Conference tallis::celt

    Mark, i'm slightly embaressed that you could enter such a truthfully
    flawed note into this conference. Although the chronological events are
    correct, the simplistic reasons behind them are extreamly naive. Did
    you not question its contents ? I find it hard to think that any adult
    would just accept its contents blindly. Might I reccomend a book titled
    "The Troubles 1967-1995", by Tim Pat Coogan. If you could refer to
    this, or any other from a respectable author, before entering such
    notes then you would save us all the embaressment of having to read
    such a load of tripe.
    
    Cheers, Shaun.

  Shaun,
    You've attacked the note, yet you've provided no detail as to what
  you found "truthfully flawed".  My note was an accurate profile of
  Mr. Adams.  You might not like the fact that the truth doesn't paint
  a very pretty picture of the British government, but all one needs to
  read is an Amnesty International Report on British injustice to find
  a confirmation of the events that taken place in north east Ireland.
                    Mark

    As usual, .0 is 90% emotional hyperbole, and 10% fact. Reading it, I
    wonder why Mr.Adams hasn't yet been canonised by the Pope.
    
    Laurie.

    Mark,
    
    When i first saw the note, I wanted to reply and highlight the real
    facts around certain 'events' listed in your note. Facts such as 'why
    was internment really set up' because, as your note mistakingly
    assumes, it was sod all to do with NIRCA and the civil rights movement.
    
    Your profile paints Gerry Adams in a very Angelic Light because it
    fails to provide, explore and analyse the events which make up his profile.
    In fact, as we all know, it is a feeble attempt to promote Gerry Adams
    and Sinn Fein.
    
    Personaly, I have a distaste for such hyperbole. If you feel the need
    to promote a person or cause then use intelligent arguments; but please
    don't enter notes that are really not worth debating.
    
    As for myself, I will discuss intelligently with you but I will not
    waste my time on such irrelevent notes as .0
    
    Shaun.
    
    

    The worrying thing is that there are hordes of people who rely on such
    tripe as their sole source of information on the situation back in the
    "oul" country. There aren't any bare-faced lies in there, but a lot of
    truth has been distorted and deliberately left out to present a
    particular picture.
    
    Laurie.

    re .4
    
    I would be interested to hear your view on why internment was
    really introduced, Shaun.
    
    

    .0
    
    
    HA! HA! HA!
    
    AHHHHH! HA! HA! HA!
    
    Brilliant! That's the funniest thing I've read for weeks!
    
    Please, you've got to post it in HUMANE::HUMOR.
    
    HA! HA! HA! No stop it.....
    
    
    CHARLEY

    Mr Dalton,
    
    If you can wait till I have more free time, say the weekend, then i'd
    be happy to share my view of why internment was introduced.
    
    Shaun.

  Let's see, we've got Shaun calling it flawed, but not offering his opinion
  as to why.  We've got Laurie Brown's reference to the Pope, and refering to
  "bare-faced lies" but never telling us what he considers a lie.  Finally,
  we have Charley, with his Ha, ha's but once again no disputing of the facts
  in the article.


  "Internment without trial was introduced in 1971 in response to the growing
   civil rights movement and community unrest over continued human rights abuses
   further provoking popular street resistance and campaigns of civil
   disobedience."

                               Mark

  

    Shaun has offered to put his opinion in at the weekend.
    
    Laurie's opinion of the article isn't far off when he says that the
    article paints Adams as a Saint, when everybody this side of the
    Atlantic knows he isn't.
    
    Me, I laughed because I treated the article as a joke, which it is.
    
    The article is openly biased, twists the truth and in all, is the sort
    of note I would expect like you to post. In fact, I don't
    take your bigotted finger pointing seriously anymore, it's getting
    boring.
    
    Also,it is with dismay that must admit, that your rantings have probably 
    done more harm than good as far as many people within (and no longer
    within) this conference with regard to their sympathies towards the people 
    of Ireland.
    
    Good job mate, done well.
    
    
    CHARLEY
    
    CHARLEY

    I have to say Mark that I agree with Charley. You post a note which is
    intellectually insulting and then expect everyone who disagrees with it
    to present their opposing arguments. Normaly, I would agree with your
    expectations, however there are limits. The profile was so crap that
    argueing it would just be a waste of time. If I wrote "All English
    people are stupid and wear frilly red knickers" I certainly wouldn't
    expect everyone to argue the toss, neither would I assume my
    assertation was correct because no one did argue the toss.
    
    However, this time I will present my views on why internment was
    introduced and I will also disect your base note and rewrite it in an
    unbiased context (this weekend). But, this is the last time I will dispute
    such an irrelevent and unresearched note.
    
    If you really feel the desire to propogate the republican cause then
    might I suggest you do so via well thought out arguments. Try to pick
    up "The Troubles, 1967-1995" by Tim Pat Coogan and use it to qualify
    your otherwise dubious resources.
    
    Shaun.

 So Shaun,
   When should I expect you to justify your reason for calling the article
 untruthful and flawed?  In 17 months?
   I'm sick to the back teeth of people who attack Mr. Adams, a man who has
 been patiently pursuing the course of peace.
   You know Shaun, you, Charley, and Laurie are doing a great injustice to
 the British conservative party by being so blatant in your support for
 them and their policies.

                     Mark

   

    Mr Adams, who refuses to denounce punishments beatings is a man of
    peace.
    
    Mr Adams, who refuses to condemn the shootings of 5 civilians by the
    I.R.A. under a flag of convenience IS a man of peace.
    
    Mr Adams, who refuses to condemn mainland U.K. bombings by the I.R.A.
    IS a man of peace.
    
    You emabarrass the United States and the people of Ireland with your
    hypocritical, ill-informed, racist rantings.
    
    
    CHARLEY

 >>When should I expect you to justify your reason for calling the article
 >>untruthful and flawed?  In 17 months?
    
    For those who are WONs (Write Only Noters) please could you read my two
    previous notes where I mention, rather clearly, that I shall write my
    views this weekend (i.e. it should be in here by Monday, thats the day
    after the weekend, this weekend!)
    
 >>I'm sick to the back teeth of people who attack Mr. Adams, a man who has
 >>been patiently pursuing the course of peace.
    
    All people who are willing to state their views in public should be
    prepared for criticism. I'm sure Mr Adams is quite aware of that fact
    and doesn't need you defending him. If you dont link the heat then get
    out of the fire.
    
 >>You know Shaun, you, Charley, and Laurie are doing a great injustice to
 the British conservative party by being so blatant in your support for
 them and their policies.
    
    I cannot speak for Charley or Laurie but I do not support all the
    British Conservative party policies. In fact I think its fair to say,
    as a social-democrat, that I support hardly any. The viewsI express in
    here are my own and bear no tory influence. As I have said before Mark,
    I am greatly interested in the Irish Troubles and spend a great deal of
    my free time reading and reseaching them. I dont seek to criticise you
    or anyone else, I'm just fed up with the propogander - be it Loyalist
    or Republican. Its just the sort of bolox that provokes sectarianism
    and disunity. 
    
    Do I ever hear you express any understanding of the other side ? Do I
    ever hear you attempting reconcilliation ? Do I ever hear you have a
    fair word for a 'Brit' ? NO, I can only conclude that your desire for
    peace is, in my oppinion, a desire for victory or else.
    
    Shaun.
    

Gerry Adams?  Great bloke.  So he's either sanctioned the bombing of civilian 
areas, or he has no control over Sinn Fein's military wing.  Either way, I 
don't see that he has much to contribute to the peace process.

Chris.

    It would be interesting to see how certain people will justify this
    action, all in the name of peace no doubt.
    
    "We can't get what we want so we'll try and kill some innocent
    civilians."
    
    Fabulous.
    
    
    CHARLEY

    RTw  02/11 1040  Sinn Fein leader Gerry Adams at a crossroads       
    
   By Martin Cowley
    
        BELFAST, Feb 11 (Reuter) - Sinn Fein president Gerry Adams, an
        implacable opponent of British rule in Northern Ireland, is at a
        defining moment in his role as leader of the republicans' political
        thrust after last Friday's bomb blast in London.
    
        Adams turned Sinn Fein, the political wing of the Irish Republican
    Army (IRA), from a sloganising lobby group to a well-oiled machine that
     commands 12.5 percent voter support in Northern Ireland and gets a 
    hearing in London.
    
    But politicians on both sides of the Irish border said his
    leadership and authority had been dealt a devastating blow by the IRA's
    decision to end a 17-month ceasefire by detonating a huge bomb in
    easternLondon, killing two and injuring 100.
    
    Adams, who took a political risk in the diehard republican camp by
    persuading the IRA to turn from violence to politics, blames
    Britain for not seizing the opportunity for progress presented by an IRA
    truce declared in September 1994.
    
    The bomb was effectively a message from the IRA that Adams had run
    out of time, prompting British authorities to question how much sway he
    has with the guerrilla group.
    
    Britain insists Adams condemn the IRA action, but if he were to do
    so he could forfeit the influence needed to once again persuade them
    to put away their weapons and explosives.
    
    For more than a year Adams, 47, has been hailed as a peacemaker by
    Dublin and Washington while London kept him at arm's length,
    refusingto accept Sinn Fein as a partner at peace talks while the IRA
    hoarded stockpiles of arms.
    
    The IRA called its truce after Britain and Ireland published the
    "Downing Street Declaration" in December 1993 which guaranteed Sinn
    Fein a place in talks if violence ended.
    
    British Prime Minister John Major said the guerrillas had to start
    handing in weapons before talks began, while Adams said an arms
    surrender was never part of the truce deal and charged that Major
    had double-crossed him and mainstream Irish nationalists.
    
    Last March, U.S. President Bill Clinton turned down British entreaties
    and welcomed Adams to the White House, a milestone in Sinn Fein's
    long trek in from a political wilderness.
    
    Adams was born in West Belfast, a traditional spawning ground for
    anti-British guerrilla activity, and came up through the ranks
    of republican activism the hard way, surviving internment and an
    assassination attempt.
    
    When Northern Ireland spiralled into region in the late 1960s, he
    was a barman in a downtown Belfast pub.
    
    British intelligence suspected him of being a top IRA officer and like
    his father in an earlier period of anti-British upheaval, Adams was
    interned in the early days of "the Troubles" in 1971. He tried to
    escape and was sentenced to 18 months jail.
    
    Adams has denied IRA membership and says that as president of Sinn
    Fein, he does not speak for the extremist group.
    
    In 1972 he was flown from internment to London, along with
    high-levelRA leaders, to talk peace. But the effort collapsed and
    Northern Ireland was propelled into violence.
    
    Adams, who became Sinn Fein leader in 1983, was wounded in one of
    several gun attacks and Protestants also bombed his home.
    
    Looking like an archetypal academic, Adams is tall, bearded, smokes
    a pipe and talks in a purposeful monotone drawl.
    
    He has penned several books, personal reminiscenses, political
    studies and childrens stories. Associates say that on long journeys to
    political meetings across Ireland, he jots down notes for future
    books.
    
        Gerry Adams was born on October 5, 1948, and is married.
    
        REUTER

  Sinn Fein is not the Irish Republican Army.  You'd think that even the
  British would finally begin to understand this.

                        Mark

                                   [Image]

                               9 February 1996

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

                     Adams responds to events in London

Sinn F�in President Gerry Adams, responding to reports of an explosion in
London said:

``Our response to today's events is one of sadness.

My sympathy and thoughts are with those injured today.

I regret that an unprecedented opportunity for peace has floundered on the
refusal of the British government and the Unionist leaders to enter into
honest dialogue and substantive negotiations.

I appeal for calm.

Sinn F�in's peace strategy remains as the main function of our party. It is
my personal priority. All those who made genuine efforts to build a peace
process must keep our nerve in the face of predictable and hypocritical
reaction from public representatives who have done nothing to encourage the
risky search for a peace settlement.

That search for peace must be redoubled.''

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sinn F�in Press Office, 44 Parnell Square, Dublin 1
Tel: +353-1-8726100 and +353-1-8726839   �   Fax +353-1-8733074

Released in the US by:

Friends of Sinn F�in, 1350 Connecticut Ave, NW, Washington DC 20036
Tel: +1-202-331-7886   �   Fax: +1-202-331-8117

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Sinn F�in Home Page   �   Sinn F�in Documents
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Web publication by [email protected]
Web archival by [email protected]

Mark,

John Major said that he accepted the six principles of the international
commission on Northern Ireland.  I understand that Gerry Adams also accepted
these six principles.

Please explain to me how Adams' refusal to condemn the violence squares with
his acceptance of principle (d).

I look forward to seeing your reply.

//alan

  Alan,

  "John Major said that he accepted the six principles of the international
commission on Northern Ireland. "

  Right, I guess the British word for acceptance means, let me introduce
  a new precondition, and ignore the recommendations of an International
  peace commission.  Wow, we really do have some serious language differences
  between British English, and American.

                      Mark

Mark,

Watch the words I used.  He said that he accepted the six principles.  That
he chose to introduce a new conditino is not something that I would choose
to defend.  However, please answer my question.  To help, I've attached the
text of the six principles.

regards,
//alan


 Accordingly, we recommend that the parties to such negotiations affirm
their total and absolute commitment: a. To democratic and exclusively
peaceful means of resolving political issues; b. To the total disarmament of
all paramilitary organisations; c. To agree that such disarmament must be
verifiable to the satisfaction of an independent commission; d. To renounce
for themselves, and to oppose any effort by others, to use force, or
threaten to use force, to influence the course or the outcome of all-party
negotiations; e. To agree to abide by the terms of any agreement reached in
all-party negotiations and to resort to democratic and exclusively peaceful
methods in trying to alter any aspect of that outcome with which they may
disagree; and, f. To urge that ``punishment'' killings and beatings stop and
to take effective steps to prevent such actions.

Mark, I notice that you're tending to make defamatory remarks about the 
British in general.  I guess that supports the theory that you have such 
hatred of the peoples of this country that you really do approve of the 
killing of innocent civilians by the IRA murderers.

Chris.

    .18
    
    >Sinn Fein is not the Irish Republican Army.  You'd think that even the
    British would finally begin to understand this.<
    
    No, they not the I.R.A.
    
    Part of, linked to, a wing of - maybe, but not *the* I.R.A.
    
    
    CHARLEY

    Holohan,
    
    The peace has not foundered on any British failures or intransigence.
    It has foundered on the back of a bomb made of 1000lbs of Semtex
    planted and detonated by the IRA. The IRA clearly gave up the
    democratic process because either it was too slow (it cannot be
    anything but slow, given the need for constant compromise where none
    appears possible) or because they thought they might not be getting
    their own way. They didn't *have* to plant that bomb, no-one forced
    them to. Other avenues hadn't been exhausted. They're just murdering
    scum doing what they love to do. So take you IRA proaganda from
    thousands of miles away, and shove it.
    
    Laurie.

 "So take you IRA proaganda from
    thousands of miles away, and shove it."

 Is this what British discussion degrades to?

 "Mark, I notice that you're tending to make defamatory remarks about the 
  British in general."

  Nope, you're so upset over the London bombing, that you are doing a
  good job all by yourself.  I can understand why the British people
  are upset.  I can understand why the Irish Republican Army resort to
  these kind of economic attacks after 18 months without peace talks
  even beginning.  As an outside observer, I suggest that you (and your
  representatives in the British government) decide to sit down with
  your enemies and reach a peaceful solution.  Rhetoric, selective condemnation,
  and continued attempts to lay blame aren't bringing either you or the
  Irish people to a peaceful solution.  Why don't you try sitting down
  immediately with your enemy?

  And Alan, the recommendations of the Mitchel commission sounded pretty 
  good to me.  Why did the British government throw them in the trash?
  The onus would have been on the Irish Republican Army, if the British
  hadn't trashed the recommendations of this independent international
  commission.  Sadly, I think it is because the British don't want peace,
  at least not if it means there might be a united Ireland, with the 
  potential for other celtic nations wanting out of the "United" part of
  the Kingdom.  Seems pretty expensive to me, both in lives, and money
  for your nation to continue with the status quo. 

                           Mark

    Answer the question. Do you condemn the bombing, yes or no?
    
    Laurie.

.26,

no need to be patronising, Mark, it just undermines your already weak 
argument.  As to the comment of `doing a good enough job yourselves', I'd like 
to point out that you have single handedly done more damage to the Republican 
cause than anyone else could ever hope to achieve.

Chris.

                      <<< Note 1541.26 by GYRO::HOLOHAN >>>


>  Nope, you're so upset over the London bombing, that you are doing a
>  good job all by yourself.  I can understand why the British people
>  are upset.  I can understand why the Irish Republican Army resort to
>  these kind of economic attacks after 18 months without peace talks
>  even beginning.  As an outside observer, I suggest that you (and your
>  representatives in the British government) decide to sit down with
>  your enemies and reach a peaceful solution.  

   So which of the "enemies" do the British Government speak to?
   The IRA? Gerry Adams who has nothing to do with the IRA? 


>					Rhetoric, selective condemnation,
>  and continued attempts to lay blame aren't bringing either you or the
>  Irish people to a peaceful solution. 

   I suspect that this statement could be equally applied to Messrs
   McGuiness and Adams.


>					 Why don't you try sitting down
>   immediately with your enemy?

    Again, who represents the enemy?
  
>  And Alan, the recommendations of the Mitchel commission sounded pretty 
>  good to me.  Why did the British government throw them in the trash?
>  The onus would have been on the Irish Republican Army, if the British
>  hadn't trashed the recommendations of this independent international
>  commission.  Sadly, I think it is because the British don't want peace,
>  at least not if it means there might be a united Ireland, with the 
>  potential for other celtic nations wanting out of the "United" part of
>  the Kingdom.  Seems pretty expensive to me, both in lives, and money
>  for your nation to continue with the status quo. 

   I would suggest that most British people would not mind a United Ireland.
   I would suggest that the British Government would quite gladly be shot
   of Northern Ireland. And,  if my experience in Dublin and conversations
   with most people I know from the South is representative, they don't want
   the North and all its attendant problems. So, I guess its down to few
   people who either have a misty view of the past, or have no idea of what
   the real situation is, or just enjoy the power of the gun, who want this
   situation to continue.

   Stuart

    .26
    
    >Is this what British discussion degrades to?<
    
    BBWWWAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
    
    That's a laugh coming from you.
    
    > I can understand why the Irish Republican Army resort to
      these kind of economic attacks after 18 months without peace talks<
    
    You seem to be quite pleased about your home city being bombed.
    
    >I suggest that you (and your representatives in the British government) 
    decide to sit down with your enemies and reach a peaceful solution.<
    
    The I.R.A. have killed several innocent citizens under a flag of
    convenience, the have exploded a 1000lb bomb in London killing two more
    and causing countless million pounds worth of damage. There are
    systematic beatings of people who do not do as they order on the
    streets of Ireland, scores of people have lost kneecaps.
    Don't give me this "peaceful solution" horseshit. The only faction not
    committed to peace is your beloved I.R.A. as the above proves beyond
    all measure of any doubt. 
    
    <Rhetoric, selective condemnation, and continued attempts to lay blame>
    
    Sound like one of your notes Mark.
    
     >with the potential for other celtic nations wanting out of the "United" 
    part of the Kingdom.  Seems pretty expensive to me, both in lives, and 
    money for your nation to continue with the status quo.<
    
    The over whelming majority of the "Celtic" nations of the United Kingdom
    wish to remain so.
    
    
    
    CHARLEY

RE:                      <<< Note 1541.26 by GYRO::HOLOHAN >>>

>> "So take you IRA proaganda from
>>     thousands of miles away, and shove it."
>> 
>>  Is this what British discussion degrades to?
    
    You aren't discussing anything, you're spouting the same tired old crap
    you always spout.

>>   Nope, you're so upset over the London bombing, that you are doing a
>>   good job all by yourself.  I can understand why the British people
>>   are upset.  I can understand why the Irish Republican Army resort to
                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    
    So, here we are again. You "understand". Well, I don't. Please tell me
    what you think this cowardly act has contributed to the peace process.
    
>>   these kind of economic attacks after 18 months without peace talks
                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    
    I'm sure that the relatives and friends of the dead and injured will be
    very pleased to hear that their loved ones were only an "economic"
    target. What planet do you live on? these people were *killed* and
    *maimed* by a bunch of cowardly thugs planting a bloody great bomb in
    the middle of London. Get a grip! They weren't "economic" they were
    people, with families, and friends.
    
>>   Rhetoric, selective condemnation,
>>   and continued attempts to lay blame aren't bringing either you or the
>>   Irish people to a peaceful solution.  
    
    Hello Pot, this is Mr. Hypocrite the Kettle calling.

>>  And Alan, the recommendations of the Mitchel commission sounded pretty 
>>  good to me.  Why did the British government throw them in the trash?
    
    The British Government didn't throw them away. They, oh this is
    pointless. Another question:
    
    Was the IRA justified in planting that bomb? Yes or no.
    
    Laurie.

    Mark,
    
    the excuse that it was an economic target won't wash. If the IRA wanted
    to do economic damage, they could have avoided Friday evening in the
    rush hour couln't they? They could have parked the bloody thing on the
    Severn Bridge at 3 am or something vaguely intelligent. They could have
    announced the ending of the ceasefire and attaked some isolated telecom
    installation a day later with small weaponry. The political effect
    would have been the same, possibly more.
    
    They wanted blood Mark. They wanted to create terror, so they can bring
    London to a standstill next week with a few hoax calls.   
    
    So they went into the heart of London on Friday evening and it is just
    good fortune that there were not a hundred dead to apologise for. But
    then, you don't agree that the IRA should apologise to its victims  do you?
       
    
    Kevin

                                   [Image]

                              12 February 1996

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

               Adams Accuses Major of Betraying Peace Process

Sinn F�in President, Gerry Adams has accused John Major of ``betraying the
peace process.'' Mr. Adams challenged Mr. Major to ``honour his
commitments'' and to ``show real leadership and join with the Irish
government to lead everyone into the all-party talks and the substantive
negations that are required even at this late stage to restore the peace
process.''

Mr. Adams said:

``I have made my position and the position of Sinn F�in very clear about the
actions taken by the IRA Friday night. The responsibility for that explosion
lies squarely with the IRA.

``There is widespread shock and sadness at the deaths and injuries but there
is also a deep sense of disbelief that for 18 months the British government
and the Unionists have doggedly refused to enter into meaningful talks.

``John Major must accept his share of the responsibility for the breakdown
in the peace process. In private discussions with Sinn F�in; in discussions
with John Hume; in discussions between the British governments and the Irish
government; and in public statements, the British position was that
substantive talks were to begin 3 months after the start of an IRA
cessation.

``The British government reneged on that commitment. John Major betrayed the
peace process. In 18 months there was not one word of real negotiation. The
lesson is clear, you cannot make peace in Ireland unless Mr. Major wants to
make peace.

``In the Middle East and in South Africa breakdowns in the peace process
required those leaders to increase their efforts on behalf of peace.

``The challenge for Mr. Major is - Will he even now honour his commitments
and show real leadership. Will Mr. Major join with the Irish government to
lead everyone into all-party talks and the substantive negotiations that are
required even at this late stage to restore the peace process.''

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sinn F�in Press Office, 44 Parnell Square, Dublin 1
Tel: +353-1-8726100 and +353-1-8726839   �   Fax +353-1-8733074

Released in the US by:

Friends of Sinn F�in, 1350 Connecticut Ave, NW, Washington DC 20036
Tel: +1-202-331-7886   �   Fax: +1-202-331-8117   �   E-mail:
[email protected]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Sinn F�in Home Page   �   Sinn F�in Documents
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Web publication by [email protected]
Web archival by [email protected]

    Tired, racist crap Mark.
    
    I feel sorry for you strangely enough.
    
    
    CHARLEY

    re .33,.34
    
    CHARLEY,
    
    if it is true that John Major lead SF/IRA to believe that talks would
    start within 3 months of a ceasefire, then that is a valid point for
    discussion. What is your answer to it? I cannot find anything in the
    form of the note to object to.
    
    Kevin 

    if it is true that John Major lead SF/IRA to believe that talks would
    start within 3 months of a ceasefire, then that is a valid point for
    discussion. What is your answer to it?

That it was to be a permanent ceasefire.  The scum never used the word 
permanent.  Yet the British government was willing to move forward - it
suggested decommissioning of weapons.

The scum refused to decommission a single weapon - it's now obvious why.  Yet
the British government was still willing to try to find some kind of 
democratic mandate for Sinn Fein in order that the peace process could move
forward - it proposed elections.

The scum responded by murdering two people in London and injuring many others.

//alan

    .36
    
    That just about sums it up Kev.
    
    No-one, but no-one, can in any way, shape, or form, blame John Major for
    the bombing of London.
    
    One group of people are responsible, no one else.
    
    
    CHARLEY

    I hope I have made my position on the bombings clear. The question is,
    why did the peace negotiations grind to a stanstill, and why have Adams
    and Bruton publicly stated that they feel Major was not playing
    straight? You see the answer I have given is that the Unionists and the
    Tory right were in a position to destabilise Major and the peace, thus
    forcing him to chance his arm by dumping Mitchell and calling for
    elections, although the Irish Government went on their knees
    diplomatically to try and stop him. 
    
    And I want to say something else which may hurt some of you but it is
    what I think:
    
    It is the failure of British public opinion to face this aspect of the
    problem and pretend that all is well in the UKOGBANI apart from some
    murderous scum who should be hunted down etc.., which is a major
    barrier to peace. And the failure to get a straight answer to this and
    have a constructive debate about how the UKOGBANI came into existence
    (through the threat of terrible and immediate war by the then Prime
    Minister Mr Loyd George) in this conference amoung the British visitors
    is as bad to me as Holohan's evasions.
    
    So let us have some straight answers to these questions CHARLEY, Alan:
    
    Is it acceptable to you that the Unionists have a veto on any change?
    
    Is it acceptable to you that the Unionists slag off nationalists
    striving for peace and refuse to cooperate with them?
    
    Do you expect the ghettoes of the minority community in NI to lie down and
    take another 75 years of discrimination from the Unionists?
    
    On the question of elections: I have already dealt with this. Why not
    32 county elections? The border has no more validity to nationalists
    than if the nazis had grabbed Kent in 1940 and it was today part of the
    FRG.
    
    Kevin
    Kevin
    
     

In my opinion, the Unionists are being a pain in the arse as far as sorting 
out peace talks is concerned.  I think it's understandable that they should 
have reservations, but not to the degree we've seen.

Chris.

>    On the question of elections: I have already dealt with this. Why not
>    32 county elections? The border has no more validity to nationalists
>    than if the nazis had grabbed Kent in 1940 and it was today part of the
>    FRG.

I think a better analogy would be, having all 32 counties voting on the future 
of NI would be like having a Scottish referendum that's open to the entire 
population of Great Britain.

Chris.

Re .38

    
>    It is the failure of British public opinion to face this aspect of the
>   problem and pretend that all is well in the UKOGBANI apart from some
>   murderous scum who should be hunted down etc.., which is a major
>   barrier to peace.

Kevin,
	That was a very good note and I think you hit the nail on the head
	with the extract I have quoted above. (I also like your 
	juxtaposition of "major" and "barrier to peace")This attitude was
	evident	last night on a "World In Action" programme which featured
	Jonathan Dimbleby interviewing Gerry Adams. The sneering looks
	perpetual interruptions and rudeness of the interviewer were evidence
	of the attitude which you describe. One of the best parts of the show
	was when Dimbleby referred to "...a bombing campaign on the mainland..."
	and Adams replied "I live on the mainland. The mainland of Ireland."
	This annoyed Dimbleby.

	This attitude is perpetuated by the British media - the same 
	media who campaigned for the release of the murderer Clegg. Some of 
	the more narrow minded noters in this conference believe 
	everything they read in "The Sun" and "The Mirror" and close their
	minds to every other source of (often more reliable) information
	available to them.
Eddie.
    

>	Some of 
>	the more narrow minded noters in this conference believe 
>	everything they read in "The Sun" and "The Mirror" and close their
>	minds to every other source of (often more reliable) information
>	available to them.

I'd be interested if you could identify these `narrow minded noters' you 
mention.  I'm frankly amazed that you believe that anyone here would take the 
likes of `The Sun' seriously, which possibly says more about your own opinions 
than it does about other people's.

I'd also be interested to know what you categorise at more reliable 
information providers?  Hopefully not the likes of the Irish Republican 
Information Service or whatever the hell it calls itself.  I know that there 
are some people who take their words as gospel and all others as heresy, but 
personally I like to take my news reports from a (hopefully balanced) set of 
sources, such as BBC, CNN, Reuters and assorted other independant reporting 
agencies who don't purport to be the mouthpiece of some organisation.

And, before you say it, I would strongly dismiss accusations that the BBC (or 
the EBC as your ever so scathing wit put it) is a government mouthpiece.

Chris.

    On the question of elections: I have already dealt with this. Why not
    32 county elections? The border has no more validity to nationalists
    than if the nazis had grabbed Kent in 1940 and it was today part of the
    FRG.

Kevin,

Let me turn this question back at you.  IF the above had happened, AND the 
majority of the residents of Kent today wanted to stay as part of Germany,
WOULD it be right that the people of Yorkshire could vote Kent back into the
UK?

It seems to me to be a direct parallel, I'd be interested in your response.

regards
//alan

    RE: .39
    
    Well said Chris. In fact, Paisley is as big a bigot as any I've seen.
    One by-product of an election of those empowered to negotiate for the
    future of NI, might well be that Paisley gets no say. Now that'd be a
    result! I don't think anyone, even the Unionists who seem to think
    they've some kind of mandate by default, has the right to a veto,
    whether through due processes or through the bomb.
    
    Eddie, Dimbleby, and other of his ilk, such as James Naughtie from R4
    and Jeremy Paxman from Beeb1 are unbelievably rude to everyone they
    interview. It seems that these days it's considered to be a sign of a
    "good" interviewer if he gives the interviewee as hard a time as
    possible using ill-mannered and aggressive tactics. I disagree, and
    prefer to more measured pace of earlier times. I think you're reading
    too much into it, frankly.
    
    Laurie.

    .38
    
    I'm with .39 .40 .42 .43 & .44
    
    
    CHARLEY

    I have gone into this already, somewhere earlier. Do a search
    "Gladstone" to find it. Yorkshire is not quite equivalent, as NI
    represents a topological rape of Donegal and all the border counties
    which affects the whole country. 
    
    I don't think an election or a referendum is the answer, what we need
    is a a piece of fudge about the size of the Isle of Wight (?sp)
    
    However, as you know I don't duck questions...
    
    So a minority of the residents of Kent want to rejoin the uk but a
    majority of former German settlers want to stay in Germany. It is clear
    for a start that the deutsche Bundestag will have to vote on any new
    legislation and it is certainly unfortunate that Dr Kohl is dependent
    on the votes of the Kentish unionists to stay in power. The little
    Englanders living in Kent are fed up with 50 years of compusory German in
    schools , no jobs, atrocious treatment in Thanet concentration camp
    etc. They are also up in arms that flying the union jack is illegal
    and point out that the german settlers were given stolen farms in the
    garden of England and that  the border of the aicient county of Kent
    was moved to give the Kentish unionists a built in majority after the
    traitor  king Edward VIII did a deal with Adolf Hitler.
    
    So, now I am sitting under the oak tree in Moate park Maidstone
    drinking a pint of Fremlins watching Yorkshire play Kent at cricket
    while German helecopters are circling round like it was Casement Park,
    talking to a Yorkshireman and a Bavarian Hop farmer from Yalding. 
    We are all reasonable chaps trying to solve the problem of the KRA
    terrorists who are leving bombs at the Gedaechniskirche in Berlin.
    
    No Alan, I would not say that in those circumstances, the Kentish
    Unionists would have a veto, and you wouldn,t find many Yorkshiremen
    who think that either. 
    
    Kevin       
         

re .46

That's the longest "yes" or "no" I've ever seen!

However, you omitted an important point or two.  The only reason the 
helicopters are flying around is because of the KRA bombings that have been
taking place.  The KRA have spent the past twenty five years bombing people
and causing misery to both those loyal to Germany and those who want to revert
to the UK.  The KRA is loathed by people on both sides of the divide.

Chancellor Kohl has told the KRA that he's willing to try to forget the blood
that the KRA has shed by its callous and cowardly use of bombs, even though
he and some of his political colleagues have been the target of KRA attacks.
The KRA even crippled the wife of one of his party chairmen - the brave KRA 
that murders people in their beds.

Yes, Kohl's willing to set that aside and treat the KRA as human beings, and
just asks for a demonstration that the KRA is willing to set aside violence
by destroying a few of its weapons.

And how does the KRA respond?  It waits until there's a children's 
basketball event in the centre of Berlin, and places a huge bomb next door to
it.  

//alan

    re .47
    
    Alan, 
    
    I am not arguing for ther IRA here, but I feel you don't understand the
    nationalist argument and also that you ignore the reality of what was
    NI under the Unionist jackboot. I'm not saying that nazi Kent is a
    perfect analogy, but it does correspond closely to IRA thinking,
    particularly Rory O'Brady. In .47 you suggest that the repression is a
    response to IRA terror but that is wrong. In the late sixties when
    loyalist pogroms of the Cathlic ghettoes started again and Unionists
    disgraced themselves beyond belief with their participation in the
    attacks on the NICRA, the IRA was practically non-existent. Graffitti
    appeared in Belfast "IRA I ran away". The IRA was born again of
    B-special brutality. Of one thing you can be sure, they are never going
    back to that, and they will bomb and bomb and bomb for another 100
    years if they have to. So by not rejecting the Unionist veto and
    calling for 6-county elections as a precondition to negotiations,
    UKOBANIans are blocking the way to peace.
    
    It is clear to SF and everyone down here that the Unionists are using
    the election ruse to play for time and would use their built in
    majority in a negotiating body to veto everything. Trimble is still
    playing politics slagging Dick Spring and is simply pretending to be
    interested in peace. 
    
    I have noted the crticisms of Unionism here, but that is not enough.
    The veto is the bad tooth which will have to be pulled. 
    
    That does not mean a sell-out, but it does mean that they will have to
    join in the spirit of the great sovereignty fudge which is being
    cooked and work together with all those who want peace to isolate the
    cancer of violence.
    
    Of course it goes without saying that every IRA outrage makes this
    harder to achieve and will make the result more fragile, as if loyalist
    terrorists feel that the IRA bombs achieve anything, they will get
    their automatic rifles out and go on the rampage again.
    
    Kevin 

    Good note Kevin, good note.
    
    Laurie.

    UK News Electronic Telegraph Wednesday June 19 1996
    
    By Toby Harnden, Ireland Correspondent 
    
    Sinn Fein is cast into wilderness
    
    TWO questions posed to Gerry Adams yesterday prompted more than 10
    minutes of rhetoric from the Sinn Fein president and angry exchanges
    with the interviewer, who accused him of giving evasive and convoluted
    replies.
    
    Mr Adams was telephoned in west Belfast by Sean O'Rourke, presenter of
    RTE radio's lunchtime news in Dublin. He was asked questions drawn up
    by the Irish government after the IRA bomb in Manchester and the
    shooting of a detective in Adare, Co Limerick.
    
    The first question was: "Have you actually gone to the IRA to ask them
    to reinstate the ceasefire?" Mr Adams's response was: "Well, I'm going
    to answer the question, Sean, and my answer to the question is that I'm
    not going to speculate about exactly where we are.
    
    "What I'm trying to do is to bring about, along with others, a peace
    settlement, and if it was useful in that process to answer that
    question, to speculate on these matters, I would speculate until the
    cows come home. My commitment is to see an end to all armed actions and
    a restoration of the peace process. That's the focus and I say what I'm
    saying in good faith.
    
    "And, of course, it's a totally legitimate question and your listeners
    can draw whatever conclusions they want from my answer."
    
    The second question was: "Does Sinn Fein support the armed struggle of
    the IRA?" Mr Adams replied: "Well, first of all Sinn Fein wants to see
    an end to the armed struggle. That's our position in one sentence. We
    want to see an end to the armed struggle. We're not involved in it; we
    do not advocate it.
    
    "We clearly are a party which has suffered as a result of the armed
    actions of others, and our focus has been, and will continue to be, the
    total end of all armed actions; and I do that with my colleagues, in
    the first instance to get a negotiated settlement which removes the
    causes of the conflict, and in the second instance - and it's part of
    the same project - to try and build an alternative to the armed
    struggle. And I have to say that I think you have to look at our record
    on this as well."
    
    When pressed about the Manchester bomb, he said: "I wish that the bomb
    had not happened in Manchester
    
    The interviewer accused Mr Adams of evasiveness. Mr Adams said: "Let's
    not confuse this any more than it needs to be, please. The answer to
    the question was given in my first sentence. I want to see an end to
    armed struggle.
    
    "That is the clear, concise, non-complicated answer to the question. I
    want to see an end to armed struggle and my record and the record and
    the endeavours of our party to help bring that about are clearly on the
    public record."
    
    When pressed about the Manchester bomb, he said: "I wish that the bomb
    had not happened in Manchester. I wish that there weren't British
    soldiers on the streets of the six counties [Northern Ireland]. I wish
    there wasn't discrimination. I wish that our island wasn't partitioned.
    
    "But the reality is that we deal with the objective situation and the
    conditions which exist in making peace. And making peace is very
    difficult."
    
    He said he wanted to deliver a lasting peace settlement: "That's my
    commitment and, no matter how difficult it is, that is what I am going
    to pursue. And I may fail. But it won't be through any lack of trying.
    
    "And my conviction is that we will get a peace settlement and that it
    will grow out of inclusive dialogue and that Sinn Fein will be in there
    alongside the other parties and working with the two governments to
    bring about an accord."
    
    He accused the Irish government of being "discourteous" in using the
    media to put questions to Sinn Fein. He said John Bruton, the Irish
    Prime Minister, was "fully aware of the efforts of Sinn Fein's
    leadership to restore the peace process".
    
    The interview continued for 10 minutes with Mr O'Rourke becoming more
    and more frustrated as Mr Adams dug himself deeper and deeper into his
    trench.