UVF ecpected to announce an "end to paramilitary activity"

Wolfe Tone

The Ulster Volunteer Force is to make a statement in the new year that it will no longer be a paramilitary force. A negotiator who has been asked to help the UVF dissolve has told the Guardian he expects the loyalist terror group to announce "very soon" that it is no longer an underground army.


At the centre of this process is a Dublin-born peace activist turned non-subscribing Presbyterian minister who is also the unofficial Christian chaplain for Ulster's gay community.

The Rev Chris Hudson told the Guardian that he now believed the UVF leadership was serious about dismantling its paramilitary structures, seven months after the Moffett murder.

Despite an upsurge in dissident republican violence in 2010 both the UVF and the larger Ulster Defence Association have insisted they will not be provoked into going back to armed campaigns.

He also revealed that during his latest discussions with the UVF, its leadership accepted that the dissident republicans do not want to attack Ulster loyalists at this stage. However, he said there was a residual fear that the anti-ceasefire republicans might in future go on the offensive against loyalists.

A reminder of some of their actions:

• Several car bombs in Dublin and Monaghan bombs in 1974, which killed 33 civilians and wounded almost 300.

• The Shankill Butchers, a unit of the UVF on Belfast's Shankill Road tortured and killed innocent Catholics picked up at night in the city. The reign of terror ended in 1979 with the capture of most of the gang; its leader, Lenny Murphy, was shot dead three years later by the IRA, having been set up for assassination by a rival loyalist, UDA extortionist Jim Craig.

• Loughinisland massacre in 1994, when the UVF shot dead six men in a bar while watching Ireland's opening World Cup game; one was aged 87, the oldest victim of the Troubles.

Full article http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/dec/27/uvf-paramilitary-activity-end


So what is this then? Another integral part of the peace process, or simply a token gesture? Will we finally see the back of loyalist brutality? Or as I think the emergence of "dissident loyalists"

Either way, if it happens it could be significant.

PeterIanStaker

[total cynicism]Wonder if this is reported in any "Irish" newspapers . . . [/total cynicism]

Biggins

Any step forward is a good step.
At least it appears to be forwards and not backwards.

KeithAFC

I doubt it. As long as there is dissident republicans running around, you will get dissident loyalists. This UVF (shudders..) is not close to what it was during the troubles.

Biggins

Sadly there will always be dissidents of some kind it seems but any known groups that come out and say "we have had enough" and/or "peace is the best route" is always a good thing.

If what the OP has brought to our attention turns out to be true, while I'm very sure it won't mean complete peace in our time (lord knows some within such orgs' are reported to have money making rackets), but its yet another step in the right direction.

lugha

Biggins wrote: »

Sadly there will always be dissidents of some kind it seems but any known groups that come out and say "we have had enough" and/or "peace is the best route" is always a good thing.

I’m not so sure. The UVF going away completely would certainly be a good thing. But the end of such an organisation does not mean the end of some of the unsavoury individuals in its makeup. With a formal organisation in place, some semblance of control might be hoped for. But without? Well, we might well find ourselves looking back at the dissolution of such groupings and find them coinciding with the genesis of some formidable organised crime outfits. Hopefully not.

Biggins

lugha wrote: »

I’m not so sure. The UVF going away completely would certainly be a good thing. But the end of such an organisation does not mean the end of some of the unsavoury individuals in its makeup.

I agree. That was a small point I alluded to above.

lugha wrote: »

With a formal organisation in place, some semblance of control might be hoped for. But without? Well, we might well find ourselves looking back at the dissolution of such groupings and find them coinciding with the genesis of some formidable organised crime outfits. Hopefully not.

I suspect as in previous cases were orgs have broken up officially, there is still some characters from within that are set in their ways and will sadly continue to operate outside the likes of state law.
A simple example of this alone was shown recently in "Primetime Investigates" and the smuggling of fake/illegal tobacco products.
...But that topic is a whole other side thread.

Wolfe Tone

We already have so called dissident loyalists, I( think there is a "Real UVF" on the go already.

dsmythy

Biggins wrote: »

Any step forward is a good step.
At least it appears to be forwards and not backwards.

Let's just hope it's not one of those one forward two backwards motions.

KeithAFC

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

We already have so called dissident loyalists, I( think there is a "Real UVF" on the go already.

I wish they would stop shaming the UVF name. The UVF from the late 70s and onwards shamed the name of the UVF. Disgraced the memory of the Somme heroes and WW1.

Wolfe Tone

KeithAFC wrote: »

I wish they would stop shaming the UVF name. The UVF from the late 70s and onwards shamed the name of the UVF. Disgraced the memory of the Somme heroes and WW1.

I am sure you mean from 1966 onwards when this UVF was set up and not just "the late 70s" onwards?

KeithAFC

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

I am sure you mean from 1966 onwards when this UVF was set up and not just "the late 70s" onwards?

Correct.

fryup

KeithAFC wrote: »

I wish they would stop shaming the UVF name. The UVF from the late 70s and onwards shamed the name of the UVF. Disgraced the memory of the Somme heroes and WW1.

just like the Provos shamed the name of irish republicanism

xp90

I ecpect this to be the way forward

HavingCrack

KeithAFC wrote: »

I wish they would stop shaming the UVF name. The UVF from the late 70s and onwards shamed the name of the UVF. Disgraced the memory of the Somme heroes and WW1.

To be honest, ww1 was an utter bloodbath and 5 years of complete butchery and for what? **** all, it just caused the rise of Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini and eventually ww2. What did all the men at the Somme die for? Nothing. If you think walking straight at an enemy trench and getting mown down is heroic...well whatever.

I always wondered why they called themselevs the UVF in 1966 anyway when they were blatently nothing similar, was it to try give themselves some link to the past?

Wolfe Tone

fryup wrote: »

just like the Provos shamed the name of irish republicanism

Care to elaborate on this? Do you mean by their existence, or by some of their more distasteful actions?

KeithAFC

HavingCrack wrote: »

To be honest, ww1 was an utter bloodbath and 5 years of complete butchery and for what? **** all, it just caused the rise of Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini and eventually ww2. What did all the men at the Somme die for? Nothing. If you think walking straight at an enemy trench and getting mown down is heroic...well whatever.

I always wondered why they called themselevs the UVF in 1966 anyway when they were blatently nothing similar, was it to try give themselves some link to the past?

I consider them brave men. I consider them heroes. The UVF was one of the best brigades on the first morning of the somme.

HavingCrack

KeithAFC wrote: »

I consider them brave men. I consider them heroes. The UVF was one of the best brigades on the first morning of the somme.

But why? I don't deny that they were among the most effective units at the Somme, they were the only unit that made any significant advance and ended up beign cut off. But I'm pointing out that ww1 was utterly pointless for all concerned. Seriously what did getting slaughtered achieve for all those men?

KeithAFC

HavingCrack wrote: »

But why? I don't deny that they were among the most effective units at the Somme, they were the only unit that made any significant advance and ended up beign cut off. But I'm pointing out that ww1 was utterly pointless for all concerned. Seriously what did getting slaughtered achieve for all those men?

I ain't saying it wasn't slaughter but i still have huge respect for that regiment and the people in it and the way they fought.

Seth Brundle

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Care to elaborate on this? Do you mean by their existence, or by some of their more distasteful actions?

is it that difficult to understand?
According to wikipedia: "Republicanism is the ideology of governing a nation as a republic, where the head of state is appointed by means other than heredity, often elections. The exact meaning of republicanism varies depending on the cultural and historical context. Several definitions are covered in this article."
How ecxactly did the likes of the IRA serve true republicanism with their murderous activities?
When did the people elect its members?
When did the people elect them to represent their views?
When did the people give them the right to use the term "Óglaigh na hÉireann"?
etc.

Wolfe Tone

kbannon wrote: »

is it that difficult to understand?
According to wikipedia: "Republicanism is the ideology of governing a nation as a republic, where the head of state is appointed by means other than heredity, often elections. The exact meaning of republicanism varies depending on the cultural and historical context. Several definitions are covered in this article."
How ecxactly did the likes of the IRA serve true republicanism with their murderous activities?
When did the people elect its members?
When did the people elect them to represent their views?
When did the people give them the right to use the term "Óglaigh na hÉireann"?
etc.

He said "Irish republicanism" did he not? I think he was saying they disgraced the likes of Wolfe Tone.

Is it that difficult to understand?

Seth Brundle

They are quite different. Wolfe Tone was trying to creater a republic.
The IRA were a terrorist organisation that murdered many people over the years who had nothing to do with trying to achieve a republic.
They were an undemocratic organisation who used fear, intimidation and murder to get their way.

Wolfe Tone

The PIRA where fighting for a 32 county republic. They were fighting for the same things as the men in 1916 where. If you cant see that.....

Seth Brundle

No I don't see that.
So why did Detective McCabe get killed then?
Why were Irish people kidnapped by them (e.g. Don Tidey)?
Why were people who didn't agree with theie views & actions killed?
How can they create a republic when they themselves don't opetrate democratically within a democratic society?
And before you suggest, I'm not condoning the actions taken by the men of 1916. Any murder is still murder regardless of the (percieved) reasons.

Zambia

No they are a dying force they have bugger all recruits of any value and shag all decent weaponary left. Even less chance of funding.

They know this the announcement will just be a face saving exercise to make out they are bowing out rather than fading away.

But I dont care how they go away as long as they go away.

lugha

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

The PIRA where fighting for a 32 county republic. They were fighting for the same things as the men in 1916 where. If you cant see that.....

Finally Muss, something we agree on!
Yes, PIRA and the 1916 crew and the present day dissidents are fighting for the same thing. And in the same way, i.e. with total disregard for the opinions of those they claimed to represent.
Perhaps we should team up and maybe we can convince a few more people of this.

OhNoYouDidn't

kbannon wrote: »

No I don't see that.
So why did Detective McCabe get killed then?

Because he had previous with one of the robbers who swore revenge if he ever saw him again.

kbannon wrote: »

Why were Irish people kidnapped by them (e.g. Don Tidey)?

To raise money

kbannon wrote: »

Why were people who didn't agree with theie views & actions killed?

Who was?

kbannon wrote: »

How can they create a republic when they themselves don't opetrate democratically within a democratic society?

They don't see themselves as undemocratic.

kbannon wrote: »

And before you suggest, I'm not condoning the actions taken by the men of 1916. Any murder is still murder regardless of the (percieved) reasons.

Which brings us back on topic. We are talking about the UVF here, not the IRA. Do you condemn them with the same venom?

KeithAFC

I just hope we never see the return of the Ulster Volunteer Force in large numbers any time soon. Hopefully peace will last.

Seth Brundle

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Because he had previous with one of the robbers who swore revenge if he ever saw him again.

So if it was a personal 'job' then why don't the IRA condemn it?

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

To raise money

They were using crime to raise funds? If their ambition for a 32 county republic was so widely supported, why resport to criminality?

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Who was?

Weren't all of the disappeared for example? Any non-military targets were killed for doing whatever they believed in (and i'm not justifying the malitary targets).

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

They don't see themselves as undemocratic.

They don't see murder as murder either. Still doesn't mean that they are in the right.

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Which brings us back on topic. We are talking about the UVF here, not the IRA. Do you condemn them with the same venom?

I condemn both equally. They are all murderers.

maxxie

The UVF ha glorified drug dealers

Wolfe Tone

WTF does that have to do with the thread? Cmon lads, stay on topic, lets not hve the usual mess.


kbannon, go start your own thread if you want to go down the usual shinner bashing route.