Caught an interview with Sir Hugh Orde, the politician masquerading as the Chief Constable of the Police Service of Northern Ireland. The issue discussed was the raised threat from republican terrorists (or “dissidents” as the official euphemism would have it) and the news that British Army special forces have been sent to Northern Ireland to raise intelligence on this terror group. The BBC chose to frame the interview by pointing out that Sinn Fein and the SDLP are very unhappy about this and then Orde was asked to explain himself. Bias Number One; The BBC saw no need to ask what unioniss think about this, presumably they are not worth hearing from. Is it possible some may actually welcome anti-terrorist moves?? Bias Number Two; The BBC now likes to pretend that Sinn Fein and the IRA are somehow strangers in the night and treats the bleating of this collective of terrorists and their depraved advocates as the new moral majority. Why does the BBC not explain that the Sinn Fein leadership contains terrorists before it goes on to lovingly provide them with a platform? Is there such a thing as a good terrorist in BBC world-view? One of my big concerns about the BBC is that fact that it will not accept that there is such a thing as a terrorist, (Except for the IDF and US armed forces) and so all discussions on terrorism are wrapped up in incoherent moral equivalence.
GOOD TERRORIST, BAD TERRORIST.
Bookmark the permalink.
One; okay I can see why they maybe should interview a unionist for the sake of fairness, but isn’t the issue about Republicans? So what useful insight could Unionists or Loyalists contribute to the media about the supposed growing Republican threat? I think your first point is a bit of a non-starter.
Two; don’t most people/commentators on either side now accept that Sinn Fein and IRA are no longer joined at the hip? Surely the unionists accept this too, otherwise they wouldn’t be content working with SF in the devolved assembly. I’m sure after all these years there are remnants of the ties that used to bind the SF and IRA, but SF used to be the political wing of the IRA, the acceptable face of it. That’s no longer the case. Proof being that the IRA no longer commit terrorism, and that SF is in government, working to achieve it’s goals through political non-violent means.
Gus
You really are displaying your ignorance if you deny that Sinn Fein and the IRA are joined at the hip.
Why have the unionists accepted SF into the devolved govt then John?
Where is the proof that IRA and SF collude like they used to. I am aware of the history of NI very well, I studied it for many years. The relationship between the 2 groups changed fundamentally in the 90s, and IRA is no longer a terrorist organisation. The terrorists who couldn’t accept the new IRA formed splinter groups, Real IRA for example, who attacked Omagh.
Gus,
Martin McGuinness boasts of his IRA membership during a particularly bloody period. Where were the unionists to interview????
Yes David, I know SF and IRA used to be brothers in arms. I am not denying that, but the relationship has changed since the 90s peace negotiations and the subsequents decommissioning.
David, do you believe the IRA are still a terrorist organisation as they used to be? Do you believe therefore that SF are too?
Also, if the IRA have (mostly) decommissined arms, have the loyalists done the same?
In a sane world,McGuinness and Adams would be either dead or in prison. They escaped both of these when they were appeased and given what they wanted – big establishment jobs and respectability. They are just not active in terrorism at the moment but, given the right circumstances, they’d butcher anybody. Once a terrorist always a terrorist for goodness sake.
The appeasement of and subsequent collusion with SinnFein/IRA has been one of the biggest crimes perpetrated by this Labour government. The BBC’s tireless sucking up to SinnFein and disparaging of Loyalists is almost as criminal.
…except there is now peace where war once raged. So, yes Labour’s sucking up really was a bad thing wasn’t it? I’m sure the people of N.Ireland far preferred the daily bombings/shootings and general violence that took place.
Of course sucking up to terrorists is a bad thing. Always. Even if it might bring benefits. Also, history is never over, there can be more chapters in the Northern Ireland saga still to come, with the new generation wanting their piece of the cake. That’s because such situations are not driven by questions of right and wrong but by the testosterone, egotism and greed of foul individuals like McGuinnes and Adams etc..
Gus,
You ask me a number of question, so permit me to respond.
1. For years, the government said that the IRA and Sinn Fein were inextricably linked. Look up the meaning of inextricable.
2. Sinn Fein contains convicted murderers, self-confessed IRA commanders —- is this your idea of “normal”?
3. I oppose ALL appeasement of ALL terrorists. I despise so-called Loyalist terrorists and have received death-threats from them for the bother so I am in no way an apologists for any side. I continually advocate the death penalty for terrorists so I believe i am entirely consistent on the issue.
4. I do not accept the IRA have decomissioned arms until I see an inventory of what was decommissioned, where this was, which modality was employed, how this was verified, for starters.
5. Adams, McGuinness are ghouls. That others choose to share power with them sickens me. Many decent people who lost loved ones to the IRA do not share your apparent enthusiasm for peace at any price.
I assume Anonymouse at 3:52 is David Vance…?
anonymous…as opposed to anonymouse
Gus, you say “So what useful insight could Unionists or Loyalists contribute to the media about the supposed growing Republican threat?”
This might be academic point scoring from your perspective, but it is potentially life and death to Unionist people in Northern Ireland.
Because Irish Republican Terrorists have a tendency to murder people from the Unionist side of the community and are preparing to do just that.
If you knew a terrorist group was planning to murder people in your community, maybe blow up your town centre burning your children, leaving your friends maimed and in wheelchairs for the rest of their life, would you not feel that you have a right to express an opinion and ave your voice hears on the matter and the level of security deployed?
There is considerable speculation and some evidence that the so called dissidents have been recruited from the Provisional Sinn Fein / IRA and have quantities of arms and explosives from the Provisional IRA stocks. Sinn Fein politicians are not pressed on this point.
Or do you work for the BBC?
Gus Haynes:
Once the recession kicks in properly expect the bombings to start again, mark my words.
Gerry Adams will have no power to stop it, yet we’ll still be paying the wages of a murdering, terrorist scumbag. You obviously have very low morals.
1. For years, the government said that the IRA and Sinn Fein were inextricably linked. Look up the meaning of inextricable.
Yes they were, are they still? Not like they were, and remember the IRA of 2009 is not the IRA of the 1980s which tried to kill the PM.
2. Sinn Fein contains convicted murderers, self-confessed IRA commanders —- is this your idea of “normal”?
No, thats not normal. But could the same claim not be made against the unionist parties?
3. I oppose ALL appeasement of ALL terrorists. I despise so-called Loyalist terrorists and have received death-threats from them for the bother so I am in no way an apologists for any side. I continually advocate the death penalty for terrorists so I believe i am entirely consistent on the issue.
Good, I’m glad to hear you’re not one of these loyalist apologists.
4. I do not accept the IRA have decomissioned arms until I see an inventory of what was decommissioned, where this was, which modality was employed, how this was verified, for starters.
Wasn’t there an independent report 2 or 3 years ago that concluded that the IRA had decomissioned? I see your reasoning, but I believe (though I cannot recall the details off the top of my head) that the report was quite comprehensive.
5. Adams, McGuinness are ghouls. That others choose to share power with them sickens me. Many decent people who lost loved ones to the IRA do not share your apparent enthusiasm for peace at any price.
Yes they have shameful pasts. But as I said earlier, sometimes we must accept that in order for peace to be achieved, some principles must be sacrificed. If peace in NI can only be reached with SF in govt, then thats the price we pay. Whats the alternative though? Marginalise SF again? Wouldn’t that just lead to the IRA becoming violent again, and therefore more terrorism taking innocent lives. if you can suggest an alternative, I’d love to hear it.
Why should any respectable political party have a problem with the deployment of any unit of the UK army within the UK?
The problem only arrises when a party aligns itself with a terrorist organisation and that organisations aims.
Gus Haynes: So you think using bombs and violence to get your place in Government is OK?
Do you think we should have let Nazi’s stay in power in Germany if they’d have promised to stop fighting in WW2?
Scum like Adams & McGuinness should be pushing up daisies. Shame their victims never got a chance to spout shite here like you Gus.
Gus,
Not sure why I suddenly became anonymous earlier!
To respond to your points;
1. Inextricable means CANNOT be separated. The IRA are Sinn Fein, it’s that simple.
2. Care to name which unionist leaders boast of their leadership in a terrorist group? Also provide your address and I will forward it.
3. Unlike the peace processors like yourself, I oppose all terrorists and do not define some as good and others as bad. They are all evil scum.
4. The decommissioning report left out all the detail I mention. For good reason.
5. Peace could have been obtained in 1939 by the setting aside of principle – would that have been your desire.
The ALTERNATIVE to appeasing terrorists is to totally and utterly wipe them out. Dead terrorists are the only good terrorists.
but david you seem to be missing the elephant in the room here; before the peace process N.Ireland was chronically instable and terrorism rife – now there is peace. Putting principle aside, how can you argue that the peace process has not worked? and how can you argue that the successful nature of the peace process came about because SF changed their ways and became part of the political process.
Gus.
“Putting principle aside”……says it all.
He who pays the Danegeld.
sometime David, pride becomes before the fall. sometimes, we must forsake our principles in the name of compromise for the greater good.
the fact that you ignored my question about the peace process working and NI no longer being a war zone sums it up really; you cannot deny what I wrote so you ignore it. you seem like an intelligent guy, just maybe a bit too dyed in the wool to see things as they are, and accept that change is necessary sometimes.
“Putting principle aside”……says it all.
Indeed it does.
“In matters of principals, stand like a rock; in matters of taste, swim with the current.” Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826)
jon, so you would prefer to have your principles, and suffer war as a result? if loss of life really worth it, especially over a trivial conflict based on political borders and religious divides?
in the case of NI, i am referring to, just so we’re clear.
and propose an alternative then jon. lets say we go back in time to the mid 90s when Major began speaking with SF. what would you do differently? just try and kill them all? and how would that plan (which would almsot certainly fail) stop the violence and terrorism?
Is “putting aside your principles” and elevating terrorists, who have maimed and killed, to high office a good thing.
This is how terrorists win – this leads to more not less terrorism.
Gus,
But why restrict your argument that principles are expendable to NI?
Here’s something to reflect on;
“An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.”
Now THAT was a real leader of men speaking.
how come its brought peace to NI? and how come the terrorism of the 70s and 80s has stopped?
maybe the terrorists did win in NI – but if that leads to peace for all then isnt that a price worth paying?
David,
Churchill right? you are still ignoring my point about war being replaced by peace. Not doing yourself any favours by dodging the question.
“..maybe the terrorists did win in NI – but if that leads to peace for all then isnt that a price worth paying?”
I’ve heard it all now. I suppose that is exactly the way Churchill thought about the Nazis – “lets give in to them at least we’ll have peace”
It stopped because the British Army and the “funnies” fought the IRA to a standstill. By killing lots of them, and making the rest scared. Adams et al saw they could not win by violence.
comparing the nazis and the IRA??
isnt that godwins law or whatever its called? i think that means you called the nazi card first, which means you lose.
Gus Haynes | 06.03.09 – 9:04 pm |
Sod off
Gus,
Godwin’s Law does not prevail on any blog I am involved in.
To the victims of IRA savagery, I would imagine the grief was as intense as those who suffered at the hands of the Nazis.
Gus, Godwins law is always a temptation, but the Irish Republican movement (Sinn Fein / IRA) has its roots in the European Nationalist Socialist movement, and still seeks a mono cultural, single party socialist republic. The Nazi anology is valid.
I guess we’ll just have to disagree in regards to the nazi/IRA comparison. no point getting into a mud slinging match about nazis etc, it’s been done.
Gus, the problem with giving in to terrorism and renouncing principles is that it sets a precedent for the future.
Following that logic through, if Loyalist terrorists were to carry out attacks on the Mainland and apply a form of genocide to Nationalists living around the border, should the Government reward them by giving in to their demands?
Should we have pulled our troops out of Afghanistan and Iraq as a result of the 7/7 bombings?
Should animal rights groups have their demands met?
Should the Brick Lane bomber be given a position of authority rather than a lengthy jail sentence?
Once the principle has been broken, it is difficult to argue that it should apply in different circumstances.
Let’s not forget that Sinn Fein/IRA wanted a Nazi victory in WW2.And De Valera was favourably disposed to the Nazis right to the end of the war.
2 dead in northern ireland tonight. british army.
seems like Hugh Orde’s warnings were not heeded.
Let’s not forget that Sinn Fein/IRA wanted a Nazi victory in WW2.And De Valera was favourably disposed to the Nazis right to the end of the war.
Dagobert | 07.03.09 – 10:49 pm
and the british were allied with Josef Stalin. mass murderer of tens of millions.
does that mean that the british were supportive of communism? of course not.
IRA/Sinn Fein were just doing what you were doing – enemy of my enemy is my friend. doesn’t mean that SF/IRA were Nazi. in fact the IRA were very much against the blueshirts in Ireland (a fascist offshoot) and even attempted to assasinate them.
Gus Haynes:
blah blah blah – now there is peace.
Read the news this morning Gus? And yes, you’ll probably say it wasn’t the IRA it was a splinter group but that will make you a tw@t. Sorry, more of a tw@t.
Gus,
it’s good of you to defend your position.
Why do you think Sinn Fein/IRA decided to switch from terrorism and adopt the peace process? Because of a change of heart, or because they realised they would not defeat the British security forces, or the the will of the British Government?
The ‘peace’ in NI can only be maintained with the knowledge that the British security forces could still enforce the law. That is the price to pay for peace, and requires vigilance, even against former terrorists who might revert.
What are the chances that the latest murders involved people released under the GFA? Not nil I’m afraird.
Gus,
Stand your ground and keep it standing.
I would like to see how many people who have left comments on this page have any experience of living or are from Northern Ireland such as myself, with a completely neutral opinion on both sides.
Nearly every single argument written here is laughable..
you all are complaining about the BBC being biased?? Pfftttt…have a look at all these comments.
BBC NI clearly doing a better job and uz guys..