So, for two days the Irish News has exposed, using British government papers, that:

Collusion between British Army units and Loyalist paramilitaries in the form of handing over weapons, intelligence and dual membership was widespread to as much as 15% of some units in the early 70s.

Has identified and named people who were killed or the subject of attempted killings as a result.

That this was well known, understood and generally accepted in Downing Street as early as 1973.

That Downing Street lied to MPs for decades to hide this truth.

And that despite having this information Downing Street took no action.

I didn't bother posting about this yesterday because I hoped one of the many crocodile tear shedding posters with an interest in the North might rouse themselves to feigning interest but seemingly no.

We also know that senior figures in the IRA were paid British agents. This means that British intelligence would have had advance knowledge of some Provo atrocities, but presumably kept quiet so as not to blow the cover of their agents. Which current senior Sinn Fein figures were touts? The whole "Armed Struggle" / "Counter-Insurgency" phenomenon was nothing but a dirty down-market political game.

__________________
There was pleasure in paradise, but no excitement - Milan Kundera

Well, I didn't know they were reporting this. Believe it or not, we don't all take the Irish News. The story wasn't, so far as I can remember, picked up by my usual news sources like RTÉ and breakingnews.ie

Sure I'll go read it now...

__________________
Romanes eunt domus

No suprise there. It was picked up by INN though.

Well, it's subscription only. I'll pick up a copy in town.

__________________
Romanes eunt domus

Yar, but...

It now begins to look quite likely that the Brits were, at an absolute minimum, heavily influencing (and in cases outright directing) the activities and strategies of all the armed groups in the conflict from the mid-80s onwards, and had had such a relationship with Loyalism from pretty much the very beginning. And were directly responsible for numerous atrocities and incidents that fuelled the fire at critical moments - just when the Troubles may have burned themselves out from sheer war-weariness, along comes another unfortunate and regrettable outrage to get everyone het up again. I cite Bloody Sunday, Dublin/Monaghan, and the Hunger Strikes as well-known and pretty indisputable examples.

Anyone still want to argue poor Mutha was a hapless piggy-in-the-middle, helplessly muddling through, trying to referee the incomprehensible barbarian squabbling Irish tribesmen?

__________________
Je suis un loo-lah

Part of the evils of partition.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

But British intelligence was also controlling the IRA internal discipline squad for Christ sake! Thus not only must the shinners take responsibility for the IRA's own atrocities, they were the stooges and dupes of British intelligence. This fatally undermines the integrity of the shinner cause (by its own twisted, incestuous, anally introspective logic). Which senior shinners are touts? Why have Adams and McGuiness, two of the most senior provo figures never been taken out? McGuiness has been less than forthcoming about his own role on Bloody Sunday. The British indeed must also be held responsible for those IRA atrocities, of which they had prior knowledge. Do the shinners really want a south African style truth and reconciliation commission that would probe into the behaviour of its members / leadership during the halcyon days of the “armed struggle”?

__________________
There was pleasure in paradise, but no excitement - Milan Kundera

Agreed. And it's why I've never supported them. I figured out fairly young that they were what I've always called "Mutha's Children". What's that line in that U2 song...

"And you've become a monster, so the monster will not break you"

Of course, that's only the first step. Anyone walks down that road eventually joins forces with the original monster. Like the pigs at the end of Animal Farm. Or Eoghan Harris

Sorry. Couldn't resist.

Seriously though. Merle has a point in that the problem isn't really Shinners, or the IRA, or Unionism, or Loyalism, or Paisley, or Revisionists, or Deefers. These are all just symptoms, shadows cast on glass by the real source - British Rule over any part of this island. And anyone with any clarity of thought can recognise that the permanent British State, usually referred to as the Realm or Crown, exists pretty much independently to the bread-and-circus theatre of the House of Commons - and always follows its own long-term agendas.

__________________
Je suis un loo-lah

The Government within a Government! The Dark networks of secret power. The sinister Svengalis who control our lives without our knowing it!

The organs of the British State;

Cynical? Yes
Ammoral? Yes
Self serving? Yes
Monolithic? Hardly
Singing from the same Hymn sheet? I'd imagine they have ferocious turf wars.

In short they exhibit the same characteristics as political/military/economic complexes throughout history.

Surely Britain's responsibility for the Northern conflict, lies not with its current behviour (Do you remember Jonathon Powell calling unionists "asses" during that phone conversation with Martin McGuiness!), but rather with the fact that Unionism is the manifestation of British nationalism on the "frontier". The cultural symbols/emotions of unionism are that of the British state, i.e. Protestant (and anti-catholic), Monarchist, a hierarchical view of the world in which the Anglo-phone super-race (English speaking peoples in Churchillian euphemism) plays the starring role! Britain has moved on a good bit from the days of empire, its one of the most PC states in the world, but the Torygraph mindset remains for some, and Unionism is the full blown strain of 1950s British Imperial kitsch.

When British politicians despair of the behaviour of the indigenes (and who wouldn't?), they conveniently ignore that the shrill hysterical unionists are simply peddling the sort of trinkets and guff that was once central to the British state building project. The Brits need their very own Cruiser to point out the connection between "mainland" British Nationalism (of the non-BNP variety) and present day Paisleyism / Loyalism!

__________________
There was pleasure in paradise, but no excitement - Milan Kundera