|
|
Post by Wasp on Jul 17, 2011 21:32:39 GMT
Why aren't loyalists being pursued by the PSNI like republicans are in regards to the rioting, wasp? Looks to me like loyalists can riot without fear of being exposed in the papers, arrested and charged in the way republicans in the ardoyne are/were. Bit of a strange reply to my points and one that is far from true. Of all the republican rioters in Ardoyne few will be lifted in comparison to the number involved, secondly you have to look at the scale of the rioting from say Ardoyne and other nationalist areas compared to some of the loyalist rioting. Loyalists have been arrested as have republicans including children as young as 10. I am sure more arrests will follow but in my experience there is a far higher tolerant level of republican violence than loyalist violence. Im not being smart but I wish you would address my points rather than answer with a question. |
|
|
|
Post by leeside on Jul 17, 2011 21:37:52 GMT
Why aren't loyalists being pursued by the PSNI like republicans are in regards to the rioting, wasp? Looks to me like loyalists can riot without fear of being exposed in the papers, arrested and charged in the way republicans in the ardoyne are/were. Bit of a strange reply to my points and one that is far from true. Of all the republican rioters in Ardoyne few will be lifted in comparison to the number involved, secondly you have to look at the scale of the rioting from say Ardoyne and other nationalist areas compared to some of the loyalist rioting. Loyalists have been arrested as have republicans including children as young as 10. I am sure more arrests will follow but in my experience there is a far higher tolerant level of republican violence than loyalist violence. Im not being smart but I wish you would address my points rather than answer with a question. Going by the events over the last couple of weeks I would seriously question your statement regarding there being a higher tolerance of republican violence than that of loyalists. Im not being smart either but what is the point you want me to address? |
|
|
|
Post by Wasp on Jul 17, 2011 22:53:06 GMT
I was speaking in more general terms over a much longer period but I would like to ask you what do you mean by what you said here regarding higher tolerance level of republican violence etc.
I know your not, I was meaning things such as my posts concerning what the psni said about rioting such as in the post by the dithering Dodds.
|
|
|
|
Post by leeside on Jul 18, 2011 13:40:08 GMT
Wasp, the reaction of the PSNI to loyalist rioting was in stark contrast to their reaction to republican rioting over the last couple of weeks. In Ballyclare they actually apologised to loyalists for dutifully taking down a loyalist paramilitary flag that was flying next to a catholic church. And this was after they came under severe attack from loyalists who in turn thrashed their own neighbourhood. I didnt hear any apologies directed at republican rioters.
Im very aware of how republican youths were involved in rioting in the ardoyne and they should be arrested and charged.
I would like to see those loyalists who were involved in rioting over the last couple of weeks being pursued with the same vigour as has been promised by Mr Finlay in relation to republican rioters.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wasp on Jul 18, 2011 19:31:44 GMT
I disagree completely.
I never heard about the apology or the reason it was given, but you are twisting things here by putting loyalists who received the apology and thuggish rioters as the same people which is far from fair.Why would they apologize to republican rioters?
It is shameful and disgusting, the crumlin road is shared space and loyalist estates are in off the road just the same as ardoyne is.
They are, but please remember its the scale of things that takes the most impotance and should take priority regardless of who was involved. What I mean by that is this, if 70 rioters are involved in some pretty serious rioting causing alot of damage to property etc and where a few officers were injured then it is important to pursue those involved. But if at the sametime 200 rioters were involved in serious sustained rioting where major damage to property was caused and dozens of officers were injured then I believe those involved should be sought with every resource available. Its pretty much common sense but where do you get they are not pursuing loyalists from?
I assure you there are feelings from certain loyalists towards the police in the areas you have mentioned which are very very tense and things could erupt again very easily. This is because these same loyalists see things as soft touch for republicans but different story for loyalists.
|
|
|
|
Post by leeside on Jul 19, 2011 15:02:11 GMT
Matt v Newt on the PSNI’s Ballyclare capitulation to loyalists
In an unusual step (in his own words), the PSNI Chief Constable Matt Baggott decided to pen a letter to the Irish News published this morning in reply to a column written by Newt Emerson in the paper yesterday.
Emerson’s article (subs required) was entitled ‘PSNI pawns in loyalist grant application scheme’ and in the piece, Emerson lambasted the PSNI for capitulating to the marauding loyalists in Ballyclare.
In the piece, Emerson noted how six police officers were injured in the loyalist violence, including one after being attacked with a concrete block, noting how this offence in Ardoyne last year led to a charge of attempted murder against a Spanish citizen recently. Furthermore, Emerson recounts how the assembled loyalists also drove a hijacked bus into a land rover, injuring five officers.
But it is Emerson’s assertion of political interference which seems to have provoked Baggott into responding with such haste:
“Policing this political must be ordered from the top which no longer seems to mean Chief Constable Matt Baggott….the official police line has OFMDFM written all over it.”
What is clear is that the PSNI are entitled to remove flags erected with the intention of intimidating the minority catholic population of the overwhelmingly unionist town, even within the terms of the ‘protocal agreement’ in place in the area. The loyalist response was as violent and intense as anything witnessed in other riots over the summer period. Subsequently, the PSNI apologised for their operation and did not object to the re-erection of the offending flags outside of the Catholic Church.
Furthermore, there has been a distinct absence of PSNI activity in relation to arresting the loyalists responsible for the rioting in Ballyclare, suggesting that the chastened PSNI certainly appear considerably less interested in arresting loyalists involved in these riots than those implicated in rioting in other parts of the north.
The Chief Constable’s letter of reply raises as many questions as it answers (again, subs required.) In stating that the decision to apologise “was taken following the significant feedback from local groups on the consultation process,” Baggott seems to be suggesting that the PSNI should be apologising far more regularly for its actions than is presently the case. For example, the policing tactics in Ardoyne were criticised by Fr Gary Donegan as well as representatives of both the SDLP and Sinn Fein, yet there has yet to be an apology for those actions. If the criteria for seeking a PSNI statement of remorse is merely the collation of significant feedback from local groups, then that criteria would appear to have been more than met. Yet a reciprocal apology to nationalists would serve only to further dent both the credibility of the PSNI and provoke a crisis of leadership, indicating an inability to make soundly based tactical decisions which could be stood over at a later stage.
Secondly, Baggott’s claim that the willingness to apologise is “a sign of our willingness to listen and excellent local leadership, when we are humble enough to acknowledge the concerns of others” is rather disconcerting when one recalls that the incident was a simple matter of the PSNI seeking to act in defence of a minority community who others were attempting to intimidate. Quite who the PSNI decided to listen to is a question that deserves further exploration, not least since the appearance of DUP MP Willie McCrea to announce the PSNI apology whilst standing beside prominent loyalist spokesperson, Ken Wilkinson, suggested that all strands of unionist-loyalist political opinion were united in pillorying the PSNI whilst ignoring or downplaying both the actions of the rioters and the sectarian motivation behind the initial move which precipitated the PSNI’s actions.
Thirdly, Baggott refutes the claims of political interference in robust tones, stating that he would not tolerate such an intervention and directly rejecting the specific charge of OFMDFM intervention:
“I would not tolerate any political interference in operational policing nor any compromise of the impartiality or operational independence of the PSNI. OFMDFM have had no part in this nor any previous operational decisions.”
But none of what Matt Baggott said actually addressed the core difficulty emerging from the PSNI’s behaviour in Ballyclare.
The message sent out by the PSNI was that it cannot be trusted to face down loyalists in the area, and allowing itself to be publicly humiliated by apologising and turning a blind eye when the flags were re-erected was a monumental error for a police service supposedly interested in promoting a vision of non-sectarian policing into the future.
Again, Newt Emerson:
“Note how the DUP seized the airwaves, with Willie McCrea standing beside PUP spokesman Ken Wilkinson and boasting about the police apology. Imagine how that feels if you have even the slightest dissident sympathy.”
Matt Baggott is going to have to do much better to prove that what Emerson correctly labelled the “spineless stance” of the PSNI is not repeated.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wasp on Jul 19, 2011 17:57:48 GMT
I will try and address what I know as fact and also your post here and also my opinion. In recent years tensions between certain loyalists and the police I have been very very tense with many allegations of police harrassment. Only a few months ago there was a small riot and stand off between bothsides in Ballyclare over houmes being raided. About 4 weeks ago police were in talks with political reps and certain loyalists about getting agreement over flags and murals as they have in other areas. As far as I am aware agreement was not reached or decisions given and this is what fueled loyalist anger over the flags being removed. The flags in question are in numerous parts of ballyclare and the reason more have been put up is in defiance of a planned building development which has caused much concern within the loyalist community.
Regarding the apology I have very little opinion on it, from a loyalist point of view (those involved in talks with the police) then they deserved an apology because police went back on there word in ongoing negociations. Concerning the riots then those responsible should be held to account and be actively pursued which the police are doing. Ballyclare has a reputation for becoming a troublesome area so it does not take much of an excuse for young people to get involved in a riot.
One of the points raised by one loyalist was how many parking/driving tickets etc are handed out in republican areas with the full knowledge that police in the past have been ordered not to stop cars for such offences incase it upsets locals.
Hope this explains things a bit more but at the end of the day we must all condemn these riots.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wasp on Jul 22, 2011 22:29:08 GMT
I was up past this chapel yesterday so I want to give a more detailed explanation of where it is. First of all the chapel is directly across the road from a staunch loyalist estate, and it is at the front of another loyalist estate. The whole area has flags along the road from most if not every lampost in the area and there are a number of paramilitary flags but they are few in number compared to the Ulster flag etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by leeside on Aug 3, 2011 15:46:54 GMT
Tbh, Wasp and I dont want to sound rude but that all stinks of petulance and entitlement to me. To suggest that the flags have been put up as a defiance against a planned building development just doesnt wash with me. The flags were only removed from outside the church, no?
Again, Wasp... Petulance from the loyalist community in Ballyclare. Disgraceful that the PSNI actually apologised to them!!
I dont really understand what you mean here. However, the actions and sense of entitlement that the loyalist community have displayed in Ballyclare makes the whole 'point' raised about the parking tickets seem ridiculous and hypocritical.
But wasnt it only the flags outside the catholic church that were taken down?
|
|
|
|
Post by Wasp on Aug 3, 2011 20:19:47 GMT
I am being honest here, I have never saw as many paramilitary flags in this area and these flags are an act of defiance, well that is one reason for them being put up.
I have been speaking to a number of people in the area and not all of them are loyalists. Each of there stories/versions were similar, they all said how the police first denied taking down these flags but later admitted to it. Tensions as I said were running very high and the violence had started to spill to other areas and if these areas had really kicked off I dont know how the police could have coped. I am still trying to find out an actual reason for the apology which I find confusing. Initial reports tried to make out that it was a paramilitary flag erected outside a chapel to intimidate which isnt the case although the flag itself can be intimidating to some.
As in a build up of frustration.
No there were a number of uvf and uda flags taken down and no paramilitary flag should be displayed outside any place of worship but that road which the chapel is on is in the middle of loyalist estates and there a number of such flags in the area. I am not trying to excuse what has happened, I am trying to give you a better insight into what has happened and what is happening. You have to remember the much larger towns of Carrick, Larne and Newtownabbey (which used to house one of the biggest estates in Europe) have a large numbers from the same group that was involved in Ballyclare.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wasp on Aug 8, 2011 19:54:39 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by leeside on Aug 10, 2011 15:07:35 GMT
4 men? Out of all the rioters in ballyclare?? Hardly being pursued with the same vigour, Wasp. Any idea how many were arrested at the short strand during the orchestrated violence? Any photos on the newspapers asking the public to identify the culprits like there was with the Ardoyne rioters? Looks to me like the loyalists involved got off pretty lightly, tbh. |
|
|
|
Post by Wasp on Aug 10, 2011 19:03:34 GMT
How many have been charged with the riots in Ardoyne? Last I heard 17 were arrested out of hundreds so when you compare like for like too many loyalists were arrested. I rarely buy local papers TBH so I cant really answer your points but I will try to find out.
|
|
