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.

 

Chilling statement from the UVF

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 04:25 PM
link   
unitedirelander.blogspot.com...




"It has never been an issue with us. Quite frankly decommissioning is not a word that we use in our vocabulary. Decommissioning is something that the Ulster Volunteer Force have neither promised nor discussed nor are likely to become engaged in. It is not on our agenda."


UVF have stated that the will be watching the 24th November deadline and has also stated that their's and the UDA ceasefire agreement was based on the "protection of the Union". If the Stormont fails, the Irish government gets involved.

Loyalists see this as a threat.

www.niassembly.gov.uk...



We remain extremely concerned about the lack of significant and meaningful progress on UVF or UDA decommissioning. We are particularly concerned about the UVF’s recent statement that it will retain its weapons until the outcome of the November deadline is known. That is a very sinister threat.




posted on Nov, 26 2006 @ 08:05 AM
link   
They're dangerous people, I'll agree with you there infinite but I also think they're for the most part 'out of time' and lost.

They have had some sort of regular contact with the Decomm body for several years so the idea that this is completely foreign to them is just rubbish.

Mind you, I was never one to see this Decomm as the vital ingredient. It's nice if you can get it but they wouldn't be the 1st grouping in this place to leave their Decomm to (as David Irving the UVF's politician) once said, 'General Rust'.

The whole thing is so full of contradiction anyway.

If the St Andrews stuff falls (and despite obvious splits Paisley's 3pm statement indicates they're still going for it) and the UK Gov & the RoI Gov go in for a (probably unstated) form of 'Joint Authority' what are they going to do?
Attack the UK to try and 'make' them go back to a closer form of Union?
Attack the RoI (and hence bring down the full weight of British and Irish Govs against them) to try and 'make' them not talk to the UK Gov about NI?

It's patently a ridiculous crock.



posted on Nov, 26 2006 @ 08:17 AM
link   
IRA, PIRA .. The Real IRA.... all got guns, all engaged in criminal activites...£30 million robbery any one? Gun point wasn't it... IRA spying ect ect ect..

all i'm trying to say is that they all have hugh caches of weapons and ammo still, it's just that those who do not want Souther irish politicians involved in the North have stated such things... the others are bare faced liars.

I think that the day the province becomes peaceful is the day god himself comes down and lays some slap down on it all... I really think that its a situation that Loyalists want to remain British, and the Catholics want to be Irish and no involement from the British... so it cannot be done...

No one wins, and death continues apace in the province.



posted on Nov, 26 2006 @ 08:36 AM
link   
Well the argument that nothing can be done and no progress achieved does actually fly in the face of the reality of what has been happening in NI for the past almost 10yrs (and more).

The truth is that the violence itself achieved nothing, for either side.
It merely stalled the inevitable political progress (which is why the so-called 'loyalist' elements started it all in the late 1960's).

The nationalist and republican side have finally woken up to this and a one-sided 'campaign' by so-called 'loyalists' in a climate where the British Gov itself is sick and tired of the whole 'problem (and now no longer actually has any 'need' of NI for any 'selfish or strategic reason' - as even a tory Sec of State publicly stated) would be futile.

The sectarian so-called 'Unionist state' is gone and is never coming back......and good riddance to it, it brought nothing but sheer disaster to everybody concerned....even those it was supposed to 'benefit'.

The truth is that progress has been made and continues to be made - and all despite the constant claims of some that nothing could ever be achieved during the entire process.

[edit on 26-11-2006 by sminkeypinkey]



posted on Dec, 26 2006 @ 07:51 AM
link   
Well, both the UDA and the UVF have said that they will blow Dublin to bits if they dare try and move Belfast closer to the republic.

I got a book for Christmas called the "UDA" by Henry McDonald and Jim Cusack. In the book, a high figure of the UDA said that the group will always become active if "the rebels" try to take over again.

My family over home (Northern Ireland) tell me that the UDA are just a mafia or another terrorist group waiting to happen. If there is peace, UDA will become a mafia involved in drugs, etc but if republicanism takes a rise and the UDA will go back to terrorists ways.



posted on Dec, 28 2006 @ 10:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by infinite
Well, both the UDA and the UVF have said that they will blow Dublin to bits if they dare try and move Belfast closer to the republic.


- IMO it's an empty threat and posturing....but I'll agree with you, coming from that bunch it's chilling enough.
Pity David Erving hadn't more clout with them (he always seemed like he was genuine, realistic and fairly open about what was what).

The so-called 'Loyalists' never were the most technically sophisticated groups but now they simply haven't the means or expertise
(and, thankfully, every year of peace takes that further and further away from them......as, happily, it does for all the paramilitary groups).

As was demonstrated during the riots of summer/autumn 2005 they already know the 'weight' of the British state forces will move fully against them if they start any of that stupidity
(which is something which has never truly happened before).

Just as the early years of the Drumcree trouble, blockades and disorder was always faced down and soundly defeated.

It's part and parcel and the inherent contradiction of 'direct rule'.
They simply have no say.

The UK has been moving ever closer to the RoI Gov in terms of NI policy for decades and that will continue no matter what those on the side-line have to say
(it'll even continue that way if there's a change of political party in power in the UK, however unlikely that is
).

It's also the catch 22 of devolved power, if they do want to have a political say they have to share power with those they have tried so long to shut out of power and having a say.


I got a book for Christmas called the "UDA" by Henry McDonald and Jim Cusack. In the book, a high figure of the UDA said that the group will always become active if "the rebels" try to take over again.


- You should have seen the UDA/UVF literature we used to get around the estate in the early 1970's.

We were regularly told -
The RoI was about to invade at any moment (their purchase of a handful of Fouga Magister trainer/light attack aircraft proved it
), republicans were going to poison the water supply (possibly a garbled interpretation of the old late 1960's hippy idea of putting '___' in the water supply to start a social revolution)
and the paranoia usually ending up with something along the lines of 'being sold out' and that 'we had to have independence for NI'.

All baseless, unworkable insanity and the product of paranoia generated by the kind that fear-monger.

They're always making such claims.

....and btw
(I expect you know this infinite but for others that may be looking at this and don't)
the truth is that it was the so-called 'Loyalists' in the shape of the UVF, Gusty Spence and Co. who actually started the last round of 'the troubles' by pretending to be the IRA (blowing up electricity power sub-stations and the like) to provoke a response from the then Unionist (devolved) Gov in NI.

(The Unionist Gov had already faced Paisley's crass rabble-rousing incitement for decades by then, usually tall tales about 'selling out' to Dublin - or papist 'Rome' - just because everyone of the NI Prime Ministers since 1950 could see the sense of north-south cooperation and closer ties.)

Well they got their reaction alright and the repressive 'state' reaction (and the by-standing whilst 'Loyalists' attacked republicans and republican areas) in turn provoked a republican response and before you know it everybody was so wound up that we had the horrors of Bloody Friday (where republicans bombed - with no warning - civilian 'targets' like the bus depot and city-centre, causing massive casualties and numerous fatalities) and of Bloody Sunday (which surely needs no further explanation) and with that the flames were utterly out of control and the rest is history.

It had nothing to do with "rebels trying to take over" and everything to do with hoping to provoke republican violence to distract and stall the political progress that was so obviously imminent.

The political progress came eventually anyways and the, disastrous, so-called 'Unionist state for a Unionist people' was swept away never to return.


My family over home (Northern Ireland) tell me that the UDA are just a mafia or another terrorist group waiting to happen. If there is peace, UDA will become a mafia involved in drugs, etc but if republicanism takes a rise and the UDA will go back to terrorists ways.


- The Loyalist gangs have always been attracted to drugs as easy financing, the UVF probably the 'cleanest' in this respect and the LVF and UDA the worst but it's all relative.

Their problem is that republicanism has wised up and isn't going to be led down the path of violence again, all that lies down there is years of stalled politics (which is why it has been used and has happened before).

The British were, at one time, happy to let their 'Loyalist proxies' use this tactic but once the republicans began targeting the major commercial centres of England - and particularly London's financial centre - that was it.
Over.

No matter what the so-called 'Loyalists' might have to say on the matter.



[edit on 28-12-2006 by sminkeypinkey]




top topics
 
0

log in

join