Armed struggle forced British to consider withdrawal

Sunday January 02, 2005 12:37

by Séamus Ó Cadhain

British saw advantage of Dublin-Monaghan bombings

A report in today's (2 Jan's) Sunday Business Post shows that the British government was faltering under the pressure of the IRA's armed struggle in 1974. It also shows senior ease with, if not sanction for, the Dublin-Monaghan bombings.

Britain considered North withdrawal

02 January 2005 By Rory Rapple
The British government considered transferring large tracts of the North to the Republic in 1974, state papers just released by the National Archives in London and Dublin reveal. The then British prime minister Harold Wilson considered complete withdrawal from the North, and giving the Six Counties dominion status within the Commonwealth.

Detailed studies of the implications of withdrawing from the North and redrawing the border were undertaken by Irish officials who anticipated three possible repartitions:

small transfers of parts of South Armagh and Derry to the Republic;

the transfer of most of Tyrone, Fermanagh, south Down, south Armagh and Derry;

a redrawing of the border along the line of the river Bann.

In another record, the British ambassador to Ireland, Sir Arthur Galsworthy, said he believed the Dublin and Monaghan bombings of May 1974 had hardened attitudes against the Republican movement and had given Irish people a greater insight into the views of Northern Protestants.

“I think the Irish have taken the point,” Galsworthy wrote in a memo.

The records also reveal that civil servants in the North were in regular contact with the UVF during the 1974 loyalist general strike and at the time of the May 1974 bombs. The bombs were planted by UVF members, according to the recent Barron Report into the atrocities.

British civil servants examined the economic and social implications of repartition and withdrawal from the North after the Sunningdale power-sharing executive fell in the spring.

save preference

Comments (24 of 24)

Jump To Comment:

Bombings were sanctioned.

by Barry

Mon Jan 03, 2005 16:37

The British forces were responsible for the bombings. While the Barron report states that those who planted them were UVF members, it should be remembered that these members were also British military agents, serving soldiers and RUC members. The British authorities covered the killers tracks and worked closely with them. It sadly appears that the Irish authorities also collaborated. They were (and are) part of the cover up too.

Bombings Weere Sanctioned

by South African Friend of Ireland

Tue Jan 04, 2005 18:13

Thank you Barry. You have just pointed out what I was trying to convey to Toneore and that clown Devil Dog.

You are beating your head against a brick wall with those 2 my friend.

Tue Jan 04, 2005 21:21

I have engaged in similar lengthy and detailed posts and they simply refuse to accept that Britain murdered this country's citizens. Ideologically incapable of accepting ANY wrongdoing by HMG.

Bazza & SAffer

by Krusty the Devil Dog

Tue Jan 04, 2005 21:43

The release of the public records do not show that the UK govt sanctioned the D & M bombings. As for wrongdoing by HMG, where have I said it never did wrong? - there are numerous examples of stupidity, incompetence and at individual levels, criminality and murder...to be fair Bazza, you've also accused me of supporting the Black & Tans, M16 and the UVF (although that might have been someone else) without any evidence to back up these claims for the simple reason that none exists, then again, trifling details like that don't matter here, do they?

What I'm really incapable of accepting is a coterie of self-appointed fascist gunmen claiming to be my legitimate Govt & Army while carrying out a vicious sectarian campaign of slaughter in the face of the overwhelming wishes of the Irish people...that, and some know-nothing from SA posting absolute shite on a subject about which he knows SFA.

It doesnt say they didnt either

Tue Jan 04, 2005 21:56

Britain has refused to co-operate with the Barron enquiry. Your point seems to be unless HMG actually admit they sanctioned the slaughter, then there is no proof. There is an overwhelming abundance of evidence that they have been up to their necks in slaughter and mayhem both sisdes of the border.

Do you have any comment either upon the activities of Brian Nelson, the importation of the huge S African arms shipment ? Have you read Joe Tiernans and Don Mullans books on the subject of the Dublin Monaghan bombings and the mureder triangle murders. This goes a lot deeper than a few bad apples. The use of counter gangs in order to spread teror among the civilian population is simply a key plank of British counter-insurgency strategy. Brigadier Frank Kitsons strategy in this regard was adopted by the British Army.

Bombings Were Sanctioned.

Wed Jan 05, 2005 07:59

Barry, it does not surprise me. British propoganda is probably the most sophisticated in the world. After all, they have had centuries of practice. So it is quite easy to understand how people refuse to accept that 'squeaky clean' Britain could possibly carry out atrocities against the citizens of other nations. After all its just not cricket is it old chap?
These two seem to forget that Britain's history with other nations is littered with violent acts against peace loving peoples, often indigenous. South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, Kenya, India, China, and of course Ireland, to name but a few, have suffered at their hands. After all one does not build a major empire by being nice. South Africa is a prime example. The British were not interested in the country until the advent of gold and diamonds, which they proceeded to rape and plunder. The Boers very nearly beat them, if it had not been for the concentration camps and Britain's scorched earth policy against the Boer people. So why should British treatment of the Irish be any different? Long Kesh feels like a historical Deja Vu. After all the British, and the English in particular created the problem in the Six Counties firstly by transplanting people from Scotland and the north of England to a country in which they did not belong, secondly by displacing the Irish of their land and making them second class citizens in their own country, thirdly, by brutally suppressing any rights the indigenous tried to realise and lastly by creating an artificial democracy in the Six Counties. Their initial grab of the industrialised North in order to secure a Loyalist majority has finally backfired, as The Republic has now far outstripped them economically, and in The Economist's survey as part of its World in 2005 Report, The Republic was voted the most desirable country in the world in which to live in terms of quality of life.
Our two correspondents have also forgotten that Britain stood indicted in the Court of Human Rights on many occasions for its human rights abuses of Republican prisoners, back in the Seventies and Eighties.
I also think Devil Dog needs to do two things. Firstly, stop making assumptions about this author, simply because of the handle I have chosen. Once is understandable, but after being advised to the contrary, twice is now tiresome. Secondly, re - examine the political spectrum. Why does he/she bring Fascism into the picture? The only extreme right wingers are certain elements of the Loyalist paramilitaries who incidentally have links with the BNP and National Front. And of course half wits like Ian Paisley and his cohorts, who, if they had half a brain between them would be more dangerous than they currently are. In a previous posting I alluded to the fact that Sinn Fein and specifically Gerry Adams have a close relationship with the ANC, and specifically with Nelson Mandela and Thabo Mbeki. They are definitely not Fascist. Devil Dog may also be interested to know that the previous apartheid regime in South Africa were indeed Fascist, and they helped to arm the Loyalist paramilitaries in the Six Counties.

SAffer

by Devil Dog

Wed Jan 05, 2005 11:42

The fact that you cite the EIU's rating of Ireland as the best place to live, apparently with some approval, shows you really are clueless. So the Brits made a mistake in 1920, if only they could have foreseen the Celtic Tiger, they'd have kept Dublin and surrounding counties instead and placed all of Ulster in the FS, is that it???

I really don't care if the ANC supports the IRA, shows they don't know their arse from their elbow either.

As for SF/IRA being fascist - own paramilitary wing, rules own community through fear and violence, exaggerated sense of nationalism, attempts to subvert democracy - yep, sounds like a good description to me.

Re the Brits' history -so what? If we go down that route, then we can condemn Irish Catholics for piking Prods in 1798, the French for starting what was effectively the First World War, the Germans for 1939-45 etc etc. Aslo, try Niall Ferguson's "Empire" - whenever I see such a list about the British Empire, Ialwys ask myself "what have the Romans eve done for us"?
For both of our crusading anti-Imperialists, riddle me this: what benefitsdo the Brits derive today from NI still being in the UK - even Nordie admitted a while back that they'd do a runner tomorrow if they could.

RE: Devil Dog

Wed Jan 05, 2005 11:55

Dog, Nordie isnt a bad fella, but he ISNT an influential member of HMG. Its not in his power to admit anything on their behalf. You asked me that question before and I gave you a lengthy and detailed reply which you never got round to answering.

RE. Devil Dog

Wed Jan 05, 2005 13:12

Sorry Barry,
Did somebody say something or am I mistaken?

Bazza,

Wed Jan 05, 2005 13:31

Missed it...which thread is it in? - I'm quite curious to read it.

I remember now, so I do.

Wed Jan 05, 2005 18:25

It was the thread about Mary Kelly addressing the RSF Ard Feis.

devil dog

by pat c

Wed Jan 05, 2005 18:52

the dog has amnesia as well. he never got around to answering the questions about the US WoI. He can find them at:

Yes it did

Thu Jan 06, 2005 00:48

But it finally settled for importing large shipments of SAfrican arms, giving them to the loyalist death squads,(which its agents controlled) and sending them out to slaughter almost exclusively innocent catholics (you accept there is such a thing I hope).

This campaign of sectarian mass murder was directed by Britains Force Research Unit, commanded by Brigadier Gordon Kerr.

Kerr has since been rewarded with the plum job of British Military attache to Beijing. We can only assume from this that Kerr did an extremely good job as far as the British are concerned.

Their objectives of Ulsterisation, normalisation, criminalisation of POWs, as well as making some form of British rule acceptable to the nationalists were delivered in full by these methods. (along with the FRU successfully infiltrating the republican leadership).

We are now doomed to more division, conflict, heartbreak and the total corruption of Irish political life as a result. Goodwork HMG, your dirty little border is now safe for a while longer. WELL JUST HAVE TO LIVE WITH THE CONSEQUENCES.

Barry and Rooster

by South Africa Friend of Ireland

Thu Jan 06, 2005 07:34

Rooster, I think I need to clarify something for you. First of all you used the K word. That is a derogatory term for a Black South African. As I am not Black, it does not apply to me. However, it is a criminal offence in South Africa to call a Black person by the use of the K word and people have been prosecuted for doing so. I have also known of people being killed for using the word. It is not a word I like so please refrain from using it. It is both derogatory and demeaning and people who do use it are racist. Are you a racist Rooster?
Secondly, please do not assume that all supporters of the ANC government actually support all their policies. I wholeheartedly agree with you on the arms issue. Forty three billion Rand being spent on weapons is not only an outrage, but flies in the face of attempts to alleviate poverty. 22 million South Africans are living in poverty at the moment, and yet our government wastes billions on unnecessary arms and additional millions throwing a party to celebrate 10 years of democracy.
Thirdly, your comments regarding the border is typical Unionist bolderdash. There should never have been a border in the first place because Ireland should be one country. If one wants to get down to the fundamentals the Anglo Saxon does not belong in Ireland, and yet the descendents of these plantationers have the audacity to call themselves Irish, simply because they were born in the country. You know the old saying.....'simply because one is born in a stable does not make one a horse.' The differences between the Celtic and Anglo Saxon cultures are still very obvious in Ireland today. Language, sport, dance, etc are different on both sides of the divide. If the Anglo Saxons had kept their noses out of Ireland in the first instance then the world would not be witnessing all the problems that have arisen down the centuries, there would not be a border, innocent people would not have suffered and the WASP would be where he belongs ...in England and the lowlands of Scotland.
And Rooster, if you want to insult me, don't use the K word, call me a Taig, or a Dan.

Barry, I agree with your posting on the arms affair. Things work both ways however. The Provos helped train Umkhonto we Siswe and made quite a contribution to kick the racist apartheid government up the ass and out of office. That is a little known fact even in South Africa. Umkhonto we Siswe (or MK for short) don't really like to admit it but they actually owe a lot to PIRA. They never reached the sophistication of the Provos, but they did cause a lot of disruption. The training camps were in the old South West Africa, (modern day Namibia) and in Tanzania. You may also be interesed to know that the now defunct Rhodesian SAS helped train Loyalist paramilitaries. For all the good it did them.

SAFOI

Fri Jan 07, 2005 01:42

Thanks for your insightful input - "Brits Out" - why, it's so simple, it's amazing no-one ever thought of it before!!!

I find it ironic you're accusing Rooster of being a racist whilst rabbitting on about "Anglo-Saxons" and how they should all piss off back to England/Scotland.

Will the same logic apply to Irish-Americans or indeed the Irish living in Britain? The country might become as crowded as a Toyko sub-way if we follow your logic.

Pat C - I believe I already responded to your questions, you feigned amazament that I didn't know a whole bunch about the Americn WoI.

rooster = friend of eugene terreblanche

by rooster

Fri Jan 07, 2005 02:24

And Rooster, if you want to insult me, don't use the K word, call me a Taig, or a Dan.

Interesting, so you say your an ANC south african activist, so how would someone from the land of the veldt know what a taig is?

south african

by eugene terreblanche (rooster)

Fri Jan 07, 2005 02:49

You know the old saying.....'simply because one is born in a stable does not make one a horse.' That was a saying by the duke of Wellington, a member of the anglo-irish ascendancy and greatest british general of all time.

Its a bit rich when you talk about terms being offensive when other members of the board freely talk about murdering policemen walking to church. Perhaps some would find that offensive?

Do you really support the ANC? perhaps you can defend how since apartheid has ended the divide between the rich (mainly white) and the poor (mainly black) has increased by so much?

South African

Fri Jan 07, 2005 07:25

I was merely pointing out the offensive nature of the K word because you were obviously ignorant of its meaning.
Your comments regarding the end of apartheid and the widening of the wealth divide under an ANC government are not only way off the mark, but display very nicely your ignorance of South African politics.
The ANC government is a BLACK government. Whilst I do not agree with all of its policies, a new Black elite has emerged which is displaying a lot of economic purchasing power. Whilst not wishing to defend the ANC, primarily because I think they have gone about transformation in the wrong way, they did inherit a shocking state of affairs from the apartheid government. What they did inherit in terms of Black poverty, appalling education lack of housing etc, would have tested the most sophisticated of planners and administrators.
They still have a lot of work to do, but they have proven to be naive in may respects. Comes with having been subjugated for so long by the likes of Eugene Terreblanche, who is not only a rabble rouser just like Ian Paisley, but makes a spectacle of himself by falling of his white horse blind drunk.

Now let me see. Someone else in history did the same thing. Who was it? Ah, maybe Eugene Terreblanche is a reincarnation of King Billy.

Assumptions, Assumptions, Assumptions.

Fri Jan 07, 2005 07:28

1. Who says I am an ANC activist?

2. Who says I am from the land of the veld?

Assumptions, Assumptions, Assumptions.

Fri Jan 07, 2005 11:13

after an extensive search i cannot find any answer to the questions below. i think they are particularly relevant given your attacks on similar tactics used by the IRA in the 1920s.

1. Were Washington, Jefferson, Henry, Adams, Madison, Hamilton terrorists? What Democratic mandate did they have to launch the American War of Independence? They certainly didnt have the sort of mandate the IRA had from the 1918 election.

2. The US Founding Fathers launched actions against individual British soldiers as well as engaging in battle. Was this terrorism?

3. The US Founding Fathers launched military actions against those civilians who stayed loyal to the Crown. Was this terrorism?

4. The US Founding Fathers launched actions which drove those civilians who stayed loyal to the Crown out of the US and into Canada. Was this Ethnic Cleansing?

5. Nathan Hale "spied" against the British. He was not in military uniform. He was hanged as a "spy". When asked if he had any regrets he said: "I regret I have only one life to give for my country". Was Nathan Hale an illegal combatant? Was he a terrorist?

Sat Jan 08, 2005 00:48

Assumptions, Assumptions, Assumptions.
by South African Friend of Ireland Friday, Jan 7 2005, 6:28am

1. Who says I am an ANC activist?

2. Who says I am from the land of the veld?

Assumptions, Assumptions, Assumptions.
AKA Lies, Lies, Lies

Well, lets see? your sign in name is " South African Friend of Ireland " so that would lead people to believe that you are actually
south african, would it not?

Oh and in your second point you spelt veldt wrong!
Your no more african than I am!

Assumptions

Sat Jan 08, 2005 11:11

I am trying to make up my mind Rooster if you are dumb, ill informed or simply myopic in nature. Probably a combination of all three.

Simply because I live in South Africa and may have an understanding about the ANC does not make me an activist.

Oxford Dictionary of Current English:

Activist, n, one who follows a policy of
vigorous action in a cause, esp. in politics.

I have never followed such a course of action for, or on behalf of the ANC. In fact I never voted for them at the last election.

Secondly, and I must admit to enjoying this one, my spelling of veld is not incorrect. In fact
veldt is the Anglicized version of the word. Both are acceptible, but, one will find veld the more common of the two.

Veldt

Fri Mar 11, 2005 20:20

As this is an english website shall we stick to the english language?
You were very quick to pick up an Oxford English dictionary when it suited you.

south african "friend" of ireland

Fri Mar 11, 2005 20:35

I have noticed that you are now trying to distance yourself from the ANC, and I ask myself, why?

-could it be with the formation of a black middle class in SA that they have forgotten their roots in the town ships?

-could it be that because of this the gap between the rich (mostly white) and the poor (mostly black) has widened even more?

-could it be that SA has been pouring billions of rand into Portugese warships american electronic warfare kit British fighter aircraft and german submarines, money which would be much better spent in the schools and the hospitals?

-when half the countrys poor are infected with AIDS and the women endure one of the worst rates of abuse in the world?

-so you do not support anc but then who?

Number of comments per page

Upcoming Events

New Events

Other Press

User Preferences

Feeds

Blog Feeds

The Saker

Public Inquiry

Human Rights in Ireland

Lockdown Skeptics

Armed struggle forced British to consider withdrawal

Comments (24 of 24)