The RA

Sir Pompous Righteousness

Richard Hillman wrote: »

The IT wing of the organisation just discovered email

No, they're still trying to decipher the calculator and the mobile phone.

RubyRoss

The OP reads like the research questions of a lazy BA/MA. Does using online discussion as empirical data count when the user has instigated the discussion?

OnTheCounter

No, I am not using an after hours as a research/sounding board for any project.

When is it ok to call another user a muppet?

anyway I am looking for a discussion on modern day republican groups not whether collins was an irish hero or if civil rights marchers back in the 50s had a right to protect themselves against attack using force as those are obviously straightforward and the only people who wont agree are young people trying to be controversial or stir sh1t.

lugha

Seaneh wrote: »

Right, so what should the Irish citizens of the 6 counties done during the 50/60/70 and 80's? When government policies made them second class citizens, when apartheid was being practised in all but name? when civil rights marches were being met with shootings and beatings?
Sit there and take it?
You can huff and puff and spout all the anty ra ****e you want but the reality is that without an armed resistance/retaliation to the policies and "law enforcement" of the day, Irish men and women in the 6 counties would have been treated as second class citizens for a lot longer.
The only time the British establishment took notice of the civil rights movement in the north was when it gained an army.

Yeah a lot of horrible things happened and they should be condemned, but the sad fact is that it took violence before the British government of the day actually treated Irishmen and women of the north like human beings.

The problem of course is that it is all but impossible to determine that this is actually true. It is just as credible to assert that reconciliation delayed rather than hastened resolution. British politicians vowed publicly, if not always privately, that they would have no truck with physical force republicans.

The fate of Northern nationalists in the 50/60 was by no means unique. In particular, there were a lot of similarities with the lot of African-Americans (denials of voting and other rights, collusion of law enforcement officers in organisations like KKK that persecuted them etc.).

But they didn’t mount a campaign similar to the PIRA. Martin Luther King was the stand out icon of their fight, Gerry Adams will probably become the equivalent figure in the North. And IMO, African-Americans made a lot more progress a lot more quickly in combating institutionalised discrimination.

Cee-Jay-Cee

Theyre a shower of low intelligence cowardly retarded wan kers that have no interest in republicanism or a united Ireland. If Britian was to pull out of NI tomorrow and hand the 6 counties back to RoI they'd still continue with their criminal activity (drug importation, fuel and money laundering, theft, robbery and fraud) because it's about money and nothing else. They're no better than the crime gangs in Dublin/ limerick except they use republicanism and anti-drugs as their excuse to commit crime whereas the gangs in Dublin/limerick are simply criminals are known to all.

Molloys Clondalkin

Im curious to know what is the modern day makeup of the IRA/CIRA/RIRA.

What are the majority of members doing these days?

Mostly keeping a low profile until the recent murder of one of thier own blows over.

Any truth that they (mainly in the north) kneecap young hooligans as a punishment for breaking the law and a warning to other young ones?

yes the "action commitees" do that to try and keep thier communities safe from people who dont pay who commit crime.

Do they actually deal drugs themselves or just extort dealers?

Heaven forbid they have to lower themselves to dealing there like the government they will just milk what little you have left.

Whats the story with them seemingly taking over the bouncer industry?

In Dublin yes on the northside with a handful of pubs on the southside.

Whats the current relationship with Sinn Fein?

like that of two old sisters who had a row over a fence on a farmyard and wont speak until thier dying day.

If you are known to be a member of the IRA is it still a convictable offence?

Most definitly.

Any guesses on total membership numbers?

Rira between 600 - 800 Cira between 900-1200 Onh significantly lower.

Wild speculation is not only allowed but encouraged.

Ill post some wild speculation later.

Ted_YNWA

lads do ye not know the first rule they tell ya when you join is..

You do not talk about the RA ..

blaze1

Just head round to Donaghmede today op. Ask around, there's plenty of "new' people around to ask

Spread

Molloys Clondalkin wrote: »

Im curious to know what is the modern day makeup of the IRA/CIRA/RIRA. ..................................................
................................................................................

Ill post some wild speculation later.

Or why not just quote Alan Shatter. He's up ther with that other paragon of makey uppy idiocy Paul Reynolds.

Sunnyisland

Ted_YNWA wrote: »

lads do ye not know the first rule they tell ya when you join is..

You do not talk about the RA ..

What ever you say, say nothing

Border-Rat

PIRA - Main organisation, most powerful (Still)
OIRA - Second most powerful and heavily armed
RIRA - Infiltrated farce ran by MI5
CIRA - Farce
ONH - Farce

.jacksparrow.

Molloys Clondalkin wrote: »

Im curious to know what is the modern day makeup of the IRA/CIRA/RIRA.

What are the majority of members doing these days?

Mostly keeping a low profile until the recent murder of one of thier own blows over.

Any truth that they (mainly in the north) kneecap young hooligans as a punishment for breaking the law and a warning to other young ones?

yes the "action commitees" do that to try and keep thier communities safe from people who dont pay who commit crime.

Do they actually deal drugs themselves or just extort dealers?

Heaven forbid they have to lower themselves to dealing there like the government they will just milk what little you have left.

Whats the story with them seemingly taking over the bouncer industry?

In Dublin yes on the northside with a handful of pubs on the southside.

Whats the current relationship with Sinn Fein?

like that of two old sisters who had a row over a fence on a farmyard and wont speak until thier dying day.

If you are known to be a member of the IRA is it still a convictable offence?

Most definitly.

Any guesses on total membership numbers?

Rira between 600 - 800 Cira between 900-1200 Onh significantly lower.

Wild speculation is not only allowed but encouraged.

Ill post some wild speculation later.

My lord where are you getting these numbers from?

KKkitty

Seaneh wrote: »

KKkitty wrote: »

I hate them with a passion. Doesn't matter what they were fighting for because what they did ripped families apart. Tough men hiding behind guns and bombs to prove a point They were rebels without a cause from the word go. They shouldn't have done what they did but of course they thought whatever they did no matter how bad it was was the right thing to do. Without their meaningless intervention The North could well have been handed back to Irish rule but thanks to the RA we'll never know.

Right, so what should the Irish citizens of the 6 counties done during the 50/60/70 and 80's? When government policies made them second class citizens, when apartheid was being practised in all but name? when civil rights marches were being met with shootings and beatings?
Sit there and take it?
You can huff and puff and spout all the anty ra ****e you want but the reality is that without an armed resistance/retaliation to the policies and "law enforcement" of the day, Irish men and women in the 6 counties would have been treated as second class citizens for a lot longer.
The only time the British establishment took notice of the civil rights movement in the north was when it gained an army.

Yeah a lot of horrible things happened and they should be condemned, but the sad fact is that it took violence before the British government of the day actually treated Irishmen and women of the north like human beings.

So blowing up innocent people and terrorising people from the north on a daily basis was the right way to go about it. The amount of money spent on rebuilding homes and businesses must come into consideration too after their bombs. Violence never solves a thing in the long run.

.jacksparrow.

KKkitty wrote: »

Seaneh wrote: »

KKkitty wrote: »

I hate them with a passion. Doesn't matter what they were fighting for because what they did ripped families apart. Tough men hiding behind guns and bombs to prove a point They were rebels without a cause from the word go. They shouldn't have done what they did but of course they thought whatever they did no matter how bad it was was the right thing to do. Without their meaningless intervention The North could well have been handed back to Irish rule but thanks to the RA we'll never know.

Right, so what should the Irish citizens of the 6 counties done during the 50/60/70 and 80's? When government policies made them second class citizens, when apartheid was being practised in all but name? when civil rights marches were being met with shootings and beatings?
Sit there and take it?
You can huff and puff and spout all the anty ra ****e you want but the reality is that without an armed resistance/retaliation to the policies and "law enforcement" of the day, Irish men and women in the 6 counties would have been treated as second class citizens for a lot longer.
The only time the British establishment took notice of the civil rights movement in the north was when it gained an army.

Yeah a lot of horrible things happened and they should be condemned, but the sad fact is that it took violence before the British government of the day actually treated Irishmen and women of the north like human beings.

So blowing up innocent people and terrorising people from the north on a daily basis was the right way to go about it. The amount of money spent on rebuilding homes and businesses must come into consideration too after their bombs. Violence never solves a thing in the long run.

Well actually it kind of did in the end.

KKkitty

.jacksparrow. wrote: »

KKkitty wrote: »

Seaneh wrote: »

KKkitty wrote: »

I hate them with a passion. Doesn't matter what they were fighting for because what they did ripped families apart. Tough men hiding behind guns and bombs to prove a point They were rebels without a cause from the word go. They shouldn't have done what they did but of course they thought whatever they did no matter how bad it was was the right thing to do. Without their meaningless intervention The North could well have been handed back to Irish rule but thanks to the RA we'll never know.

Right, so what should the Irish citizens of the 6 counties done during the 50/60/70 and 80's? When government policies made them second class citizens, when apartheid was being practised in all but name? when civil rights marches were being met with shootings and beatings?
Sit there and take it?
You can huff and puff and spout all the anty ra ****e you want but the reality is that without an armed resistance/retaliation to the policies and "law enforcement" of the day, Irish men and women in the 6 counties would have been treated as second class citizens for a lot longer.
The only time the British establishment took notice of the civil rights movement in the north was when it gained an army.

Yeah a lot of horrible things happened and they should be condemned, but the sad fact is that it took violence before the British government of the day actually treated Irishmen and women of the north like human beings.

So blowing up innocent people and terrorising people from the north on a daily basis was the right way to go about it. The amount of money spent on rebuilding homes and businesses must come into consideration too after their bombs. Violence never solves a thing in the long run.

Well actually it kind of did in the end.

I just wish violence wasn't a part of it. The Omagh bombing was one of the worst atrocities of our time and the RA took it too far.

.jacksparrow.

KKkitty wrote: »

.jacksparrow. wrote: »

KKkitty wrote: »

Seaneh wrote: »

KKkitty wrote: »

I hate them with a passion. Doesn't matter what they were fighting for because what they did ripped families apart. Tough men hiding behind guns and bombs to prove a point They were rebels without a cause from the word go. They shouldn't have done what they did but of course they thought whatever they did no matter how bad it was was the right thing to do. Without their meaningless intervention The North could well have been handed back to Irish rule but thanks to the RA we'll never know.

Right, so what should the Irish citizens of the 6 counties done during the 50/60/70 and 80's? When government policies made them second class citizens, when apartheid was being practised in all but name? when civil rights marches were being met with shootings and beatings?
Sit there and take it?
You can huff and puff and spout all the anty ra ****e you want but the reality is that without an armed resistance/retaliation to the policies and "law enforcement" of the day, Irish men and women in the 6 counties would have been treated as second class citizens for a lot longer.
The only time the British establishment took notice of the civil rights movement in the north was when it gained an army.

Yeah a lot of horrible things happened and they should be condemned, but the sad fact is that it took violence before the British government of the day actually treated Irishmen and women of the north like human beings.

So blowing up innocent people and terrorising people from the north on a daily basis was the right way to go about it. The amount of money spent on rebuilding homes and businesses must come into consideration too after their bombs. Violence never solves a thing in the long run.

Well actually it kind of did in the end.

I just wish violence wasn't a part of it. The Omagh bombing was one of the worst atrocities of our time and the RA took it too far.

Until your educated on the situation up the north or have read the 2 sides to the omagh bombing then its silly to make judgements.but definitely no innocent person should ever die,ever.

robbie3045

i think the I.R.A today are not freedom fighters but they still hep alot of irish catholics
and wont let the protestants push us around and i do think they are involved in alot of crime up the north but i think they do it more for the fact it cost the english alotof money to try and stop them

Sunnyisland

robbie3045 wrote: »

i think the I.R.A today are not freedom fighters but they still hep alot of irish catholics
and wont let the protestants push us around and i do think they are involved in alot of crime up the north but i think they do it more for the fact it cost the english alotof money to try and stop them

AH Bless your little cotton socks robbie Have a read of this


http://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=provisional%20ira&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CB4QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FProvisional_Irish_Republican_Army&ei=b0pLUJvNLMimhAef_IHgCQ&usg=AFQjCNEeiCwwgBEFMtHHbjoZ8rKctKcdMg

Spread

KKkitty wrote: »

......................................................
...........................................................................................
................ Violence never solves a thing in the long run.

Just look at the history of the world from ancient times. Violence gets everything. How do you think national boundaries were determined? How do you think Royal families came to power? How did fascist powers come to rule? How were these fascist rulers defeated? The Roman Empire was brought about through dialogue? The fall of the said empire through round table talks? This is just an example ....... all empires the same way.

Gran Hermano

Border-Rat wrote: »

PIRA - Main organisation, most powerful (Still)
OIRA - Second most powerful and heavily armed
RIRA - Infiltrated farce ran by MI5
CIRA - Farce
ONH - Farce

You forgot ICBINIRA, I can't believe its not IRA

Red About Town

Border-Rat wrote: »

PIRA - Main organisation, most powerful (Still)
OIRA - Second most powerful and heavily armed
RIRA - Infiltrated farce ran by MI5
CIRA - Farce
ONH - Farce

The Provos are finished as an armed group, think all political observers agree on that. As for the Officials, it is ludicrous to claim they are still 'powerful' or 'heavily armed'. How have they demonstrated this over the last 25 plus years (at least)

lugha

Spread wrote: »

Just look at the history of the world from ancient times. Violence gets everything. How do you think national boundaries were determined? How do you think Royal families came to power? How did fascist powers come to rule? How were these fascist rulers defeated? The Roman Empire was brought about through dialogue? The fall of the said empire through round table talks? This is just an example ....... all empires the same way.

Certainly, physical force has achieved a lot throughout history, but invariably by those who were powerful enough to defeat their opponents. Look at examples where neither side is capable of comprehensively defeating the other (Israel, NI pre-94 etc.) and the effect of violence on either side is usually to make things worse, in turn pushing further back any prospect of a solution.

It is far more credible to argue that PIRA ensured that any resolution was going to come later rather than sooner. Do you think the likes of Thatcher or Tebbit post Brighton were thinking “maybe if we softened our stance or compromised a bit, this won’t happen again”?

Sunnyisland

Red About Town wrote: »

The Provos are finished as an armed group, think all political observers agree on that. As for the Officials, it is ludicrous to claim they are still 'powerful' or 'heavily armed'. How have they demonstrated this over the last 25 plus years (at least)

There in power now with full control of our Armed services






Totally agree with you the sticks have been out of the paramilitary equation a long time now.

Red About Town

realies wrote: »

There in power now with full control of our Armed services






Totally agree with you the sticks have been out of the paramilitary equation a long time now.

Shhss Were not meant to mention that.

Spread

lugha wrote: »

.............................................................
..................................................................................................

It is far more credible to argue that PIRA ensured that any resolution was going to come later rather than sooner. Do you think the likes of Thatcher or Tebbit post Brighton were thinking “maybe if we softened our stance or compromised a bit, this won’t happen again”?

"We will not talk to the men of violence blah, blah, blah", that was their mantra. But, ultimately, after a good few reminders they did.
Both Thatcher and her attack dog Tebbit displayed a total lack of human emotion to the fate of, what was then a minority, in a corner of Ireland.
Can you tell me where, in any colonial scenario, Britain instigated talks about pulling out ........... before the locals started taking pot shots?
Remember, Nelson Mandela was also a terrorist in their books.

Chuck Stone

lugha wrote: »

It is far more credible to argue that PIRA ensured that any resolution was going to come later rather than sooner.

First, you are beginning the narrative at a point that suits your view on the subject. It is far more credible to state that if violence had not been been used against civil rights movement then the IRA likely would not have gained impetus.

Second, this is pretty pointless conjecture. We can't recreate the conditions in a lab and do an experiment that removes the PIRA from the test tube to see what the outcome would be.

My own personal opinion is that the conflict would have been over far sooner if the IRA had focussed on the economic targets in Great Britain rather than attempting a war of attrition against the BA and Unionist militias.

In my estimation it was the Canary Wharf bomb and the bombing of the Manchester CBD that brought the troubles to a close - or at least put momentum into the PP. As soon as the IRA started to focus on hurting the UK economy the game was up.

lugha

Spread wrote: »

"We will not talk to the men of violence blah, blah, blah", that was their mantra. But, ultimately, after a good few reminders they did.

Thatcher and Tebbit didn’t. They probably wouldn’t have anyway but anyone on the British side who might have been disposed to compromise would obviously be less inclined to if they were the direct targets of an attack

Spread wrote: »

Can you tell me where, in any colonial scenario, Britain instigated talks about pulling out ........... before the locals started taking pot shots?

This is the usual post hoc ergo what’s it mistake republicans make, automatically assume it’s because of rather than in spite of. It is particularly odd line for them to take because more than most, they knew the actual impact was on attitudes of the British side coming in heavy. Invariably, the effect after the likes of Bloody Sunday or the hunger strikes or Gibraltar was to strengthen republican resolve rather than weaken it. Why republicans assume the British would response in anything but an identical way when they played hard ball is simply baffling.

Again I would point to the lot of African-Americans. In much the same place in the 1950s / 1960s and made a lot more progress a lot more quickly.

lugha

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Second, this is pretty pointless conjecture. We can't recreate the conditions in a lab and do an experiment that removes the PIRA from the test tube to see what the outcome would be.

No but you being a little bit of logic to bear on the matter. If the impact of British attacks on nationalists did not lead the latter to think “we better back down or we will get more of the same” why on earth would republicans think that the British response to republican attacks would be any different?

Chuck Stone

lugha wrote: »

If the impact of British attacks on nationalists did not lead the latter to think “we better back down or we will get more of the same” why on earth would republicans think that the British response to republican attacks would be any different?

I'm not sure the rational aim of the IRA was to beat the BA or make it 'back down', rather, to make the north into a political, financial and security 'hot potato' that the British would deem not worth the trouble (pretty much what happened).

oranbhoy67

Well i love them

Sir Pompous Righteousness

I Ran Away.

Chuck Stone

Sir Pompous Righteousness wrote: »

I Ran Away.

That was what the local people called the OIRA when they were being burned out of their homes by 'loyalists' and being attacked by the BA.

Enter the PIRA.

What's that? It's all going over your head?

Yeah.. don't worry - just go back to getting your views from section 31 tossers.

end of the road

KKkitty wrote: »

Without their meaningless intervention The North could well have been handed back to Irish rule but thanks to the RA we'll never know.

i wouldn't think that it would have been handed back at all. could be wrong though, as you said, we'l never know.

Molloys Clondalkin

.jacksparrow. wrote: »

My lord where are you getting these numbers from?

Move along now nothing more to see here :cool:

Red About Town

Chuck Stone wrote: »

My own personal opinion is that the conflict would have been over far sooner if the IRA had focussed on the economic targets in Great Britain rather than attempting a war of attrition against the BA and Unionist militias.

In my estimation it was the Canary Wharf bomb and the bombing of the Manchester CBD that brought the troubles to a close - or at least put momentum into the PP. As soon as the IRA started to focus on hurting the UK economy the game was up.

Your estimation is correct.

It's unfortunate but bombs in London were far more effective than killing hundreds of working class British soldiers or local RUC/UDR men.

lugha

Chuck Stone wrote: »

I'm not sure the rational aim of the IRA was to beat the BA or make it 'back down', rather, to make the north into a political, financial and security 'hot potato' that the British would deem not worth the trouble (pretty much what happened).

Except it isn’t pretty much what happened. The Brits are still in NI as I’m sure you have noticed. And they will stay there until a majority of the people there decide they want them out.

Now given that they have long conceded that they don’t give a monkeys about NI, given that they are accepting of, if not enthused by, the departure of Scotland and maybe Wales from the union and given that NI costs them billions of pounds each year to subsidize why would anyone think they would stay a day in NI longer than they are wanted?

So the great victory for republicans was something that was always there anyway?

Sir Pompous Righteousness

Chuck Stone wrote: »

That was what the local people called the OIRA when they were being burned out of their homes by 'loyalists' and being attacked by the BA.

Enter the PIRA.

What's that? It's all going over your head?

Yeah.. don't worry - just go back to getting your views from section 31 tossers.

Blip blah blap.

Chuck Stone

lugha wrote: »

Except it isn’t pretty much what happened. The Brits are still in NI as I’m sure you have noticed.

The BA, the RUC, the UDR, the B-Special needs - all have been removed from the streets. The look-out towers, check-points and border military bases have been dismantled. SF are in administration.

There isn't much British about the north any more.

Now given that they have long conceded that they don’t give a monkeys about NI

Long conceded is wrong. The point was'nt officially conceded until 1990..

9 November, 1990
Peter Brookes "no selfish strategic interest" speech.
Peter Brooke said Britain had no "selfish strategic or economic interest" in Northern Ireland and would accept unification, if the people wished it.

BBC

... and wasn't given credibility until the annual Loyalist hate-fest was prevented from marching up the Garvaghy Rd (1998).

So the great victory for republicans

I don't believe it was a 'great victory' - it was a military stalemate.

was something that was always there anyway?

In a test tube experiment where the NICRA was respected instead of protesters being murdered in cold blood?

Perhaps.

Chuck Stone

Sir Pompous Righteousness wrote: »

Baa, baa, baa.

FYP.

Tom_Cruise

So will N.Ireland will always be part of Britain?

getzls

[QUOTE=Chuck Stone;806727
There isn't much British about the north any more.




Well apart from 70% of the population that consider them-selves British.

lugha

Chuck Stone wrote: »

The BA, the RUC, the UDR, the B-Special needs - all have been removed from the streets. The look-out towers, check-points and border military bases have been dismantled. SF are in administration.

There isn't much British about the north any more.

Well if that’s your criteria there is very little British about Britain anymore.

Anyway back to my question. Can you offer any evidence that the civil rights gains in NI were because off, or even hastened by, PIRA activity?

I don't think so. The gains would all have come anyway but I can certainly understand why republicans could ever bring themselves to admit this, especially to themselves, as that really would be an appalling vista.

Red About Town

Chuck Stone wrote: »

The BA, the RUC, the UDR, the B-Special needs - all have been removed from the streets. The look-out towers, check-points and border military bases have been dismantled. SF are in administration.

There isn't much British about the north any more.

If there was any serious return to violence British soldiers would be back in their thousands in no time.

There was no watch towers in 1965; didn't mean the state was any less British.

Chuck Stone

lugha wrote: »

Can you offer any evidence that the civil rights gains in NI were because off, or even hastened by, PIRA activity?

No. I refer you back to my 'test tube experiment' concept.

I don't think so. The gains would all have come anyway

In your opinion. I don't claim to have access to alternate realities that you seem to have.

but I can certainly understand why republicans could ever bring themselves to admit this

Admit to your alternate reality? It's an odd thing to have to admit to.

In my alternate reality the British ended Unionist privilege, the north has reunited with the south, Unionists are happy to be in the Dail.

Can you provide any evidence that this wouldn't have happened if the British had nurtured the civil rights movement?

lugha

lugha wrote: »

Can you offer any evidence that the civil rights gains in NI were because off, or even hastened by, PIRA activity?

Chuck Stone wrote: »

No. I refer you back to my 'test tube experiment' concept.

No? No?

So let me get this straight. You defend, in broad terms, the use of force by PIRA over 30 years and when I ask if you can cite even one piece of evidence that such drastic action was necessary, you say no?

Is this really your position? :eek:

Chuck Stone

lugha wrote: »

So let me get this straight. You defend, in broad terms, the use of force by PIRA over 30 years and when I ask if you can cite even one piece of evidence that such drastic action was necessary, you say no?

I don't broadly 'defend' the PIRA - I would say that people have the right to take up arms against an oppressive anti-democratic regime (which for all intents and purposes is what the British backed Unionist statelet was).

Is this really your position? :eek:

That I can't say whether or not the PIRA advanced the cause of civil rights or hindered it?

Yes. Who can? We work with the reality we have not the one we would have liked.

Spread

Tom_Cruise wrote: »

So will N.Ireland will always be part of Britain?

In much the same way that you will always be a part of Katie Holmes'

Border-Rat

Red About Town wrote: »

The Provos are finished as an armed group, think all political observers agree on that. As for the Officials, it is ludicrous to claim they are still 'powerful' or 'heavily armed'. How have they demonstrated this over the last 25 plus years (at least)

The Stickies have huge arms caches and the Provos are in bed with Putins regime. You really do know nothing.

czx

Border-Rat wrote: »

The Stickies have huge arms caches and the Provos are in bed with Putins regime. You really do know nothing.

Straight from the horse's mouth!

Border-Rat

lugha wrote: »

Well if that’s your criteria there is very little British about Britain anymore.

Anyway back to my question. Can you offer any evidence that the civil rights gains in NI were because off, or even hastened by, PIRA activity?

I don't think so. The gains would all have come anyway but I can certainly understand why republicans could ever bring themselves to admit this, especially to themselves, as that really would be an appalling vista.

I hope you don't liVe in the South. Surely a man of your morals couldn't see himself living in a state founded by an IRA much, much worse than the PIRA?