would have had no time for sectarian killings carried out in their names---not their political leaders whom I believe many had a fair knowledge of what was going on.

JO,

"The St Matthews gun battle in 1970 has been mythologised as a battle defending the Short Strand but IRA snipers shooting Orange men from a Catholic church didnt exactly fit with an image of fighting for unity of Protestant Catholic and Dissenter right from the outset..."

I would be interested to know the sources from which you obtained this perspective of the battle of the Short Strand.

jo

Sorry for being away from my computer for a while. I hope you check this tread before you go to another days blogging. You asked for one example where the IRA provided protection to nationalists. Let me give you one from my own experience.

I have not lived in Northern Ireland for over 25 years but when I lived there north Belfast was terrorized by the Shankill butchers. I was out with a friend of mine on a Friday night and 30 minutes after I left him he was kidnapped by Lenny Murphy and his gang. This bunch of loyalist thugs killed him and many others. So confident were they of not being caught by the police that they would take their dates on their killing sprees in their black taxi. The cavorted with members of the UDR and had enough security force contacts to kill an informer inside crumlin rd jail.

In spite of what Martin Dillon wrote in his otherwise excellent book the RUC did not do much to catch this gang.

In the end it was the IRA who identified the killers, turned a loyalist godfather to get information on their leader’s movements, and then put and end to his reign of terror. In the process they save many innocent Catholics who would have suffered the same fate had Lenny Murphy not been killed.

To me the people who took out Lenny Murphy are heroes.

I have never voted Sinn Fein but if I was still in Belfast this one act would guarantee them my vote.

Jo,

I'll help out Headmelter with his question to you as your comments clearly have been drawn from reading the usual uninformed political text books. I live in Short Strand and recently (as part of The St Matthews Festival), a talk was organised to discuss and recollect the events surrounding what became known as The Battle of St Matthews. I was just six years old at the time and it remains my most vivid childhood memory. Being awakened in the early hours of the morning by the sound of rapid bursts of gunfire and sitting with my family downstairs as all hell broke loose outside. The seminar last week had contributions from many people caught up in the trouble. From victims families, Republicans,the C.D. organisation (which emerged in Short Starnd as an independant defence organisation and incredibly still exists to this day). One thing however is without doubt. If it had not been for the actions of The that night, the area would have sufferered an onslaught from the dozens of armed loyalists who attacked it. We can all pontificate (rightly) about the sheer madness of violence, but this was a different time. A frightening spasm in our history when entire communities were faced with being burnt out and many lost their lives. 'Mythology' is not how the local people view those events. Tragedy, fear and yes, a certain pride for those who defended the area are how it is remembered. It's eventual historical significance is now well documented, but at the time it was just another case of a small, isolated and very vunerable community defending itself. After all, who else would have done so?

Sinn Fein should look in the mirror.

Where is the outcome of the IRA/SF statement?

What about this Northern Bank robery, makro robbery and cigarette heists?

And the many other punishments beatings etc etc that the IRA have been responsible for in recent times? What did Liam Kennedy stand against in West Belfast in the May GE?

Any sectarian attack should be condemned - whether loyalist, republican or otherwise. However please note Sinn Fein, these loyalist groups responsible for these attacks are not inextricably linked to any major Unionist party, unlike the IRA to Sinn Fein.

These attacks are not in the name of Unionism, but in the name of bigotry and sectarianism.

"In spite of what Martin Dillon wrote in his otherwise excellent book the RUC did not do much to catch this gang.

In the end it was the IRA who identified the killers, turned a loyalist godfather to get information on their leader’s movements, and then put and end to his reign of terror. "

In reality, most of the Shankill Butchers gang were arrested, tried and convicted years before Murphy was killed.

Please! Listen to yourselves - cherry-picking, political point scoring and all the usual generous portions of whataboutery.

The bottom line is - paramilitaries on the loyalist side are currently running amok in this country with a sustained campaign of hate, intimidation and murder. Then there's the whole argument that the current loyalist feud is in fact little more than a drug/turf war but we won't go into that here.

As someone who was brought up in a protestant background and who lives in East Belfast, it is absolutely clear to me that unionist/loyalist politicians are doing VERY VERY LITTLE in the way of speaking out against the actions of those living within the communities they claim to represent.

Surely if there was a coherent and vociferous strategy on the behalf of ALL Unionist/Loyalist leaders to undermine these vile people then we might have a chance of actually moving forward in this country.

What do we get instead? Big Ian says he backs up something which some other DUPer said up in Ballymena in a quiet way last week sometime. I mean, the contrast between this and their typical reaction towards republican/nationalist violence is absolutely startling.

If I didn't know better, I could swear the DUP were somewhat biased in their attitude towards loyalist violence.

PLEASE MAKE IT STOP! ALL OF IT! WE DESERVE BETTER!

Mike

And it's just as easy to say that loyalists were happy to use the IRA to knock off their rivals.

Is it a coincidence that there was a lot less loyalist fueds during the troubles than there has been recently.

Visioneer-unionist politicans are in the orange order and march with paramilitary bands linked to uda/uvf.they sit with them on parades forums and happily let them marshall orange parades.you couldnt get any more inextricable

"you couldnt get any more inextricable"

Well you could.

For instance, if elected politicians were also members of illegal organisations, that would be "more" inextricable.

Who do republicans think they are convincing with all this stuff?
It's not as if the nationalist electorate need the wool pulled over their eyes, they have shown that they're happy to vote for terrorists.
And the unionist electorate are hardly likely to be moved by Sinn Fein speeches denounicing terrorism.

What's to be gained by this deliberate demonisation of all unionists?

I defy anyone ere to tell me that they wouldn't be offended by the term nationalist paramilitaries.

Denny Boy,

"Let's embarrass the unionists again, shall we:"

It seems like you are more concerned with point scoring with those you label unionists than bringing an an end to this mindless violence.

"Loyalist flags erected in mixed Lisburn Road area"

I would hardly call erecting the national flag of this country an "attack from Unionist Paramilitary groups".

I think Sinn Fein have pushed the self victimisation boat out just a little bit too far on this one....

"5th August - Further rioting on the Crumlin Road."

Sinn Fein would know all about rioting on the Crumlin Road. This is becoming a joke! Some people have no shame....

"12th Nationalist residents in Lower Ormeau attacked by stone throwing loyalists taking part in
12th parade."!

As news reports will confirm it was actually nationalists youths who through stones at a parade on Stranmillis embankment.

So much for accuracy....

Macswiney, thanks.
I don't suppose the seminars were documented? I know it is unlikely but I would be really interested.

"...Orange Parade through Ardoyne, Mountainview and the Dales in North Belfast."

There have been no orange order parades through Ardoyne, Mountainview or the Dales this year.

If the parade had gone up the ardoyne road THEN it would have been goin through Ardoyne. It when past a few shop fronts not through a housing area.

I see there is no mention made to attacks on protestant homes.

Quite surprising from the party "building an Ireland of Equals".

Good point Real World, I think it would have been a lot more hard hitting if it had included ALL attacks. Granted if a similar list was compiled of nationalist/republican attacks on Protestants it would no doubt be a lot shorter, nonetheless, a complete dossier of all sectarian and paramilitary attacks would definitely have a wider impact.

Instead of just focusing on loyalist attacks the dossier should have been called, 'Northern Ireland: It Doesn't Work'. The list SF have compiled is a litany of shame, 80 odd yrs after partition and 11 yrs into a peace process and still this crap goes on to the point where it's now almost casualised.

On the loyalist flags point :

"Well, speaking from my own experience, I was too shit scared to remove them."

What about the politicans you vote for ? Wouldn't they want to get them removed ? Are the elected politicans scared of the paramilitaries ?

Stalin: There are Catholics with UFF/UVF murals on their walls for the precise reason that they've got no say in the matter. I'm pretty sure they don't support the sectarian murder squads.

The murals are there to ensure that the impression is given that levels of public support are greater than they actually are.

"Are the elected politicans scared of the paramilitaries ?"

What makes the politicains any more immune to a bullet than any of the ordinary working class protestants you mentioned should be removing the flags/murals in your previous post?

Real world-attacks on protestant homes would be mentioned if there actually was any.Your attempt to divert attention away from the anti-catholic pogram being executed, with unionists and the psni looking on in north antrim is pathetic.Just accept the truth.Though iy may upset you but attacking catholic homes is sectarian and a criminal offence.its not 1969 anymore you know

"Real world-attacks on protestant homes would be mentioned if there actually was any."

Why jump in with one foot when you ca jump in with two? Some sectarian attacks on protestants that have taken place during the same period as SF/IRA's report.

The ongoing attacks on the Fountain
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/3226323.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/4150784.stm

Attacks on suffolk
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/4689081.stm

Attacks on cluan place
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/4683047.stm

An attack in Glenbryn (please note the person in this mentioned a long number of attacks in a previous debate I mentioned an attack on his home which you denied ever happened)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/4677767.stm

An attack at the start of the Apprentice boys parade
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/4147488.stm

Sectarian petrol bombing of Ainsworth Avenue
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/4673933.stm

An attempted sectarian attack gone wrong
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/4677835.stm

This includes reference to sectarian attacks on Donegall Pass and Glenbryn
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/4692103.stm

A sectarian attack on people driving past the Markets
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/4643223.stm

The sectarian attack on the Twelfth parade and the Tour of the North parade at Ardoyne. The illegal protests in Dunloy and Kilrea on the twelfth. In the past couple of days there was a sectarian attack on a Protestnat family in Doury road Ballymena and two protestant homes in Rathfriland.

Also to boost its figures the Sinn Fein report included general paramilitary activity other than sectarian attacks we have a number of recent bomb attacks ie vaiable devices and hoaxes with associated rioting blamed on 'dissidents'.

Here is the republican equivalent of the loyalist disruption of the policing partnershipo meeting;
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/4664111.stm

The tricolour argument in Limavady looks like the equivalent of the complainst in the is report of flags in Dunmurry and Lisburn Road.

Here is a republican punishment shooting in Strabane
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/4706193.stm

And for good measure some racist attacks, one in nationalist village Kilrea and the nationalist Obins street area
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/4130624.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/4667679.stm
Should I aslo mention the ongoing pattern of homophobic attacks in Londonderry?

Sectarianism exists in both communities. A culture of violence exists in both communities. Accept that and you begin to tackle it. Deny it and you perpetuate it.

"What makes the politicains any more immune to a bullet than any of the ordinary working class protestants you mentioned should be removing the flags/murals in your previous post?"

I didn't mention "ordinary working class Protestants", I would never use a cliched tribalist phrase like that in any contribution.

I do not expect the people in the neighbourhoods to stand up to paramilitarism - it is admirable when they do so but also deadly. Instead I expect their political leadership to do it. Our politicans are entitled to police guard and can hold a personal protection weapon, when is the last time a serving unionist politician was assassinated by loyalists ?

If all of the unionist politicians united on this point, and got the police on side, the paramilitaries wouldn't be able to move. Now if you're saying that unionist politicians don't have the balls to put their money where their mouth is over paramilitarism, fair enough.

But what I really suspect is that the unionist politicians don't oppose paramilitarism strongly enough to actually come out against it. That is where the whole problem lies.

I wouldn't like to see a list of Provisional nationalist paramilitary incidents.

The Provos have some cheek!

Olibhear Chromaill

The UVF were founded by the founding fathers of the Unionist Party (Carson and Craig) ...

No. The UVF in question was founded by Gusty Spence. You're (probably deliberately) mixing up two organisations of the same name.

Comrade Stalin

I keep asking this, but never get an answer. If people in unionists areas reject paramilitarism then why won't they take down the UVF/UDA flags on their lampposts and why don't they paint over the UVF/UDA murals on their gable-ends ?

Is this a serious question? The answer is fear, you fool!

fair deal-illegal protests in dunloy and kilrea?what about the one in ballymena on the 9th of august where dup councillors sam gaston,robin sterling,paul frew and roy gillespie stood with an illegal protest consisting of masked loyalists waving uda flags and possessing the intent to attack catholics and their property.Later that night cars owned by bandsmen and catholic homes in suffolk st were attacked.the named coucillors seemed to be happy with the company they were in and mervyn storey praising the protest though it was illegal and was clearly organised by the uda.

Is this a serious question? The answer is fear, you fool!

Would it then, perhaps, perchance, by some stretch of the imagination, not then be too much of a leap to suggest that a goodly chunk of the "fear" that feeds the "seige mentality" has as its source not the IRA but, in fact, the Loyalists?

Ciaran

Would it then, perhaps, perchance, by some stretch of the imagination, not then be too much of a leap to suggest that a goodly chunk of the "fear" that feeds the "seige mentality" has as its source not the IRA but, in fact, the Loyalists?

No, it would be too much of a leap. The source of the fear to which I referred was indeed the "loyalist paramilitaries", but this was in respect of fear of removing terrorist flags and emblems, not the "siege mentality". The source of the "siege mentality" is a combination of Irish nationalism and British indifference. If you wish to characterise the "siege mentality" as "fear", then it is a political fear, not a physical fear. The fear of "loyalist paramilitaries", however, is a physical fear.

Reality check

1. I notice you have ignored the central point of my previous post about how sectarianism and violence regrettably is the preserve of no one community. I take it, as you have stranegely focused on one incident and try to ignore the above evidence you now withdraw your false claim that:

"Real world-attacks on protestant homes would be mentioned if there actually was any."

2. "what about"

You have responded with quite literally whataboutery. If your response on this site to a reasoned and evidenced argument is whataboutery then you have essentially admitted defeat

3. The despicable incidents you mentioned happened after the protest was over. The PSNI asked DUP political representatives to be at the protest to help maintain it as peaceful and publicly thanked them for their assistance (as they thanked Paddy Murray and other parade organisers). Their role on the evening was comparable with that of Martin McGuinness's role at the Dunloy protest.

4. Nationalist and republican commentators have asked Unionists to try and use what little if any influence over those inclined to violence. However, if they do this as exemplified at the Ballymena protest the nationalist republican response is to attack them as you have done. A classic example of some so hellbent on maintianing MOPEry that they can't or won't realise the shear gutless double standards of demanding something, then condemning what they demanded.

5. The 'Our two illegal protests are ok because your community had one too' is utter garbage. It is an example of the sectarian blinkers that excuse sectarianism and violence. I repeat:

"Sectarianism exists in both communities. A culture of violence exists in both communities. Accept that and you begin to tackle it. Deny it and you perpetuate it."

Unfortunately you seem to be happy living in denial and to perpetuate the cycles of sectarianism and violence.

Fair Deal,

Your hypocracy is disgusting.

At least I can condemn all attacks no matter who they are against.

Real World aka Reality Check

1. Please provide an example from this site where I have ever refused to condemn an act of violence. I think a few others on this thread e.g. Comrade Stalin would be able to back me up on that. For example, in my previous post I described the attacks after the republican march as despicable.

2. In this thread I have never tried to deny sectarian attacks were Catholics were the victim while you have tried to deny that there have been sectarian attacks were Protestants were the victims ie "Real world-attacks on protestant homes would be mentioned if there actually was any"

3. As you seem to have a difficulty with the following simple message I will repeat it a third time:

"Sectarianism exists in both communities. A culture of violence exists in both communities. Accept that and you begin to tackle it. Deny it and you perpetuate it"

4. "I can condemn all attacks no matter who they are against."

I wish that were true but I am afraid you don't. Over recent violence at Ardoyne you did not do so for example you excused the sectarian assault by Celtic fans on Twadell as "drink culutre". The sectarian stoning of the Tour of the North parade you excused as young people taking "umbrage".

Fair deal-I feel the need to clear your up misunderstandings about me.I enuciate i condemn all the attacks on protestants by republicans you mentioned,especially the repeated petrol bombings of the fountainI'm not the not crazed,fanatical anti-protestant bigot you think i am.far from it in fact.These sort of cowardly attacks do nothing for the republican cause and are detrimenal to the peace process.the main point im making is that the loyalist attacks are organised and carried out by paramilitaries.Republican attacks are carried out by mindless,hoods with no political direction or organisation.I trust you will fogive my lack of knowledge on the amount of incidents regarding attacks on protestant homes.I CONDEMN THESE ATTACKS!That said i still believe its more of a problem in the loyalist community and needs to be seriously addressed.Regarding Ballymena,i'm perturbed as to why the Dup politicans looked comfortable standing with individuals carrying uda flags.They made no condemnation of this.I question the logic of the protest.loyalists from ahoghill,cullybackey,broughshane,harryvlle,ballykeel and ballee.Presumably the ahoghill ones were going to petrol bomb homes.Why did they come from all overto be offended by a parade in a catholic estate?There was no intimidation of the few protestant families in Fisherwick and Robin Stirling and Roy Gillespie were free to observe the parade from inside the estate.No threats of violence or violence.Compare this parade to the recent loyalist one in rasharkin.attacks the night before and uda and uvf bands marching through a catholic area shouting sectarian slogans.

im don't use the name real world for your information.
Why would i use another name?

Reality check

Thank you for that last post. I honestly believe it is the most reasoned contribution I have read from yourself.

As for my mistaken assumption that real world and yourself were the same individual I apologise. The similarity is style led me to a false assumption.

On Ballymena and the surrounding area only a fool would try and deny there are serious problems and I have no intention of looking foolish.

I do not agree entirely with your portrayal of the republican march in Ballymena for example paramilitary garb was worn and pro-INLA chants shouted by bandsmen. However those plus the matter of the UDA flags are for the PSNI and courts to deal with.

The DUP representatives may believe their blanket condemnation of paramilitarism covers flags. It may have been a judgement call of keeping the crowd peaceful was more important that tackling those who had UDA flags. However, because of the divided nature of our society condemning what is a specific concern of the other community has its merits and this could be an example when a Unionist poltical representative could have been more responsive to something nationalists viewed with concern.

Personally, I had no objection to the original route applied for by the republican parade. I believe in freedom of assembly, association and speech so I do not seek to deny it to others. For those who disagree with what the parade represents or advocates they have the right to peaceful protest.

As Martin Luther King once said "we have got to learn to disagree without being violently disagreeable". Such a process is not easy at various times while parading I have been had things thrown at me, spat at and verbally abused. It was mighty tempting to respond but I managed some self-restraint. Also we will have failures but ultimately it must be where we get everyone in Northern Ireland to if we are to have a truly peaceful society.

This is an extremely depressing thread. Above all else it confirms to me the raw hatred that nationalism holds for the entire unionist population. There are no good guys in their view, just unionist scum out to oppress catholics.

That aside, unionists urgently need to confront the cancerous sectarian mindset within sections of the community which feeds the "pond life" who are executing a vicious campaign of intimidation and violence against their neighbours.

Never mind the "whataboutery". This is an issue for unionism to deal with and should not be ignored on the basis of "they do it too". Neither should the need to deal with it, be based on a desire to remove the ammunition from those that use it to demonise a whole community. They will always find another way and they certainly will not change their view of unionists.

This is a moral imperative and a pre-condition to ever building a wholesome community within unionism, never mind trying to go further and build a wholesome community across NI.

We need to stand up to the bully boys and "pond life" that are tearing our communities apart and robbing our children of a decent future.

I was born and bred in a little village called Stoneyford, now much maligned, probably for good reason. About fifteen years ago a certain yob element started to assert themselves within the area and suddenly paramilitary flags appeared on lamp posts around the 12th. One appeared outside my mothers home. She, at sixty five years old, took it down and handed it to the ringleader, telling him to stick it in his own house. Surprisingly they slithered away back to their pond. That approach is not always sensible in certain areas, where paramilitaries have a greater hold. It may no longer be an option in Stoneyford. However, we need to do more than we are doing now. Don't use nationalism as an excuse for not setting our own house in order.

DK

Fair play to your mother. Now let me tell you about an incident last month in your home village.

A protestant lady, in similar manner, objected to flags being erected in front of her home. Unfortunately, her fate was different. She had her windows broken, as did the unfortunate catholic lady living next door- the latter has since moved out, the former remains, though now living in fear.

What is the response from local DUP cllr. Cecil Calvert- or indeed MP Jeffrey Donaldson? Why to blame Sinn Fein/ IRA for causing trouble and riaisng tensions in the village.

Now, I ask, who is going to take on these people within the Unionist community?

irishman

Shame on Calvert, (a man of limited intellect). The people who should be taking on "these people", are of course the local protestant community. The minister of the local Church of Ireland should be leading the charge in the absence of any responsible political leadership. The local Orange Lodge, once on the whole populated by decent people, is probably now infected by the cancer and therefore part of the problem. Shame on them too.

The main point is that it is up to that community to sort it out for it's own sake as well as that of their neighbours.

SF may well be uping the ante. It's certainly not unheard of. However that is irrelevant. It is an act of moral cowardice to hide behind such an excuse, real or otherwise. It is also an act of self destruction.

I understand the root cause of the problem in Stoneyford is a hardcore loyalist called Mark Harbinson.He was a supreme advocate of the orange order's right to walk the garvaghy road and his name is mentioned when attacks on catholics in stoneyford take place.He's been linked to the shadowy orange volunteers as well

Fair Deal-im unsure that the dup's condemnation covers flags as well.Loyalist paramilitarism has huge power and ballymena and given the fact there was huge potential for serious trouble that night,perhaps their presence may have calmed the situation down and no hostility was shown to messrs stirling gillespie shows the organisers wanted a peaceful march contributed to lowering tension.though the INLA chants were regrettable.Billy mccaughey offered unionists to sit with nationalists and discuss a way for republicans to articulate their culture in a way acceptable to everyone.Maybe this is the way ahead

reality check

Harbinson is that one that my mother told to stick his flag. Here is an example how one moronic individual has managed to destroy the reputation of what use to be a decent community. There have always been the young wannabe's around with a potential to aggrevate on the 11th night or other such events. As individuals they never got anywhere as the elder members of the community would put them in their place. Harbinson has managed to galvanise them into his fan club and now the community pay the price.

During the worst of the "troubles", Stoneyford managed to escape relatively lightly. The most serious event in my memory was the brutal killing of a catholic father in front of his four young children. The house opposite Calvert's as it happens. Ironically, that foul deed was the work of PIRA. You see Adrian, (the victim), was a lorry driver who committed the crime of delivering materials to a police station.

That said, Adrian had previously rented my house whilst I was working oversea's. Someone took exception and smashed all the windows to drive Adrian out. It happened around the same time as the flag incident. We always suspected Harbinson and his young gang of hoods.

Harbinson is a splendid example of the "pond life" that I have referred to earlier. In my view it is unfair to use his crimes to demonise the entire community, as appears to be the case in many contributions to this thread. However, if that's what people want to do then so be it. It should not detract from the long overdue need for the community to put him in his place, ie a cell for a long time.

Reality check

"Billy mccaughey offered unionists to sit with nationalists and discuss a way for republicans to articulate their culture in a way acceptable to everyone.Maybe this is the way ahead"

1. I would need some more convincing on this. Is it not up to a community or political organisation to articulate itself rather than have its message or culture vetted by another political group? Dialogue and negotiation has its uses however sometimes it can be used to try and avoid living and accepting some of the basics required to share a divided community.
2. Billy McCaughey's authority to negotiate I think is limited.

Fair Deal-im not saying it would be easy in anyway.A lot of difficulties would need to be overcome.Considering both sf and sdlp were against the parade means any future parade/event would have to be consented by them to then negotiate with unionists.Billy mccaughey wasn't opposed to the parade hence his absence.the fact a local leading loyalist wasn't opposed gave it credence though billy has no mandate.His vote of around 150 in the council election confirms your belief

DK-mr harbinson is well known to the police.he has regulary appeared in local papers and is said to be a leader of a paramilitary linked band in stoneyford.Surely the psni must have something on him?

I thought Billy McCaughey offered some real hope in Ballymena with his more thoughtful attitude to the parade in Fisherwick.

Let me be clear, though. I didn't support the parade as I saw it for what it was: an attempt by a small group of dissident-minded individuals to get free publicity and undermine the more productive approach of people like Philip McGuigan and Monica Digney, who have more successfully articulated nationalist concerns in the strongly loyalist town.

I wouldn't be surprised if McCaughey did meet with Sinn Fein. Such a move would leave the DUP apopleptic- and undoubtedly be reminiscent of the post-GFA days, when the DUP sabre-rattled to no avail as the 'snakes' had signed up to the deal. (that said, I wouldn't be too optimistic on this front; regardless of McCaughey's view, there are plenty of loyalists willing to march to the sectarian beat.

reality check

there is the small matter of evidence that will stand up in court. There are many people walking around who the PSNI, (and the proverbial dogs in the street), know to be, or to have been part of the leadership of paramilitary gangs, never mind bands. Some of them may even be public representatives. It doesn't mean that the PSNI can just lift them. I dare say there would be an outcry from all the usual "human rights" groups if they tried to. Look waht happened when they were told to lift the despicable Sean Kelly!

Unfortunate, but there you have it. We as a society have elected to elevate the rights of the tormentor at the expense of the victims.

irishman-as honourable as he sometimes seems,billy mccaughey usually has a hidden agenda.he has been noted in his support for uvf flags/murals in b'mena but regulary campaigns for a de-sectarianised environment for everyone.He's desperate to be elected to the council but most people wouldnt even think of coting for him.if there was an event organised for the whole nationalist community i would support it.Though declan o'loan isn't keen on parades or displays of any kind