Dissident Republicans

mconigol

I just want to preface this by saying I've never really concerned myself with the situation in the North and I'm not a campaigner for or against but after watching the primetime video below.......

How is is that RTE, a state broadcaster, owned and financed by the Irish people are able to sit down and interview a spokesman for the continuity IRA who admits responsibility for murdering innocent people and states their intention to continue??

WTF?? An interview!

Is it right that RTE can do this? Surely there should be some responsibility on their part to have the authorities waiting outside to pick these guys up when he's done at the very minimum? The tax payer is essentially providing a platform for these guys to spout their drivel :eek: I could maybe understand them broadcasting a statement but to actually sit down face to face for an interview is just incredible in my opinion.

If I was to walk on TV and give an interview as to how I've murdered someone and how I intend to pick off a few more in the future I'm fairly certain that I wouldn't be left alone for too long and I can't imagine the state broadcaster would be allowed to not disclose the fact that they know my location. Yet if you label yourself as some kind of freedom fighter it's apparently fine?

Link:
http://www.rte.ie/news/av/2011/0419/media-2945425.html#

Iomega Man

Oh I don't know.. Carole Coleman interviewed George Bush!

landsleaving

In order to effictively argue against something, one must first understand it.

Plus it's good for ratings.

stovelid

Because if you go down the road of supressing people's views - even animals like them - you're as bad as they are. The state -and the state broadcaster - has to be above all that and allow juggle the responsibility of letting them speak but challenging their views.

Well it's not enough for a conviction so what's the point in arresting him and I'd rather the media not be too tied with the state.

prinz

It's probably some RTE staffer reading a script.

Wolfe Tone

At least they let him use his own voice!

reprazant

RTE have interview SF members, IRA members, loyalist members and their associated political groups before.

That are journalists. Or at least some of them are.

That is what journalists do.

mconigol

stovelid wrote: »

Because if you go down the road of supressing people's views - even animals like them - you're as bad as they are. The state -and the state broadcaster - has to be above all that and allow them to juggle the responsibility of letting them speak but challenging their views.

Interviewing is not the same....It gives them a platform!

I can't go on TV and blaspheme since that's against the law but I could go on and represent murders and threaten to "make this state ungovernable" and "cripple the state" so that's grand in the interest of "fairness"?

Wolfe Tone

mconigol wrote: »

Interviewing is not the same....It gives them a platform!

I can't go on TV and blaspheme since that's against the law but I could go on and represent murders and threaten to "make this state ungovernable" and "cripple the state" so that's grand in the interest of "fairness"?

What about Ross Kemps programs?

celtictiger32

what would happen to broadcasting and journalism then? if every time a dissident, or a criminal was interviewed there was a few coppers waiting outside for them do you really think you'd ever have a similar interview again? there has been so many good books or even articles etc written on the back of similar interviews and i know of one author who even spent time with these people for the purposes of his books. what would we all watch then ?,.......fair city?:eek:

Logical Fallacy

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

What about Ross Kemps programs?

Well, they are an act of terrorism all by themselves.

Sonics2k

reprazant wrote: »

RTE have interview SF members, IRA members, loyalist members and their associated political groups before.

That are journalists. Or at least some of them are.

That is what journalists do.

Basically this.

Journalists should try to remain separated, independent (though it rarely happens), and report on the news and sometimes, interview people other's would dislike immensely.

mconigol

reprazant wrote: »

RTE have interview SF members, IRA members, loyalist members and their associated political groups before.

That are journalists. Or at least some of them are.

That is what journalists do.

I know all that.

I don't agree that saying "that is what journalists do" is a valid point.

They're criminals and shouldn't be given any special status. As I've said it wouldn't be acceptable for any ordinary joe soap.

pablomakaveli

I saw the interview last night and i thought it was a good thing. It shows how little these guys care about anyone but themselves. Hopefully people will see it and they'll lose more of what little support they have.

mconigol

celtictiger32 wrote: »

what would happen to broadcasting and journalism then? if every time a dissident, or a criminal was interviewed there was a few coppers waiting outside for them do you really think you'd ever have a similar interview again? there has been so many good books or even articles etc written on the back of similar interviews and i know of one author who even spent time with these people for the purposes of his books. what would we all watch then ?,.......fair city?:eek:

There would be one less of these guys on the street.

What else does it get us except for a few good books and documentaries. If they succeed in recruiting even one additional member to their cause then that is effectively financed by the Irish state.

Wolfe Tone

AFAIK the CIRA arent up to much whatsoever.


The "big boys" are the RIRA and OnH.

mconigol

pablomakaveli wrote: »

I saw the interview last night and i thought it was a good thing. It shows how little these guys care about anyone but themselves. Hopefully people will see it and they'll lose more of what little support they have.

I don't really think their supporters would leave them over an interview such as this one.

In fact I think that there is a danger that the opposite may occur. Some naive person get drawn into what their preaching...

RichieC

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

AFAIK the CIRA arent up to much whatsoever.


The "big boys" are the RIRA and OnH.

in their heads.

KeithAFC

That guy must think that Unionists don't exist. The true enemy of our country. He should of been arrested on the spot via intelligence.

Psydeshow

Mconigal:

They're criminals and shouldn't be given any special status

but in your very first message you pointed out that

I've never really concerned myself with the situation in the North

Am I the only one who would question your ability to judge the people being interviewed as Criminals given your self admitted lack of knowledge on the situation in the North?

For the record I would tend to believe that journalism should be kept separate from the state and therefore Journalists should be able to conduct this type of interview without having to report the interviewee whatever their particular political or ideological views are.

It should then be up to the journalists to decide the pros and cons of conducting the interview.

However logical gaffs like the one above really bug me!

knird evol

mconigol wrote: »

If I was to walk on TV and give an interview as to how I've murdered someone and how I intend to pick off a few more in the future

If you listen to the interview again you'll notice that he didn't say any of those things you have there.
And obviously didn't say "cira" or anything else incriminating.

celtictiger32

mconigol wrote: »

There would be one less of these guys on the street.

who? criminals, dissidents or journalists.

niallers1

These guys need to play the long game and realise that the path that Sinn Fein are on is the only real way of getting what they want.

They're deluded if they think they can get it any other way..

Wolfe Tone

Hmmm I'm a bit confused as to who the "CIRA" in that clip actually are.


Especially seen as he said they have split from Republican Sinn Féin. Which, afaik, is not true.

RSF are a mess with a break off group called Real Sinn Féin and there is a RCIRA apparently. Based in Limerick, seen as he mentioned Limerick as a stronghold I think it might be the RCIRA. Maybe they where the ones in that clip? Anyone have any ideas?



Just for those who are interested here is a post I put on the politics forum about militant republicans and why they do what they do.

---

First of all if you want to understand why militant republicans are doing what they are you need to understand who they are. I suggest reading this guide, which is fairly accurate. There are a few further subsplits(Ie Real Sinn Féin or whatever the lads in Limerick are calling themselves these days) but you don't really need to concern yourself with that.

On the whole militant republicans believe that SF through accepting the GFA have copper-fastened British rule and are administering it through Stormont. The republican movement, like what happened with the accepting of the treaty in 1921, has suffered a very nasty, bitter split. They regard Adams, and McGuinness in particular(as he was one of them, a soldier) as traitors of the highest order. They feel that the provos have abandoned republicanism and its ideals, taken the Queens shilling, etc.

This split pretty much came in two waves, in the mid nineties with the founding of the RIRA(that movement was pretty much stopped dead by Omagh) and a second later wave this century.

Why do they bomb do you ask?

There are a number of reasons.

They believe that SF have sold everyone a lie. SF say everything has changed, they say that SF have pulled the wool over everyones eyes and the union is stronger than ever and that SF, people who call themselves republicans, are enabling and helping that. In other words, SF have sided with the old enemy. SF have advocated "normalization" in the north. Militant republicans want to smash what they believe is the "myth" of normalisation. They say that this ""normalization" meerly extends to SF and the DUP playing happy families whereas on the ground it is the same as ever.

Above all militant republicans are sickened that SF have seemingly convinced most people that the Brits arent really in charge any more. They say that SF are merely an acceptable face to British rule. Its hard to overstate the bitterness of this split, in fact its hard to see who militant republicans hate more, SF or the British.

Des Dalton, president of Republican Sinn Féin, viewed as the political wing of the Continuity IRA, said his organisation would not talk to the “surrogates” of “British rule” in Northern Ireland. “From that point of view we have nothing to say to the Provisionals,” he said.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northern-ireland/dissidents-in-a-chilling-warning-to-prison-staff-we-have-got-your-details-15114270.html

Militant republicans believe SF have brought republicanism to its knees from a position of strength by selling out. They are apocalyptic that SF are advocating "touting" on militant republican volunteers. In fact the following video is a perfect example and sums up how and why militant republicans feel SF are traitors and hypocrites of the highest order...

By smashing normalization militant republicans want to show everyone that while the BA may be off the streets they could be back in an instant, they want to show that no matter what SF may say London is still in charge. They want to show that republicans got nothing more than what the Sunningdale Agreement offered. It wasn't good enough then, why now? What did everyone die for after that? Did Sands starve himself for Sunningdale?

Its important to note that the current militant republican campaign is NOT intended to remove the British, at least not in the short term. Their supporters arent idiots, armed struggle in an entire year these days would barely add up to a month of provo attacks during the troubles. They know they wont bomb the Brits out. Its a "wake up and see the reality" campaign. The reality that nothing has changed, and that they believe nothing will as long as British rule is being administrated by so called republicans. Personally I interpret it as something along the lines of "lets keep attacking in the hope that something along the way will happen to change everything".

Why bomb police? Simple reasons really. The reality on the ground is that the PSNI is a long way from being an impartial police force, people ARE being harassed etc. Stopped and searched for no legitimate reason, homes raided for little or no reason, crap like that. The RUC have always been the face of "British occupation" and the thought process involved in that killing was intended to portray militant republicans both as "fighting back", fighting against Brit rule and fighting against normalization, aka pretending everything is OK.

"Rowan: Did you target Peadar Heffron, or did you target a police officer?

ONH: We never target an individual in uniform. We target the uniform and what it stands for. "

The above was taken from a rather interesting interview, available to view here.

Normalization will be smashed, militant republicans will get what they want, proof that everything is the same as before, if there is an OTT reaction from the PSNI, the British government or god forbid the BA. For me personally the British Army back on the streets would pretty much be a deal breaker.

Other actions militant republicans are engaged in is so called "community policing", aka punishment beatings and kneecappings of drug dealers and anti social hoods. Its at this stage that most say militant republicans are up to their necks in drugs. That is a lie. Smuggling fags, laundering diesel, maybe, but not drugs. This "policing" is intended to both build support and provide an alternative to the unacceptable PSNI.

The attacks on courthouses are largely symbolic attacks on British rule. However its important to remember the republican prisoners, that may also be a factor in attacks on courthouses. Prisoners are treated like crap, much like prisoners in the seventies and eighties where. This provides militant republicans with excellent propaganda and there will be little condemnation from certain quarters if they follow through with their threats, it will build support.

Fundamentally militant republicans are attempting to create a situation in which British rule will be overthrown by force of arms, and the Irish will rise up once again. Thats my main objection, they know what they are doing has zero chance of resulting in a UI. I have raised that point on various sites and the reaction is invariably "ten plus years of SFs way has not got us closer to a UI has it?" I get the impression that militant republicans and their supporters regard it almost as a duty to resist British rule by force of arms.

Personally speaking I see that they have a point about how the situation has not really changed that much, but if the provos couldn't bomb the Brits out over 30 years no one will. There is nothing wrong with making a point about resisting British rule, whether they feel it is SF administered or otherwise, however you don't need to kill to do so. Civil disobedience, sit ins that type of thing will make that point just as well.

Gerry Adams copped decades ago that Armed struggle and politics where incompatible. Big success in one meant the other suffered. Thats why I think that OnH are the ones to watch, and the most dangerous. They just have the armalite.

In very very simple terms militant republicans don't feel that the GFA will lead to a UI. SF do.

I will just finish by saying that I don't support militant republicanism and I am a SF supporter and member. The above is my take on the situation, and I feel it is accurate.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=71764198&postcount=15

mickydoomsux

KeithAFC wrote: »

That guy must think that Unionists don't exist. The true enemy of our country

Nope. Morons like you with your outdated thinking are the true enemy of our country.

KeithAFC

Interesting point Wolfe Tone. Looking at it now, this guy seems to have conned this woman for an interview. Could be a guy on a complete wind up to be honest.

SEPT 23 1989

I dont care what they call themselves they are all cowards

Dyr

stovelid wrote: »

Because if you go down the road of supressing people's views - even animals like them - you're as bad as they are. The state -and the state broadcaster - has to be above all that and allow juggle the responsibility of letting them speak but challenging their views.

*cough*section 31*cough*

above all that me arse

PeterIanStaker

A consequence of the likes of Section 31 was to prolong the Troubles.

Having said that, these dissidents are retards.

Dyr

I'm watching that link now, what really disgusts me is how hamfisted RTE are at this kind of coverage. Bloody awful.

KeithAFC

Having said that, we had a 13 minute video and how long out of those 13 minutes did the dissident speak for? Not much. Instead we had to listen to the other lot.

stovelid

Bambi wrote: »

*cough*section 31*cough*

It's not in existence anymore?

Hannibal

His denying of links to Republican SF could also be an attempt to deflect attention away from their members. We have to engage these groups as to ignore them could create bigger problems for them to gain attention. They might operate under CIRA, RIRA, ONH, RCIRA etc but these groups while different are cooperating with each other so much that they're essentially the same. Republican SF are as run down and irrelevent as their offices in Dublin suggests.

Jim McAllister is right by saying they're not going to bring us anywhere. But don't forget we're in a recession, and there's young people out of work north and south and these are people likely to be sucked in as members to these organisations as "something to do". I don't think we'll ever have a situation on this island without conflict and go into any urban area and you'll find a gang of young people willing to throw missiles at the Garda/Police.

It's also worth noting that they will never achieve the numerical strength of the IRA as the conditions that existed in 1969 through to 1994 no longer exist. You will always have some people willing to join but you won't have mass numbers

sensibleken

bunch of cowardly scum! wouldnt stand a chance if they weren't hiding away like a crab!

mconigol

Psydeshow wrote: »

Mconigal:

but in your very first message you pointed out that

Am I the only one who would question your ability to judge the people being interviewed as Criminals given your self admitted lack of knowledge on the situation in the North?

For the record I would tend to believe that journalism should be kept separate from the state and therefore Journalists should be able to conduct this type of interview without having to report the interviewee whatever their particular political or ideological views are.

It should then be up to the journalists to decide the pros and cons of conducting the interview.

However logical gaffs like the one above really bug me!

Where's the logical gaff exactly?

Murder is a criminal act regardless of who carries it out? I think I've perfectly able to judge somebody who says that they represent the people who carry out those murders since they would be an accessory would they not?

mconigol

knird evol wrote: »

If you listen to the interview again you'll notice that he didn't say any of those things you have there.
And obviously didn't say "cira" or anything else incriminating.

I represent the belfast brigade of the continuity ira. I have permission to speak on behalf of the leadership of continuity IRA.

Those are the first words out of the mouth of the guy being interviewed?? How exactly didn't he say "cira"!?

In 2009 it claimed the responsibility for the murder of policeman Steven Carroll.

Quote from the reporter.


So, what exactly did I say that was incorrect? and by the way I'm pretty sure that representing an illegal group that claim responsibility for the illegal murder of even one innocent people is a crime. I'm open to correction though.

FUNKY LOVER

Have to wonder where half of these hoaxes come from considering the PSNI left a van surrounded with cones whilst knowing their was a bomb in it.

PeterIanStaker

stovelid wrote: »

It's not in existence anymore?

Nope, scrapped in '93 or '94 AFAIK.

FUNKY LOVER

It really was a joke of an interview and will only do damage to the cira if it was them!!Why didnt they get one of the more active groups like RIRA,ONH.

anyway these people are a laughing stock to republicans across the island.

Wolfe Tone

FUNKY LOVER wrote: »

It really was a joke of an interview and will only do damage to the cira if it was them!!Why didnt they get one of the more active groups like CIRA,ONH.

anyway these people are a laughing stock to republicans across the osalnd.

Because they wouldn't waste their time participating in an interview which could only ever portray them negatively, and be edited to ensure that.

FUNKY LOVER

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

Because they wouldn't waste their time participating in an interview which could only ever portray them negatively, and be edited to ensure that.

Ye its clear RTE knew how bad the CIRA would portray republicanism in that interview which turned out to be true.Good point about it been heavily edited,they left out the bit saying their was a warning about the bomb and the PSNI left cones around it and left the scene(how careless).

vampire of kilmainham

id say that interview was carried out at a private location known only to the dissedent republicans it certinally wouldent of been in the RTE studioes the crew would of been brought to a secret location and probabley blindfolded on route so the wouldent know where it is and then driven back to where they met up and dropped off that was allways the procedure in the past...

Bottle_of_Smoke

I can't view the link but anything I've heard RSF interviews before. They're not morons, they know exactly what they can and can't get away with saying.

So rather than say "join the CIRA" they'll say "we respect the right of all irish people to resist British occupation" etc

AFAIK they always deny there's a formal link between them and CIRA anyway.

Wolfe Tone

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

I can't view the link but anything I've heard RSF interviews before. They're not morons, they know exactly what they can and can't get away with saying.

So rather than say "join the CIRA" they'll say "we respect the right of all irish people to resist British occupation" etc

AFAIK they always deny there's a formal link between them and CIRA anyway.

It was a lad in a bally saying that he was NOT connected with RSF, and that RSF speak for themselves and NOT the CIRA. Mentioned he was representing the Belfast brigade, and was authorized to speak on behalf of the army council.


I reckon he is a product of the whole limerick thing.

Bottle_of_Smoke

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

It was a lad in a bally saying that he was NOT connected with RSF, and that RSF speak for themselves and NOT the CIRA. Mentioned he was representing the Belfast brigade, and was authorized to speak on behalf of the army council.


I reckon he is a product of the whole limerick thing.

:eek: ok that's completely different then.

Wouldn't RTE get into huge trouble for broadcasting a statement for them?

no_bother

FUNKY LOVER wrote: »

Ye its clear RTE knew how bad the CIRA would portray republicanism in that interview which turned out to be true.Good point about it been heavily edited,they left out the bit saying their was a warning about the bomb and the PSNI left cones around it and left the scene(how careless).

not half as 'careless' as leaving all those explosives there in the first place!

BOHtox

Cool shades!

lcrcboy

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

Hmmm I'm a bit confused as to who the "CIRA" in that clip actually are.


Especially seen as he said they have split from Republican Sinn Féin. Which, afaik, is not true.

RSF are a mess with a break off group called Real Sinn Féin and there is a RCIRA apparently. Based in Limerick, seen as he mentioned Limerick as a stronghold I think it might be the RCIRA. Maybe they where the ones in that clip? Anyone have any ideas?



Just for those who are interested here is a post I put on the politics forum about militant republicans and why they do what they do.

---

First of all if you want to understand why militant republicans are doing what they are you need to understand who they are. I suggest reading this guide, which is fairly accurate. There are a few further subsplits(Ie Real Sinn Féin or whatever the lads in Limerick are calling themselves these days) but you don't really need to concern yourself with that.

On the whole militant republicans believe that SF through accepting the GFA have copper-fastened British rule and are administering it through Stormont. The republican movement, like what happened with the accepting of the treaty in 1921, has suffered a very nasty, bitter split. They regard Adams, and McGuinness in particular(as he was one of them, a soldier) as traitors of the highest order. They feel that the provos have abandoned republicanism and its ideals, taken the Queens shilling, etc.

This split pretty much came in two waves, in the mid nineties with the founding of the RIRA(that movement was pretty much stopped dead by Omagh) and a second later wave this century.

Why do they bomb do you ask?

There are a number of reasons.

They believe that SF have sold everyone a lie. SF say everything has changed, they say that SF have pulled the wool over everyones eyes and the union is stronger than ever and that SF, people who call themselves republicans, are enabling and helping that. In other words, SF have sided with the old enemy. SF have advocated "normalization" in the north. Militant republicans want to smash what they believe is the "myth" of normalisation. They say that this ""normalization" meerly extends to SF and the DUP playing happy families whereas on the ground it is the same as ever.

Above all militant republicans are sickened that SF have seemingly convinced most people that the Brits arent really in charge any more. They say that SF are merely an acceptable face to British rule. Its hard to overstate the bitterness of this split, in fact its hard to see who militant republicans hate more, SF or the British.


http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northern-ireland/dissidents-in-a-chilling-warning-to-prison-staff-we-have-got-your-details-15114270.html

Militant republicans believe SF have brought republicanism to its knees from a position of strength by selling out. They are apocalyptic that SF are advocating "touting" on militant republican volunteers. In fact the following video is a perfect example and sums up how and why militant republicans feel SF are traitors and hypocrites of the highest order...

By smashing normalization militant republicans want to show everyone that while the BA may be off the streets they could be back in an instant, they want to show that no matter what SF may say London is still in charge. They want to show that republicans got nothing more than what the Sunningdale Agreement offered. It wasn't good enough then, why now? What did everyone die for after that? Did Sands starve himself for Sunningdale?

Its important to note that the current militant republican campaign is NOT intended to remove the British, at least not in the short term. Their supporters arent idiots, armed struggle in an entire year these days would barely add up to a month of provo attacks during the troubles. They know they wont bomb the Brits out. Its a "wake up and see the reality" campaign. The reality that nothing has changed, and that they believe nothing will as long as British rule is being administrated by so called republicans. Personally I interpret it as something along the lines of "lets keep attacking in the hope that something along the way will happen to change everything".

Why bomb police? Simple reasons really. The reality on the ground is that the PSNI is a long way from being an impartial police force, people ARE being harassed etc. Stopped and searched for no legitimate reason, homes raided for little or no reason, crap like that. The RUC have always been the face of "British occupation" and the thought process involved in that killing was intended to portray militant republicans both as "fighting back", fighting against Brit rule and fighting against normalization, aka pretending everything is OK.



The above was taken from a rather interesting interview, available to view here.

Normalization will be smashed, militant republicans will get what they want, proof that everything is the same as before, if there is an OTT reaction from the PSNI, the British government or god forbid the BA. For me personally the British Army back on the streets would pretty much be a deal breaker.

Other actions militant republicans are engaged in is so called "community policing", aka punishment beatings and kneecappings of drug dealers and anti social hoods. Its at this stage that most say militant republicans are up to their necks in drugs. That is a lie. Smuggling fags, laundering diesel, maybe, but not drugs. This "policing" is intended to both build support and provide an alternative to the unacceptable PSNI.

The attacks on courthouses are largely symbolic attacks on British rule. However its important to remember the republican prisoners, that may also be a factor in attacks on courthouses. Prisoners are treated like crap, much like prisoners in the seventies and eighties where. This provides militant republicans with excellent propaganda and there will be little condemnation from certain quarters if they follow through with their threats, it will build support.

Fundamentally militant republicans are attempting to create a situation in which British rule will be overthrown by force of arms, and the Irish will rise up once again. Thats my main objection, they know what they are doing has zero chance of resulting in a UI. I have raised that point on various sites and the reaction is invariably "ten plus years of SFs way has not got us closer to a UI has it?" I get the impression that militant republicans and their supporters regard it almost as a duty to resist British rule by force of arms.

Personally speaking I see that they have a point about how the situation has not really changed that much, but if the provos couldn't bomb the Brits out over 30 years no one will. There is nothing wrong with making a point about resisting British rule, whether they feel it is SF administered or otherwise, however you don't need to kill to do so. Civil disobedience, sit ins that type of thing will make that point just as well.

Gerry Adams copped decades ago that Armed struggle and politics where incompatible. Big success in one meant the other suffered. Thats why I think that OnH are the ones to watch, and the most dangerous. They just have the armalite.

In very very simple terms militant republicans don't feel that the GFA will lead to a UI. SF do.

I will just finish by saying that I don't support militant republicanism and I am a SF supporter and member. The above is my take on the situation, and I feel it is accurate.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=71764198&postcount=15

not to sure but a while back there was a story in the papers saying that the younger members of the C-IRA had split from the group in the south and the reason for this was that they felt the group in the south was moving towards laying down their arms and are involved in drug dealing, the story also talked about the fact that the C-IRA in the north was mainly made up of younger men aged from their late teens up to late thirties with a few older hard-liners and that the southern group was mainly composed of older members from their late thirties upwards. Actually Shannon outside Limerick is supposed to be a large stronghold for them and there has been a few stories from the area of them threatening drug dealers, in Limerick they were pictured extorting the two main gangs and threatening to wipe them out if they didint pay protection money

lcrcboy

just on that post above there is a story going around my local estate (I live in Limerick) that a few men in balaclavas had pulled up in a car and gave hassle to a few of the local teens about causing problems in the area and they apparently claimed to be republicans how true this is Im not sure