IRA Decomissioning

  • Thread starter Thread starter solerina
  • Start date Start date
Originally posted by Melendez@Oct 13 2005, 10:28 AM
Several audience members walked out in protest, but Fr Reid later apologised, saying his remarks were made during a flash of anger.

He said he had been provoked and outraged when some audience members made comments about his integrity and his church.
Click to expand...
You can imagine some of the comments made by the sensitive souls prior to his retort :lol:
 
Leaders of the Ulster Defence Association confirmed today that it had decommissioned all weapons under its control.
Click to expand...
​
The North’s largest loyalist paramilitary group put the remainder of its arsenal out of use in recent weeks.​

The paramilitary organisation, responsible for some of the bloodiest atrocities during the conflict, had already put a small number of guns beyond use last June.​

The act was facilitated by the Independent International Commission on Decommissioning (IICD) under the leadership of General John De Chastelain.​

​
Click to expand...
​

The disarmament was verified by two independent witnesses – former Church of Ireland primate Robin Eames and former top civil servant and chair of the Ulster Bank George Quigley.​

Another big step......​
 
Hell's teeth: over four years since this thread was started, and they've just got down to announcing the guns are silenced at last. Now, can we see all the aggressive wall paintings and graffiti painted over, please? I'm still saddened that there are possibly a few small breakaways that may still be armed, though, and want to make some inane but tragic 'gesture'.
 
I dont get this "decommisioning" stuff at all...

What happens? They say "thats all of the bombs then is it?" "er yes"

"you sure?" " honest guv, would i lie to you?"




Agree with Krizon. A good first step would be getting rid of all that graffitti glorifying murderers. Of course its poisonous...
 
Desert Orchid said:
Well, a step.

So long as the bigotry (both sides) is instilled in the minds of the young through families, etc, the problem will persist but maybe not as aggressively as in the last 40+ years.
Click to expand...


We all know it's symbolic. It's more the point that they have reached a point where decommisioning does not feel like a loss of face to them that's important.it will take generations to dilute the hate.
 
Gee, this is going to sound really ignorant, but sometimes I have to 'fess up and just ask anyway: what really kicked off the hatred? Was it simply Proddy vs Catholic-based, with the Proddies siding with unionism, feeling vulnerable to Catholics overwhelming them, or what? It's far, far more than just 40 years of brutality by both sides. Something runs deeper than that, so what year - possibly well back in time - did the hatred kick off? Did it start with partisans after the English sent in Cromwell's thugs? (Too bad An Capall's no longer posting - I know what the answer would be!) I'd like to understand the reason (if something as illogical as hate can be reasonable) for it all.
 
krizon said:
Gee, this is going to sound really ignorant, but sometimes I have to 'fess up and just ask anyway: what really kicked off the hatred? Was it simply Proddy vs Catholic-based, with the Proddies siding with unionism, feeling vulnerable to Catholics overwhelming them, or what? It's far, far more than just 40 years of brutality by both sides. Something runs deeper than that, so what year - possibly well back in time - did the hatred kick off? Did it start with partisans after the English sent in Cromwell's thugs? (Too bad An Capall's no longer posting - I know what the answer would be!) I'd like to understand the reason (if something as illogical as hate can be reasonable) for it all.
Click to expand...

Don't even go there, everyone has their own version, a good place to start would be 1611 and the plantation of Ulster but I could be accused of not going back far enough. The whole 'Irish Question' goes back to 1100 and something. Anyway I have no desire to get into it, too messy !! :)
 
I think it was the Plantation way back (17th century?), of settlers from southern Scotland ... they took the land. Land ownership is often an underlying factor, I think, in such histories.
Anyway, that led to poverty for the land-dispossessed and that never stopped.
Without resorting to wikipedia, that's my impression.
 
I thought it had to go very much further back than one, as an ignorant outsider, might imagine. Thanks for a starting point, though. No, I don't want to kick off some ruckus - I just wanted an idea of what the pivotal moment might have been and when. Thanks for the info - I can Google the rest!
 
:whistle: I'm saying nowt. Schtum. Shhhhh...

No, seriously. Could never find a straight or unheated answer to the Q in the past, but like so much of national histories, the spark point usually lies far, far back, in something quite different to the current situation. There are so many festering sores, like the Turks and Armenians, and it's all down to just sometimes the inanity of vanity (oh, that rhymed!): not wanting to apologise for some terrible wrong done 500 years ago by A to B, because one looks 'weak' or 'loses face'. Actually, I think it takes a lot more strength to say sorry than to carry on being a prick, but there you go.
 
krizon said:
:whistle: I'm saying nowt. Schtum. Shhhhh...

No, seriously. Could never find a straight or unheated answer to the Q in the past, but like so much of national histories, the spark point usually lies far, far back, in something quite different to the current situation. There are so many festering sores, like the Turks and Armenians, and it's all down to just sometimes the inanity of vanity (oh, that rhymed!): not wanting to apologise for some terrible wrong done 500 years ago by A to B, because one looks 'weak' or 'loses face'. Actually, I think it takes a lot more strength to say sorry than to carry on being a prick, but there you go.
Click to expand...

The problems in the North are very complex and wrong doing has continued into the modern era but they do seem to be getting it sorted ..... and they need to be commended for that.
 
Last edited:
Still no official apology to the Armenians for the 1915 massacres, and no real acceptance by the Turks that they occurred. It's like the Japanese govt. and the surviving Chinese 'comfort women' - no real acceptance of responsibility for their sexual slavery to Japanese invaders, no real apology, and bugger-all compensation - not that that would wipe the dreadful memories clean. Now, that's modern history, not medieval or Jurassic, and you'd think countries might want to wipe their dirty slates clean, but it's that old, idiotic vanity getting in the way again.
 
The Germans have done a lot to face up to the wrongs they inflicted on the world in the first half of the 20th century.
 
In what way, Grey? I thought they'd dragged their feet in paying compensation to survivors of Jewish families who'd had their homes looted of objects which the Nazis stored away in vaults. Like the odd Rembrandt, Louis Quinze furniture, that kinda stuff. Or have they been moved to try to locate survivors and give the many millions of pounds' worth of goods back to them? I guess when you've done your very best (and mostly succeeded) to wipe out entire families, finding the odd survivor in Israel or Canada is a tad difficult.
 
Well, the German state could surely force their hands, couldn't it? If they knew that those august institutions were holding looted money and goods, then surely they should demand that they turn them over to the State, for formal issue to the inheriting survivors? Why is that impossible?
 
Did anybody else see the Spotlight investigation on BBC tonight? Robinson's position as first minister is surely untenable if he is unable to come up with a very convincing defence for his actions (or lack thereof, as the case may be).

Yet another strange twist in what has always looked a distinctly strange marriage as well.
 
Didn't see anything on tv but been reading about it online. £50K to Mrs Robinson ("here's to you... "!) to 'help' her teenaged lover buy a caff, which she later thought he should pay back to her and a church, 50/50, having already solicited £5K of it earlier. As what? A finder's fee? Then Mr R clearly covered things up and both failed to report any of what was going on to fund the Lock Keeper's cafe for that nice young man.

I thought Robinson himself was puke-inducing with his sanctimonious "I've forgiven her, and I know that God's forgiven her" rhubarb during his trembly interview a night ago. Hmm... leaving God aside for a moment, Mr Robinson, and your unstable wife, what about failing to report what was going on, as your ministerial code requires you to do? God may well forgive you that, too, but I doubt that your co-ministers will be too pleased with your 'oversight'. And with the missus claiming to be conveniently 'unwell' (that's usually journalese for pissed out of your brains - shurely shome mistake?), you can't make yourselves look like the Crazy House and claim to be a bit off-centre, too, can you? Someone's going to carry the can for this little farrago, and it isn't going to be the boy. I think it's bye-bye time for one, if not both of them, but they can always console themselves with a nice hot cuppa and a brioche at the Lock Keeper's...
 
Iris has already stood down and "withdrawn from public life".

With regards to the allegations made on the Spotlight programme that Peter Robinson knew about and helped to cover up what was going on and failed to report it, they didn't produce any hard evidence - only the claims of Iris Robinson's assistant. Whilst I have little doubt that this did happen as claimed, I wouldn't be surprised to see Peter try to brazen this out. Though if people keep digging into the family history there may be some more allegations to come to light regarding him, won't go into what I have heard on a public forum though..

It's also very convenient for Iris to have developed mental health issues at the very time that these allegations come to light - especially as she has broken a slew of ministerial rules and has received money in a very dodgy fashion from a property developer which she has acted on behalf of in her role as a public representative.

Would love to be watching the next sitting of Stormont!

The timing of this could not be better if you are Gerry Adams - takes his family's issues nicely out of the spotlight.
 
Back
Top