Conference tallis::celt

1325.0. "Terrorist Ian Paisley speaks." by KOALA::HOLOHAN () Thu Feb 03 1994 13:03

NORTHERN IRELAND REPORT INTERVIEW: TALKING WITH REV. IAN PAISLEY, M.P.

        NIR Number 16, January 21 1994



Rev. Ian Paisley, M.P. is leader of the Democratic Unionist Party and a
member of the European Parliament. NIR's Jim Dee interviewed him at the
DUP's East Belfast office prior to recent events.




DEE: On the subject of talks and negotiations, how do you view John Hume's
approach to Gerry Adams?

PAISLEY: Well we have made it perfectly clear that we will not be talking to
John Hume as long as he is talking to Gerry Adams. Because he is talking to
a man who is the IRA's political representative. Sinn Fein is part of the
IRA - and the IRA is part of Sinn Fein. That's what British government
ministers have been saying. That's what Paddy Mayhew [British Secretary of
State for Northern Ireland] has been saying,  up until recently. And that is
what we know, as loyalists, on the ground. And we will not be talking to
those who have been murdering our kindred kin, committing these awful deeds
of blood in our country.

DEE: But a lot of people feel that, as with any conflict, somehow at the end
of the day, you have to get the opposing sides together to talk. Sinn Fein
is obviously one key player in the conflict. Do you not have to talk to the
people fundamentally involved in the conflict?

PAISLEY: No. You have to disarm them, and beat them, and then talk to them.

DEE: But won't backing them into a corner increase the violence?

PAISLEY: Well if they take up arms and maim and kill people, they have to pay
the price for it. I mean, I'm for a victory over the IRA, I'm not for making
concessions to the IRA. We have no concessions to make to the IRA - none
whatsoever.

DEE: You portray your party as a party of law and order, advocating a law and
order crackdown on the IRA...

PAISLEY: And on all terrorists. Not only on IRA terrorists. We have no time
for any terrorists. You have only to read the articles that appear in the
papers of the so-called Protestant paramilitaries. I've had my house bombed
by them! So it is not a matter of Ian Paisley being weak on so-called
Protestant paramilitaries. I don't believe these people are Protestants at
all.

DEE: With regards the crackdown on the IRA, many observers feel that a
serious military effort has not eradicated the IRA...

PAISLEY: We've never had a serious military crackdown - that's nonsense. The
British government has never tried to defeat the IRA. They have had the hands
of their officers tied behind their backs. And when an ambush is successful,
they try those who shot the IRA men with murder. It's ridiculous. They have
not tried to defeat the IRA.

DEE: How would your strategy against the IRA differ from current British
strategy?

PAISLEY: It would differ immensely. First of all, it would be WAR. It
wouldn't be talking with their leaders. I wouldn't be trying to throw out
hope to their leaders, or as Mayhew has said "All they have to do is
repudiate violence and they'll get to the table." That is not acceptable to
the people of Northern Ireland. For a leader one day to say "Oh, I give up
violence" and he can get to the table and negotiate the future of his
country - that is not acceptable. Mayhew has given them lines of oxygen at
the very time when they are beat. I mean, even as far as these corporals who
were murdered [two undercover British soldiers killed by the IRA after being
captured while operating at a republican funeral in the aftermath of the
Gibraltar shootings, March 1988]. The most atrocious murder. And now he's
going to review the sentence of those convicted of the killing. Whereas in a
case that was open and shut, where four UDR men were brought up, and the
evidence against the four was the same, and because of a political reason,
Neil Latimer is still in prison [The case of the "UDR Four" involved
soldiers convicted for the 1983 killing of Adrian Carroll, a Catholic from
Armagh. Three of the four were released in August 1992 after Electro-static
Detection Analysis Tests showed that RUC interrogation notes had been
doctored. Neil Latimer's conviction was upheld]. And now Mayhew says he will
never open that case again. There is no justice in the courts.

DEE: But again, how would you prosecute a war differently than is already
being done?

PAISLEY: Number one, everybody must have an identity card. Once a bomb goes
off, identification of those in the area is of vital importance. Now the
security forces are stymied in that there is no such thing as an identity
card. And those that refuse to carry an identity card should be told
"Alright, you will not get your national monies, pensions and all. You won't
carry the card, you won't get them." That's the way to stop the attitude of
"We'll boycott carrying the card." The second thing we must do is seal off
the areas from which the terrorists work. If people from that area want to
support the terrorists, give them cover, refuse to report their activities to
the police, these people must be punished along with the terrorists.

DEE: You're talking about punishing a whole community?

PAISLEY: Yes. So instead of blocking off all the Protestant areas and hassling
the Protestants in their areas when a bomb goes off, they should close off
West Belfast. And they should say to the West Belfast people [nationalists]
"Well, you are harboring terrorists. You're not prepared to report them to
the police. You're not co-operating. You're making your area a no-go area.
Well, you'll have to live with that."

DEE: You're saying on a permanent basis?

PAISLEY: I'm saying until such time as the local people totally repudiate the
IRA. And how can they repudiate the IRA when they're going out and voting,
when a third of the nationalist community is going to vote for the gunmen?
Well, they must be punished for that. They must be. Why should the whole
society be held to ransom?

DEE: But doesn't voting for Sinn Fein fall within the democratic process?

PAISLEY: That's not part of democracy.

DEE: Sinn Fein is a legal political party.

PAISLEY: Well it shouldn't be. The government has been very quick at banning
other people because they happen to be on the Protestant side - the UDA and
so on and so forth. But they'll not ban Sinn Fein! Sinn Fein should be
banned. In the local councils, my mother could be murdered, I could go to the
local council and the council could move a motion of condolences. And the IRA
will attack it and refuse to support it. And I'm asked to do business with
these people! Yet the British ministers will not do business with them. But
they say to us "YOU must sit down with them."

DEE: The DUP has produced a pamphlet detailing Sinn Fein/IRA links. They
responded by pointing out your links with Ulster Resistance.

PAISLEY: That's nonsense.

DEE: But when Ulster Resistance first appeared weren't you in fact attending
their rallies and marches?

PAISLEY: Yes, certainly I was. But I repudiated my links with Ulster
Resitance once they started to go the wrong way.

DEE: What would be Ulster Resistance's legitimate role?

PAISLEY: Their legitimate role is to protect. The legitimate role is, for any
area that is under theat, to have a system of defense when the government
refuses to protect them. Take the Pomeroy area, for instance, where the IRA's
carrying out genocide. The Protestant people of that area are totally
entitled to ally themselves together and to form a defensive operation to
protect themselves. We have people who can't sleep in their homes on the
border. We have people who have no protection - they'll ring the police and
the police will not come out! We've had one of the largest bombs ever made,
brought across the border and when the home next to it asked the police to
come, the police refused to come. And for 24 hours they were held hostage,
the family was held - with young children in that family - at gunpoint. So no
country can have that sort of thing. I'm entitled to defend myself with
whatever force is necessary if I'm under attack.

DEE: Now you say that you parted ways with Ulster Resistance when they went
down the wrong path. What would constitute the wrong path?

PAISLEY: The wrong path for Ulster Resistance was simply that they started to
import weapons. There are enough legally held weapons in the country to
defend yourself now. But the IRA's statement about my links to Ulster
Resistance is ridiculous. I mean, tell me what attrocities Ulster Resistance
has carried out? They don't murder. I happen to associate myself with them.
But that was a very long time ago [1986 - NIR eds]. But the thing is this
here: if I was doing what Gerry Adams is doing, as leader of the DUP, I would
be in prison. They are not legitimate and therefore we will not talk to them.
The time to talk to them is when they're disarmed and when they're defeated.

DEE: You said earlier that you rejected Mayhew's overtures to the IRA
implying that if there was a ceasefire they'll be allowed at the table. That
seems like a Catch-22 situation - whether they cease fire or not, you refuse
to deal with them.

PAISLEY: It's not a Catch-22. We had another party here called the Official
IRA and they formed themselves into the Worker's Party. And after years, 20
years, they now are a constitutional party. And they're still not at the table.
Let me say also that if the DUP had only the vote of the IRA, or Sinn Fein,
we wouldn't be at the table. We were kept away from the table for years
becasue they said we didn't have a big enough vote. And the only thing that
brings us to the table is our strength and the fact that they have to bring
in the Alliance party. So the Alliance party, even if they fall to five, four
or three percent of the vote must be at the table. So then everyone else
above that must be at the table.

DEE: The UDA has been banned, yet they're very easy to find, they still
operate out of the same building. It doesn't seem like the ban is very
serious. What's your opinion on that?

PAISLEY: My opinion is that it's only Mayhew who is responsible for banning
any organisation. I don't know why he banned the UDA.

DEE: You don't feel they've had any connection with terrorism?

PAISLEY: But that's not the basis. He doesn't make that the basis of banning.
Sinn Fein has links with terrorists, but he doesn't ban them. So we don't
know what is the basis for banning organizations.

DEE: But in fact Sinn Fein engages in political activity for a constituency,
whereas the UDA...

PAISLEY: Well the UDA has a political party that does constituent work - the
Ulster Democratic party. Sinn Fein is the political wing of the IRA. And the
Ulster Democratic party is the political wing of the UDA. But that is a
matter that Mayhew is answerable for. I don't know what papers were before
him when he signed the ban. If the UDA was banned because they have links
with terrorist organizations and murders, the Sinn Fein ought to be banned.
Sinn Fein members have been up on IRA charges and proved guilty.

DEE: How do you think future talks will evolve?

PAISLEY: There will be no future talks until the British government takes the
jugular of Dublin and says that Articles 2 and 3 have to be dealt with.

DEE: Do you think that will happen?

PAISLEY: I think they can't soldier on at the talks without the SDLP. But my
party, which always gets the highest votes in European elections, and has
always had a substantial vote, until we were in coalition with the Official
Unionists in council elections, cannot be ignored. The "Newsletter", which is
not a DUP paper, it's Official Unionist, states in its editorial today: "you
might as well say you'll leave out the SDLP, as say you'll leave out the
DUP." So the talks can't go on without us. And if the talks do go on, it will
lead to the total demise of Paddy Mayhew, if he goes on without the DUP.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Northern Ireland Report,
        PO Box 9086,
        Lowell, MA 01853.

        Tel. +1 413 467 7860

        Subscription: U.S. $20.00 (10 issues)

"NIR is an independent publication and is not affiliated with any political
party, group or organization in Northern Ireland or the United States"

*******************************************************************************

    When Paisley is interviewed on the TV or radio, do they employ an actor
    to dub what he says?
    

    
    Of course not - no one could duplicate the accent.
    

    >Of course not - no one could duplicate the accent.
    Good one.  Liken it to understanding someone from Waterford. ;v)
    
    Just think how many actors and dubbers will be on the dole if
    peace ever comes to NI.  The cost of peace...

     They are not the words of Ian Paisley.....
    

     If they were they would.....BE IN CAPITOLS,BECAUSE THE MAN HAS A VERY
    POWERFUL VOICE AND HAS NEVER,I SAY NEVER SAID ANYTHING IN LESS THAN
    100 DECIBELS IN HIS LIFE.

    SCott  

Mark H. - You deserve a medal.  I never thought that I would have anything 
to say on Ian Paisley except outright condemantion of his attitudes, 
politics etc.  But let's be consistent.  If you are going to call Paisley a 
terrorist because his words appear to support a certain terrorist movement, 
then you should also call Gerry Adams a terrorist.

  Much as the British government would like, there
  is no comparison between Gerry Adams and Ian Paisley.
  Paisley is a bigot and a supporter of government
  oppresssion and terrorism.  Paisley wants nothing
  less that for the croppies to lie down.

  Gerry Adams, wants to immediately sit down with all
  parties involved, and work towards a lasting peace.

                       Mark

    
    And Assad is a humanitarian..

RE.-1  This is nonsense and you know it.  The only difference between
Paisley and Adams is that one is Protestant and the other Catholic.  The 
number of similiarities betwee the two is amazing - The double-talk, the 
intransigence, the total lack of compromise.  They are both heads of 
extreme parties who don't actually give a sh*t about what the majority of 
their respective communities want. 

They are like any other politicians - capable of bare-faced lies when it suits 
them.  And also it's not what they say that you need to watch for - it's what 
they *don't* say that is often more important.

I can't wait for the ridiculous ban on Adams to be lifted.  Once he get's a 
real grilling from a hostile interviewer (not the namby-pamby guff he was 
"subjected" to in the US) we'll see what a real two-faced cretin he is.

As an aside.  Ken Livingston and Roy Jenkins were on Question Time last 
night. They both seemed to think that Adams visit to the US could have it's 
plus points for the peace process.  Since he appears to head the 
"progressive" wing of Sinn Fein, then the more prestige he gets, the more 
powerful he becomes within the organisation, and the better chance he has of 
bringing the IRA to a cessation of violence.  As both Jenkins and 
Livingstone said, there's no point in getting Adams to declare peace if he 
only brings half of the IRA with him.


Mark R

  re. .8
  What do you know, you live in a society that has
  accepted government censorship of legal political
  opposition parties.  Your government is behind a
  litany of human rights abuses reaped on the people
  in north east Ireland.

  Mr. Gerry Adams came to New York to attend a peace
  conference.  British politician, Ian Paisley and
  others, refused to attend.  What does this tell you
  about British desires for peace?

                     Mark

   I watched an interview with Adams last night  -  with Donahue and Posner.
   When asked about the Shankill rd bombing, Adams predictably tap danced
   around the coffin bearing activities, but said he condemned it. 
   He said all operations like this that put civilians at risk were
   wrong and bad revolutionary war practice. Now, I realise it's easy
   for Adams to say this, for they are only words, and the IRA doesn't 
   have to change at all - just give Adams dispensation to say this
   for media consumption to make him appear reasonable; but I find it
   a positive step that he can actually say it. I find it rather ironic
   that there are those here that can't bring themselves to say here what
   Adams said on TV. We can see who the extreme elements are, can't we?


    

    re Last.
    
    Agreed.  Adams when asked by the dubilant supporters who he claims to
    represent,  why the Shankhill and Warrington bombings happened,  smiled
    then P*sdd off as fast as his Toadies could carry him.  Gone were the
    Brave words of Freedom spoken to the John Wayne Supporters.  Nothing
    Said Everything made Clear.  We know where his true sympathies lie.
    
    Hows the 6000 mile away weather Mr H. ???
    
    Regards
    
    Bruce 

    It's only about 3500 miles Bruce, even though it may feel a lot
    longer these days.  ;v)

>  What do you know, 

A hell of a lot more than you.  That's plain for everyone to see.


>			you live in a society that has
>  accepted government censorship of legal political
>  opposition parties.  

Well you see we've got this strange notion about democracy.  Here we believe 
that if you get out-voted, you lose.  If you don't accept that basic 
principle of democracy, and resort to violence instead, then you really 
don'y have any right to join in the democratic process.  That said, I don't 
agree with the censorship of Sinn Fein, nor does anyone I know of except 
for a handful of Tory politicians.


>			Your government is behind a
>  litany of human rights abuses reaped on the people
>  in north east Ireland.

That's true.  If you equate Loyalist paramilitairies with the UK Govt, the 
shooting of terrorists with human rights abuses.

>  Mr. Gerry Adams came to New York to attend a peace
>  conference.  British politician, Ian Paisley and
>  others, refused to attend.  What does this tell you
>  about British desires for peace?


I'll tell you exactly what it means.  Again it's about democracy - totally 
alien to you it seems.  The conditions that Mr Paisley wants already mostly 
exist. That is, that Northern Ireland remains a part of the UK.  These 
conditions are supported my a majority of the electorate time and time 
again.  Now, you don't like that and I din't like that.  But the fact is 
MOST OF THE PEOPLE IN NORTHERN IRELAND WANT IT THAT WAY.  So why should Mr 
Paisley attend a conference in New York which seeks to change all that.  He 
has already got what he wants, backed by the electorate in Northern 
Ireland. Why, from his point of view, should he seek to change it ?  I 
thought the whole thing was rather obvious.  By the way, I am in no way a 
fan of Ian Paisley.   

Mark R.

>A hell of a lot more than you. 

 I'm sure you do, I bet you're a self proclaimed
 expert. Do you have trouble getting your British head 
 through doors? 

 I don't claim to know everything. I'm always 
 trying to learn more.

>Well you see we've got this strange notion about democracy.

 That's obvious.  Over there you censor legal political
 opposition, you hold juryless trials, and you have a
 nice track record of beating confessions out of 
 innocent Irish nationals.  On your spare time your
 military colludes with loyalist terror gangs, and
 when they're out and about themselves, have a nasty
 habit of executing the political opposition.

>I'll tell you exactly what it means.  Again it's about
>democracy - totally alien to you it seems.

 Democracy, I see, It's because of democracy that 
 Ian Paisley refuses to meet for a discussion on peace.
 Thankyou for clarifying British democracy for me.

>But the fact is MOST OF THE PEOPLE IN NORTHERN IRELAND
>WANT IT THAT WAY.

 NORTHERN IRELAND, would that be the top 1/2 of the Island?
 Do you mean Ulster?  Or do you mean the artificial majority
 created by the British government? 
 If nationalists ever become a "majority" in this artificial
 state-let, will the British draw a new border, and create
 a new "majority"?  Why not, I mean what if that's what this
 artifical majority decide?  Is that democracy in action?

 Do the "majority" of people in the artificial statelet,
 have a veto over U.K. policy as well as Irish policy?
 If the majority of people in the U.K want the British Army
 to pull out of north east Ireland, shouldn't that majority
 have their wish?  Isn't it undemocratic for the minority
 in the 6 county statelet, to have veto power over not
 only Irish policy, but also British policy? 

                       Mark 

> expert. Do you have trouble getting your British head through doors? 

I have trouble getting any part of my anatomy through doors.  Don't you?
That must be an interesting trick to watch.