|
|
Post by Harry on Sept 27, 2007 14:04:57 GMT
I'm surprised he's quit the UPRG and think something else has gone on behind the scenes. I see the tough situation ahead but how does him resigning help the matter?? Maybe the man has done all he can and simply has had enough.
|
|
|
|
Post by bearhunter on Sept 27, 2007 20:26:48 GMT
He means that if the UDA top a few taigs, maybe someone will up the financial offer to make them stop.
|
|
|
|
Post by Harry on Sept 28, 2007 8:08:32 GMT
That's a air point Harry and from what I've read about him hes a dedicated community worker. But why is he mentioning the UDA would begin to focus on "resistance to pan-nationalism"? I fully understand the need for Minister Ritchie to apply pressure on the UDA to disarm but what they've done has simply create a no win situation for anybody. The UDA will not disarm a single thing within 60 days and the minister must know this surely. Now the UDA has been backed into a corner and the minister must follow through with her threat or else be seen to be backing down to the UDA. A withdrawal of funds and with no voice at all within the political arena creates a very dangerous situation. Supposedly the UDA was due to make some very significant statements soon but with the the pressure and threats being applied on them this may not happen anymore. I don't know exactly where the money was going but it was meant to be for community projects and not directly to anyone within the UDA. Loyalism still feels very left out of everything and misrepresented in every sense of the word. The danger is that some may slip back to the comfort of what the know best and i'm sure this is the danger he's speaking of, its not a threat but his understanding of what may arise from this situation. The UDA have to fade away into the background as they are no longer required. Criminal activity must stop and a statement must be issued from those within the UDA who still care about the cause that the UDA has ceased to exist and anyone still using the UDA/UFF name as a means to strike fear or intimidation are merely criminals posing as Loyalists and the statement should make clear that these people should be reported to the PSNI. In return the government must address the issue and try to give the Loyalist community a voice through community groups and various projects. Former members of the UDA should be encouraged to get involved in politics at a local level and represent their community. Something has to give now in order to allow both sides some space for maneuver. Maybe a relaxation from the minister or a change of criteria in the sense of trying get rid of the criminal elements first instead of making silly demands with no chance of them being met. I'm fully aware of how difficult the UDA are making the situation with the potential feud looming but the minister can either try and keep afloat some hope by making it easier for those who are trying to influence the UDA for the good or she can carry out her threat and sink the whole lot and face the situation with no calming influence at all within the UDA. |
|
|
|
Post by bearhunter on Sept 28, 2007 8:27:36 GMT
Supposedly the UDA was due to make some very significant statements soon but with the the pressure and threats being applied on them this may not happen anymore. I don't know exactly where the money was going but it was meant to be for community projects and not directly to anyone within the UDA. Loyalism still feels very left out of everything and misrepresented in every sense of the word. The danger is that some may slip back to the comfort of what the know best and i'm sure this is the danger he's speaking of, its not a threat but his understanding of what may arise from this situation. . No offence Harry, but what you're saying is that the UDA is basically holding the country to ransom. If "Loyalism" is feeling hard done by, perhaps they should realise that their political representatives are in the majority in the Assembly and the union has been tacitly accepted by Loyalism's biggest enemy, Sinn Fein. What do they want? Medals? Pensions? They've already got everything they claimed to be fighting for. |
|
|
|
Post by Harry on Sept 28, 2007 9:08:15 GMT
Supposedly the UDA was due to make some very significant statements soon but with the the pressure and threats being applied on them this may not happen anymore. I don't know exactly where the money was going but it was meant to be for community projects and not directly to anyone within the UDA. Loyalism still feels very left out of everything and misrepresented in every sense of the word. The danger is that some may slip back to the comfort of what the know best and i'm sure this is the danger he's speaking of, its not a threat but his understanding of what may arise from this situation. . No offence Harry, but what you're saying is that the UDA is basically holding the country to ransom. If "Loyalism" is feeling hard done by, perhaps they should realise that their political representatives are in the majority in the Assembly and the union has been tacitly accepted by Loyalism's biggest enemy, Sinn Fein. What do they want? Medals? Pensions? They've already got everything they claimed to be fighting for. No offence BH but you know nothing about the Loyalist community and while entitled to your opinion it appears you may be ignorant to what is felt within the Loyalist community. |
|
|
|
Post by Harry on Sept 28, 2007 14:26:05 GMT
Tell me this Harry. Why don't the UDA, who have a massive membership, have any support from the vast majority of Unionists? (quick edit to add a couple more questions) Who are the UDA Loyal to? Is their Loyality returned in willing cooperation? Now, outside of their own membership very few would support the UDA but thats just my opinion. In the days of the troubles a hell of alot more mainstream Unionists would of supported them than would of let on. Never publically showing support but in private it was different. In its heyday the UDA would of been backed by the majority of working class loyalists and support would of been greatest in times of the workers strike etc. You only have to look at the way they carry on now to see why many Unionists don't support them. They have lost sight and have forgotten why they were created and for what purpose. Loyalty would be to Queen and country and to the lasting Union. Actions sometimes bring this loyalty into question even for me. The queen has no interest in Loyalty from the UDA and nothing is returned for their loyalty but this is down to the actions of the organistaion and has to be expected. Regardless this does not dilute the respect for the royal family our their desire to remain loyal subjects of her majesty. Again this only my views and others from within Loyalism would feel differently |
|
|
|
Post by Wasp on Sept 28, 2007 20:01:24 GMT
I absolutely agree, why should these areas with many ordinary folk suffer because of the uda. People in loyalist areas and I presume republican areas are fed up to the teeth with the paramilitarys be it the ira or the uda etc. But one thing for sure is they hate the 'other' side more so the will come out in support of there side or rather those who claim to represent there side.
Now that's a bit silly, they are loyal to the Queen but they would argue that Her Majesty doesn't live here so she wouldn't know all the facts and fight on. Did the ira listen to the pope when he said on my knees I beg you?? And' don't say the ira were not loyal to the pope etc as many ira members were devout or practising Catholics. The pope is the head of all Catholics with supreme authority according to the vatican over the worldbut the ira ignored him the way all terrorist groups etc ignored pleas from politicians from both sides of the border and from countless families.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Sept 28, 2007 22:46:40 GMT
The IRA arent loyal to the pope  what about those protestant republicans throughout history surely they wherent loyal to the pope either, what goes on in the vatican city is of little interest to most catholics most of it is tradition these days. The UDA have given unquestionable loyality to the monarch of a country. I think its an interesting question, if the Queen made a statement tomorrow demanding that the UDA disband, would they do it? |
|
|
|
Post by Republic on Sept 29, 2007 11:15:26 GMT
The IRA pledge Loyality to Ireland. No one and nothing else. No religous leader no matter who. The UDA on the other hand pledge loyality to The Queen explicity. Setanta your Qs are perhaps a bit unfair. The Queen and Britain does not value the loyalty of the UDA. That is true. But Ireland does not value the loyalty of the IRA either. Your Qs seem to have a moral high ground; as if the IRA were accepted and the UDA were rejected by their respective nations. Both groups probably had support among their communities in NI. But the Irish nation did not support the IRA and neither did the British nation support the loyalist paramilitaries. If I asked you the same about the IRA I bet your answer would be much the same as Harrys. |
|
|
|
Post by Republic on Sept 29, 2007 11:18:16 GMT
WASP,
I would doubt that many IRA men cared about the catholic church.
Unionists have on the whole, failed to understand that republicanism is not linked to religion in the same way that unionism/loyalism is.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Sept 29, 2007 12:53:58 GMT
No, your right, Ireland doesnt value the loyality of the IRA, or at least the Provos, but they wherent giving their loyalty to the south anyway, they gave their loyality to "the republic", and always have, which as we know doesnt exist so it becomes a thing to fight for so its not as if they're giving loyalty to Mary McAleese either. The UDA loyalty is to defend something that exists so I dont see it as an unfair question but I do understand why you and Wasp would see it as so. I've found unionists dont seem to understand the IRA and church links either, or the church and republicanism in general (because not all republicans are in the IRA!), it doesnt have that close link that loyalism and protestantism has, for most of us the catholic church just happens to be there, we've little interest or care for it and I go even further in my opinion and think it should be taken off the face of the earth  |
|
|
|
Post by Wasp on Sept 29, 2007 16:06:36 GMT
WASP, I would doubt that many IRA men cared about the catholic church. Unionists have on the whole, failed to understand that republicanism is not linked to religion in the same way that unionism/loyalism is. I understand and see you point. Because of the suffering at the hands of the Catholic church placed upon Protestants for centuries, the fact that Ireland was almost totally Catholic when the troubles started, the fact the Catholic church basically ran Ireland, the fact the republic had what Unionists see as an illegal claim over N.Ireland, the fact the IRA came from Catholic communities, the fact of the likes of Chesney, the pope blessing the hunger strikers (sending a crucifix I believe), the fact the ira waged a sectarian campaign against Protestants and were invovled in the ethnic cleansing of Protestants from various areas etc etc you will see why the link is there or why Protestants view things this way. I know many within the Catholic church condemned the ira, but there were those who supported and take chesney for example and you will see the sectarian hatred from many republicans towards there Protestant neighbours. And of course it is the same on all sides. But the ira and there ilk cannot even admit there sectarian campaign which has years and years of factual proof. |
|
|
|
Post by bearhunter on Sept 30, 2007 19:21:49 GMT
No offence Harry, but what you're saying is that the UDA is basically holding the country to ransom. If "Loyalism" is feeling hard done by, perhaps they should realise that their political representatives are in the majority in the Assembly and the union has been tacitly accepted by Loyalism's biggest enemy, Sinn Fein. What do they want? Medals? Pensions? They've already got everything they claimed to be fighting for. No offence BH but you know nothing about the Loyalist community and while entitled to your opinion it appears you may be ignorant to what is felt within the Loyalist community. No offence taken, harry and you're right I am ignorant of what is felt within the loyalist community. No one seems able to articulate what is happening there. |
|
|
|
Post by Harry on Oct 1, 2007 7:26:17 GMT
No offence BH but you know nothing about the Loyalist community and while entitled to your opinion it appears you may be ignorant to what is felt within the Loyalist community. No offence taken, harry and you're right I am ignorant of what is felt within the loyalist community. No one seems able to articulate what is happening there. Fair one mate and i'd have to agree with that its got to be our own fault. Either we simply don't have the right people to represent us so we don't vote or we vote for the same old people simply to maintain the status quo. Its about time we got up off our backsides and did something, me included |
|
|
|
Post by Wasp on Oct 1, 2007 20:18:34 GMT
No setanta I do not keep concentrating on the Catholic ira links. I was replying to a post trying to explain why Unionists have that train of thought.
|
|
what about those protestant republicans throughout history surely they wherent loyal to the pope either, what goes on in the vatican city is of little interest to most catholics most of it is tradition these days. The UDA have given unquestionable loyality to the monarch of a country.
