Gerry Adams offers to talk to dissidents

danbohan

Denerick wrote: »

But we know what the issues are and we know how to resolve them peacefully. Stop making these people out to be drifting idealists. They have every opportunity to participate in democratic politics but choose not to. Whatever war or struggle happened in Northern Ireland is over, these guys are an anachronism. We deal with them by imprisoning them and preventing them harming citizens. This is what you do with murderers and criminals, you don't make them out to be freedom fighters or heroes, you deal with them according to the law, they get their day in court, and then you wave them off as they are led to their cell. This is how you deal with murderers.

This is how you deal with murderers

of course nobody had this approach before did they ? , your rhetoric sounds almost identical to some of the british minsters in the north in 80s 90s etc such as tom king .
unfortunately it has been tried and failed in the past many times , no reason it would would work now and a heavy handed approach might only add to their support, of course thats exactly what they are trying to achieve

Sunnyisland

Eventually some one will talk to them, why not Gerry Adams, There is no way that these people will just disappear or vanish as whether we like or not they have got some community support,Its all very well saying that they have no democratic mandate the same was said in the 70,s about PIRA and to the descendants Sinn fein have sold out, Persuading them to talk out there differences is a much better way forward maybe forming a republic equivalent of the combined loyalist military command that was formed years ago which held steady throughout the 90,s.

FUNKY LOVER

I suppose they look at the many treaties peace processes through 100 of years and it never led to their aims,so why would this one.its a cycle that will repeat itself for many a generation.that's the sad fact.more and more people in the north are becoming disillusionedwith the GFA.

KeithAFC

FUNKY LOVER wrote: »

I suppose they look at the many treaties peace processes through 100 of years and it never led to their aims,so why would this one.its a cycle that will repeat itself for many a generation.that's the sad fact.more and more people in the north are becoming disillusionedwith the GFA.

Based on what? A few people running around planting bombs? It seems more people are united.

cardwizzard

Denerick wrote: »

Lets not aggrandise these cowards. They are petty criminals who have been given a kind of nobility by a political ideology this nation still embraces. In any other country they would be involved in gang wars or drug feuds.

Firstly Denrick thats a nonsense statement. You can't tell what someone 'might' be if they lived in a different country/culture. They maybe petty in your mind, but come next wek or month if they kill someone else or bomb another cop you will be the first to call them everything. So why not try to resolve the problem and get this worked out. Calling them scum or cowards, which I agree, isn't going to stop them is it? It's easy to come on a site like this and call them everything you want, while it's quite another feat to do like Mr Adams is doing to try and bring a peace to all of us.

Sunnyisland

Let us not forget that when the talks between Gerry Adams & john hume were leaked there was uproar from most of the media & political spokesmen, yet look how far that has brought us,let them talk it has to be better than more killings.

Wolfe Tone

yekahS wrote: »

Its hard to tell from your posts.

Its obvious you don't agree with the dissidents, but do you agree they are murderers, no different than the criminals who commit murder in other countries?

They are murderers, but they are fundamentally different from your common criminal variety killer. For one the motivations are different.

They are a product of the political situation and the only solution will be a political one. Arrest them and more will follow imo.

Yitzhak Rabin

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

They are murderers, but they are fundamentally different from your common criminal variety killer. For one the motivations are different.

They are a product of the political situation and the only solution will be a political one. Arrest them and more will follow imo.

But the same can be said about almost any criminal gang.

Heroin dealers in Limerick just want to be allowed to sell their drugs and extort and intimidate business.

If we arrest them and throw them in prison only more drug dealers will replace them. Therefore we should compromise with them?

Its really simple. They want Northern Ireland to be part of the republic. The majority of the Northern Irish citizens want to remain in the union. Once you remove that from the table, there is nothing to talk about.

There is a democratic opportunity available to pursue if a majority of people in the north with to leave the union.

Anyway, say we do 'talk' to the dissidents and reach a compromise.... should we then talk to the dissident dissidents...?

Denerick

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

They are murderers, but they are fundamentally different from your common criminal variety killer. For one the motivations are different.

They are a product of the political situation and the only solution will be a political one. Arrest them and more will follow imo.

There are less than a thousand of them. Most of their recruits are from rough estates and deprived communities. Arrest the ringleaders and the footsoldiers will drift into what they were born to do; drug dealing and petty criminality. The justice system will take over from there.

Wolfe Tone

yekahS wrote: »

But the same can be said about almost any criminal gang.

Heroin dealers in Limerick just want to be allowed to sell their drugs and extort and intimidate business.

Ok, why are they doing that? Money. Why are militant republicans doing what they are doing? Its not for personal gain.

If we arrest them and throw them in prison only more drug dealers will replace them. Therefore we should compromise with them?

Im not gonna get into a "legalize drugs" debate. But militant republicans are not the same as your Limerick gangs. Hence they shouldnt be treated the same. Thats not saying one group is better than the other or anything, simply that they are different, and should be treated as such.

Its really simple. They want Northern Ireland to be part of the republic. The majority of the Northern Irish citizens want to remain in the union. Once you remove that from the table, there is nothing to talk about.

Not entirely. People don't support the dissidents solely because of the Brit presence, there are other reasons, which could be addressed.

There is a democratic opportunity available to pursue if a majority of people in the north with to leave the union.

I have a major issue with this, the talk of "majority". What about the majority on this island? Majorities seemingly only count when it suits the Brits or Unionists. From talking to people sympathetic to militant republicans its clear that they simply do not trust the British to keep their promises. Looking at Britains past its not hard to see why.

Anyway, say we do 'talk' to the dissidents and reach a compromise.... should we then talk to the dissident dissidents...?

I dont think a compromise can be reached, but its worth a try if it can stop PSNI men being killed and the north further disrupted.

cardwizzard

yekahS wrote: »

But the same can be said about almost any criminal gang.

Heroin dealers in Limerick just want to be allowed to sell their drugs and extort and intimidate business.

If we arrest them and throw them in prison only more drug dealers will replace them. Therefore we should compromise with them?

Its really simple. They want Northern Ireland to be part of the republic. The majority of the Northern Irish citizens want to remain in the union. Once you remove that from the table, there is nothing to talk about.

There is a democratic opportunity available to pursue if a majority of people in the north with to leave the union.

Anyway, say we do 'talk' to the dissidents and reach a compromise.... should we then talk to the dissident dissidents...?

Yekahs, if you can't tell the difference between a gang in Limerick and Republican Paramilitraries, it's going to be a useless discussion.

Wolfe Tone

Denerick wrote: »

There are less than a thousand of them. Most of their recruits are from rough estates and deprived communities. Arrest the ringleaders and the footsoldiers will drift into what they were born to do; drug dealing and petty criminality. The justice system will take over from there.

Arrest the ringleaders and others will step up.

"Born to do"? What are you suggesting about people from deprived areas?

danbohan

yekahS wrote: »

But the same can be said about almost any criminal gang.

Heroin dealers in Limerick just want to be allowed to sell their drugs and extort and intimidate business.

If we arrest them and throw them in prison only more drug dealers will replace them. Therefore we should compromise with them?

Its really simple. They want Northern Ireland to be part of the republic. The majority of the Northern Irish citizens want to remain in the union. Once you remove that from the table, there is nothing to talk about.

There is a democratic opportunity available to pursue if a majority of people in the north with to leave the union.

Anyway, say we do 'talk' to the dissidents and reach a compromise.... should we then talk to the dissident dissidents...?

your position was the long time agenda of British politicians , no talks with terrorists etc etc , eventually they did and it brought peace .
to equate the dissidents with common drug dealers shows a complete lack of understanding of the situation . talking costs nothing , talking to the dissident disedents will cost nothing , if your simplistic approach was workable in the northern ireland situation it would have happened a long time ago

Yitzhak Rabin

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

Why are militant republicans doing what they are doing? Its not for personal gain.

...
militant republicans are not the same as your Limerick gangs. Hence they shouldnt be treated the same.

cardwizzard wrote: »

Yekahs, if you can't tell the difference between a gang in Limerick and Republican Paramilitraries, it's going to be a useless discussion.

danbohan wrote: »

to equate the dissidents with common drug dealers shows a complete lack of understanding of the situation . talking costs nothing , talking to the dissident disedents will cost nothing , if your simplistic approach was workable in the northern ireland situation it would have happened a long time ago

Saying they are different doesn't make it so. Just because they are motivated by some delusional notions doesn't mean they deserve anything other than the full implementation of the law.

What exactly makes them different? Because they "politically motivated"? So was the unabomber, but like the dissidents he was also delusional.

Now, I'm not against the points raised by the OP with regards the fair treatment of prisoners etc. But this has nothing to do with dissidents.

southsiderosie

Pauleta wrote: »

You can try and get the likes of the RIRA and whoever else onside to the peace process all you like but once they are onside there will be a new dissident group and then after they come into the peace process there will be another dissident group.

yekahS wrote: »

Its really simple. They want Northern Ireland to be part of the republic. The majority of the Northern Irish citizens want to remain in the union. Once you remove that from the table, there is nothing to talk about.

There is a democratic opportunity available to pursue if a majority of people in the north with to leave the union.

Anyway, say we do 'talk' to the dissidents and reach a compromise.... should we then talk to the dissident dissidents...?

Exactly. Which is why now that there is a constitutional path to reunification, there should be no negotiation with these groups. There is a legal framework to achieve their overarching goals.

danbohan wrote: »

your position was the long time agenda of British politicians , no talks with terrorists etc etc , eventually they did and it brought peace .
to equate the dissidents with common drug dealers shows a complete lack of understanding of the situation . talking costs nothing , talking to the dissident disedents will cost nothing , if your simplistic approach was workable in the northern ireland situation it would have happened a long time ago

And now that there is a peace agreement and a viable constitutional means of achieving reunification, there should be no talks with terrorists. This did not exist before 1998, but the institutional framework today is completely different.

Also, talking to dissidents DOES have costs: it has a very strong signaling function that suggests the state is willing to compromise with people who reject the democratic process.

In order to have a normal, functioning society, people have to give some leeway and credence to the democratic institutions of the state, whether that is the police force (who should be dealing with drug dealers, not vigilantes) or through the consent principle when it comes to the national question. I understand that everyone in NI is still feeling their way through "normal" politics, but this HAS to involve a strong stance against extrajudicial activity.

cardwizzard

Get real Yekas, of course its political, otherwise you will have to move this thread!!

There is no point sticking your head in the sand, in general not just you, and calling them criminals, with the round them up and throw away the key attitude. This has never worked in Ireland and the key is dialogue.

Yitzhak Rabin

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

Not entirely. People don't support the dissidents solely because of the Brit presence, there are other reasons, which could be addressed.

I agree that those things should be addressed if there is a genuine poor treatment of prisoners, or police corruption. But this has nothing to do with dissidents and there is no need to talk to them about it.

I have a major issue with this, the talk of "majority". What about the majority on this island? Majorities seemingly only count when it suits the Brits or Unionists. From talking to people sympathetic to militant republicans its clear that they simply do not trust the British to keep their promises. Looking at Britains past its not hard to see why.

NI is a separate country and has as much right to democratic self-determination as Ireland did. It would have been unfair to say "Why don't we include the whole union in a vote on Irish independence" if Ireland were to try and democratically leave the union prior to it being its own country.

Its not because they "don't trust the Brits" Its because the majority of people disagree with them and like a spoilt child who doesn't get their way, they have thrown their teddy out of the pram and decided they don't care what anyone else thinks...

I dont think a compromise can be reached, but its worth a try if it can stop PSNI men being killed and the north further disrupted.

The dissidents are a lunatic fringe terrorist group. As you are well aware the only thing that would be achieved by talking to them would be legitimising them and making a mockery of the peace plan that has been democratically implemented.

Wolfe Tone

yekahS wrote: »

Saying they are different doesn't make it so. Just because they are motivated by some delusional notions doesn't mean they deserve anything other than the full implementation of the law.

They are different. You have to be careful, the PSNI cant go in kicking down doors and arresting and interrogating everyone. A "crack down" s the worst thing they cold do.

Now, I'm not against the points raised by the OP with regards the fair treatment of prisoners etc. But this has nothing to do with dissidents.

Its their main "recruitment drive", support the prisoners. You have prisoners being treated barbarically. Its easy to cast similarities between republican prisoners today and those 30 years ago. Then there is the whole remand thing.

If any mistakes are made it will play into the dissidents hands. They are saying that the Brits arent gone, SF are saying they pretty much are. Even a photo of BA jeeps out in the streets was made a big deal of,you have to be careful.

Wolfe Tone

yekahS wrote: »

I agree that those things should be addressed if there is a genuine poor treatment of prisoners, or police corruption. But this has nothing to do with dissidents and there is no need to talk to them about it.

Yes you do, they are their prisoners.

NI is a separate country and has as much right to democratic self-determination as Ireland did. It would have been unfair to say "Why don't we include the whole union in a vote on Irish independence" if Ireland were to try and democratically leave the union prior to it being its own country.

The island was gerrymandered on sectarian grounds. The partition was not just or fair. A majority of people clearly wanted a 32 county republic.

The dissidents are a lunatic fringe terrorist group. As you are well aware the only thing that would be achieved by talking to them would be legitimising them and making a mockery of the peace plan that has been democratically implemented.

So Gerry Adams wants to mess up the peace process?

danbohan

yekahS wrote: »

Saying they are different doesn't make it so. Just because they are motivated by some delusional notions doesn't mean they deserve anything other than the full implementation of the law.

What exactly makes them different? Because they "politically motivated"? So was the unabomber, but like the dissidents he was also delusional.

Now, I'm not against the points raised by the OP with regards the fair treatment of prisoners etc. But this has nothing to do with dissidents.

Saying they are different doesn't make it so. Just because they are motivated by some delusional notions doesn't mean they deserve anything other than the full implementation of the law.

What exactly makes them different? Because they "politically motivated"? So was the unabomber, but like the dissidents he was also delusional.

personally if they were completely eliminated i would shed no tears , we are not talking about just a bunch of idiots who want to continue an armed struggle , they have support however small within some nationalist areas . thats what makes them different and thats what makes how you deal with them very very important . they are very isolated right now , what we need to do is work on further isolating them from any support they have , full implementation of the law if that means raids and arrests and intimidation by a police force that is still 70% unionist will only add to their numbers not reduce it

arybvtcw0eolkf

And to coin another phrase from Churchill..

"Its better to jaw jaw, than war war".

Terrorism was a cancer on Irish society both north and south of the border, its almost gone save for a few rogue cells.

I don't think talking to these murdering bastards goes any way to legitimize them in anyone's eyes but their own, and tbh I don't care.

After Constable Kerr was murdered I told my son about 'the troubles' here, and how awful it was.. How nightly we got news of another Catholic or Protestant murdered outside a school, or in front of their families in their own living rooms.

Or news flashes asking shop owners to return to their premises and check for incendiary devices.

Not talking to the IRA during their border campaign or in the early 70's achieved nothing, it was like ignoring a cancer - they didn't go away and just grew.

Swallow a bitter pill, talk to them and nip this in the bud.

And instead of cutting back, and weakening our security resources here we should be looking to strengthen them, because as much as we like to slag off our security services here (Garda and Army) it wasn't only by the grace of God that this country didn't tear itself apart in the same way Yugoslavia went - after all, no other country since the second world war faced the same internal security threat which we did.

Finally, a powerful anti-terror TV ad from Irish TV in 1993..

Eliot Rosewater

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

Im not gonna get into a "legalize drugs" debate. But militant republicans are not the same as your Limerick gangs. Hence they shouldnt be treated the same. Thats not saying one group is better than the other or anything, simply that they are different, and should be treated as such.

How exactly do you think they should be treated differently? Usually when people say political prisoners should be treated differently, they mean such prisoners should be afforded special privileges not afforded to other prisoners. I.e., that political prisoners be treated better than the non-political prisoners, in which case there is a clear positive bias towards political prisoners.

Similarly here. You've said on this thread that the PSNI should not storm into suspected dissidents' homes. That amounts to saying that dissidents should be treated with more leniency than other criminals. Which is also to say that the actions of dissidents should be less punishable than those of other criminals.

I find that hard to reconcile with a full condemnation of dissident actions. The justifications for such a move are unconvincing. Clear strong majorities in both communities have renounced violence as a political means. The dissidents aren’t on the up, and any crack down will be supported by both communities.

In that context, arguments of practicality are irrelevent. That a tiny micro-minority of NI people will be annoyed by a crackdown does not matter. Murdering a member of the PSNI is wrong no matter what. Hard-line sensitivities should no get in the way of the democratically elected government enforcing commonly held ideals of justice, such as that one may not kill another human being.

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

I have a major issue with this, the talk of "majority". What about the majority on this island?

The issue of which majority to pick is irrelevant. Republicans often say that NI shouldn't have a choice itself: that the choice should lie with all of Ireland. It's worth asking: why shouldn't the choice lie with all of the British Isles? If a majority of the UK and the Republic want the whole of Ireland in the UK, even if the Republic itself does not want to be in the UK, then why not?

Of course, if you're not in the business of distorting notions of democracy and sovereignty for political gain, the clear choice is to go with the political boundaries as they are now, and allow self-determination for Northern Ireland.

KeithAFC

I have a major issue with this, the talk of "majority". What about the majority on this island? Majorities seemingly only count when it suits the Brits or Unionists. From talking to people sympathetic to militant republicans its clear that they simply do not trust the British to keep their promises. Looking at Britains past its not hard to see why.

What? Its an agreement.

Denerick

Janiyah Defeated Cub wrote: »

Finally, a powerful anti-terror TV ad from Irish TV in 1993..

That was very sad. We aren't going back, not for nothing or nobody. And most Irish people feel the same way.

I'd love to put every single dissident terrorist into a small room and force them to watch home movie videos of the victims they killed for the rest of their life. Relentless, on the loop. They'd have to meet a family member of one of the victims every day for the rest of their lives.

cardwizzard

Denerick wrote: »

That was very sad. We aren't going back, not for nothing or nobody. And most Irish people feel the same way.

I'd love to put every single dissident terrorist into a small room and force them to watch home movie videos of the victims they killed for the rest of their life. Relentless, on the loop. They'd have to meet a family member of one of the victims every day for the rest of their lives.

Yip I agree Denerick. And I hear what you are saying. But it wasn't that long ago when I wanted every Loyalist group hung up the same way. Thing is talking to these people won't do any harm, even if they would talk to Adams which is doubtful. It's good to talk as BT says.

Wolfe Tone

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

How exactly do you think they should be treated differently? Usually when people say political prisoners should be treated differently, they mean such prisoners should be afforded special privileges not afforded to other prisoners. I.e., that political prisoners be treated better than the non-political prisoners, in which case there is a clear positive bias towards political prisoners.

Cross border cooperation is all the rage these days, they should be treated the same as those in Portlaiose. Basically what w have in maghbarry in particular is republican prisoners being beaten and repeatably stripsearched, for no reason.

Similarly here. You've said on this thread that the PSNI should not storm into suspected dissidents' homes. That amounts to saying that dissidents should be treated with more leniency than other criminals. Which is also to say that the actions of dissidents should be less punishable than those of other criminals.

If the PSNI get it wrong and arrest people who are simply anti GFA(that doesnt mean militant) then that will drive people into dissident ranks, ie it will appear that anti GFA republicans are being "harrassed" by the British state forces. What you say is correct in an ideal world but the north is anything but that and common sense is required. They need to tread softly or they run the risk of destroying the trust that they have.

I find that hard to reconcile with a full condemnation of dissident actions. The justifications for such a move are unconvincing. Clear strong majorities in both communities have renounced violence as a political means. The dissidents aren’t on the up, and any crack down will be supported by both communities.

Well, you would wouldnt you?
Arent on the up? They will be if the PSNI don't react to this very very carefully. You must realize that the dissidents WANT a reaction, they want to show that whatever SF say the Brits are still there and will be back to their old ways at the drop of a hat.

In that context, arguments of practicality are irrelevent. That a tiny micro-minority of NI people will be annoyed by a crackdown does not matter.

Ignorance.
The widespread community WOULD be annoyed by a crackdown, its what the dissidents want.

Murdering a member of the PSNI is wrong no matter what.

I agree.

Hard-line sensitivities should no get in the way of the democratically elected government enforcing commonly held ideals of justice, such as that one may not kill another human being.

More idealistic unrealistic and foolish nonsense.
If the PSNI go around kicking in peoples doors it will be easy to paint a picture of it being back to the bad old days.

The issue of which majority to pick is irrelevant. Republicans often say that NI shouldn't have a choice itself: that the choice should lie with all of Ireland. It's worth asking: why shouldn't the choice lie with all of the British Isles? If a majority of the UK and the Republic want the whole of Ireland in the UK, even if the Republic itself does not want to be in the UK, then why not?

The future of Ireland should lie in the hands of Irish people. It really is not that complicated. Ive read some terrible justifications for imperialism in my day, this is nearly the worst. So, in your book, if a country with a high population invades one with a lower one thats grand because the majority want it that way? Even if a majority in the invaded land dont want it?

And leave out your "British isles" Put the rod away.

Wolfe Tone

KeithAFC wrote: »

What? Its an agreement.

Keith I bet that once the population of the two communities become nearly equal you will drop your championing of majorities.

KeithAFC

The future of Ireland should lie in the hands of Irish people. It really is not that complicated. Ive read some terrible justifications for imperialism in my day, this is nearly the worst. So, in your book, if a country with a high population invades one with a lower one thats grand because the majority want it that way? Even if a majority in the invaded land dont want it?

Why should the ROI have any say in the future of Northern Ireland?

KeithAFC

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

Keith I bet that once the population of the two communities become nearly equal you will drop your championing of majorities.

So what? Why do people have to kill to get a UI? There is an agreement. Everyone knows what it is about. Why can't some republicans just accept it? Its up to the people of Northern Ireland to decide the future of Northern Ireland.

Wolfe Tone

KeithAFC wrote: »

So what? Why do people have to kill to get a UI? There is an agreement. Everyone knows what it is about. Why can't some republicans just accept it? Its up to the people of Northern Ireland to decide the future of Northern Ireland.

Oh I accept that Keith, thats the reality of the situation, but it is neither right or fair.

KeithAFC

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

Oh I accept that Keith, thats the reality of the situation, but it is neither right or fair.

Of course it is fair. I have a few political outlooks on Ulster in general. None of them include to put all of Ulster into an Irish republic.

cardwizzard

We just want 6 more:D:D

southsiderosie

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

Keith I bet that once the population of the two communities become nearly equal you will drop your championing of majorities.

But here's the issue with that statement: you can't support constitutional means only when they look like they are swinging in your favor. This is what you are essentially accusing KeithAFC of (in the future). But this also means that in the present, Republicans have to suck it up, and live within the constitutional means set out by the GFA framework when it comes to political violence and police activity - and actively shun anyone who does otherwise.

Republicans who want a united Ireland should be strongly against any kind of negotiation with dissident groups today for the simple fact that if, thirty years from now, it looks like there will be a Republican majority in NI ready to vote for re-unification, you will be screaming your heads off when Unionist politicians start making noise about "talking to" armed Loyalist interests who want to derail the unification process.

You can't pick and choose when the institutions of the state are legitimate; either they are or they aren't.

junder

southsiderosie wrote: »

But here's the issue with that statement: you can't support constitutional means only when they look like they are swinging in your favor. This is what you are essentially accusing KeithAFC of (in the future). But this also means that in the present, Republicans have to suck it up, and live within the constitutional means set out by the GFA framework when it comes to political violence and police activity - and actively shun anyone who does otherwise.

Republicans who want a united Ireland should be strongly against any kind of negotiation with dissident groups today for the simple fact that if, thirty years from now, it looks like there will be a Republican majority in NI ready to vote for re-unification, you will be screaming your heads off when Unionist politicians start making noise about "talking to" armed Loyalist interests who want to derail the unification process.

You can't pick and choose when the institutions of the state are legitimate; either they are or they aren't.

A fair answer

Eliot Rosewater

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

If the PSNI get it wrong and arrest people who are simply anti GFA(that doesnt mean militant) then that will drive people into dissident ranks, ie it will appear that anti GFA republicans are being "harrassed" by the British state forces.

No it won't. People don't want the dissidents, and if there is an attempt made to stop them then people will be happier. I have enough trust in both police forces of this island to be happy that random door barging of kind you say will happen won't. I think you're grossly exaggerating both the potential actions of the PSNI and the response people will have to them. Example,

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

If the PSNI go around kicking in peoples doors it will be easy to paint a picture of it being back to the bad old days.

I saw television pictures the other night of armed Gardaí kicking down the doors of a house. Not only was it the first time I saw such pictures, but it also didn't make me jump up and run down the road to join the nearest criminal gang. I know the situation is fragile, but saying a crackdown on dissident activities will result in a surge in dissident support is stretching it. Especially given the monumental scenes we all saw last week, where the Taosieach of the Republic of Ireland, the unionist Leader of the NI Executive and the nationalist Deputy Leader of the NI Executive stood side by side watching the coffin of a murdered member of the PSNI being carried by members of the GAA.

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

The future of Ireland should lie in the hands of Irish people. It really is not that complicated. Ive read some terrible justifications for imperialism in my day, this is nearly the worst. So, in your book, if a country with a high population invades one with a lower one thats grand because the majority want it that way? Even if a majority in the invaded land dont want it?

What I don't understand is that you could type that paragraph out and simultaneously believe that the people of the Republic of Ireland have some sort of democratic right to decide the future of Northern Ireland. Just as the people of the UK do not have a right to decide for the Republic, the Republic does not have a right to decide for the North.

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

And leave out your "British isles" Put the rod away.

"The British Isles" is the consensus term for the islands of Ireland, Great Britain and the other smaller islands surrounding them. I'm not going to be bullied by any political ideology into abandoning perfectly good words. In either case, the issue is off-topic.

Bottle_of_Smoke

Read an absolute cracker of an article today. Explains why Adams or McGuinness talking to these groups would not only be non-constructive but also patently absurd. Its written by the guy who did 'voices from the grave'with Brendan Hughes and David Irvine. Its long so just gonna paste the most relevent bit. Well worth looking at the whole thing though

Martin McGuinness, Informers, the Media and Why Dissident Republicans Still Kill People

The point about all this history telling is this. Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness played roles in the development and selling of the peace process that was a little akin to Mutt and Jeff, the good cop, bad cop routine. Adams was the good cop, whose role was to interact with John Hume and be the public face of diplomacy in dealings with governments, the White House and so on. McGuinness’ role, a suitable one since he had the active service record and Adams didn’t, was to be the bad cop, to reassure the IRA grassroots that there would be no sell out while he was running Northern Command and that if Martin backed the peace process then there was nothing to be worried about.

And it worked perfectly, well almost so. Dissident opposition to the Adams-McGuinness strategy did emerge but it came in two waves and because of that the strategy triumphed. The first was led by people like Michael McKevitt, the IRA Quarter-Master General who was close enough to events and the major players to get suspicious early on about the real deal that was coming down the pike. But his effort to overthrow Adams was frustrated and then when he broke off to form the Real IRA and made common cause with the INLA and the Continuity IRA against the Adams-McGuinness strategy, the venture was torpedoed by the Omagh bomb.

The next wave came many years later and really didn’t gather steam until the Provos agreed to accept and recognise the PSNI in the wake of the St Andrews’ Agreement which brought them into government with Ian Paisley and the DUP. The people involved in this wave were those who had ignored McKevitt’s warnings, and went along with the leadership’s claim that he was just an ambitious malcontent. They chose to stay within the bosom of the Provos, preferring to believe Martin McGuinness’s soothing words rather than the reality unfolding all around them. But when Martin & Co. agreed to back the PSNI they could deny the reality no longer

Their determination to go back to war appears therefore to be fueled less by any sophisticated plan to destabilize Sinn Fein or the peace deal and more by their anger at being misled and tricked by the Provo leadership, especially the bad cop, Martin McGuinness. They were always wary of Gerry Adams. He was ever the crafty politician, never to be trusted. But Martin was one of their own. How could he lie so treacherously, they cried?

And so their anger at McGuinness is expressed in the killing of Ronan Kerr. Except that’s not the full truth either. The people they’re really angry at are themselves, for being so stupid, except they won’t admit as much. That’s why they’ll keep on planting “up and unders” and why others like Ronan Kerr will die. And it is why they’re not really a threat and why the peace process will likely survive everything they throw at it.

Bottle_of_Smoke

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

No it won't. People don't want the dissidents, and if there is an attempt made to stop them then people will be happier. I have enough trust in both police forces of this island to be happy that random door barging of kind you say will happen won't. I think you're grossly exaggerating both the potential actions of the PSNI and the response people will have to them. Example,



I saw television pictures the other night of armed Gardaí kicking down the doors of a house. Not only was it the first time I saw such pictures, but it also didn't make me jump up and run down the road to join the nearest criminal gang. I know the situation is fragile, but saying a crackdown on dissident activities will result in a surge in dissident support is stretching it. Especially given the monumental scenes we all saw last week, where the Taosieach of the Republic of Ireland, the unionist Leader of the NI Executive and the nationalist Deputy Leader of the NI Executive stood side by side watching the coffin of a murdered member of the PSNI being carried by members of the GAA.

To be fair that is a ridiculous comparison. You need to look at this situation from the point of view of people in working class republican areas in the context of the last 40 years. You know people who's family have in the past lost people to the conflict and quite possibly been unfairly interrogated themselves.

Think back to riots in Ardoyne last July. Remember how restrained the PSNI were being. No other police force in the world would have been that restrained whilst being pelted with rocks/petrol bombs. Ask yourself why they remained restrained. It is because the slightest reaction could provide fuel for republican propaganda.

So if people who aren't involved in violent republicanism start getting interrogated/searched simply because they don't dance to the Sinn Fein tune it will make it easy for anti-police sentiment to flourish.

KeithAFC

I'd send in the Gardaí in Northern Ireland to do door knocking or raiding houses. I doubt nationalists will have much to say then.

dreamer_ire

Some people are missing the point here because they do not think along the lines of those who see themselves as marginalised/disengaged from the police. Those of us who are appalled by recent events would never support the disidents, it's those on the margins who can potentially be swayed. Wolfe Tone was right earlier when he said that a kicking down doors response from the police will increase the support for these groups. If the aim is to remove their oxygen, it's this group who need to be the focus, not the law abiding majority. And it's primarily young men within these groups who need to be the focus. These are the people most likely to be swayed, the challenge now for the police is to sway them their way rather than towards the disidents.

The article just posted is a good one, and is the reason why I think that Gerry Adams is not the right person to enter into dialogue. He's not trusted by them, and whoever the intermediary is it cannot be someone who doesn't have their trust. BTW, I have no idea who could fill this role, possibly the church, but I don't know.

Dialogue must start, albeit behind the scenes. Having listened to the republican on the 5live programme my blood ran cold. http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00g42bg I thought, this will never end as they cannot have what they want i.e. a United Ireland. But there are other things, that Wolfe Tone has mentionned, like the treatment of prisoners that must be addressed. Not to give into the disidents but to sway those people I referred to earlier. There will always be disidents, there will always be those who will want to take up arms to fight for a united Ireland/the Union - the real aim is to keep their support base to an absoloute minimum. The only way to do this is to ensure that bar the national question there are no significant gripes/inequalities.

This is a dangerous time, for the police and society as a whole. We all depend on them getting this right. So far they seem to have, I for one hope that this not only continues but starts to make significant inroads.

Wolfe Tone

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

No it won't. People don't want the dissidents, and if there is an attempt made to stop them then people will be happier. I have enough trust in both police forces of this island to be happy that random door barging of kind you say will happen won't. I think you're grossly exaggerating both the potential actions of the PSNI and the response people will have to them. Example,

You simply dont understand Eliot. If its the Gardaí kicking in doors down south thats fine, they are an accepted police force with a solid history in policing. The PSNI are not, they are less than a decade old and are filled with former RUC men. In addition its only what, four years since SF voted to accept them? The PSNI are on probation in many peoples minds.

I saw television pictures the other night of armed Gardaí kicking down the doors of a house. Not only was it the first time I saw such pictures, but it also didn't make me jump up and run down the road to join the nearest criminal gang. I know the situation is fragile, but saying a crackdown on dissident activities will result in a surge in dissident support is stretching it.

Its not stretching it, it is true. I dont want militant republicans to continue on. I trust the provisional movement. I want the GFA to be a success. If the PSNI lose the head and try to crack down harshly it will damage it.

What I don't understand is that you could type that paragraph out and simultaneously believe that the people of the Republic of Ireland have some sort of democratic right to decide the future of Northern Ireland. Just as the people of the UK do not have a right to decide for the Republic, the Republic does not have a right to decide for the North.

So its grand to divide up areas to insure you get the result you want, super.

IN 1918 the vast majority of Irish MPs elected stood as abstentionist candidates. The Irish people clearly expressed their desire for a 32 county Irish republic. The British had no right to divide this island, none whatsoever. I accept that the reality is the people in the 6 must decide. But I don't like it, or think its fair.
Anyways if its ok I would rather focus on today, rather than rehash the same arguments of old, puts people off apparently.

"The British Isles" is the consensus term for the islands of Ireland, Great Britain and the other smaller islands surrounding them. I'm not going to be bullied by any political ideology into abandoning perfectly good words. In either case, the issue is off-topic

.
Its a politically loaded term to the extent that neither government use it, you know that. Anyway, lets leave it.

Wolfe Tone

KeithAFC wrote: »

I'd send in the Gardaí in Northern Ireland to do door knocking or raiding houses. I doubt nationalists will have much to say then.

All island police force keith? Sure why not.

KeithAFC

Wolfe Tone wrote: »

All island police force keith? Sure why not.

Well in this incident and case to catch these people, why not? Most nationalists dislike them.

FUNKY LOVER

Very disturbing news coming through from Armagh city tonight. It appears an Armagh RNU activist and his 12 year old son were both beaten by the PSNI in the Killylea Road / Drumarg area before both being driven off into custody in Lurgan.
From accounts given by the family, the incident occurred during a stop and search of the fathers car at around 6pm, having tried to force entry to the car in an aggressive manner, the child became frightened and ran from the car to a nearby chip shop.
He was followed by the PSNI who then dragged him back into the street and beat him with batons.
Upon seeing this the RNU activist who attempted to intervene was then himself batoned before being beaten into a squad car.
During the incident one PSNI officer produced CS gas canister and only put it away after a female officer screamed that 'there was no need for that'.
Inexplicably, the RNU activist was driven into a nearby Rugby ground for around twenty minutes, away from locals who were gathering to witness the incident, his family are concerned that he was further beaten at this location.
Both the RNU activist and his twelve year old son are currently in PSNI custody in Lurgan.


Now i want to make this clear.I only took got this information from a website,i am still looking for a credible link etc,so it could be hearsay.But if its true its this behaviour that will play into the dissidents hands.

getz

cardwizzard wrote: »

Yip I agree Denerick. And I hear what you are saying. But it wasn't that long ago when I wanted every Loyalist group hung up the same way. Thing is talking to these people won't do any harm, even if they would talk to Adams which is doubtful. It's good to talk as BT says.

talk to the group who said recently they would burn dublin to the ground, if they get their way would you still think the same ?

Wolfe Tone

FUNKY LOVER wrote: »

Very disturbing news coming through from Armagh city tonight. It appears an Armagh RNU activist and his 12 year old son were both beaten by the PSNI in the Killylea Road / Drumarg area before both being driven off into custody in Lurgan.
From accounts given by the family, the incident occurred during a stop and search of the fathers car at around 6pm, having tried to force entry to the car in an aggressive manner, the child became frightened and ran from the car to a nearby chip shop.
He was followed by the PSNI who then dragged him back into the street and beat him with batons.
Upon seeing this the RNU activist who attempted to intervene was then himself batoned before being beaten into a squad car.
During the incident one PSNI officer produced CS gas canister and only put it away after a female officer screamed that 'there was no need for that'.
Inexplicably, the RNU activist was driven into a nearby Rugby ground for around twenty minutes, away from locals who were gathering to witness the incident, his family are concerned that he was further beaten at this location.
Both the RNU activist and his twelve year old son are currently in PSNI custody in Lurgan.


Now i want to make this clear.I only took got this information from a website,i am still looking for a credible link etc,so it could be hearsay.But if its true its this behaviour that will play into the dissidents hands.

Heard that too, probably from the same source. Here is some more detail...

Statement from Chip shop worker
The following written statement was kindly signed and provided by a chip shop worker to local RNU activists following the incident.

"statement from chip shop owner 12th april
I am a local business woman from armagh city today the 12th april I was workin in ******* chip which is at the bottom off the killylea road. At about 4.50pm I had heard a police sirenn outside I looked out off the chip shop and seen a police car pull another car over on the side off the road.
About 5-10 minutes later I seen a young child with fair hair getting chassed by a police officer outside the chip shop the police man was swinging and swinging at the young boys legs with a police batton, I was very shocked at what I was seeing the young boy then run into the chip shop and his father then came in behind him to see was he ok, at this point I then realised I knew the father off the boy as ++++++.
The police man then came as far as the shop door and arrested the young boy, then the childs father said " you cant arrest him he is my son he is only 12years old" the police man didnt seem to acknowledge this and carried on and arrested the young lad.
As far as I am concerned the young lad or his father had not done anything to get treated like this it was very disturbing for my to watch. I then seen them arrest ===== who is the father off the young boy, I can not stress enough from what I had seen this man and his son had not done anything to push the police officer's to this sort off brutality.
All i can say is that I am very shocked and upset from what I have witnessed today, I think that the PSNI officers in question where very heavy handed to both father and son and where completely out off order this is a very big shock to see this in are local community. I seriously thought these days off seeing that kind off stuff was over.""



Now this is just one instance. A crackdown would inevitably result in more of the same which will only destroy the rather fragile trust people have in the PSNI.

KeithAFC

I find it hard to believe that a 12 year old kid was beaten with batons by a PSNI officer. If anything, sounds like utter drivel and propaganda.

maccored

KeithAFC wrote: »

I find it hard to believe that a 12 year old kid was beaten with batons by a PSNI officer. If anything, sounds like utter drivel and propaganda.

The PSNI can never do wrong, eh keith?

KeithAFC

maccored wrote: »

The PSNI can never do wrong, eh keith?

Did you see the PSNI last year in Ardoyne? Absolute masterclass in how to defend a riot against people looking to be offended. The PSNI is a top class police force.

maccored

KeithAFC wrote: »

Did you see the PSNI last year in Ardoyne? Absolute masterclass in how to defend a riot against people looking to be offended. The PSNI is a top class police force.

"against people looking to be offended" - ah now keith. your bias comes through loud and clear.

KeithAFC

maccored wrote: »

"against people looking to be offended" - ah now keith. your bias comes through loud and clear.

It is true though. A lot of myths are flown about that route.