Trade Union Leaders at SF Conference

Jackie laughlin

As a member first of he IT&GWU and later SIPTU, I am hurt at Jack O'Connor's betrayal of the movement in speaking to the murderers of so many trade unionists.

ghostdancer

are you, yeah?

well it looks like you'll just have to stop dwelling on the past, or else get left behind.

fair play to Jack, at least he's willing to have an open mind and engage with elected representatives of Ireland, as opposed to the tribal, backwards mentality of some members of his organisation.

Jackie laughlin

Ghostdancer,
Are you prepared to be consistent? That is to say, will you forget about all past criminal activity or just SFIRA criminal activity? The young fella who steals a car tonight, the paedophiles, the gangland murderers etc., will you forget all that because it is in the past?

Then there's the question of election. Does election absolve all criminals or just SFIRA criminals?

But let's get back on topic. I'm a trade unionist who has protested against the murder, wounding, jailing of trade unionists and workers in many countries. SFIRA, with their record of murdering workers, should be shunned by trade unionists. Jack O'Connor has betrayed the movement.

Raskolnikov

Jackie laughlin wrote:

As a member first of he IT&GWU and later SIPTU, I am hurt at Jack O'Connor's betrayal of the movement in speaking to the murderers of so many trade unionists.

Would you be hurt if he spoke with FF/PD's who let so many people die while on waiting lists or from MRSA?

Zambia

Jackie laughlin wrote:

I am hurt at Jack O'Connor's betrayal of the movement in speaking to the murderers of so many trade unionists.

If Ian Paisley ,the DUP and the Unionist people of Northern Ireland who vote for them can do it I think its only fair he at least makes the effort.

The members of Sinn Fein are elected representatives of a section of People to not speak to them is also unfair.

It is not the job of an election to decide the guilt or innocence of a politician. If the police/courts have not found any evidence of murder then they are innocent till proven guilty.

The absence of Dialogue leads to violence which would only claim the lives of more workers. That said a lot of the combatants from both Paramilitary sides where probaly fully paid up Union men/women.

Wishbone Ash

Zambia232 wrote:

a lot of the combatants from both Paramilitary sides where probaly fully paid up Union men/women.

Which trade union recruits terriorists?

SeanW

I assume he's referring to people who worked full time and did paramilitary killings on the side.

Zambia

SeanW wrote:

I assume he's referring to people who worked full time and did paramilitary killings on the side.

Thank you that is eactly what I meant.

Jackie laughlin

I can't see Jack O'Connor going to a PD or a FF conference and failing to address the question of people dying on trollies, yet he goes to a SFIRA conference and fails to mention the murder of trade unionists. (I'm not for a moment making a moral equivalence between allowing people to die while the health service is privatised and premeditated murder.)

Zambia

So are you saying that if a person is a member of SIPTU or the like they exercise there political right to vote SF. They should not expect the leader of their trade union to work with their elected Politician.

His presence should be at every Political conference fighting for the rights of his members.

ghostdancer

Jackie laughlin wrote:

Ghostdancer,
Are you prepared to be consistent? That is to say, will you forget about all past criminal activity or just SFIRA criminal activity? The young fella who steals a car tonight, the paedophiles, the gangland murderers etc., will you forget all that because it is in the past?

Then there's the question of election. Does election absolve all criminals or just SFIRA criminals?

well you see the people you have mentioned have all committed crimes. if they've served their time and have expressed regret at what happened then i've no problem.
you seem to be of the ignorant mindset that everyone in Sinn Fein is involved in murders, or at least crime, as demonstrated by your previous posts, and your pathetic attempt to lump both SF and PIRA together as one.
at least Jack seems to be exercising a bit of cop on.

Jackie laughlin

I don't know of a convicted pseudo-republican terrorist who has served time and expressed regret for his crime/s and remained a member of SFIRA. There's a convicted, unrepentent gun-runner in the Dail.

SF is the political wing of the IRA and within their structure is subordinate to the IRA.

Of course very few members of SF have committed murder or any other crime. However, they have decided in joining to support murder. It is a similar but rather more serious decision than someone joining the PDs and necessarily supporting economic liberalism.

People join unions for all sorts of reasons but mainly to protect themselves. Some become union activists, some graduate to socialism. However, as a movement there has always been a commitment to condemning those who murder trade unionists. What Jack O'Connor has done is the moral equivalent of meeting the organisers of right wing death squads who murdered leftists in many, many countries. He could have gone to the SFIRA conference and spoken out courageously condemning the murder of his members and other trade unionists in Britain and Northern Ireland. He chose not to.

Andrew 83

O'Connor is a member of the Labour party and if I'm not mistaken sits on the party's executive committee so although I've no particular problem with him being there it is noteworthy,

Zambia

Jackie laughlin wrote:

I don't know of a convicted pseudo-republican terrorist who has served time and expressed regret for his crime/s and remained a member of SFIRA. There's a convicted, unrepentent gun-runner in the Dail.

SF is the political wing of the IRA and within their structure is subordinate to the IRA.

Of course very few members of SF have committed murder or any other crime. However, they have decided in joining to support murder. It is a similar but rather more serious decision than someone joining the PDs and necessarily supporting economic liberalism.

People join unions for all sorts of reasons but mainly to protect themselves. Some become union activists, some graduate to socialism. However, as a movement there has always been a commitment to condemning those who murder trade unionists. What Jack O'Connor has done is the moral equivalent of meeting the organisers of right wing death squads who murdered leftists in many, many countries. He could have gone to the SFIRA conference and spoken out courageously condemning the murder of his members and other trade unionists in Britain and Northern Ireland. He chose not to.

Once again he has met with elected Politicians , any crimes any of them commited and where charged with there time has been served. They have put themselves forward for election and been elected by the people of this island. As I said before at least some of them would also be in SIPTU.

They are elected representatives of the people of Ireland this meeting. If the DUP, The PUP and the UUP who are elected by Unionists who suffered as much if not more anyone at the hands of the IRA can meet with SF in the North. Then SIPTU should be able to meet with SF in the South with a blast of piontless rhetoric.

SF are a fairly large Political party , I dont like them any more than you do but I would be loath to cast democracy aside to spite them.

Raskolnikov

Raskolnikov wrote:

Would you be hurt if he spoke with FF/PD's who let so many people die while on waiting lists or from MRSA?

Its hardly an accurate analogy. I don't think one should equate bank heists and murder with whether our hospital staff are hygenic.

ghostdancer

ghostdancer wrote:

you seem to be of the ignorant mindset

Carefull now.



As for the topic at hand-why shouldn't trade union leaders appear at party conferences of various parties?

I saw Gerry Adams dodge questions from Bryan Dobson right left and centre last night on the politics show.
SF spokespersons will really have to brush up on the nitty gritty of policy if they want to break out of their niche voting group.

For example - Refusing to answer questions on the effect that a nearly 20% Corporation tax would have on the tens of thousands of jobs in US based industries here is simply not acceptable.
Refusing in an election year to quantify what SF's policies are specefically on personal tax is not inspiring me to vote for them.

Rabbiting on with sound bytes about rich and poor and how we'll tax the rich without specefics is simply not good enough if they want to break out of their niche voting group and into middle Ireland.

That said I think SF have a golden opportunity to capture votes if they show a committment to sensible policies-they already have good social sentiments-just not a clue in my opinion on how to apply them properly.
They'd have to walk the walk in these matters as well as talking the talk,they should specify the beef and ask for a mandate on specefics and not on sound bytes.
Otherwise they are as bad as any of the other parties in that respect I think.

Jackie laughlin

I am not casting democracy aside. I accept that people in Ireland elect gun runners, supporters of murder, corrupt and corrupting candidates. That's not the point. Jack O'Connor can never again with a shred of credibility condemn the murder of a trade unionist. He went to a convention of murderers and fellow travellers and didn't mention their killings of workers and TU members.

Tristrame,
I'm following you off topic but Gerry Adams has no intention of trying to secure a majority. His target is to become pivotal in a hung Dail. His bash-the-rich routine is for the consumption of the alienated and disadvantaged. He doesn't mean it; he sings a different tune to his US audience.

Shutuplaura

I have to agree with the above that said moving on is the only productive thig to do. After fascism was ended in Spain people just got in with things to a large degree. Likewise in South Africa with the peace and reconciliation committee. I think its a sign of how mild the troubles were in Ireland that people are unwilling to move on from and forget the past. Even France forgave Germany after World War II.
Not talking to republicans and leaving them out of the political processes in the country will only marginalise them which would be completely counter-productive, leaving alone the fact that they have a sizable support which in a democracy deserves to be heard. Besides, its completely hypocrital to advocate the DUP and SF sitting down together in the north without being prepared to do so in the south.

Finally, didn't the IRA apologise for all inocent victims of its violence?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/2134320.stm

Zambia

Jackie laughlin wrote:

I am not casting democracy aside. I accept that people in Ireland elect gun runners, supporters of murder, corrupt and corrupting candidates. That's not the point. Jack O'Connor can never again with a shred of credibility condemn the murder of a trade unionist. He went to a convention of murderers and fellow travellers and didn't mention their killings of workers and TU members.

So what your saying is every time he meets SF he has to bring this up?

I cant agree , we have to stop raking up the past at every political attempt to move forward.

Jackie laughlin

This was a first, a TU leader at a SF conference, a major coup for SFIRA and Jack O'Connor failed to mention killing!

"Not talking to republicans and leaving them out of the political processes in the country will only marginalise them which would be completely counter-productive ..." That's what SFIRA keep saying and it sounds like a threat to me.

The IRA made an apology for unintended killings not for the intentional murders.

The IRA still exists. What is it for? Would Jack O'Connor attend the conference of another party which was structurally under the command of an "army"?

Zambia

Jackie laughlin wrote:

This was a first, a TU leader at a SF conference, a major coup for SFIRA and Jack O'Connor failed to mention killing!

Yes cause maybe he saw it would achieve nothing by doing so. You cant start a dialogue this way Unless you want to achieve nothing , a ploy well used by Politicians up here.

Jackie laughlin wrote:

"Not talking to republicans and leaving them out of the political processes in the country will only marginalise them which would be completely counter-productive ..." That's what SFIRA keep saying and it sounds like a threat to me.

No its a fact just because SF say it does not make it a threat.

Jackie laughlin wrote:

The IRA still exists. What is it for? Would Jack O'Connor attend the conference of another party which was structurally under the command of an "army"?

The IRA, PIRA , CIRA etc will always exist as to re-assemble simply takes a change in attitude and a few volunteers. As it stands they exist only in the minds of people with a grudge against SF. It has been widely accepted up North they are not capable at present of starting a military Campaign as they did before.

SF obtain there support in the same areas the a lot of Trade Unions do they are bedfellows where you like it or not.

Besides FF, FG both where from the original IRA so by your rational every Anglo Irish meeting should start by Tony Blair Calling Bertie a murdering git.

Jackie laughlin

If SFIRA argue that to marginalise them would cause trouble, they are issuing a threat.

I saw the IRA in jackboots and uniform march in Dublin last year at the head of the Make Partition History parade. As Gerry Adams said, "They haven't gone away, you know."

I hope you are right and that SFIRA will slip harmlessly into a democratic party, eventually joining FF. Call me a pessimist but I don't think that's what is going on and I fear that many of us are being naive.

Is Jack O'Connor naive or afraid that SFIRA won't speak to him anymore if he speaks plainly? I don't know but he betrayed a long and honourable tradition last weekend.

FTA69

Jackie laughlin wrote:

There's a convicted, unrepentent gun-runner in the Dail.

Two of them in fact. Morgan was done for possesion too.

SF is the political wing of the IRA and within their structure is subordinate to the IRA.

No it isn't. As an ex-member of that group I can tell you you're wrong. What gave you that idea?

People join unions for all sorts of reasons but mainly to protect themselves. Some become union activists, some graduate to socialism. However, as a movement there has always been a commitment to condemning those who murder trade unionists.

By that logic would you suggest that Trade Unions refuse support for the Gardaí? After all they did viciously beat Nicky Kelly who was a union activist at that time. And don't forget the British Army or RUC, they killed many a trade unionist. I'm not trying to engage in whataboutery by any means, simply pointing out the fact that all sides were involved with the unions, while all sides probably ended up killing trade unionists as well. It's in the past. Let it go.

What Jack O'Connor has done is the moral equivalent of meeting the organisers of right wing death squads who murdered leftists in many, many countries.

We already have them in Ireland, they're called the UVF and UDA. And the British government armed and directed them in killing leftists. At least make an accurate analogy.

Jackie laughlin

Trade unionists were to the fore in condemning the "heavy gang".

Were you a member of the IRA, SF or both? My understanding is that the "army" ultimately is in charge. I'm open to correction. What is the formal structural relationship?

I hope that Jack O'Connor has been selective and that he would not attend a gathering of loyalist killers and their supporters.

Zambia

Jackie laughlin wrote:

If SFIRA argue that to marginalise them would cause trouble, they are issuing a threat.

No it would remove the voice of there voters and that would cause trouble. If a section of the population are ignored especially ones as commited as some SF voters. They will fall into the hands of the RIRA and the like.

Jackie laughlin wrote:

I saw the IRA in jackboots and uniform march in Dublin last year at the head of the Make Partition History parade. As Gerry Adams said, "They haven't gone away, you know."

He was wrong they have if they hadnt we would not have pulled down the last watch tower this year. Besides he said that years ago.

Jackie laughlin wrote:

I hope you are right and that SFIRA will slip harmlessly into a democratic party, eventually joining FF.

Ahh hold no need for those two to join

Jackie laughlin wrote:

I don't know but he betrayed a long and honourable tradition last weekend.

Many extreme right Unionists are saying Paisley is doing the exact same thing. The basics of healing any wound is the initial removal of the cause of the wound. Only when people stop calling each other terrorists will anything ever get done and we can move past what has gone before.

Bar that I will leave it at I respect the man for trying to move ahead.

FTA69

Trade unionists were to the fore in condemning the "heavy gang".

To be fair jackie that isn't an answer to the question I asked. The Gardaí smashed Nicky Kelly's head against a locker until he signed a confession over a robbery he didn't even commit. The fact was he was arrested and treated this way because of his political beliefs. So the question remains should trade unionists refuse to co-operate with the cops because of that action? The sensible answer of course is no, similarly the fact the IRA killed trade unionists (not because they were trade unionists I might add, most Volunteers would have been in unions themselves) has no real bearing on whether Jack O'Connor should work with a left-wing party like Sinn Féin.

Were you a member of the IRA, SF or both? My understanding is that the "army" ultimately is in charge. I'm open to correction. What is the formal structural relationship?

There is no formal structural relationship, membership may overlap but the vast majority of Sinn Féin activists had and have no real input, knowledge or control over IRA affairs. Likewise the two bodies have seperate leaderships (going to the highest level in both organisations) as well as seperate purposes. Sinn Féin used to be under heavy influence from the IRA up until about 1981-3 but after that Sinn Féin became very much its own organisation. Nowadays the IRA's political purpose has largely been served.

Of course this is my own opinion, I myself was never a member of an armed group, and of course there are those who'll disagree with me.

Jackie laughlin

Zambia,
You express it marginally differently but it remains a threat. Indeed as you express it, it appears more threatening.

The IRA will not attack the British army again. They are now partitionist. Now, what is their purpose? They have not dispanded.

What initial wound has been healed? SFIRA have murdered thousands of people for absolutely nothing.

FTA,
You've answered your own question. The framing of Nicky kelly and the others killed two birds with one stone: it locked up innocent people with unpopular political views and it got a result.

You prompt another good question. Why DID SFIRA murder T. Unionists and workers? (Jack O'Connor should have asked the question.)

SF is the political wing of the IRA. They therefore have different purposes of course. You refer to the IRA's purpose as now served. If that's the case, why does it continue to exist? Moreover, if its purpose is now served, most of us must have misunderstood its purpose for the past 30 years.

Zambia

Jackie laughlin wrote:

The IRA will not attack the British army again. They are now partitionist. Now, what is their purpose? They have not dispanded.

I will let you argue that with British Inteligence , if they are in existance they have little to do with SF in its current form.

Jackie laughlin wrote:

What initial wound has been healed? SFIRA have murdered thousands of people for absolutely nothing.

I never said it had I said it might if everyone stops dragging up the past in every political arena. SIPTU has a responsiblity to its workers and securing the best deals for them with all political parties. If SIPTU wantrs to become a political party and engage in Speeches and indignation well then let them go on the register. I am happy that Jack Oconnor is moving along and leaving the past in the past.

FTA69

Why DID SFIRA murder T. Unionists and workers?

They didn't kill people for being trade unionists, they killed people in the context of a war, some just happened to be trade unionists, and as I said the IRA were trade unionists themselves so your argument is largely moot.

You've answered your own question. The framing of Nicky kelly and the others killed two birds with one stone: it locked up innocent people with unpopular political views and it got a result.

I know it did, all I'm saying is that the guards battered people because of their beliefs, by your logic Jack O'Connor shouldn't talk to them either.

You refer to the IRA's purpose as now served. If that's the case, why does it continue to exist?

That's a question for the IRA. I would opine they stay structured because of the need to steward thousands of ex-members.

mike65

Debate within republican circles.

http://www.socialistdemocracy.org/RecentArticles/RecentDebateRepublicanRegroupment.html

Mike.

Jackie laughlin

Zambia,
If this were in the past, it would be the very recent past. "Dragging up the past" is never a problem; it should be discussed. SFIRA should justify their actions. "Dragging up the past" in this context is used as a rhetorical device to prevent the questioning of SFIRA.

However, it is not in the past. As I've often said, I SAW the IRA marching at the head of a parade in Dublin last year.

FTA,
Come on, don't attempt to dignify what happened. The Le Mon victims had to be shovelled into bags, Gerry McCabe etc. etc.

SFIRA, having been defeated militarily, are now on a new uncertain tack.

Would Jack O'Connor attend ANY party rally? I hope not. I hope this was a singular error.

Zambia

Jackie laughlin wrote:

Zambia,
If this were in the past, it would be the very recent past. "Dragging up the past" is never a problem; it should be discussed. SFIRA should justify their actions. "Dragging up the past" in this context is used as a rhetorical device to prevent the questioning of SFIRA.

However, it is not in the past. As I've often said, I SAW the IRA marching at the head of a parade in Dublin last year.

If you think a march consitutes military action never come here in July.

If any of these SF members knew anything about murders of Trade Unionists well then there are two perfectly decent police forces to question them. I fail to see the piont of of having jack OConnor asking SF these questions. What you want isto disrupt with rheotoric a conference where I can only assume SF where trying to move along with the peace process and Political issues on both sides of the border.

The other night on Spotlight Gerry Adams without reservation stated if anyone has a problem or sees anything criminal they should call the PSNI end of Story.

If you believe any of these people are murders go to your local Gardai Station and report your evidence.

I understand the past is recent but the past is still the past unless you and everyone else fail to let it drift into that.

FTA69

As I've often said, I SAW the IRA marching at the head of a parade in Dublin last year.

No you didn't, you saw a number of colour parties marching, the majority of whom had nothing to do with the IRA, I've seen fifteen year old girls marching in those things, they're simply representations. Colour parties used to represent the IRA but now they're simply a mark of tradition more than anything. You'd see similar carry on at the Fianna Fáil march in Bodenstown.

Come on, don't attempt to dignify what happened. The Le Mon victims had to be shovelled into bags, Gerry McCabe etc. etc.

You don't need to tell me about incidents that occurred during the war, I'm well acquainted with them. All sides committed atrocities. The issue at hand was your suggestion that SF be boycotted by trade unions, which really is silly considering were actually supportive of trade unions when other parties and groups weren't.

SFIRA, having been defeated militarily

I wouldn't say they were militarily defeated, they just compromised themselves politically. Militarily the situation was a stalemate.

Would Jack O'Connor attend ANY party rally? I hope not. I hope this was a singular error.

It depends on your view of what trade unions are for, I would say they should be there for the advancement of a worker's agenda, and working with socialistic parties should be a part of that.

Jackie laughlin

Don't be silly. Of course I don't think a march constitutes military action but a military parade constitutes a public statement.

I've never seen a jack booted private army at a FF gathering but what I saw at the head of the SFIRA march most certainly was not a colour party.

Yes, murders were comitted by loyalists and by state personnel but by far the greatest number were murdered by the IRA. Indeed, they murdered more catholics than anyone else.

One of the people jailed for the manslaughter of Gerry McCabe is due out soon. Will he come on TV and tell the full story including who ordered the attack? Marin McGuinness admits to commanding the IRA in Derry. Will he confess to ordering murders or will he deny it and say who did?

You know, I was becoming bothered at how far this was drifting off topic but then I think that Jack O'Connor, a SIPTU official, mixed with these people and pretended that they had no questions to answer.

K-9

Jackie laughlin wrote:

Yes, murders were comitted by loyalists and by state personnel but by far the greatest number were murdered by the IRA. Indeed, they murdered more catholics than anyone else.

One of the people jailed for the manslaughter of Gerry McCabe is due out soon. Will he come on TV and tell the full story including who ordered the attack? Marin McGuinness admits to commanding the IRA in Derry. Will he confess to ordering murders or will he deny it and say who did?

You know, I was becoming bothered at how far this was drifting off topic but then I think that Jack O'Connor, a SIPTU official, mixed with these people and pretended that they had no questions to answer.

I presume he was addressing the conference as a SIPTU official. SIPTU have obviously moved on and think the past is the past. If the DUP Can eventually countenance power sharing (eventually) with SF I can't see why a SIPTU official can't address a SF conference.

In The Gerry McCabe case the criminals did serve their time and had a legal trial. I don't want to go off topic but their early release shouldn't have been an issue, ever. The IRA made sure to issue statements at the time that the robbery was not sanctioned by them. It was just as much the Govts. fault as SF's to suggest that they could be released.

On Martin McGuinness, again it depends on your viewpoint and it's another thread, but he has brought alot of hardline republicans with him on the peace process exactly because of who he was 20/30 years ago.

Zambia

Jackie laughlin wrote:

Don't be silly. Of course I don't think a march constitutes military action but a military parade constitutes a public statement.

The irish republic was founded by the Efforts of the IRA there will always be marches and parades of this nature. Whats silly is to connect them to SF every time someone dons a balaclava and Green pants.

On my last count SF held 8 seats in the Dail and they have aquired 25 seats in the North thats a pretty big endorsement from a free electorate. SIPTU are completly correct in dealing with them they are no longer a fringe group.

FTA69

I've never seen a jack booted private army at a FF gathering but why I saw at the head of the SFIRA march most certainly was not a colour party.

As I said the colour parties (they were carrying flags of the four provinces, the tricolour and the Starry Plough) are simply representations. They aren't supposed to insinuate they're the IRA and in most respects they aren't even IRA Volunteers in the first place.

Yes, murders were comitted by loyalists and by state personnel but by far the greatest number were murdered by the IRA. Indeed, they murdered more catholics than anyone else.

About half the deaths in the conflict were caused by the IRA, the other half consisted of the British Army, Loyalists and to a lesser extent the RUC. Percentage wise the majority of those killed by the IRA were combatants while the vast majority of those killed by the British Army and their proxy forces in Loyalism were Catholic civilians.

One of the people jailed for the manslaughter of Gerry McCabe is due out soon. Will he come on TV and tell the full story including who ordered the attack?

Probably not considering Michael will have served his sentence in full and will want to get on with his life.

Jackie laughlin

A tiny proportion of IRA victims were "other than civilian". The IRA killed more Catholics than any other group.

I know a colour party when I see one and I did not see a colour party.


I would like all of the killers and conspirators tried and jailed. I want those in the British forces who colluded in murder tried and jailed. I want those in SFIRA who colluded in murder tried and jailed. If SFIRA are serious about giving support to the Garda and the PSNI, they will inform.

I'm sure many "ordinary decent criminals" would love to forget the past and avoid investigation but it's not on. Similarly SFIRA members guilty of murder and/or conspiracy to murder will have to face the courts.

It is a regretable fact that SFIRA is no longer a fringe group. They enjoy significant support. Though not comparable in terms of of their behaviour, C. Haughey and M. Lowry enjoyed support. Support doesn't make crime acceptable.

Zambia

Jackie laughlin wrote:

I would like all of the killers and conspirators tried and jailed. I want those in the British forces who colluded in murder tried and jailed. I want those in SFIRA who colluded in murder tried and jailed. If SFIRA are serious about giving support to the Garda and the PSNI, they will inform.

I agree however none of these aims would be brought about by Jack OConnor making speeches at the SF Confernce.

What you want is each side to prostate themselves in front of the other , this wont happen ever and trying to force them to do so would plow us back to the past.

We have gone in circles long enough and will have to agree to differ.

Jackie laughlin

I simply think it outrageous that Jack O'Connor would avoid mention of "the elephant in the room" and pretent that he was addressing, say, the PDs.

I don't want anyone prostrated and ritually humiliated; I just want criminals brought to justice.

Frankly, as soon as this "peace process" is sorted out one way or another, I think some of the better journalists and media outlets will take the gloves off and begin to tell truths which the police forces will find impossible to ignore.

FTA69

A tiny proportion of IRA victims were "other than civilian".

I'm sorry Jackie you're actually wrong. The IRA killed about 1600 people, roughly 640 of them were British Army and around 630 were RUC.

I know a colour party when I see one and I did not see a colour party.

Well that's what it was, I was at that march too, you can call it whatever you want.

Jackie laughlin I simply think it outrageous that Jack O'Connor would avoid mention of "the elephant in the room" and pretent that he was addressing, say, the PDs.

So addressing a left-wing group is a travesty for a trade unionist you say, but you've no problem with O'Connor talking to the PDs, the most anti-union party in the country?

Jackie laughlin

FTA,
No, it would be entirely appropriate for Jack O'Connor to go to a PD conference and attack the neo-liberalism which characterises the PDs. It would be outrageous if he were to go to a PD conference and ignore the PD's history and defining characteristic.

I most certainly was not at the march. I saw the march. I wouldn't know the difference between a company and a platoon but there was a significant number of jack booted, military and they were marching.

There are quite a few people who tabulate the killings in the "NI conflict". Take a look at Malcolm Sutton's An Index of Deaths from the Conflict in Northern Ireland. There's a useful feature which allows any pair of features to be cross-indexed. Anyway, the IRA were the largest killers of Catholics at 340; their nearest rivals were the UVF at 278. The IRA killed c. 1,000 Crown forces, c. 520 civilians, c. 140 "Republicans", c. 30 Loyalist paramilitaries and 7 Irish security members. There are other sources giving different figures but the thrust remains the same.

Who commanded the IRA's Belfast Brigade to fix fuel, paint and explosives to the Le Mon restaurant in order to cause terrible burns to the citizens inside? Should SFIRA turn in the perpetrators and their leader/s to the PSNI?

FTA69

I saw the march. I wouldn't know the difference between a company and a platoon but there was a significant number of jack booted, military and they were marching.

There is no such titles in the IRA. Secondly as I said colour parties often wear garb of that sort, it's a representation, its not supposed to be the IRA and most of the crowd doing those aren't even IRA members.

the IRA were the largest killers of Catholics at 340; their nearest rivals were the UVF at 278.

A skewed statistic considering the UDA and British Army also killed over 150 Catholic civilians, which would mean Loyalists were the biggest killers of Catholics, and of course they were armed and informed by the state.

The IRA killed c. 1,000 Crown forces, c. 520 civilians

Therefore you'll admit that the majority of those killed by the IRA were combatants and that your previous posts saying that a "small percentage were other than civilian" was wrong?

c. 140 "Republicans

Most of these were actually IRA Volunteers who blew themselves up while preparing explosives, how this equates with the IRA killing them is a loss to me. The rest were touts, in which case they weren't actually Republicans. A handful would have been IPLO or "Official" IRA.

Who commanded the IRA's Belfast Brigade to fix fuel, paint and explosives to the Le Mon restaurant in order to cause terrible burns to the citizens inside?

Incendiary bombs aren't prepared to kill people, and La Mon was an accident commonly regretted within the IRA itself. In fairness jackie you don't seem to even begin to understand the Republican mentality nor the logic behind their actions.

Should SFIRA turn in the perpetrators and their leader/s to the PSNI?

Of course not, I don't believe anyone should be touting to the PSNI personally. Besides, there's no point seeking retribution for every incident that occurred during the conflict, otherwise we would be stuck in that process for scenarios.

Jackie laughlin

I didn't mean to give the impression that I tthought "platoon" and "company" were part of the IRA structure, though they do love their pretend-army ranks like, "OC", "Brigade", "Volunteer", "quartermaster" etc. The point i was making is that there was a greater presence than necessitated by a colour party and they were asserting a military presence. Be sensible, peaceful groups protesting aren't lead by "soldiers" of a private army or even by uniformed colour parties.

Yes, I was wrong to say that a "tiny percentage of IRA victims were other than civilians". If I were to approximate on the figures I used in my last post, I would have to say that about one third of IRA victims were soldiers. The rest were police officers, ordinary citizens, anyone the IRA cared to label an "informer", rival pseudo-republicans, etc. We can quibble too about who killed the most Catholics. The point is that the IRA's list of victims portrays more of a blood lust than a policy.


La Mon wasn't attacked with an incendiary bomb. An incendiary bomb when used by terrorists is meant to destroy property and livlihoods, while minimising casualties. The La Mon bomb was designed to cause human casualties and to leave the survivors horribly burned. Anyone with a shred of self respect would inform on the perpetrators, their commanders and associates.

I make a point of referring to SFIRA as pseudo-republicans and I try very hard to understand their mentality. There is no discernible logic behind their actions and that is apparent when their targetting is scrutnised.

Are you saying that all the murders and conspiracies to murder should be forgotten? What about the collusion with loyalist murders and Bloody Sunday?

FTA69

Be sensible, peaceful groups protesting aren't lead by "soldiers" of a private army or even by uniformed colour parties.

Fianna Fáil have colour parties of a similar nature.

The rest were police officers, ordinary citizens,

Ordinary citizens who collude with death squads, carry automatic weapons, wear flak jackets and drive in armoured cars. Would you describe the RIC of the 20s as "ordinary citizens" too? The police were as much combatants as the brits ever were.

The La Mon bomb was designed to cause human casualties and to leave the survivors horribly burned.

Put yourself in the IRA's shoes, why would they want to do that? What possible point would it serve, and why did they seek to avoid casualties on other occassions if they had such a blood lust? Do you think every killing by the IRA was intentional and premeditated?

Are you saying that all the murders and conspiracies to murder should be forgotten?

No, I believe in a truth and reconciliation process myself.

Jackie laughlin

FF most certainly do not have colour parties like that, though they have a residual fondness for strutting about and worshipping the dead.

There was a comma in there. It was a list. I was differentiating between police officers and ordinary civilians. My views on murderers in uniform and collusion with paramilitaries don't need to be repeated.

I think the police generally carrying weapons, wearing flak jackets and using armoured cars could be described as prudent. How would you behave if your life were constantly threatened?

I don't think that all IRA killings were intentional. Neither do I think they cared very much who got killed. I can find little evidence that they tried to minimise casualties. Anyway, military fantasists who think they are fighting a war would try to maximise casualties. SFIRA have a problem identifying their enemy.

Does "truth and reconciliation" mean letting off police officers who colluded in murder and similarly letting off the Bloody Sunday killers?

FTA69

FF most certainly do not have colour parties like that

They have similar get-ups at their Bodenstown commemoration every year.

I think the police generally carrying weapons, wearing flak jackets and using armoured cars could be described as prudent. How would you behave if your life were constantly threatened?

The cops were well able to threaten people's lives as well, the fact remains the RUC were combatants and were as much "ordinary civilians" as the Black and Tan "police units" were in the 20s.

I can find little evidence that they tried to minimise casualties.

The majority of IRA bombs went off without injuring anyone, this was as a result of warnings.

Anyway, military fantasists who think they are fighting a war would try to maximise casualties.

Not when they were also fighting a propaganda war to borrow a phrase from Ted Heath. They sought to maximise military casualties, but they aren't fools, and they knew a high civilian death toll would damage the reputation and propaganda on which they depended.

Does "truth and reconciliation" mean letting off police officers who colluded in murder and similarly letting off the Bloody Sunday killers?

It means the disclosure of truth. Not banging people up for actions they committed in a war which we are trying to bring to an end.

Jackie laughlin

FTA,
Are you serious? You would let police officers who colluded in murder go free, if they told the truth!!

The FF militarists are oul fellas with a few medals. Some of them might be retired terrorists. The IRA exists and marches and no one says openly what it is for.

I certainly distinguish between police officers and ordinary civilians.

I'm not aware of a source which categorises IRA bombs by warning and casualties caused. They certainly managed on some occasions to cause big bangs with little effect and on other occasions to destroy buildings, putting people out of work, and yet avoid casualties. However, they also set out to kill and main and were frequently successful.

FTA69

FTA,
Are you serious? You would let police officers who colluded in murder go free, if they told the truth!!

Yes. And I think you missed the boat on this issue jackie, Republican and Loyalist prisoners were all released in order to facilitate the peace process, all I really want is accountability and a new start, not retribution.

The IRA exists and marches and no one says openly what it is for.

We're going around in circles on this issue. You say colour parties are the IRA, I say they aren't. Sin é.

Jackie laughlin

Convicts were released on licence. You're suggesting letting killers off scot free!

FTA69

Convicts were released on licence.

You're only splitting hairs now, they were realeased in order to facilitate the peace process, the same should be applied to all.