Loyalists paramilitaies during the Troubles

BalcombeSt4

There's plenty of Republican threads on the Northern conflict but hardly any Loyalists even tho they killed close to 1000 civilians. And each time I say anything about Loyalists in a IRA thread I'm told this thread isn't about Loyalists so please don't derail the thread with IRA whataboutery.

I'm suprised by the lack of knowledge people have & I had up until recently about Loyalist attacks from 1969 - the early 2000's, for example hardly anybody seems know Dublin airport was bombed by the UDA in 1975.

And the brutality of the attacks is astonishing. One of the first acts of the UVF in 1966 was to burn an old Protestant woman to death. I'm guessing everyone knows who the Shankill Butchers were. The "romper room" killing of Anne Ogivly who had her head bashed in with a brick. The murder of Senator Paddy Wilson & Irene Andrews who each stabbed dozens of times and had their throats slit from ear to ear.

And also the propaganda line of the RHC, UVF, LVF & UDA was they were taking the "fight" to the IRA yet the UDA out of almost 400 victims only killed 14 members of either the IRA or INLA.

But some of the worst Loyalist attacks other than Loughinisland, Miami Showband, Greysteel & Dublin & Monaghan seem to wiped from history like.....

The Top of the Hil Bar gun attack by the UDA which left 5 civilians dead

The Hillman Street bombing which left a Catholic couple and their 10 month old baby dead.

Benny's Bar bombing by the UDA on Halloween which left 2 small girls who were out trick or treating

There was the Rose & Crown Bar bombing that killed six people and injured 20.

The Reavey and O'Dowd family murders left 6 dead when they killed 3 brothers from each the Reavey & o'Dowd family on the same night.

The Strand Bar gun & bomb attack by the Red Hand Commando left 6 dead.

Kay's Bar bombing which killed 5 people and injured 80, the UVF put snipers in posistion to shot any surviving people coming out of the blast.

I'm guessing most people know of the December 1972 & January 1973 Dublin bombings which left 3 dead & about 250 injured.

3 weeks after the Dublin bombing in January 1972 the UVF launched 3 seperate attacks in 3 different counties in the Republic within in the space of 30 minutes killing 2 people and injuring 20.

The UVF launched a gun and bomb attack on McGleenan's Bar killing 3 people and injuring about two dozen.

On the 2nd of October 1975 the UVF launched 5 seperate attacks which left which left 11 people dead and about 100 injured. The day after the attacks the UVF was made illegal again (no idead why they were made legal in 1974 in the first place.

In 1975 the UVF launched 2 attacks in the Republics border counties. which left 5 dead and 30 injured In the first Kay's Tavern in Dundalk was bombed killing 2 people and injured 20. In the second UVF gunmen attacked Donnelly's Bar and filling station in Silverbridge killing 3 people and injuring 10. Brining the

The 1976 Hillcrest bar bombing (or the St.Patricks day massacre) left 4 dead and 50 injured.

Clancy's Bar bombing & almost straight way a gun attack on the nearby Eagles Bar left 4 dead and about 100 injured.

Chlorane Bar attack left 5 dead.

Less than a month aftr the Chlorane attack the UVF carried out a similar attack on the Ramble Inn which this time left 6 people dead and about 25 injured.

The UVF bombed the Whitefort Inn killing 3 people and injuring 60.

The PAF launched a gun attack in Avenue Bar killing 3 and injuring a dozen.

The 1992 Sean Grahams Bookmakers massacre by the UDA left 5 dead.

Just a few months the UDA attacked another bookmakers on Oldpark Road killing another 3 innocent people.

The LVF opened fire on a 400 packed teenage disco injuring several people and killing one

The LVF shot dead Martin O'Haggan a Sunday World journalist. The killing recieved nowhere near the attention Veronica Guerin's murder got.


There also seems to be huge double standards between Loyalist & republican attacks. For example Enniskillen was a giant, giant blow to the IRA and the media and even there own supporters lay into them hard & rightfully. But the Dublin & Monaghan bombings were considered a "successful operation" and it wasn't a blow to the UVF it even enhanced their reputatio even tho that operation killed nearly 3 times the amount of people killed at Enniskillen.
Also most people seem to know most IRA attacks that killed 3 or more civilians I'd doubt most people have ever heard about the attacks I mentioned.

laoch na mona

if you haven't already I would suggest reading lethal allies by anne cadwallader. It also interesting how the Irish government reacted over 100 killed on this side of the border with no one charged for the attacks. Or the Irish governments willingness to ignore British collusion in attacks such as the Dublin Monaghan bombings

BalcombeSt4

laoch na mona wrote: »

if you haven't already I would suggest reading lethal allies by anne cadwallader. It also interesting how the Irish government reacted over 100 killed on this side of the border with no one charged for the attacks. Or the Irish governments willingness to ignore British collusion in attacks such as the Dublin Monaghan bombings

And most of those 100 were killed during Liam Cosgraves time in power with the "law & order government" of a Fine Gael/Labor coalition.

It's really astonishing that no Loyalist was ever convicted or even just questioned by the Gardai for the many crimes they committed against this state.

Maybe when they were investegating the 100 murders they found something they didn't want to find and keeping good relations with Britain was more important than protecting the citizens of this state.

Another pile of crap I hear from Loyalists is that they targted Dublin because they got the idea from the IRA saying 1 bomb in London was worth a 100 in Belfast. The UVF attack Dublin in 1969 before the PIRA even exsisted and they didn't attack London until 1973 and the UVF had attacked Dublin atleast twice before that after the PIRA came into exsistence.

Strangely enough back in 1976 a joint Army/Garda patrol arrested a 8 man SAS team who drove over the border at Flagstaff Hill. The SAS team was armed but well out numbered by the Irish Army but they were released after a few hours. But if the Army had deployed these type of tactics earlier it might have saved a lot lives as most of the Loyalist (& possibly British attacks) could have stopped as most attacks were carried out in this state between 1972 - 1976,
Anyway I doubt those SAS men were coming into this state with those weapons to shot at ducks.

laoch na mona

Pleanty of attacks happened in the 80s and 90s as well, Eddie Fullerton a sinn féin councilor was murdered in his home in Buncranna in 1991 by the UDA on intelligence provided by the RUC.

And of course Kieran Doherty who was an elected TD when he died on hunger strike, what other state would accept the imprisonment let alone the death of a public representative by another state.

there was also Martin Doherty who was shot outside the widow scallans pub in 1994 by the UVF during a failed attempt to bomb a function inside.

BalcombeSt4

laoch na mona wrote: »

Pleanty of attacks happened in the 80s and 90s as well, Eddie Fullerton a sinn féin councilor was murdered in his home in Buncranna in 1991 by the UDA on intelligence provided by the RUC.

And of course Kieran Doherty who was an elected TD when he died on hunger strike, what other state would accept the imprisonment let alone the death of a public representative by another state.

there was also Martin Doherty who was shot outside the widow scallans pub in 1994 by the UVF during a failed attempt to bomb a function inside.

Yes, the UVF leaders were not happy with the Hidden Hand Documentary on the Dublin/Monaghan bombings making them out to be amateuirsh and not capable of launching attacks in Dublin by themselves so they tried to launch a number of attacks in the South in 1994 which just sort of proved the documentaries point that they were not capable of launching a major attack by themeslves although a number of people were hurt in their efforts, one bomb injured 2 civilians on the dart near Connolly station, 2 members of the Irish Army bomb disposal unit were injured trying to defuse a UVF bomb sent to a SF office in Dublin & the murder of Martiin Doherty like you already said.

But most of the attacks were security forces were also probably involved or atleast credible arguments can be made of them being involved happened in the first half of the 70's and usually while a big political issue was going on like the Dail debates in 1972, the power sharing executive established by Sunningdale in 1974 & the IRA ceasefire of 1975.

Very likely no other state, wasn't there 2 hunger strikers elected to the Dail?

jonniebgood1

Is there a point to this thread? I would expect most people on an irish history forum would be aware that there are loyalist paramilitary groups just as there are mirror image republican groups. Can you explain what point you are making balcombe???

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

riffmongous

Yeah also a few I hadn't heard of there too, especially the 'smaller' ones that happened in the Republic

BalcombeSt4

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

Is there a point to this thread? I would expect most people on an irish history forum would be aware that there are loyalist paramilitary groups just as there are mirror image republican groups. Can you explain what point you are making balcombe???

I know people are aware of Loyalist groups, but I was drawning attention to the fact that besides a handful of massacres there seems to be very little known about what they did in Ireland for about 35+ plus years even tho killed a lot more civilians than the IRA and the extent to which British Int worked with them.

laoch na mona

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

Is there a point to this thread? I would expect most people on an irish history forum would be aware that there are loyalist paramilitary groups just as there are mirror image republican groups. Can you explain what point you are making balcombe???

that is historically and politically incorrect, republican paramilitaries emerged from radically different conditions to republican ones.

In a sense by showing such a lack of understanding of the nature of violent loyalism you proved the point of this thread, There is a degree of ignorance around the role of the british state in encouraging loyalist violence.

BalcombeSt4

laoch na mona wrote: »

that is historically and politically incorrect, republican paramilitaries emerged from radically different conditions to republican ones.

In a sense by showing such a lack of understanding of the nature of violent loyalism you proved the point of this thread, There is a degree of ignorance around the role of the british state in encouraging loyalist violence.

Thats right the UVF was formed in 1966 with Gusty Spence as its leader as they feared there was going to be another uprising for the 50th anniversary of 1916, Ian Paisleys Ulster Protestant Volunteers were also formed around the same time and worked with the UVF in a bombing campaign to bring the O'Neill government which they felt was being to liberal towards Catholics.
The UDA was formed in late 1971 and was made up of various vigilante groups and "tartan gangs" from Loyalist areas and had a membership of over 30,000 in its early years. They weren't proscribed until 1992 after the attack on Sean Grahams Bookmakers which killed 5 people. By the 1990's the UDA had alot of skinnhead Neo-Nazi types in it and were closely linked with far-right groups in Britain like Combat 18.
The LVF was a breakaway group from the UVF's mid-Ulster brigade led by Billy Wright who were responsible for some of the worst Loyalist attacks in the late 1990's
And there was also Ulster Resistance who formed in opposistion to the Anglo-Irish Agreement and worked with the UDA & UVF in smuggling weapons from the Middle-East.

tac foley

...and your point is?

tac

Esel

BalcombeSt4 wrote: »

Thats right the UVF was formed in 1966 with Gusty Spence as its leader as they feared there was going to be another uprising for the 50th anniversary of 1916, Ian Paisleys Ulster Protestant Volunteers were also formed around the same time and worked with the UVF in a bombing campaign to bring the O'Neill government which they felt was being to liberal towards Catholics.
The UDA was formed in late 1971 and was made up of various vigilante groups and "tartan gangs" from Loyalist areas and had a membership of over 30,000 in its early years. They weren't proscribed until 1992 after the attack on Sean Grahams Bookmakers which killed 5 people. By the 1990's the UDA had alot of skinnhead Neo-Nazi types in it and were closely linked with far-right groups in Britain like Combat 18.
The LVF was a breakaway group from the UVF's mid-Ulster brigade led by Billy Wright who were responsible for some of the worst Loyalist attacks in the late 1990's
And there was also Ulster Resistance who formed in opposistion to the Anglo-Irish Agreement and worked with the UDA & UVF in smuggling weapons from the Middle-East.

The bombing campaign was conveniently blamed on the IRA, thus stoking up the tension.

The loyalist weapons you refer to were sourced from Israel (captured from the PLO afaik), but shipped to the loyalists from South Africa in exchange for Shorts missile technology.

BalcombeSt4

tac foley wrote: »

...and your point is?

tac

Not really any point per se just discussing some issues around Loyalist paramilitary scene.

BalcombeSt4

Esel wrote: »

The bombing campaign was conveniently blamed on the IRA, thus stoking up the tension.

The loyalist weapons you refer to were sourced from Israel (captured from the PLO afaik), but shipped to the loyalists from South Africa in exchange for Shorts missile technology.

Yes, it wasn't until a UVF member blew himself up trying to plant a bomb at a power station in Donegal that people coped on that it was actually Loyalists behind the bombings.

That's intresting about the PLO weapons, I thought they came from Lebanon.

Jesus.

laoch na mona wrote: »

republican paramilitaries emerged from radically different conditions to republican ones.

I can't see how that is possible

Esel

Jesus. wrote: »

I can't see how that is possible

Most people read that and understood the meaning.

Stovepipe

I suggest anyone wondering about police forces and Loyalist gangs read the Martin Dillon book about the Shankill Butchers and the vigorous effort to catch them. No collusion, no looking away, just proper policing.

jimmythedivil

It's something that has struck me too in the past few years,particularly since SF have become a more prominent party in the Republic, how the IRA are constantly portrayed by the usual loudmouth in the Irish media as brutal oppressors against a defenseless enemy during the troubles when in fact, as you point out, Loyalists carried out some of the most appalling acts of violence on both sides of the border. I find it inexplicable how the Irish government seemed to almost turn a blind eye to Irish citizens being butchered and murdered.

If anyone emerged from the troubles as 'victors' then it was probably the loyalists. Even after Brexit, it's unlikely there will ever be a United Ireland, and they managed to murder a thousand civilians with everybody apparently forgetting within a decade or so.

The IRA on the other hand were pretty much forced to hand over their weapons, didn't achieve their stated aim of a United Ireland or anything close to it and are remembered as a bunch of vicious murderers, despite the fact that, for the most part, they actively tried to avoid killing civilians and concentrated instead on taking on the British army and British economic targets. Obviously some of the stuff they did was horrendous, but the event worst examples tended to be rouge elements within the IRA taking matters into their own hands (Kingsmill) or botched operations that didn't go as planned. Loyalists actually targeted Catholic civilians and made no attempt to conceal the fact. I still remember going to school in the mid 90's and almost every morning there would be another story about a Catholic taxi driver being shot in the back of the head in some remote part of the country the previous night. Heinous acts carried out against innocent people that have totally been forgotten about.

Giacomo McGubbin

terrorists are terrorists who get their kicks murdering main and killing innocent people in an attempt to gain some sort of power for themselves, what does it matter if they use the cover of nationalism, unionism, or Islam. They are all the same.

Giacomo McGubbin

jimmythedivil wrote: »

The IRA on the other hand were pretty much forced to hand over their weapons, didn't achieve their stated aim of a United Ireland or anything close to it and are remembered as a bunch of vicious murderers, despite the fact that, for the most part, they actively tried to avoid killing civilians and concentrated instead on taking on the British army and British economic targets.

Really ?, is that why they cowardly murdered and maimed far more civilians than they ever did people who could fight back, all the time while dealing in drugs, racketeering, robbery and extortion, just like all the other terrorists ?

Jesus.

Giacomo McGubbin wrote: »

terrorists are terrorists.

That's an easy throwaway line but I'm afraid its bunkum.

BalcombeSt4

Stovepipe wrote: »

I suggest anyone wondering about police forces and Loyalist gangs read the Martin Dillon book about the Shankill Butchers and the vigorous effort to catch them. No collusion, no looking away, just proper policing.

I don't think anyone ever accused the RUC or Army of colluding with the Shankill Butchers in their murders.

BalcombeSt4

Jesus. wrote: »

That's an easy throwaway line but I'm afraid its bunkum.

I try not to use the word terrorist, its just lost all meaning and has become a propganda term for one side to use against their enemies, the Nazis used it discredit the Jewish resistance in Poland.

Stovepipe

@balcombe st, it has long since been standard practise, whether true or not, for Republicans to state that the police colluded with Loyalists whenever a Catholic was murdered. That was the central point of Dillon's book; the police did not collude with the killers and made strenuous attempts to get them, which was regarded as notable and worthy of comment, as, in a tide of awful murders, the killings stood out as particularly gruesome and pointless.

Giacomo McGubbin

Jesus. wrote: »

That's an easy throwaway line but I'm afraid its bunkum.

no, it's just a fact. What's bukum is being twisted enough to claim terrorists are not terrorists while secretly supporting the murders of innocent civilians, and expecting people to be stupid enough not to know the facts to swallow it.

Jesus.

No its not a fact. If killing innocent civilians is the prerequisite for being a terrorist then you might as well call the British Army terrorists too considering the amount of innocent civilians they've killed in other people's Countries in the last decade or so even.

So, are they terrorists too then?

Giacomo McGubbin

Jesus. wrote: »

No its not a fact. If killing innocent civilians is the prerequisite for being a terrorist then you might as well call the British Army terrorists too considering the amount of innocent civilians they've killed in other people's Countries in the last decade or so even.

So, are they terrorists too then?

Whataboutery ?
Anyone who kills them is including isolated incidents by British Army Soldiers, and out of the two, who killed the most innocent civilians, and constantly and deliberately targeted them throughout their "campaign" and planted bomb after bomb that only targeted civilians ?

- The cowardly scum and gangsters from the so called IRA.
Well, not in my name. Nor will history be revised and airbrushed by their sycophants. I was there.

Jesus.

Giacomo McGubbin wrote: »

Whataboutery ?

How is it whataboutery? I said the terrorists are terrorists line is bunkum and I've given an example to prove that.

Giacomo McGubbin wrote: »

Anyone who kills them is including isolated incidents by British Army Soldiers, and out of the two, who killed the most innocent civilians, and constantly and deliberately targeted them throughout their "campaign" and planted bomb after bomb that only targeted civilians ? .

The British Army by far. Bomb after bomb of theirs and their US Allies killed many more times the amount of civilians in Iraq, for example, in just a short time compared to what the IRA did in three whole decades. So according to your logic that makes the BA much worse terrorists than the IRA.

So, you see, the terrorists are terrorists line is so simplistic it is, quite frankly, childlike.

Giacomo McGubbin

Jesus. wrote: »

How is it whataboutery? I said the terrorists are terrorists line is bunkum and I've given an example to prove that.



The British Army by far. Bomb after bomb of theirs and their US Allies killed many more times the amount of civilians in Iraq, for example, in just a short time compared to what the IRA did in three whole decades. So according to your logic that makes the BA much worse terrorists than the IRA.

So, you see, the terrorists are terrorists line is so simplistic it is, quite frankly, childlike.

Terrorists are terrorists. It's a fundamental fact you can't change or try to cover up not matter how many times you try whataboutery.

So are the so called "IRA" terrorist or not, and did they kill, threaten and intimidate the civilian population or not ? Let's see you worm your way out of that . . .

Jesus.

Giacomo McGubbin wrote: »

Terrorists are terrorists. It's a fundamental fact you can't change or try to cover up

I've just shown you a crucial flaw in your argument yet all you can resort to once again is "terrorists are terrorists". Telling me its a fundamental fact is meaningless unless you can provide some proof. I'm just using your own logic here and by that logic the British Army are also terrorists.

Giacomo McGubbin wrote: »

So are the so called "IRA" terrorist or not, and did they kill, threaten and intimidate the civilian population or not ? Let's see you worm your way out of that . . .

Why would I want to worm my way out of anything!

The point I'm making is its a far more complex question than the simplistic notion you're extolling. If we call the IRA terrorists (and lets do so, I've no problem with that) then we must also call the British Army terrorists. They also killed, threatened and intimidated civilian populations in many theatres... far more than the IRA could ever dream of by the way.

So the IRA are terrorists. You must now say the British Army are terrorists.

Do so and at least you're consistent. Do it not and you cannot be taken seriously because you'll have completely contradicted yourself.