Martin Mcguinnes dead

[kelvink]

johnxjsc1985 said:

kelvink said:

What a strange remark. I don't remember anybody in the UK having a problem criticising the IRA back in the 70's and 80's. Politicians, the media, the public etc

what a strange reply I don't remember many people being free in N.I to openly criticise the IRA and I am talking of the Public not members of other Para Military organisations.

My family is from Belfast, 2 were in the RUC, 1 had a tree trunk put through his front window by republicans but believe me calling the IRA out in what was (and still is) a predominantly Loyalist Belfast wasn't an issue. There were thousands of small protests against IRA violence. If you think Ulstermen were shy to decry who they saw as the scum of the earth every night in the local pub you need your reality adjusting. I was there frequently during the troubles. As for "how many survived?" er most actually.

[saaby93]

The new word dictionary
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-3935...
shibboleth

a : a word or saying used by adherents of a party, sect, or belief and usually regarded by others as empty of real meaning
the old shibboleths come rolling off their lips — Joseph Epstein

Miriam Webster

When was the last time you saw shibboleth posted on PH?

[SMcP114]

Jinx said:

SMcP114 said:

Well, he's not is he?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenanne_gang

I never thought I'd say this but reading this thread I wish I wish English. I wish I had such a deluded view of current affairs, it makes me wonder what exactly you were being told over there during the Troubles. I suspect it was pretty much the same nonsense 'The Muslims' now face.

For a pretty serious thread this has given me an unexpectedly good laugh.

Controlled does not equal colluded so yes he is a liar.

No you're right mate collusion definitely never happened. Keep it coming

[boobles]

Ziplobb said:

I wonder who will provide the security at the funeral - The IRA or the Police NI ? will he get a 'traditional' IRA funeral ? will members of the British government get an invite and how will that sit with some of the IRA members that will no doubt want to show their faces ?

Paddy will probably go.

[Jinx]

SMcP114 said:

No you're right mate collusion definitely never happened. Keep it coming

Reading fail I never implied collusion never happened.

[speedyman]

Dr Jekyll said:

King Herald said:

Without getting deep into the politics of these numerous situations, when the west decides a regime change is required, when some leader or despot is deemed to have gone too far, then it is okay for us to arrange his overthrow, to take them out, to invade their country. The USA is famous for it, the U.K. not so bad.

Examples?

Noriega in Panama, google it.

[BOR]

SMcP114 said:

I wish I had such a deluded view of current affairs, it makes me wonder what exactly you were being told over there during the Troubles.

We were told nothing, but the extraordinary thing is that we never asked anything.

I think people had a binary attitude to NI, so "our cities are being bombed, therefore you are our enemies, therefore Unionists are on our side, therefore we support Unionism and the actions of the military in maintaining the status quo".

Nobody asks "why" ? It seems like some sort of tribalism, supporting our team regardless whether right or wrong.

Every few years there would be a"World In Action" documentary where a shocked journalist would describe the electoral jerrymandering, and the anti nationalist discrimnination. But nobody gave the slightest of two sts.

Post Partion NI history might be a little complex, but not that complex that people would not be able to understand the reasons for, and the effects of, the Unionist Veto.

I wouldn't even mind if people were still anti nationalist if they at least understood the political set up of of NI, but they don't and never will, because they genuinely don't care why.

[S11Steve]

BOR said:

I wouldn't even mind if people were still anti nationalist if they at least understood the political set up of of NI, but they don't and never will, because they genuinely don't care why.

When you see pre-school kids on one side throwing bottles and stones at passing police cars, and pre-school kids on the other watching burning effigies of the Pope, both backed and cheered on by their parents, is it any wonder that nothing changes?

[BOR]

The state of NI was constructed PRECISELY to achieve as much polarisation of each side as possible.

Inter-breeding of loyalist and nationalist had previously weakened England's hold over Ireland, so had to be avoided.

[Dr Jekyll]

BOR said:

We were told nothing, but the extraordinary thing is that we never asked anything.

I think people had a binary attitude to NI, so "our cities are being bombed, therefore you are our enemies, therefore Unionists are on our side, therefore we support Unionism and the actions of the military in maintaining the status quo".

No they didn't. Most people in England/Scotland/Wales regarded the Unionists claim to be pro British as an embarrassment and Ian Paisley as a dangerous nutter.

The military were not there to support the status quo and certainly not to support Unionism but to assist the police in trying to restrain the thugs on both sides.

[kurt535]

Dr Jekyll said:

BOR said:

We were told nothing, but the extraordinary thing is that we never asked anything.

I think people had a binary attitude to NI, so "our cities are being bombed, therefore you are our enemies, therefore Unionists are on our side, therefore we support Unionism and the actions of the military in maintaining the status quo".

No they didn't. Most people in England/Scotland/Wales regarded the Unionists claim to be pro British as an embarrassment and Ian Paisley as a dangerous nutter.

The military were not there to support the status quo and certainly not to support Unionism but to assist the police in trying to restrain the thugs on both sides.

Back in ohh, must have been late 1980's (?), I was in the briefing as a guest for 2RTR's deployment to the Maze. I clearly remember the OC being at pains to not differentiate between the various factions they'd be overseeing and how their rôle was to keep the peace as far as possible and allow normal people a chance to lead a normal life. That obviously has stayed with me. After the brief we were invited down to the baracks cellars where there were crates and crates and crates of German beer which had to be drunk! Officers and men did indeed drink together till breakfast. I am sure not one person from that group would pass the mourning of McG or Paisley.

[JuniorD]

Dr Jekyll said:

BOR said:

We were told nothing, but the extraordinary thing is that we never asked anything.

I think people had a binary attitude to NI, so "our cities are being bombed, therefore you are our enemies, therefore Unionists are on our side, therefore we support Unionism and the actions of the military in maintaining the status quo".

No they didn't. Most people in England/Scotland/Wales regarded the Unionists claim to be pro British as an embarrassment and Ian Paisley as a dangerous nutter.

The military were not there to support the status quo and certainly not to support Unionism but to assist the police in trying to restrain the thugs on both sides.

When the Army were sent over initially that probably was the case. But then they were asked to police situations and deal with civilian protests that the UK Government didn't know how to handle.

In the recent words of another PH favourite "They sent in the generals and the generals did what generals do".

What developed is now the ignominious history of ALL SIDES.

[chris390]

kurt535 said:

Dr Jekyll said:

BOR said:

We were told nothing, but the extraordinary thing is that we never asked anything.

I think people had a binary attitude to NI, so "our cities are being bombed, therefore you are our enemies, therefore Unionists are on our side, therefore we support Unionism and the actions of the military in maintaining the status quo".

No they didn't. Most people in England/Scotland/Wales regarded the Unionists claim to be pro British as an embarrassment and Ian Paisley as a dangerous nutter.

The military were not there to support the status quo and certainly not to support Unionism but to assist the police in trying to restrain the thugs on both sides.

Back in ohh, must have been late 1980's (?), I was in the briefing as a guest for 2RTR's deployment to the Maze. I clearly remember the OC being at pains to not differentiate between the various factions they'd be overseeing and how their rôle was to keep the peace as far as possible and allow normal people a chance to lead a normal life. That obviously has stayed with me. After the brief we were invited down to the baracks cellars where there were crates and crates and crates of German beer which had to be drunk! Officers and men did indeed drink together till breakfast. I am sure not one person from that group would pass the mourning of McG or Paisley.

In the main the British forces were there to support the police and treat both sides in the same manor but there were over the years units set up to work in a fairly isolated way with limited reporting structures, and although there are numerous tin hat stories of their opperations there is little doubt they aided Unionist in various ways and also allowed IRA opperations in order to maintain anonimity of agents in IRA cells. I have no inside information but had a freind in the FRU, pic below.

[kurt535]

chris390 said:

kurt535 said:

Dr Jekyll said:

BOR said:

We were told nothing, but the extraordinary thing is that we never asked anything.

I think people had a binary attitude to NI, so "our cities are being bombed, therefore you are our enemies, therefore Unionists are on our side, therefore we support Unionism and the actions of the military in maintaining the status quo".

No they didn't. Most people in England/Scotland/Wales regarded the Unionists claim to be pro British as an embarrassment and Ian Paisley as a dangerous nutter.

The military were not there to support the status quo and certainly not to support Unionism but to assist the police in trying to restrain the thugs on both sides.

Back in ohh, must have been late 1980's (?), I was in the briefing as a guest for 2RTR's deployment to the Maze. I clearly remember the OC being at pains to not differentiate between the various factions they'd be overseeing and how their rôle was to keep the peace as far as possible and allow normal people a chance to lead a normal life. That obviously has stayed with me. After the brief we were invited down to the baracks cellars where there were crates and crates and crates of German beer which had to be drunk! Officers and men did indeed drink together till breakfast. I am sure not one person from that group would pass the mourning of McG or Paisley.

In the main the British forces were there to support the police and treat both sides in the same manor but there were over the years units set up to work in a fairly isolated way with limited reporting structures, and although there are numerous tin hat stories of their opperations there is little doubt they aided Unionist in various ways and also allowed IRA opperations in order to maintain anonimity of agents in IRA cells. I have no inside information but had a freind in the FRU, pic below.

Can't disagree very nasty covert stuff did go on but way above your average squaddie's payscale sitting in their sangar waiting for an RPG or sniper round.

[S11Steve]

kurt535 said:

Can't disagree very nasty covert stuff did go on but way above your average squaddie's payscale sitting in their sangar waiting for an RPG or sniper round.

There's still a lot of people bitter about the "random" house searches carried out by the Army, but invariably it was to create a distraction whilst one of the Det went in and bugged another local house. All the locals would come out to jeer and throw things at the search party, leaving the undercover guys to go about their work unhindered.

I'm pretty certain that even though the high level role McGuinness had was widely known, there is probably good reason why he was never brought in for anything, and time will tell whether he was on two opposing payrolls.

[JuniorD]

S11Steve said:

kurt535 said:

Can't disagree very nasty covert stuff did go on but way above your average squaddie's payscale sitting in their sangar waiting for an RPG or sniper round.

There's still a lot of people bitter about the "random" house searches carried out by the Army, but invariably it was to create a distraction whilst one of the Det went in and bugged another local house. All the locals would come out to jeer and throw things at the search party, leaving the undercover guys to go about their work unhindered.

I'm pretty certain that even though the high level role McGuinness had was widely known, there is probably good reason why he was never brought in for anything, and time will tell whether he was on two opposing payrolls.

There has always been the persistent rumour that one of the IRA Army Council was an agent. I doubt it would have been Martin McGuinness. However, if the rumour is true, I think it's fair enough to consider the State as being fully complicit in every death at the hands of the IRA.

[Emanresu]

S11Steve said:

kurt535 said:

Can't disagree very nasty covert stuff did go on but way above your average squaddie's payscale sitting in their sangar waiting for an RPG or sniper round.

There's still a lot of people bitter about the "random" house searches carried out by the Army, but invariably it was to create a distraction whilst one of the Det went in and bugged another local house. All the locals would come out to jeer and throw things at the search party, leaving the undercover guys to go about their work unhindered.

I'm pretty certain that even though the high level role McGuinness had was widely known, there is probably good reason why he was never brought in for anything, and time will tell whether he was on two opposing payrolls.

As someone who experienced these random house searches a few times, let me explain why a lot of people are still bitter. It wasn't just pretending to search someone's house to distract from something else they were doing. It was kicking innocent people's doors in at 2-3 am when they were asleep and had to get up for work the next morning. It was scaring the living bejesus out of small kids who were too young to understand what was going on. It was breaking people's jaws with the butt of a rifle because they dared to protest their innocence. And it's not that they came into houses and had a look for a handgun in someone's knicker drawer, they trashed the houses. Busted walls and ceilings, smashed up TV sets, furniture, crockery and everything else that innocent people worked hard to buy. And there was never any compensation given for anything that was damaged, people had to work hard and replace everything themselves just for the english soldiers to come and do it again any time they felt like it and there was nothing the people could do about it.

I like your theory that Mr McGuiness could have been on opposing payrolls and I too am interested to see what stories come out in the following months. It's well known that the government approached him to become a double agent in his ra days in the 70s. Who's to know he didn't say yes?

[kurt535]

Emanresu said:

S11Steve said:

kurt535 said:

Can't disagree very nasty covert stuff did go on but way above your average squaddie's payscale sitting in their sangar waiting for an RPG or sniper round.

There's still a lot of people bitter about the "random" house searches carried out by the Army, but invariably it was to create a distraction whilst one of the Det went in and bugged another local house. All the locals would come out to jeer and throw things at the search party, leaving the undercover guys to go about their work unhindered.

I'm pretty certain that even though the high level role McGuinness had was widely known, there is probably good reason why he was never brought in for anything, and time will tell whether he was on two opposing payrolls.

As someone who experienced these random house searches a few times, let me explain why a lot of people are still bitter. It wasn't just pretending to search someone's house to distract from something else they were doing. It was kicking innocent people's doors in at 2-3 am when they were asleep and had to get up for work the next morning. It was scaring the living bejesus out of small kids who were too young to understand what was going on. It was breaking people's jaws with the butt of a rifle because they dared to protest their innocence. And it's not that they came into houses and had a look for a handgun in someone's knicker drawer, they trashed the houses. Busted walls and ceilings, smashed up TV sets, furniture, crockery and everything else that innocent people worked hard to buy. And there was never any compensation given for anything that was damaged, people had to work hard and replace everything themselves just for the english soldiers to come and do it again any time they felt like it and there was nothing the people could do about it.

I like your theory that Mr McGuiness could have been on opposing payrolls and I too am interested to see what stories come out in the following months. It's well known that the government approached him to become a double agent in his ra days in the 70s. Who's to know he didn't say yes?

Such house searches are just one example of how to gain civvie and £ support for the IRA amongst local population

[S11Steve]

kurt535 said:

Such house searches are just one example of how to gain civvie and £ support for the IRA amongst local population

Given the highly visible and long standing sectarian split in most towns, the local population was hardly likely to support anyone other than their own, on either side.

[JuniorD]