It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Soldiers armed loyalists

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 2 2006 @ 04:46 PM
link   
Today it has been confirmed by the Irish News that British Soldiers armed Loyalists.

Here's an extract from the front page;




intelligence documents show how more than 200 British Army rifles and sub-machine guns were passed to loyalists.


These documents reveal that;




5-15% of UDR (Ulster Defence Regiment) soldiers were linked to loyalist paramilitaries


We can clearly see that the army knew that the guns that they were passing to the loyalist paramilitaries were being used to murder Republicans. Why was this aloud to happen in the first place?

I have found two interesting websites on this article;
www.etext.org...
cain.ulst.ac.uk...

It is interesting that, so recently after the death of a British spy, within Shin Fein that these documents were released.

The old theory of 'the brits are fighting the brits with the brits in the middle' looks to now be a fact after all!




posted on May, 2 2006 @ 04:58 PM
link   
May I ask your stance in the whole scenario? As in biased towards Republicans or Loyalists.. I think I can guess but hey!



posted on May, 3 2006 @ 10:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Knights
May I ask your stance in the whole scenario? As in biased towards Republicans or Loyalists.. I think I can guess but hey!


I am on the Republican side, but I personally don't think that it matters because I was simply letting everyone in on what was once a conspiracy theory and is now fact.



posted on May, 3 2006 @ 04:18 PM
link   
An update on the situition;

Army guns were used in 12 murder bids, resulting in 1 death and 11 injuries to Republicans.
A dossier lists a string of incidents across Northern ireland where arms were passed to loyalists, and these dosiers included the victims names.
Another army gun, may have been used to kill a 16 year old boy, but it has not been documented.

Here is a transcript from an RTE documentry based on this;




Interviewer- ' Who do you see as the enemy in your area'
Officer- 'The provisional IRA is the only enemy we have


The soldier then says that he is suspicious of 50% of the Catholic community, but only 10-15% were involved.

If the IRA are the only enemies, then why did they (apparantly) kill a 16 year old boy?



posted on May, 3 2006 @ 04:38 PM
link   
Good on the British army for getting rid of IRA /PIRA 'soldiers' - what ever means needed to get the job done.

There is proof also that Irish Army and Police intelligence actualy gave information that led directly to the dearths of at least 6 members of the British defence Forces - yet oh suprise suprise theres none of that in your thread....oohhh la la what a suprise! (not).

Look, the war was dirty, fought on one side by an Army, and on the other side by a bunch of cowards who's main weapon was a car bomb or a knee capping..... oh so brave !

They protested that they were 'prisoners of war' and 'political' prisoners when it suited them, but oh did the IRA ever stick to the geneva convention? nope. treat prisoners well? nope tortured and shot them - Oh and killed Irish Catholic women who comforted wounded / dying soldiers...... Best of rid of scum like that - SAS or British weapons, what ever worked best.... until the Labour party got in... oh and then it was pander to terror time.... Tony tough on terror? well yes if their Muslims...but his 'Irish crusaders' ? never. Claire Short even DEFENDED the cross maglen sniper teams and terror teams...DEFENDED them in debate! (and as a member of the British cabinet??!!)

[edit on 3/5/06 by MadGreebo]


CX

posted on May, 3 2006 @ 05:01 PM
link   
Madgreebo, thanks for that post, put a smile on my face before i turn in for the night! Best one, and most truthfull one i've read all day


CX.



posted on May, 3 2006 @ 07:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by MadGreebo
until the Labour party got in... oh and then it was pander to terror time


- MG even though you might cling to the idea that a 'military solution' was possible to this 'problem' in NI I think few will agree with you if you do.

Labour and Tony Blair did not "pander" to 'republican terrorism'.

Labour and Tony Blair (together with many many others), through inclusive talks and proper negotiation, actually got 'the troubles' stopped......something many of us who grew up here in the 1970's at the height of 'the troubles' thought impossible and would never happen.
They successfully encouraged republicans to engage solely in the political and 'peace' process (much to the benefit of all of us here in NI and throughout the UK and RoI for that matter).
Big difference.

It might be something you disdain but I applaud their efforts and I thank God for the lives those efforts have saved......and yes, I applaud not just the efforts of the governments involved but also those involved and in positions of responsibility in the political parties here, including Sinn Fein, who have achieved so much 'normality' for those of us living here.
Sinn Fein (like many others) have come a long way in this process and to refuse to recognise that is absurd IMO.
(I grew up in a unionist area and was raised as a unionist btw)

I will not 'defend' anyone in their 'prosecution' of the 'war' but I will say that I agree it was indeed a very "dirty war" (as they almost all always are) and enormous wrongs were carried out by all sides involved.

I see no difference between a murder or maiming carried out by republicans, loyalists, British soldiers or agents acting either for or in collusion with the British state, or Irish state for that matter - and IMO they all did that kind of thing.

The truth is that after 30yrs+ of 'war' there was little 'innocence' to be found on any particular 'side' (and let's be honest, large numbers of the so-called 'non-combatants' were perfectly happy to openly declare 'support' for whatever 'side' they were from/allied to).
But IMO each side had a right to point to a real and genuine 'justice', no one was 100% in the right all the time but equally no one was 100% in the wrong all the time either.

You might not like speight89 highlighting the collusion issue but it is true and it did happen. It was a terrible crime.
Saying that there were other terrible crimes or that it also happened on the other side is hardly the point, is it?

It is also perfectly true to say that the 'peace process' came about because of a recognition (initially under John Major's tory government, actually) that neither side could force a military victory.

Once that fundamental truth (that a military victory could not be had by either side) was accepted on all sides (with the exception of the more insane but tiny fringe elements on each side) what else is there to do?
All that is left are political talks.

That is not "pandering", that is sanity.
It is the only sane thing left to do.

It is a sane and honest recognition of reality, to act responsibly and properly to stop the violence and any consequential additional casualties on all sides.



posted on May, 4 2006 @ 10:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by MadGreebo
Good on the British army for getting rid of IRA /PIRA 'soldiers' - what ever means needed to get the job done.

There is proof also that Irish Army and Police intelligence actualy gave information that led directly to the dearths of at least 6 members of the British defence Forces - yet oh suprise suprise theres none of that in your thread....oohhh la la what a suprise! (not).

Look, the war was dirty, fought on one side by an Army, and on the other side by a bunch of cowards who's main weapon was a car bomb or a knee capping..... oh so brave !

They protested that they were 'prisoners of war' and 'political' prisoners when it suited them, but oh did the IRA ever stick to the geneva convention? nope. treat prisoners well? nope tortured and shot them - Oh and killed Irish Catholic women who comforted wounded / dying soldiers...... Best of rid of scum like that - SAS or British weapons, what ever worked best.... until the Labour party got in... oh and then it was pander to terror time.... Tony tough on terror? well yes if their Muslims...but his 'Irish crusaders' ? never. Claire Short even DEFENDED the cross maglen sniper teams and terror teams...DEFENDED them in debate! (and as a member of the British cabinet??!!)

[edit on 3/5/06 by MadGreebo]


I may be on the Republican side, yes I want a United Ireland, but I do oppose to violence, its totally un-nessecary in todays society.

So you are celebrating British soldiers killing innocent men, women and children? I don't care what side they are on, killing the innocent is a total disgrace!

By the way, I was only talking about the collusion in the UDR because those documents have been released and have also been in newspapers. I am in no way denying that the Irish Army helped the IRA, but this thread is about the British soldiers arming the loyalists.

You must remember that the loyalists have also used car bombs and knee capings!



posted on May, 5 2006 @ 07:24 AM
link   
Many of the residents living in N.Ireland actually want to remain British. They should have a say in which country they belong to or do Republicans just plan to take 'their land' away from them?

The IRA is renound for other criminal activities such as, bank robbery, extortion, violence, bombing, drug smuggling, and counterfeiting to name afew, hmmm.. and i wonder who supplied them with munitions?


All in the name of a whole state? I think not!

Oh and..


I am in no way denying that the Irish Army helped the IRA, but this thread is about the British soldiers arming the loyalists.


Whoa, isn't the whole point in making such accusations is to have informed decisions from both perspectives? We can't just all argue that one point in which you want to raise, it goes both ways.



posted on May, 9 2006 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by speight89
So you are celebrating British soldiers killing innocent men, women and children? I don't care what side they are on, killing the innocent is a total disgrace!

By the way, I was only talking about the collusion in the UDR because those documents have been released and have also been in newspapers. I am in no way denying that the Irish Army helped the IRA, but this thread is about the British soldiers arming the loyalists.

You must remember that the loyalists have also used car bombs and knee capings!


Yes, the killing of civilians is a disgrace, but maybe you should look ath the Sinn Fein/IRA viewpoint on this. They have stated many times that the murder of innocent people is necessary to achieve their aims. They have also been very reluctant to apologise for these murders for the above reason. The provos have killed many more innocents than the British Army by a long shot.

I was a member of the Ulster Defence Regiment until it was disbanded in 1992, and I still serve with the Royal Irish Regiment. There were (and no doubt still are) members of the Regiment that are affiliated with paramilitary groups, but no-where near in the numbers that were in the bad old days.

The only thing that has changed recently is the fact that the government has made what was a commonly known fact official.



posted on May, 9 2006 @ 01:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by sminkeypinkey

It is also perfectly true to say that the 'peace process' came about because of a recognition (initially under John Major's tory government, actually) that neither side could force a military victory.

Once that fundamental truth (that a military victory could not be had by either side) was accepted on all sides (with the exception of the more insane but tiny fringe elements on each side) what else is there to do?
All that is left are political talks.

That is not "pandering", that is sanity.
It is the only sane thing left to do.

It is a sane and honest recognition of reality, to act responsibly and properly to stop the violence and any consequential additional casualties on all sides.


I fail to see how releasing the largest number of detained known terrorists in the world as part of a political concession can be seen as a 'sane' thing to do.

The next concession is the disbandment of The R. Irish Home-Service, putting over 3000 troops out of employment. If there are 5-15% of this regiment with paramilitary connections, then you are going to have between 150 and 450 individuals with terrorist connections, an intimate knowledge of terrorist tactics and weapons, and no immediate source of income on the street in an area that already has a large rate of unemployment.

To put this into context, the approximate estimate for the PIRA at any one time was approximately 80 active members (i.e. 20 ASUs each containing 4 members, not supporters)

Oh dear.


[edit on 9-5-2006 by PaddyInf]



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join