Irish mercenaries, unionist coat trailers and the Bard of Dunclug

[Hardy]

Of course. All politicians are more wary of their opponents on their "own" side than those on the opposite side. (For clarity, I was including the combination of groupings organising the protests against the main parade - éirigí, SF, etc. - as "the other side").

[Hardy]

Fair enough, Donagh, if that's Éirigí's purpose. What form will the éirigí demonstration take and how is it expected to keep a lid on things? (Sorry if it's been covered - 46 pages is a bit too much research at present).

[Donagh]

Fair enough, Donagh, if that's Éirigí's purpose. What form will the éirigí demonstration take and how is it expected to keep a lid on things? (Sorry if it's been covered - 46 pages is a bit too much research at present).

I was thinking more of the Shinners trying to keep a lid on things by using their protest as a valve to release the tension over the security operation and everything that will come with that. As far as Éirigí is concerned, I came into contact with them quite a bit during the recent referendum campaign so I'm prepared at this stage to give them the benefit of the doubt and take it at face value that their's is a principled protest against the actions of the British Army in recent conflicts. In saying that most of the Éirigí people I know as southern based lefties. How the recent influx of northern ex-IRA people into their ranks will change their methods, I've no idea. 

[Evil Genius]

Disagree with EG and you are similar to a Nazi supporter

No, my point was that anti-British hatred amongst a section of the Irish population is no different now from it was e.g. two generations ago, when it manifested itself in support for Nazism. (Besides, don't you mean disagree with President McAleese or Father Alex Reid, and find yourself labelled a Nazi supporter?  )

Drug Trafficking
It was the CIA  backed Mujahideen who raised funds through Opium trade. It was called the US sponsored Drug trade.
Richard Davenport-Hines, an expert in the history of narcotics. eminent prize winning historian, author of
"The Pursuit of Oblivion: A Global History of Narcotics"
states
"US government agencies have been crucial in escalating this supply of heroin to the western world".

And how does the present UN-approved war in Afghanistan qualify as "US government agencies escalating the supply of heroin to the western world"?

on UK claims that Al Quaida profiteering from the drug trade
"This  may be overstated, for drug trafficking does not seem to be a major source of money for his al-Qaeda network"
rather it is their opponents who are into the production.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1590827.stm

I didn't claimn Al Quiada was profiting from Heroin, but the Taliban. And the Taliban are their Allies, not their opponents.

Gen. James L. Jones, the supreme allied commander for NATO,
Washington Post]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/01/AR2006120101654.html]Washington Post
"It is truly the Achilles' heel of Afghanistan,"  said in a recent speech at the Council on Foreign Relations. Afghanistan is NATO's biggest operation, with more than 30,000 troops. Drug cartels with their own armies engage in regular combat with NATO forces deployed in Afghanistan, he said. "It would be wrong to say that this is just the Taliban. I think I need to set that record straight," he added.

Obviously the Taliban do not control the Heroin trade in the areas which they do not control. That was the case even before they were deposed from power in Kabul. But the key point is that the US-led forces are fighting both the Taliban and the various other warlords etc who remain outside the elected coalition Government of President Karzai.

More to the point - which you appear to ignore as an inconvenience, perhaps? - is that the war in Afghanistan is entirely UN-approved. And moving back to the subject of this thread, regardless of what one thinks about Aghanistan etc, that conflict is the responsibility of the politicians who ordered it. Sunday's Parade is an opportunity for the friends, families and loved ones of the RIR to welcome them home safe and sound from their Tour of Duty.

The fact that various Republican groups feel the need to catch buses from all over the country to get into Belfast City Centre on a Sunday morning, when the place is otherwise pretty quiet, so as to be properly "offended", is what is significant (and repellent, imo)

[Evil Genius]

Well I called Bin Laden a murdering scum. I of course condemn the murder of 3000 innocents. Unlike you however, I don't think that the 3000 in the twin towers were more important than the 10's of thousands murder by the US, British and Israeli. I tried to show you why these things happen becasue if you don't understand the cause it can never be fixed. Since you state that I didn't unequivalently condemn the 9/11 killings may I ask you if you are willing to condemn the following...

- Israel incursion and murder of Palestinian Contrary to UN resolutions calling this act illegal
- Britain and US illegal invasion of Iraq.
- Britain and US torture of prisoners, as listed numerously on Amnesty Internationals website, contrary to the Geneva convention.
- Quantanamo Bay - Holding of men without trial or representation contrary to Geneva Convention.
- Britain and US use of depleted uranium in their weapons during Iraq war which has more than quadrupled cancer in Iraq.
- Britain and US use of cluster bomb in residential areas in both Iraq and Afghanistan contrary to the Geneva convention.
- Britain and US sponsor sanctions against Iraq preventing the sale of food and medicine and the net effect of the deaths of 500,000 children during the length of those sanctions (which did nothing to get rid of Sadam)
- Britain, US and German sale of poison gas to Iraq for use against Iran which was also used against their own people (Kurds)

I could go one but my fingers are soar!

I would condemn most of what you list, actually (forgive me if I don't specify which, my fingers are soar).

But that is hardly the point. What happened on 9/11 was quite simply wrong and the US was entirely justified in leading a coalition to try to seize the perpetrators. Which is not just my judgement, but that of the United Nations (something which all the anti-American and anti-British posters on this Board refuse to address, btw).

Therefore, the RIR were perfectly entitled to be in Afghanistan and those people in NI who wish to, should be perfectly entitled to welcome them home safe and sound.

Of course, those people who think differently should be entitled to demonstrate their opposition. However, it is the height of irresponsibility to do so in the cynical manner of Sinn Fein, whereby they deliberately organised a time and route to clash with the RIR parade, even changing the time following the MOD changing the time of their parade. Worse still that they were at least partly motivated by the activities of Eirige i.e. SF were less concerned about proper protest, and more fearful of losing ground to other Republican groupings in the struggle to demonstrate their true Anti-Brit credentials.

There is no earthly reason why SF couldn't have organised an anti-War demo of their own in West Belfast on Sunday morning, or in Central Belfast at another time, except that they'd rather have a "battleground", than the "moral high ground".

Consequently, as Kevin Myers so perceptively pointed out, with these tactics, they are not one whit different from e.g. Paisley, when he organised his own counter demonstrations at the time of the Civil Rights campaign.

Disgraceful.

[Lecale2]

Andytown News is agin it.

Editorial

It didn't work for Paisley and it isn't going to work for us today

Andersonstown News Thursday

Counterdemonstrations – often ugly and bitter – were the modus operandi of Paisleyism, that twisted and nihilistic political philosophy which caused to so much mayhem.

Thankfully, they have never been part of the toolbox of nationalism — not least because counter-protests are usually counterproductive.

Paisley, of course, for all his bluster, merely served to give an elevated platform to the civil rights cause and to expose the narrow-mindedness of his own supporters.

Therefore, the news that republicans are to stage a counterdemonstration to the 'welcome home' parade and rally for the British army came as a surprise to many nationalists. It's a fact that Belfast is split — fairly evenly — between those who regard the returning troops as heroes and those who regard them as representatives of a foreign army involved in an illegal war and occupation.

Unionists, especially working class unionists who historically provided the cannon-fodder for the British army, will view the welcome home reception as an opportunity to fly the flag for the union. Nationalists, however, will view with some distaste the glorification of war and the fact that the reception has been given the official seal of approval by Belfast City Council. But no matter how split the city may be, surely we should now be mature enough to allow both views to  have their day.

When nationalists won the right – at the cost of many lives – to protest for civil rights in Belfast city centre, it was never the intention to deny anyone else the same right. That means nationalists, no matter how upset at the heroes' welcome being given one of the most discredited regiments in the discredited British army, must tolerate and make space for this welcome home rally. They can disassociate themselves from the welcome home reception – this paper does that in no uncertain terms – and should exercise their right to protest against the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and the record of the UDR/RIR.

However, bringing nationalists on to the streets of downtown Belfast to stage a counterdemonstration against the returning troops will be counterproductive to the republican cause.

The counterdemonstration runs the risk of being hijacked by the type of people who attacked the police and engaged in rioting in Lurgan recently. It may also encourage loyalists to stage a counterdemonstration to the next republican march into Belfast city centre. But most importantly, the anti-war message will be lost in the media focus on the confrontation between the opposing demonstrations. Note that to date, many more column inches have been spent discussing the protest rather than its purpose.

Even at this late stage, would it not of more benefit to the republican cause if the anti-war and anti-UDR/RIR protest was moved to another date? The same points could be made as forcefully and would be heard much more clearly  without the risk of damaging steadily improving inter-community relations in Belfast

[Evil Genius]

I used to think the Shinners had a clever plan but now I know they just react to situations and have learned nothing from the Peace Process.

Oh SF understand the "Peace Process" [sic] only too well - they were part of it, after all. No, the problem for them is twofold. On the one hand, they're no longer a "physical force movement", so they can't impose their former brand of "community justice" in their natural constituencies. Nor are they ready unequivocably to endorse the PSNI as the force of law and order in their stead. Consequently, various dissident groups, hoods, anti-social elements, drug-dealers etc are moving in to fill the vacuum, to the dismay and discomfort of SF.
On the other hand, in their new role as constitutional politicians in Stormont etc, far from this being seen to move us all closer to the United Ireland they promised us, it is increasingly being seen as just their helping to administer British Rule in Ireland, on British-funded salaries. Which, as the Border question recedes in peoples' minds, might be fair enough if the people in their constituencies were seeing significant benefit in their daily lives (jobs, health, education etc). But they manifestly are not.

Therefore SF cannot move the border issue forward; they are unable to make progress over "normal" political issues; they have foresworn use of the bomb and bullet. Which means their only political strategy is to go back to the old days of street demonstrations and protests. Which would be bad enough, were it not for the tactics they have cynically chosen for Sunday. That is, their demo will comprise a tightly marshalled 500, so that they will be able to claim that they were there in the vanguard opposing "Bruddish Imperialisum", but should violence break out, then they can claim that this was because other Republicans were only defending themselves in the face of intolerable Brit provocation and blah, blah blah...

So why don't MoD call of the match? I don't know why they agreed to it in the first and I don't know why they won't call it off.

Why should they? This was a perfectly peaceful opportunity for friends and family to welcome their loved ones home, in a location and at a time which was offending nobody (at least nobody who wasn't absolutely determined to be offended). Moreover, when they heard SF were organising a counter demo, the MOD moved the time of their parade, to avoid a clash. SF then moved the time of their parade, to ensure a clash.

[Donagh]

Oh SF understand the "Peace Process" [sic] only too well - they were part of it, after all. No, the problem for them is twofold. On the one hand, they're no longer a "physical force movement", so they can't impose their former brand of "community justice" in their natural constituencies. Nor are they ready unequivocably to endorse the PSNI as the force of law and order in their stead. Consequently, various dissident groups, hoods, anti-social elements, drug-dealers etc are moving in to fill the vacuum, to the dismay and discomfort of SF.
On the other hand, in their new role as constitutional politicians in Stormont etc, far from this being seen to move us all closer to the United Ireland they promised us, it is increasingly being seen as just their helping to administer British Rule in Ireland, on British-funded salaries. Which, as the Border question recedes in peoples' minds, might be fair enough if the people in their constituencies were seeing significant benefit in their daily lives (jobs, health, education etc). But they manifestly are not.

Therefore SF cannot move the border issue forward; they are unable to make progress over "normal" political issues; they have foresworn use of the bomb and bullet. Which means their only political strategy is to go back to the old days of street demonstrations and protests. Which would be bad enough, were it not for the tactics they have cynically chosen for Sunday. That is, their demo will comprise a tightly marshalled 500, so that they will be able to claim that they were there in the vanguard opposing "Bruddish Imperialisum", but should violence break out, then they can claim that this was because other Republicans were only defending themselves in the face of intolerable Brit provocation and blah, blah blah...

If you must insist on contributing to this thread, please stay on topic. There's a good lad...

[mylestheslasher]

Disagree with EG and you are similar to a Nazi supporter

No, my point was that anti-British hatred amongst a section of the Irish population is no different now from it was e.g. two generations ago, when it manifested itself in support for Nazism. (Besides, don't you mean disagree with President McAleese or Father Alex Reid, and find yourself labelled a Nazi supporter?  )

Drug Trafficking
It was the CIA  backed Mujahideen who raised funds through Opium trade. It was called the US sponsored Drug trade.
Richard Davenport-Hines, an expert in the history of narcotics. eminent prize winning historian, author of
"The Pursuit of Oblivion: A Global History of Narcotics"
states
"US government agencies have been crucial in escalating this supply of heroin to the western world".

And how does the present UN-approved war in Afghanistan qualify as "US government agencies escalating the supply of heroin to the western world"?

on UK claims that Al Quaida profiteering from the drug trade
"This  may be overstated, for drug trafficking does not seem to be a major source of money for his al-Qaeda network"
rather it is their opponents who are into the production.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1590827.stm

I didn't claimn Al Quiada was profiting from Heroin, but the Taliban. And the Taliban are their Allies, not their opponents.

Gen. James L. Jones, the supreme allied commander for NATO,
Washington Post]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/01/AR2006120101654.html]Washington Post
"It is truly the Achilles' heel of Afghanistan,"  said in a recent speech at the Council on Foreign Relations. Afghanistan is NATO's biggest operation, with more than 30,000 troops. Drug cartels with their own armies engage in regular combat with NATO forces deployed in Afghanistan, he said. "It would be wrong to say that this is just the Taliban. I think I need to set that record straight," he added.

Obviously the Taliban do not control the Heroin trade in the areas which they do not control. That was the case even before they were deposed from power in Kabul. But the key point is that the US-led forces are fighting both the Taliban and the various other warlords etc who remain outside the elected coalition Government of President Karzai.

More to the point - which you appear to ignore as an inconvenience, perhaps? - is that the war in Afghanistan is entirely UN-approved. And moving back to the subject of this thread, regardless of what one thinks about Aghanistan etc, that conflict is the responsibility of the politicians who ordered it. Sunday's Parade is an opportunity for the friends, families and loved ones of the RIR to welcome them home safe and sound from their Tour of Duty.

The fact that various Republican groups feel the need to catch buses from all over the country to get into Belfast City Centre on a Sunday morning, when the place is otherwise pretty quiet, so as to be properly "offended", is what is significant (and repellent, imo)

Yet again EG your facts are wrong. When the Taliban took power in Afghanistan, the export of Heroin dropped to record lows. The Taliban were totally against drug use as per their strict code of sharia law. Anyone caught with drugs would have their head cut off!  When the Taliban were overthrown and the heros from the US and UK joined forces with the northern alliance (another bunch of nasty butchers) heroin trade got up to highest levels ever experienced by Afghanistan as local warlords found that no one was policiing their activities and so selling heroin again was the crop of choice. There is zero evidence that the Taliban or Al Quaida were selling drugs to fund war efforts. Of course, the invading armies would like to tells us otherwise.

[Evil Genius]

Oh SF understand the "Peace Process" [sic] only too well - they were part of it, after all. No, the problem for them is twofold. On the one hand, they're no longer a "physical force movement", so they can't impose their former brand of "community justice" in their natural constituencies. Nor are they ready unequivocably to endorse the PSNI as the force of law and order in their stead. Consequently, various dissident groups, hoods, anti-social elements, drug-dealers etc are moving in to fill the vacuum, to the dismay and discomfort of SF.
On the other hand, in their new role as constitutional politicians in Stormont etc, far from this being seen to move us all closer to the United Ireland they promised us, it is increasingly being seen as just their helping to administer British Rule in Ireland, on British-funded salaries. Which, as the Border question recedes in peoples' minds, might be fair enough if the people in their constituencies were seeing significant benefit in their daily lives (jobs, health, education etc). But they manifestly are not.

Therefore SF cannot move the border issue forward; they are unable to make progress over "normal" political issues; they have foresworn use of the bomb and bullet. Which means their only political strategy is to go back to the old days of street demonstrations and protests. Which would be bad enough, were it not for the tactics they have cynically chosen for Sunday. That is, their demo will comprise a tightly marshalled 500, so that they will be able to claim that they were there in the vanguard opposing "Bruddish Imperialisum", but should violence break out, then they can claim that this was because other Republicans were only defending themselves in the face of intolerable Brit provocation and blah, blah blah...

If you must insist on contributing to this thread, please stay on topic.

I thought the topic was Sunday's parade, which inevitably led to discussion of SF's counter demonstration, which I attempted to put in context with my post.

Are you embarrassed at SF's discomfort being exposed for all the world to see - even in that august organ, the "Angrytown News"?  

Or are you more embarrassed at having been excluded from the "Famous Five Hundred", and having to slum it with the southern Lefties and Northern ex-Provos of Eirige?  

There's a good lad...

It's always a sign of your personal discomfort when you resort to condescension and petty personal jibes. And that always amuses me.

[mylestheslasher]

Well I called Bin Laden a murdering scum. I of course condemn the murder of 3000 innocents. Unlike you however, I don't think that the 3000 in the twin towers were more important than the 10's of thousands murder by the US, British and Israeli. I tried to show you why these things happen becasue if you don't understand the cause it can never be fixed. Since you state that I didn't unequivalently condemn the 9/11 killings may I ask you if you are willing to condemn the following...

- Israel incursion and murder of Palestinian Contrary to UN resolutions calling this act illegal
- Britain and US illegal invasion of Iraq.
- Britain and US torture of prisoners, as listed numerously on Amnesty Internationals website, contrary to the Geneva convention.
- Quantanamo Bay - Holding of men without trial or representation contrary to Geneva Convention.
- Britain and US use of depleted uranium in their weapons during Iraq war which has more than quadrupled cancer in Iraq.
- Britain and US use of cluster bomb in residential areas in both Iraq and Afghanistan contrary to the Geneva convention.
- Britain and US sponsor sanctions against Iraq preventing the sale of food and medicine and the net effect of the deaths of 500,000 children during the length of those sanctions (which did nothing to get rid of Sadam)
- Britain, US and German sale of poison gas to Iraq for use against Iran which was also used against their own people (Kurds)

I could go one but my fingers are soar!

I would condemn most of what you list, actually (forgive me if I don't specify which, my fingers are soar).

But that is hardly the point. What happened on 9/11 was quite simply wrong and the US was entirely justified in leading a coalition to try to seize the perpetrators. Which is not just my judgement, but that of the United Nations (something which all the anti-American and anti-British posters on this Board refuse to address, btw).

Therefore, the RIR were perfectly entitled to be in Afghanistan and those people in NI who wish to, should be perfectly entitled to welcome them home safe and sound.

Of course, those people who think differently should be entitled to demonstrate their opposition. However, it is the height of irresponsibility to do so in the cynical manner of Sinn Fein, whereby they deliberately organised a time and route to clash with the RIR parade, even changing the time following the MOD changing the time of their parade. Worse still that they were at least partly motivated by the activities of Eirige i.e. SF were less concerned about proper protest, and more fearful of losing ground to other Republican groupings in the struggle to demonstrate their true Anti-Brit credentials.

There is no earthly reason why SF couldn't have organised an anti-War demo of their own in West Belfast on Sunday morning, or in Central Belfast at another time, except that they'd rather have a "battleground", than the "moral high ground".

Consequently, as Kevin Myers so perceptively pointed out, with these tactics, they are not one whit different from e.g. Paisley, when he organised his own counter demonstrations at the time of the Civil Rights campaign.

Disgraceful.

Why don't you tell me which ones you don't condemn?

If it is ok for the USA to invade a country to catch those responsible for 9/11 is it then ok for the 1000's of families of people blown to smithereens by the US and UK in Iraq/Afghanistan to launch a military action against the UK and US. If it is by your logic, then that excuses the people who blew up the twin towers as they were acting out of a sense of revenge for US policy in the middle east. So it is clear your argument is self defeating.

The war in Afghanistan was sanctioned by UN only after the US threatened to act unilatarily. They forced the hand of the UN by attempted discrediting of them. The same as they did in Iraq when they tried to discredit the arms inspectors and even told us all they would invade Iraq even if no weapons of mass destruction were found. Legal or not the invasion of Afghanistan was a ppointless exercise that did not achieve one goal. The country is now an even more lawless place than it ever was and the US are cutting troops and are leaving the warlords, northern alliance and taliban to blow the crap out of each other.

[Minder]

Robin Livingstone would need to watch that he does not receive any more angry phone calls from Gerry after that editorial.

[Donagh]

I thought the topic was Sunday's parade, which inevitably led to discussion of SF's counter demonstration, which I attempted to put in context with my post.

The thread topic is obvious and there was no mention of the parade in anything you posted. Now as I said please keep on topic and stop ruining the thread with your irrelevant diatribes. We wouldn't want you having to serve out another ban. Now be a good lad and play nice.

[Orior]

Hardy,

I object to the britsh army parade simply because its an armed force marching through an occupied territory. Quite simply, in my view they shouldnt be there in the first place.

But, relaxing a little, did the GFA mean anything to anyone? Didnt it recognise that there is a large percentage of the six counties that dont consider themselves british? Therefore why are they trying to rub our noses in it? Unionist arrogance continues unabatted - they wouldn't even welcome the Tyrone team up here, but they want us to welcome the british military.

[Hardy]

Orior, why are you telling me that? I'm against the parade too, pretty much for the reasons Feeney states. My point was that  holding a counter parade was not the appropriate response.