The UDA has announced that units of its military wing, the Ulster Freedom
Fighters, are to be stood down at midnight. 

The organization also said weapons are to be put beyond use. It was unclear how
and when the UDA intends to engage with the decommissioning body chaired by
General John De Chastelain.

At a Remembrance Day ceremony in Belfast's loyalist Sandy Row, the UDA said it
believed the war was over and said it is going to concentrate on developing
communities through peaceful means.
Advertisement

It said it was making the momentous move because the struggle to maintain the
Union was on a new and more complex battlefield.

The UDA sent out a general order to all members not to be involved in crime or
criminality, and it said those who had joined its ranks for such purposes had to
be rooted out.

The statement said: 'The Ulster Defense Association is committed to achieving a
society where violence and weaponry are ghosts of the past.'

Taoiseach Bertie Ahern welcomed the statement by the UDA. Mr Ahern particularly
welcomed the 'acknowledgement that the conflict is over and its commitment to
achieving a society where violence and weaponry belong to the past.'

DUP's Lagan Valley MP Jeffrey Donaldson described it as a positive signal for
communities across Northern Ireland.

More than 12 years has passed from the IRA's 1994 ceasefire to Sinn Féin
pledging to support the PSNI last January. The process by Loyalist
paramilitaries to end their campaign has been even more protracted.

Some of its leaders want to commit to an exclusively political path. Others
continue to engage in crime, including drug dealing and racketeering.
Print this page

http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/1111/uda.html

What do they expect a medal for giving up random murder of Catholics?  FFS!!!
They make it sound like a noble gesture...  It's sorta like a serial killer
sending a note to the paper saying "I won't abduct, rape, cook and eat my
victims anymore" and expecting people to say "well done!"  Grrrrr!!!!


End of UDA militant operations welcomed

The Irish and British governments have welcomed the announcement by the UDA that
its military wing, the Ulster Freedom Fighters, was stood down at midnight.

The UDA said weapons were to be put beyond use.

It is unclear how and when the UDA intends to engage with the decommissioning
body, chaired by General John De Chastelain.
Advertisement

DUP MP Gregory Campbell said the UDA would be judged by its actions not its
words.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/1112/uda.html

Put their weapons beyond use?  How?  By handing them out to the retarded
membership?

This should NOT be greeted as some sort of good thing...  This should be greeted
as about fuckin' time!    

The Brits marked the IRA end of the war as if they won something...  But they
mark the end of loyalist psychopathy as if it was some sort of God send...  It's
sickening...

What say you?

Ray

-- 
****************************************************************************************
The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed
 by the tribe.  If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes
frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning
yourself. - Friedrich Nietzsche
****************************************************************************************
Email  : rayh(removeSPAM)@iol.ie : Website: http://www.eirefirst.com
****************************************************************************************

On 13 Nov, 18:32, "Der Weiße Wolf <rayh<spam>@iol.ie>" 
wrote:
> The UDA has announced that units of its military wing, the Ulster Freedom
> Fighters, are to be stood down at midnight.
>
> The organization also said weapons are to be put beyond use. It was unclear how
> and when the UDA intends to engage with the decommissioning body chaired by
> General John De Chastelain.
>
> At a Remembrance Day ceremony in Belfast's loyalist Sandy Row, the UDA said it
> believed the war was over and said it is going to concentrate on developing
> communities through peaceful means.
> Advertisement
>
> It said it was making the momentous move because the struggle to maintain the
> Union was on a new and more complex battlefield.
>
> The UDA sent out a general order to all members not to be involved in crime or
> criminality, and it said those who had joined its ranks for such purposes had to
> be rooted out.
>
> The statement said: 'The Ulster Defense Association is committed to achieving a
> society where violence and weaponry are ghosts of the past.'
>
> Taoiseach Bertie Ahern welcomed the statement by the UDA. Mr Ahern particularly
> welcomed the 'acknowledgement that the conflict is over and its commitment to
> achieving a society where violence and weaponry belong to the past.'
>
> DUP's Lagan Valley MP Jeffrey Donaldson described it as a positive signal for
> communities across Northern Ireland.
>
> More than 12 years has passed from the IRA's 1994 ceasefire to Sinn Féin
> pledging to support the PSNI last January. The process by Loyalist
> paramilitaries to end their campaign has been even more protracted.
>
> Some of its leaders want to commit to an exclusively political path. Others
> continue to engage in crime, including drug dealing and racketeering.
> Print this page
>
> http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/1111/uda.html
>
> What do they expect a medal for giving up random murder of Catholics?  FFS!!!
> They make it sound like a noble gesture...  It's sorta like a serial killer
> sending a note to the paper saying "I won't abduct, rape, cook and eat my
> victims anymore" and expecting people to say "well done!"  Grrrrr!!!!
>
> End of UDA militant operations welcomed
>
> The Irish and British governments have welcomed the announcement by the UDA that
> its military wing, the Ulster Freedom Fighters, was stood down at midnight.
>
> The UDA said weapons were to be put beyond use.
>
> It is unclear how and when the UDA intends to engage with the decommissioning
> body, chaired by General John De Chastelain.
> Advertisement
>
> DUP MP Gregory Campbell said the UDA would be judged by its actions not its
> words.
>
> http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/1112/uda.html
>
> Put their weapons beyond use?  How?  By handing them out to the retarded
> membership?
>
> This should NOT be greeted as some sort of good thing...  This should be greeted
> as about fuckin' time!    
>
> The Brits marked the IRA end of the war as if they won something...  But they
> mark the end of loyalist psychopathy as if it was some sort of God send...  It's
> sickening...
>
> What say you?
>
> Ray
>
> --
> ***************************************************************************­*************
> The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed
>  by the tribe.  If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes
> frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning
> yourself. - Friedrich Nietzsche
> ***************************************************************************­*************
> Email  : rayh(removeSPAM)@iol.ie : Website:http://www.eirefirst.com
> ***************************************************************************­*************

The DUP where quite willing to use UDA heavies at rallies in the past.
Standing down the UFF simply means that branding will not be used. The
UFF was simply a cover name for the UDA.

What is important is that the UDA have shown a will to move to
normality. The main thing is they stop the crime and extortion which
is effecting all of the norths economy. Disarming or disbanding should
not be the main focus though if they did disarm under the terms of the
GFA it would be a huge symbolic act that would benefit loyalists and
victims more than any other groups.

Though its laughable that the UDA believes that these are the peoples
guns and they fought the IRA, considering they killed more loyalists
than members of the IRA.

"freeireland"  wrote in message 
news:1195048148.601556.185210@o3g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
[...]
> Though its laughable that the UDA believes that these are the peoples
> guns and they fought the IRA, considering they killed more loyalists
> than members of the IRA.

True, infighting and feuds were rife during the conflict. The IRA had a 
similarly laughable record; they killed far more republicans than loyalists. 
It makes you wonder who everyone thought they were fighting.

-- 
Falcon:
fide, sed cui vide. (L)
UK National Defence Association
www.uknda.org

On 14 Nov, 14:44, "Falcon"  wrote:
> "freeireland"  wrote in message
>
> news:1195048148.601556.185210@o3g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> [...]
>
> > Though its laughable that the UDA believes that these are the peoples
> > guns and they fought the IRA, considering they killed more loyalists
> > than members of the IRA.
>
> True, infighting and feuds were rife during the conflict. The IRA had a
> similarly laughable record; they killed far more republicans than loyalists.
> It makes you wonder who everyone thought they were fighting.
>

Well the main thing is I think they are moving away from this now as
well.

Well statistics show the PIRA killed more soldiers and police than any
other grouping including civilians. Loyalists where not high on the
IRAs targeting priority.
Infact the IRA where the only group not to kill more civilians than
non civilian groupings. 36% of IRA killings were civilians as opposed
to 52% of British secruity force killings and a massive 86% of
loyalist killings.

Knowing this 86% figure I find it hard to accept that loyalists were
protecting their areas.

See

http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/sutton/crosstabs.html

Lots of interesting trends can be spotted and I am interested in any
you see.

Another I spotted is that 56% of people killed by British secruity
forces were 24 or under while loyalists and the IRA looks to be more
spread out without any pattern.


> --
> Falcon:
> fide, sed cui vide. (L)
> UK National Defence Associationwww.uknda.org

"freeireland"  wrote in message 
news:1195060431.505988.201110@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
> On 14 Nov, 14:44, "Falcon"  wrote:
>> "freeireland"  wrote in message
>>
>> news:1195048148.601556.185210@o3g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>> [...]
>>
>> > Though its laughable that the UDA believes that these are the peoples
>> > guns and they fought the IRA, considering they killed more loyalists
>> > than members of the IRA.
>>
>> True, infighting and feuds were rife during the conflict. The IRA had a
>> similarly laughable record; they killed far more republicans than 
>> loyalists.
>> It makes you wonder who everyone thought they were fighting.
>>
>
> Well the main thing is I think they are moving away from this now as
> well.
>
> Well statistics show the PIRA killed more soldiers and police than any
> other grouping including civilians. Loyalists where not high on the
> IRAs targeting priority.
> Infact the IRA where the only group not to kill more civilians than
> non civilian groupings. 36% of IRA killings were civilians as opposed
> to 52% of British secruity force killings and a massive 86% of
> loyalist killings.
>
> Knowing this 86% figure I find it hard to accept that loyalists were
> protecting their areas.
>
> See
>
> http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/sutton/crosstabs.html
>
> Lots of interesting trends can be spotted and I am interested in any
> you see.
>
> Another I spotted is that 56% of people killed by British secruity
> forces were 24 or under while loyalists and the IRA looks to be more
> spread out without any pattern.

Thanks. I think the light is beginning to dawn at last. I don't know what 
all the fuss was about. The IRA weren't that bad, it was the Brits and 
loyalists that caused all the trouble, destroyed most of the property and 
killed most of the innocent people. Fuckin' bastards. Can I vote for Gerry 
next time round?

-- 
Falcon:
fide, sed cui vide. (L)
UK National Defence Association
www.uknda.org

Falcon wrote:
> "freeireland"  wrote in message
> news:1195060431.505988.201110@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
>> On 14 Nov, 14:44, "Falcon"  wrote:
>>> "freeireland"  wrote in message
>>>
>>> news:1195048148.601556.185210@o3g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>> Though its laughable that the UDA believes that these are the
>>>> peoples guns and they fought the IRA, considering they killed more
>>>> loyalists than members of the IRA.
>>>
>>> True, infighting and feuds were rife during the conflict. The IRA
>>> had a similarly laughable record; they killed far more republicans
>>> than loyalists.
>>> It makes you wonder who everyone thought they were fighting.
>>>
>>
>> Well the main thing is I think they are moving away from this now as
>> well.
>>
>> Well statistics show the PIRA killed more soldiers and police than
>> any other grouping including civilians. Loyalists where not high on
>> the IRAs targeting priority.
>> Infact the IRA where the only group not to kill more civilians than
>> non civilian groupings. 36% of IRA killings were civilians as opposed
>> to 52% of British secruity force killings and a massive 86% of
>> loyalist killings.
>>
>> Knowing this 86% figure I find it hard to accept that loyalists were
>> protecting their areas.
>>
>> See
>>
>> http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/sutton/crosstabs.html
>>
>> Lots of interesting trends can be spotted and I am interested in any
>> you see.
>>
>> Another I spotted is that 56% of people killed by British secruity
>> forces were 24 or under while loyalists and the IRA looks to be more
>> spread out without any pattern.
>
> Thanks. I think the light is beginning to dawn at last. I don't know
> what all the fuss was about. The IRA weren't that bad, it was the
> Brits and loyalists that caused all the trouble, destroyed most of
> the property and killed most of the innocent people. Fuckin'
> bastards. Can I vote for Gerry next time round?

LOL! I fear you are wasting your time here with ironic sarchasm! He is a 
sectarian fuckwit, and it all goes right over his head!

-- 
Hal Ó Mearadhaigh.

Falcon wrote:
> "freeireland"  wrote in message 
> news:1195048148.601556.185210@o3g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> [...]
> 
>>Though its laughable that the UDA believes that these are the peoples
>>guns and they fought the IRA, considering they killed more loyalists
>>than members of the IRA.
> 
> 
> True, infighting and feuds were rife during the conflict. The IRA had a 
> similarly laughable record; they killed far more republicans than loyalists. 
> It makes you wonder who everyone thought they were fighting.
> 



I think UDR was more or less the IRA way of getting to the tribal issue.

G.

Falcon wrote:

> 
> Thanks. I think the light is beginning to dawn at last. I don't know what 
> all the fuss was about. The IRA weren't that bad, it was the Brits and 
> loyalists that caused all the trouble, destroyed most of the property and 
> killed most of the innocent people. Fuckin' bastards. Can I vote for Gerry 
> next time round?
> 


I won't be voting.

We had thirty years of bombing and killing and for what?

It was pointless.

G.

Falcon wrote:
> "freeireland"  wrote in message
> news:1195060431.505988.201110@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
> > On 14 Nov, 14:44, "Falcon"  wrote:
> >> "freeireland"  wrote in message
> >>
> >> news:1195048148.601556.185210@o3g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> >> [...]
> >>
> >> > Though its laughable that the UDA believes that these are the peoples
> >> > guns and they fought the IRA, considering they killed more loyalists
> >> > than members of the IRA.
> >>
> >> True, infighting and feuds were rife during the conflict. The IRA had a
> >> similarly laughable record; they killed far more republicans than
> >> loyalists.
> >> It makes you wonder who everyone thought they were fighting.
> >>
> >
> > Well the main thing is I think they are moving away from this now as
> > well.
> >
> > Well statistics show the PIRA killed more soldiers and police than any
> > other grouping including civilians. Loyalists where not high on the
> > IRAs targeting priority.
> > Infact the IRA where the only group not to kill more civilians than
> > non civilian groupings. 36% of IRA killings were civilians as opposed
> > to 52% of British secruity force killings and a massive 86% of
> > loyalist killings.
> >
> > Knowing this 86% figure I find it hard to accept that loyalists were
> > protecting their areas.
> >
> > See
> >
> > http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/sutton/crosstabs.html
> >
> > Lots of interesting trends can be spotted and I am interested in any
> > you see.
> >
> > Another I spotted is that 56% of people killed by British secruity
> > forces were 24 or under while loyalists and the IRA looks to be more
> > spread out without any pattern.
>
> Thanks. I think the light is beginning to dawn at last. I don't know what
> all the fuss was about.
> The IRA weren't that bad, it was the Brits and
> loyalists that caused all the trouble, destroyed most of the property and
> killed most of the innocent people. Fuckin' bastards. Can I vote for Gerry
> next time round?


I never claimed that at all and its a giant leap of faith to come to
that conclusion. However likewise the IRA again were did not cause all
the trouble. The statistics clearly show that loyalists claims that
they defended their own areas was at very best extremely weak. The
British secruity forces and IRA figures clearly put the civilian death
rate against overall killings by loyalists into context.


> --
> Falcon:
> fide, sed cui vide. (L)
> UK National Defence Association
> www.uknda.org

Gregory wrote:
> Falcon wrote:
>
> >
> > Thanks. I think the light is beginning to dawn at last. I don't know what
> > all the fuss was about. The IRA weren't that bad, it was the Brits and
> > loyalists that caused all the trouble, destroyed most of the property and
> > killed most of the innocent people. Fuckin' bastards. Can I vote for Gerry
> > next time round?
> >
>
>
> I won't be voting.
>
> We had thirty years of bombing and killing and for what?
>
> It was pointless.
>
> G.

Even if you put the troubles behind us what has the assembly
delievered.

"freeireland"  wrote in message 
news:1195079674.256327.117770@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
>
> Falcon wrote:
>> "freeireland"  wrote in message
>> news:1195060431.505988.201110@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
>> > On 14 Nov, 14:44, "Falcon"  wrote:
>> >> "freeireland"  wrote in message
>> >>
>> >> news:1195048148.601556.185210@o3g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>> >> [...]
>> >>
>> >> > Though its laughable that the UDA believes that these are the 
>> >> > peoples
>> >> > guns and they fought the IRA, considering they killed more loyalists
>> >> > than members of the IRA.
>> >>
>> >> True, infighting and feuds were rife during the conflict. The IRA had 
>> >> a
>> >> similarly laughable record; they killed far more republicans than
>> >> loyalists.
>> >> It makes you wonder who everyone thought they were fighting.
>> >>
>> >
>> > Well the main thing is I think they are moving away from this now as
>> > well.
>> >
>> > Well statistics show the PIRA killed more soldiers and police than any
>> > other grouping including civilians. Loyalists where not high on the
>> > IRAs targeting priority.
>> > Infact the IRA where the only group not to kill more civilians than
>> > non civilian groupings. 36% of IRA killings were civilians as opposed
>> > to 52% of British secruity force killings and a massive 86% of
>> > loyalist killings.
>> >
>> > Knowing this 86% figure I find it hard to accept that loyalists were
>> > protecting their areas.
>> >
>> > See
>> >
>> > http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/sutton/crosstabs.html
>> >
>> > Lots of interesting trends can be spotted and I am interested in any
>> > you see.
>> >
>> > Another I spotted is that 56% of people killed by British secruity
>> > forces were 24 or under while loyalists and the IRA looks to be more
>> > spread out without any pattern.
>>
>> Thanks. I think the light is beginning to dawn at last. I don't know what
>> all the fuss was about.
>> The IRA weren't that bad, it was the Brits and
>> loyalists that caused all the trouble, destroyed most of the property and
>> killed most of the innocent people. Fuckin' bastards. Can I vote for 
>> Gerry
>> next time round?
>
> I never claimed that at all and its a giant leap of faith to come to
> that conclusion. However likewise the IRA again were did not cause all
> the trouble. The statistics clearly show that loyalists claims that
> they defended their own areas was at very best extremely weak. The
> British secruity forces and IRA figures clearly put the civilian death
> rate against overall killings by loyalists into context.

Playing with percentages does that, does it? Oh well, if it helps you to 
sleep better, who am I to argue?

-- 
Falcon:
fide, sed cui vide. (L)
UK National Defence Association
www.uknda.org

Hal Ó Mearadhaigh. wrote:
> Falcon wrote:
> > "freeireland"  wrote in message
> > news:1195060431.505988.201110@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
> >> On 14 Nov, 14:44, "Falcon"  wrote:
> >>> "freeireland"  wrote in message
> >>>
> >>> news:1195048148.601556.185210@o3g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> >>> [...]
> >>>
> >>>> Though its laughable that the UDA believes that these are the
> >>>> peoples guns and they fought the IRA, considering they killed more
> >>>> loyalists than members of the IRA.
> >>>
> >>> True, infighting and feuds were rife during the conflict. The IRA
> >>> had a similarly laughable record; they killed far more republicans
> >>> than loyalists.
> >>> It makes you wonder who everyone thought they were fighting.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Well the main thing is I think they are moving away from this now as
> >> well.
> >>
> >> Well statistics show the PIRA killed more soldiers and police than
> >> any other grouping including civilians. Loyalists where not high on
> >> the IRAs targeting priority.
> >> Infact the IRA where the only group not to kill more civilians than
> >> non civilian groupings. 36% of IRA killings were civilians as opposed
> >> to 52% of British secruity force killings and a massive 86% of
> >> loyalist killings.
> >>
> >> Knowing this 86% figure I find it hard to accept that loyalists were
> >> protecting their areas.
> >>
> >> See
> >>
> >> http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/sutton/crosstabs.html
> >>
> >> Lots of interesting trends can be spotted and I am interested in any
> >> you see.
> >>
> >> Another I spotted is that 56% of people killed by British secruity
> >> forces were 24 or under while loyalists and the IRA looks to be more
> >> spread out without any pattern.
> >
> > Thanks. I think the light is beginning to dawn at last. I don't know
> > what all the fuss was about. The IRA weren't that bad, it was the
> > Brits and loyalists that caused all the trouble, destroyed most of
> > the property and killed most of the innocent people. Fuckin'
> > bastards. Can I vote for Gerry next time round?
>
> LOL! I fear you are wasting your time here with ironic sarchasm! He is a
> sectarian fuckwit, and it all goes right over his head!
>
> --
> Hal Ó Mearadhaigh.

Do the words kettle, pot and black mean anything to you or greenhouse,
stones, throw and shouldn't.


Can you at least come up with somethign original as a change in
nuisances is as good as a vacation.

"I find that a change of nuisances is as good as a vacation."
-Lloyd George

Falcon wrote:
> "freeireland"  wrote in message
> news:1195079674.256327.117770@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Falcon wrote:
> >> "freeireland"  wrote in message
> >> news:1195060431.505988.201110@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
> >> > On 14 Nov, 14:44, "Falcon"  wrote:
> >> >> "freeireland"  wrote in message
> >> >>
> >> >> news:1195048148.601556.185210@o3g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> >> >> [...]
> >> >>
> >> >> > Though its laughable that the UDA believes that these are the
> >> >> > peoples
> >> >> > guns and they fought the IRA, considering they killed more loyalists
> >> >> > than members of the IRA.
> >> >>
> >> >> True, infighting and feuds were rife during the conflict. The IRA had
> >> >> a
> >> >> similarly laughable record; they killed far more republicans than
> >> >> loyalists.
> >> >> It makes you wonder who everyone thought they were fighting.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > Well the main thing is I think they are moving away from this now as
> >> > well.
> >> >
> >> > Well statistics show the PIRA killed more soldiers and police than any
> >> > other grouping including civilians. Loyalists where not high on the
> >> > IRAs targeting priority.
> >> > Infact the IRA where the only group not to kill more civilians than
> >> > non civilian groupings. 36% of IRA killings were civilians as opposed
> >> > to 52% of British secruity force killings and a massive 86% of
> >> > loyalist killings.
> >> >
> >> > Knowing this 86% figure I find it hard to accept that loyalists were
> >> > protecting their areas.
> >> >
> >> > See
> >> >
> >> > http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/sutton/crosstabs.html
> >> >
> >> > Lots of interesting trends can be spotted and I am interested in any
> >> > you see.
> >> >
> >> > Another I spotted is that 56% of people killed by British secruity
> >> > forces were 24 or under while loyalists and the IRA looks to be more
> >> > spread out without any pattern.
> >>
> >> Thanks. I think the light is beginning to dawn at last. I don't know what
> >> all the fuss was about.
> >> The IRA weren't that bad, it was the Brits and
> >> loyalists that caused all the trouble, destroyed most of the property and
> >> killed most of the innocent people. Fuckin' bastards. Can I vote for
> >> Gerry
> >> next time round?
> >
> > I never claimed that at all and its a giant leap of faith to come to
> > that conclusion. However likewise the IRA again were did not cause all
> > the trouble. The statistics clearly show that loyalists claims that
> > they defended their own areas was at very best extremely weak. The
> > British secruity forces and IRA figures clearly put the civilian death
> > rate against overall killings by loyalists into context.
>
> Playing with percentages does that, does it? Oh well, if it helps you to
> sleep better, who am I to argue?
>

In this case I think it does, how can a group who claim to defend
their own areas kill only a very small percentage of the enemy and
such a high percentage of civilians?

Why shouldn't statistical analysis of killings due to the troubles be
used to try and determine motive.  Its certainly more accurate than
asking any of the organisations involved, lets face it none of them
have a good record when it comes to telling the truth. I feel the
statistics contradict currently what the UDA are claiming as their
reason for existing.

> --
> Falcon:
> fide, sed cui vide. (L)
> UK National Defence Association
> www.uknda.org

"freeireland"  wrote in message 
news:1195085766.665300.292120@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
>
> Falcon wrote:
>> "freeireland"  wrote in message
>> news:1195079674.256327.117770@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
>> >
>> > Falcon wrote:
>> >> "freeireland"  wrote in message
>> >> news:1195060431.505988.201110@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
>> >> > On 14 Nov, 14:44, "Falcon"  wrote:
>> >> >> "freeireland"  wrote in message
>> >> >>
>> >> >> news:1195048148.601556.185210@o3g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>> >> >> [...]
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > Though its laughable that the UDA believes that these are the
>> >> >> > peoples
>> >> >> > guns and they fought the IRA, considering they killed more 
>> >> >> > loyalists
>> >> >> > than members of the IRA.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> True, infighting and feuds were rife during the conflict. The IRA 
>> >> >> had
>> >> >> a
>> >> >> similarly laughable record; they killed far more republicans than
>> >> >> loyalists.
>> >> >> It makes you wonder who everyone thought they were fighting.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > Well the main thing is I think they are moving away from this now as
>> >> > well.
>> >> >
>> >> > Well statistics show the PIRA killed more soldiers and police than 
>> >> > any
>> >> > other grouping including civilians. Loyalists where not high on the
>> >> > IRAs targeting priority.
>> >> > Infact the IRA where the only group not to kill more civilians than
>> >> > non civilian groupings. 36% of IRA killings were civilians as 
>> >> > opposed
>> >> > to 52% of British secruity force killings and a massive 86% of
>> >> > loyalist killings.
>> >> >
>> >> > Knowing this 86% figure I find it hard to accept that loyalists were
>> >> > protecting their areas.
>> >> >
>> >> > See
>> >> >
>> >> > http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/sutton/crosstabs.html
>> >> >
>> >> > Lots of interesting trends can be spotted and I am interested in any
>> >> > you see.
>> >> >
>> >> > Another I spotted is that 56% of people killed by British secruity
>> >> > forces were 24 or under while loyalists and the IRA looks to be more
>> >> > spread out without any pattern.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks. I think the light is beginning to dawn at last. I don't know 
>> >> what
>> >> all the fuss was about.
>> >> The IRA weren't that bad, it was the Brits and
>> >> loyalists that caused all the trouble, destroyed most of the property 
>> >> and
>> >> killed most of the innocent people. Fuckin' bastards. Can I vote for
>> >> Gerry
>> >> next time round?
>> >
>> > I never claimed that at all and its a giant leap of faith to come to
>> > that conclusion. However likewise the IRA again were did not cause all
>> > the trouble. The statistics clearly show that loyalists claims that
>> > they defended their own areas was at very best extremely weak. The
>> > British secruity forces and IRA figures clearly put the civilian death
>> > rate against overall killings by loyalists into context.
>>
>> Playing with percentages does that, does it? Oh well, if it helps you to
>> sleep better, who am I to argue?
>>
>
> In this case I think it does, how can a group who claim to defend
> their own areas kill only a very small percentage of the enemy and
> such a high percentage of civilians?
>
> Why shouldn't statistical analysis of killings due to the troubles be
> used to try and determine motive.  Its certainly more accurate than
> asking any of the organisations involved, lets face it none of them
> have a good record when it comes to telling the truth. I feel the
> statistics contradict currently what the UDA are claiming as their
> reason for existing.

The justification claimed by the UDA for its existence is as unacceptable 
and illogical as that claimed by the IRA. I know you and HH2 would like to 
claim that a statistical analysis more accurately determines motives, but an 
unsound statistical analysis based on percentage 'kill rates' cleverly (if 
transparently) avoids the facts: that more people died at the hands of 
republican terrorists than everyone else put together; and that in spite of 
the fact that terrorists used them as convenient human shields during street 
disturbances, civilians were ten times more likely to be killed or injured 
by terrorists than by the security forces.

-- 
Falcon:
fide, sed cui vide. (L)
UK National Defence Association
www.uknda.org

On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 17:32:36 -0000, "Falcon"
 wrote:

>
>
>"freeireland"  wrote in message 
>news:1195060431.505988.201110@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
>> On 14 Nov, 14:44, "Falcon"  wrote:
>>> "freeireland"  wrote in message
>>>
>>> news:1195048148.601556.185210@o3g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> > Though its laughable that the UDA believes that these are the peoples
>>> > guns and they fought the IRA, considering they killed more loyalists
>>> > than members of the IRA.
>>>
>>> True, infighting and feuds were rife during the conflict. The IRA had a
>>> similarly laughable record; they killed far more republicans than 
>>> loyalists.
>>> It makes you wonder who everyone thought they were fighting.
>>>
>>
>> Well the main thing is I think they are moving away from this now as
>> well.
>>
>> Well statistics show the PIRA killed more soldiers and police than any
>> other grouping including civilians. Loyalists where not high on the
>> IRAs targeting priority.
>> Infact the IRA where the only group not to kill more civilians than
>> non civilian groupings. 36% of IRA killings were civilians as opposed
>> to 52% of British secruity force killings and a massive 86% of
>> loyalist killings.
>>
>> Knowing this 86% figure I find it hard to accept that loyalists were
>> protecting their areas.
>>
>> See
>>
>> http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/sutton/crosstabs.html
>>
>> Lots of interesting trends can be spotted and I am interested in any
>> you see.
>>
>> Another I spotted is that 56% of people killed by British secruity
>> forces were 24 or under while loyalists and the IRA looks to be more
>> spread out without any pattern.
>
>Thanks. I think the light is beginning to dawn at last. I don't know what 
>all the fuss was about. The IRA weren't that bad, it was the Brits and 
>loyalists that caused all the trouble, destroyed most of the property and 
>killed most of the innocent people. Fuckin' bastards. Can I vote for Gerry 
>next time round?

You can if you live in Andersontown for 3 months, iirc.

Thank you for your support.

Nik

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Falcon wrote:
> "freeireland"  wrote in message
> news:1195085766.665300.292120@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Falcon wrote:
> >> "freeireland"  wrote in message
> >> news:1195079674.256327.117770@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
> >> >
> >> > Falcon wrote:
> >> >> "freeireland"  wrote in message
> >> >> news:1195060431.505988.201110@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
> >> >> > On 14 Nov, 14:44, "Falcon"  wrote:
> >> >> >> "freeireland"  wrote in message
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> news:1195048148.601556.185210@o3g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> >> >> >> [...]
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > Though its laughable that the UDA believes that these are the
> >> >> >> > peoples
> >> >> >> > guns and they fought the IRA, considering they killed more
> >> >> >> > loyalists
> >> >> >> > than members of the IRA.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> True, infighting and feuds were rife during the conflict. The IRA
> >> >> >> had
> >> >> >> a
> >> >> >> similarly laughable record; they killed far more republicans than
> >> >> >> loyalists.
> >> >> >> It makes you wonder who everyone thought they were fighting.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Well the main thing is I think they are moving away from this now as
> >> >> > well.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Well statistics show the PIRA killed more soldiers and police than
> >> >> > any
> >> >> > other grouping including civilians. Loyalists where not high on the
> >> >> > IRAs targeting priority.
> >> >> > Infact the IRA where the only group not to kill more civilians than
> >> >> > non civilian groupings. 36% of IRA killings were civilians as
> >> >> > opposed
> >> >> > to 52% of British secruity force killings and a massive 86% of
> >> >> > loyalist killings.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Knowing this 86% figure I find it hard to accept that loyalists were
> >> >> > protecting their areas.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > See
> >> >> >
> >> >> > http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/sutton/crosstabs.html
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Lots of interesting trends can be spotted and I am interested in any
> >> >> > you see.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Another I spotted is that 56% of people killed by British secruity
> >> >> > forces were 24 or under while loyalists and the IRA looks to be more
> >> >> > spread out without any pattern.
> >> >>
> >> >> Thanks. I think the light is beginning to dawn at last. I don't know
> >> >> what
> >> >> all the fuss was about.
> >> >> The IRA weren't that bad, it was the Brits and
> >> >> loyalists that caused all the trouble, destroyed most of the property
> >> >> and
> >> >> killed most of the innocent people. Fuckin' bastards. Can I vote for
> >> >> Gerry
> >> >> next time round?
> >> >
> >> > I never claimed that at all and its a giant leap of faith to come to
> >> > that conclusion. However likewise the IRA again were did not cause all
> >> > the trouble. The statistics clearly show that loyalists claims that
> >> > they defended their own areas was at very best extremely weak. The
> >> > British secruity forces and IRA figures clearly put the civilian death
> >> > rate against overall killings by loyalists into context.
> >>
> >> Playing with percentages does that, does it? Oh well, if it helps you to
> >> sleep better, who am I to argue?
> >>
> >
> > In this case I think it does, how can a group who claim to defend
> > their own areas kill only a very small percentage of the enemy and
> > such a high percentage of civilians?
> >
> > Why shouldn't statistical analysis of killings due to the troubles be
> > used to try and determine motive.  Its certainly more accurate than
> > asking any of the organisations involved, lets face it none of them
> > have a good record when it comes to telling the truth. I feel the
> > statistics contradict currently what the UDA are claiming as their
> > reason for existing.
>
> The justification claimed by the UDA for its existence is as unacceptable
> and illogical as that claimed by the IRA. I know you and HH2 would like to
> claim that a statistical analysis more accurately determines motives, but an
> unsound statistical analysis based on percentage 'kill rates' cleverly (if
> transparently) avoids the facts: that more people died at the hands of
> republican terrorists than everyone else put together; and that in spite of
> the fact that terrorists used them as convenient human shields during street
> disturbances, civilians were ten times more likely to be killed or injured
> by terrorists than by the security forces.
>

Though clearly the IRA targeted British secruity forces by enlarge. As
for British secruity forces and loyalist killings it could be argued
they should be combined.

For example in the case of Brian Nelson and other informers were his
killings attributed to the UDA or British Secruity forces who were
paying him? Mark Haddock a serial killer was on the PSNI pay roll upto
2003, were his killings attributed to the UDA or British secruity
forces?  Subversion in the UDR not only shows tat the UDR had cross
membership with the UDA but that the British government new about it
as far back as 1973.

Total civilian deaths as a result of loyalists and British secruity
forces are 1063 with 783 attributed to the IRA.


> --
> Falcon:
> fide, sed cui vide. (L)
> UK National Defence Association
> www.uknda.org

"freeireland"  wrote in message 
news:5272e59b-bb2d-4be5-b31f-79cbc5948c6d@l1g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>
>
> Falcon wrote:
>> "freeireland"  wrote in message
>> news:1195085766.665300.292120@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
>> >
>> > Falcon wrote:
>> >> "freeireland"  wrote in message
>> >> news:1195079674.256327.117770@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
>> >> >
>> >> > Falcon wrote:
>> >> >> "freeireland"  wrote in message
>> >> >> news:1195060431.505988.201110@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
>> >> >> > On 14 Nov, 14:44, "Falcon"  wrote:
>> >> >> >> "freeireland"  wrote in message
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> news:1195048148.601556.185210@o3g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
>> >> >> >> [...]
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> > Though its laughable that the UDA believes that these are the
>> >> >> >> > peoples
>> >> >> >> > guns and they fought the IRA, considering they killed more
>> >> >> >> > loyalists
>> >> >> >> > than members of the IRA.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> True, infighting and feuds were rife during the conflict. The 
>> >> >> >> IRA
>> >> >> >> had
>> >> >> >> a
>> >> >> >> similarly laughable record; they killed far more republicans 
>> >> >> >> than
>> >> >> >> loyalists.
>> >> >> >> It makes you wonder who everyone thought they were fighting.
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Well the main thing is I think they are moving away from this now 
>> >> >> > as
>> >> >> > well.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Well statistics show the PIRA killed more soldiers and police 
>> >> >> > than
>> >> >> > any
>> >> >> > other grouping including civilians. Loyalists where not high on 
>> >> >> > the
>> >> >> > IRAs targeting priority.
>> >> >> > Infact the IRA where the only group not to kill more civilians 
>> >> >> > than
>> >> >> > non civilian groupings. 36% of IRA killings were civilians as
>> >> >> > opposed
>> >> >> > to 52% of British secruity force killings and a massive 86% of
>> >> >> > loyalist killings.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Knowing this 86% figure I find it hard to accept that loyalists 
>> >> >> > were
>> >> >> > protecting their areas.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > See
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/sutton/crosstabs.html
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Lots of interesting trends can be spotted and I am interested in 
>> >> >> > any
>> >> >> > you see.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Another I spotted is that 56% of people killed by British 
>> >> >> > secruity
>> >> >> > forces were 24 or under while loyalists and the IRA looks to be 
>> >> >> > more
>> >> >> > spread out without any pattern.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Thanks. I think the light is beginning to dawn at last. I don't 
>> >> >> know
>> >> >> what
>> >> >> all the fuss was about.
>> >> >> The IRA weren't that bad, it was the Brits and
>> >> >> loyalists that caused all the trouble, destroyed most of the 
>> >> >> property
>> >> >> and
>> >> >> killed most of the innocent people. Fuckin' bastards. Can I vote 
>> >> >> for
>> >> >> Gerry
>> >> >> next time round?
>> >> >
>> >> > I never claimed that at all and its a giant leap of faith to come to
>> >> > that conclusion. However likewise the IRA again were did not cause 
>> >> > all
>> >> > the trouble. The statistics clearly show that loyalists claims that
>> >> > they defended their own areas was at very best extremely weak. The
>> >> > British secruity forces and IRA figures clearly put the civilian 
>> >> > death
>> >> > rate against overall killings by loyalists into context.
>> >>
>> >> Playing with percentages does that, does it? Oh well, if it helps you 
>> >> to
>> >> sleep better, who am I to argue?
>> >>
>> >
>> > In this case I think it does, how can a group who claim to defend
>> > their own areas kill only a very small percentage of the enemy and
>> > such a high percentage of civilians?
>> >
>> > Why shouldn't statistical analysis of killings due to the troubles be
>> > used to try and determine motive.  Its certainly more accurate than
>> > asking any of the organisations involved, lets face it none of them
>> > have a good record when it comes to telling the truth. I feel the
>> > statistics contradict currently what the UDA are claiming as their
>> > reason for existing.
>>
>> The justification claimed by the UDA for its existence is as unacceptable
>> and illogical as that claimed by the IRA. I know you and HH2 would like 
>> to
>> claim that a statistical analysis more accurately determines motives, but 
>> an
>> unsound statistical analysis based on percentage 'kill rates' cleverly 
>> (if
>> transparently) avoids the facts: that more people died at the hands of
>> republican terrorists than everyone else put together; and that in spite 
>> of
>> the fact that terrorists used them as convenient human shields during 
>> street
>> disturbances, civilians were ten times more likely to be killed or 
>> injured
>> by terrorists than by the security forces.
>>
>
> Though clearly the IRA targeted British secruity forces by enlarge. As
> for British secruity forces and loyalist killings it could be argued
> they should be combined.
[...]

Only if you are trying to justify a terror campaign.

-- 
Falcon:
fide, sed cui vide. (L)
UK National Defence Association
www.uknda.org

Falcon wrote:
> "freeireland"  wrote in message
> news:5272e59b-bb2d-4be5-b31f-79cbc5948c6d@l1g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> >
> >
> > Falcon wrote:
> >> "freeireland"  wrote in message
> >> news:1195085766.665300.292120@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
> >> >
> >> > Falcon wrote:
> >> >> "freeireland"  wrote in message
> >> >> news:1195079674.256327.117770@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Falcon wrote:
> >> >> >> "freeireland"  wrote in message
> >> >> >> news:1195060431.505988.201110@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
> >> >> >> > On 14 Nov, 14:44, "Falcon"  wrote:
> >> >> >> >> "freeireland"  wrote in message
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> news:1195048148.601556.185210@o3g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> >> >> >> >> [...]
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > Though its laughable that the UDA believes that these are the
> >> >> >> >> > peoples
> >> >> >> >> > guns and they fought the IRA, considering they killed more
> >> >> >> >> > loyalists
> >> >> >> >> > than members of the IRA.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> True, infighting and feuds were rife during the conflict. The
> >> >> >> >> IRA
> >> >> >> >> had
> >> >> >> >> a
> >> >> >> >> similarly laughable record; they killed far more republicans
> >> >> >> >> than
> >> >> >> >> loyalists.
> >> >> >> >> It makes you wonder who everyone thought they were fighting.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Well the main thing is I think they are moving away from this now
> >> >> >> > as
> >> >> >> > well.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Well statistics show the PIRA killed more soldiers and police
> >> >> >> > than
> >> >> >> > any
> >> >> >> > other grouping including civilians. Loyalists where not high on
> >> >> >> > the
> >> >> >> > IRAs targeting priority.
> >> >> >> > Infact the IRA where the only group not to kill more civilians
> >> >> >> > than
> >> >> >> > non civilian groupings. 36% of IRA killings were civilians as
> >> >> >> > opposed
> >> >> >> > to 52% of British secruity force killings and a massive 86% of
> >> >> >> > loyalist killings.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Knowing this 86% figure I find it hard to accept that loyalists
> >> >> >> > were
> >> >> >> > protecting their areas.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > See
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/sutton/crosstabs.html
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Lots of interesting trends can be spotted and I am interested in
> >> >> >> > any
> >> >> >> > you see.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Another I spotted is that 56% of people killed by British
> >> >> >> > secruity
> >> >> >> > forces were 24 or under while loyalists and the IRA looks to be
> >> >> >> > more
> >> >> >> > spread out without any pattern.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Thanks. I think the light is beginning to dawn at last. I don't
> >> >> >> know
> >> >> >> what
> >> >> >> all the fuss was about.
> >> >> >> The IRA weren't that bad, it was the Brits and
> >> >> >> loyalists that caused all the trouble, destroyed most of the
> >> >> >> property
> >> >> >> and
> >> >> >> killed most of the innocent people. Fuckin' bastards. Can I vote
> >> >> >> for
> >> >> >> Gerry
> >> >> >> next time round?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I never claimed that at all and its a giant leap of faith to come to
> >> >> > that conclusion. However likewise the IRA again were did not cause
> >> >> > all
> >> >> > the trouble. The statistics clearly show that loyalists claims that
> >> >> > they defended their own areas was at very best extremely weak. The
> >> >> > British secruity forces and IRA figures clearly put the civilian
> >> >> > death
> >> >> > rate against overall killings by loyalists into context.
> >> >>
> >> >> Playing with percentages does that, does it? Oh well, if it helps you
> >> >> to
> >> >> sleep better, who am I to argue?
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > In this case I think it does, how can a group who claim to defend
> >> > their own areas kill only a very small percentage of the enemy and
> >> > such a high percentage of civilians?
> >> >
> >> > Why shouldn't statistical analysis of killings due to the troubles be
> >> > used to try and determine motive.  Its certainly more accurate than
> >> > asking any of the organisations involved, lets face it none of them
> >> > have a good record when it comes to telling the truth. I feel the
> >> > statistics contradict currently what the UDA are claiming as their
> >> > reason for existing.
> >>
> >> The justification claimed by the UDA for its existence is as unacceptable
> >> and illogical as that claimed by the IRA. I know you and HH2 would like
> >> to
> >> claim that a statistical analysis more accurately determines motives, but
> >> an
> >> unsound statistical analysis based on percentage 'kill rates' cleverly
> >> (if
> >> transparently) avoids the facts: that more people died at the hands of
> >> republican terrorists than everyone else put together; and that in spite
> >> of
> >> the fact that terrorists used them as convenient human shields during
> >> street
> >> disturbances, civilians were ten times more likely to be killed or
> >> injured
> >> by terrorists than by the security forces.
> >>
> >
> > Though clearly the IRA targeted British secruity forces by enlarge. As
> > for British secruity forces and loyalist killings it could be argued
> > they should be combined.
> [...]
>
> Only if you are trying to justify a terror campaign.
>

I have in noway tried to justify anything never mind a terror
campaign.

As an example if we look at the case of Gerard Slane Sutton clearly
shows him as being killed by the UFF however we also know he was
targeted for the UFF by Brian Nelson an FRU agent. So the question is
how many civilians killed by loyalists and indeed republicans had
secruity force involvement?

> --
> Falcon:
> fide, sed cui vide. (L)
> UK National Defence Association
> www.uknda.org

"freeireland"  wrote in message 
news:15d4c5be-080d-4369-baa0-b32836f80117@e1g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
[...]

> As an example if we look at the case of Gerard Slane Sutton clearly
> shows him as being killed by the UFF however we also know he was
> targeted for the UFF by Brian Nelson an FRU agent. So the question is
> how many civilians killed by loyalists and indeed republicans had
> secruity force involvement?

We've had similar conversations in the past, and you're wasting your time. 
You'll just have to get used to the fact that you will never convince anyone 
with an ounce of intelligence that the security forces routinely directed 
the UDA - and that republicans will never gain any respect while you and 
your guilt-ridden friends manipulate statistics in a vain attempt to 
convince the world that the IRA were mere reactionaries in the face of 
oppression. Stop playing the MOPE card: it's embarrassing.

-- 
Falcon:
fide, sed cui vide. (L)
UK National Defence Association
www.uknda.org

Falcon wrote:
> "freeireland"  wrote in message
> news:15d4c5be-080d-4369-baa0-b32836f80117@e1g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> [...]
>
> > As an example if we look at the case of Gerard Slane Sutton clearly
> > shows him as being killed by the UFF however we also know he was
> > targeted for the UFF by Brian Nelson an FRU agent. So the question is
> > how many civilians killed by loyalists and indeed republicans had
> > secruity force involvement?
>
> We've had similar conversations in the past, and you're wasting your time.
> You'll just have to get used to the fact that you will never convince anyone
> with an ounce of intelligence that the security forces routinely directed
> the UDA


Well I don't think your in any position to speak for everyone.

"A branch of British army intelligence and some police officers in
Northern Ireland actively and deliberately helped a loyalist
paramilitary group to murder Catholics in the late 1980s, according to
the Stevens Report."

- BBC.  http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/2954773.stm


http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/2777/

- and that republicans will never gain any respect while you and
> your guilt-ridden friends manipulate statistics in a vain attempt to
> convince the world that the IRA were mere reactionaries in the face of
> oppression. Stop playing the MOPE card: it's embarrassing.
>

Again I am not a republican certainly without any links to the IRA or
sinn fein what so ever. How dare you try to link me to anything.  I
have never claimed anyone was oppressed in this thread. I have pointed
out that the secruity forces clearly were not independantand many
people would agree with me. To claim they were independant is like
claiming Gerry Adams was never in the IRA.

> --
> Falcon:
> fide, sed cui vide. (L)
> UK National Defence Association
> www.uknda.org

"Der Weiße Wolf <rayh<spam>@iol.ie>"  wrote in message
news:12rjj39v1hqf6h31rlqgu0qsk8e5j7b45d@4ax.com...
> The UDA has announced that units of its military wing, the Ulster Freedom
> Fighters, are to be stood down at midnight.
>
> The organization also said weapons are to be put beyond use. It was
unclear how
> and when the UDA intends to engage with the decommissioning body chaired
by
> General John De Chastelain.
>
> At a Remembrance Day ceremony in Belfast's loyalist Sandy Row, the UDA
said it
> believed the war was over and said it is going to concentrate on
developing
> communities through peaceful means.
> Advertisement
>
> It said it was making the momentous move because the struggle to maintain
the
> Union was on a new and more complex battlefield.
>
> The UDA sent out a general order to all members not to be involved in
crime or
> criminality, and it said those who had joined its ranks for such purposes
had to
> be rooted out.
>
> The statement said: 'The Ulster Defense Association is committed to
achieving a
> society where violence and weaponry are ghosts of the past.'
>
> Taoiseach Bertie Ahern welcomed the statement by the UDA. Mr Ahern
particularly
> welcomed the 'acknowledgement that the conflict is over and its commitment
to
> achieving a society where violence and weaponry belong to the past.'
>
> DUP's Lagan Valley MP Jeffrey Donaldson described it as a positive signal
for
> communities across Northern Ireland.
>
> More than 12 years has passed from the IRA's 1994 ceasefire to Sinn Féin
> pledging to support the PSNI last January. The process by Loyalist
> paramilitaries to end their campaign has been even more protracted.
>
> Some of its leaders want to commit to an exclusively political path.
Others
> continue to engage in crime, including drug dealing and racketeering.
> Print this page
>
> http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/1111/uda.html
>
> What do they expect a medal for giving up random murder of Catholics?
FFS!!!
> They make it sound like a noble gesture...  It's sorta like a serial
killer
> sending a note to the paper saying "I won't abduct, rape, cook and eat my
> victims anymore" and expecting people to say "well done!"  Grrrrr!!!!
>
>
> End of UDA militant operations welcomed
>
> The Irish and British governments have welcomed the announcement by the
UDA that
> its military wing, the Ulster Freedom Fighters, was stood down at
midnight.
>
> The UDA said weapons were to be put beyond use.
>
> It is unclear how and when the UDA intends to engage with the
decommissioning
> body, chaired by General John De Chastelain.
> Advertisement
>
> DUP MP Gregory Campbell said the UDA would be judged by its actions not
its
> words.
>
> http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/1112/uda.html
>
> Put their weapons beyond use?  How?  By handing them out to the retarded
> membership?
>
> This should NOT be greeted as some sort of good thing...  This should be
greeted
> as about fuckin' time!
>
> The Brits marked the IRA end of the war as if they won something...  But
they
> mark the end of loyalist psychopathy as if it was some sort of God send...
It's
> sickening...
>
> What say you?
>
> Ray

Believe it when I see it.



James
aka
Commander Hughes


>
> --
>
****************************************************************************
************
> The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed
>  by the tribe.  If you try it, you will be lonely often, and sometimes
> frightened. But no price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning
> yourself. - Friedrich Nietzsche
>
****************************************************************************
************
> Email  : rayh(removeSPAM)@iol.ie : Website: http://www.eirefirst.com
>
****************************************************************************
************