Warrington Bomb Linked to Red Action - BBC News

[bignose1]

High eggsplosive

 

[SpineyNorman]

mine must have been an elephant bomb this morning. four flushes - four!

I don't suppose someone could offer a precis of the program for those of us posting on our phones temporarily without access to a telly or broadband (which to be fair might only be me)?

 

[Casually Red]

Your approximation of Red Action's position on Ireland in the 1990's is as much a caricature as Ayatollah's recollection of its position in the 1980's.

Can you actually quote any of the articles concerned and those parts that refer to, or imply that anyone who disagreed with the political process was a 'British agent'? I don't think you do 'remember correctly' that aspect. There was certainly reference to a 'securocrat agenda' but it's nonsense to approximate the Red Action position as being basically that of Sinn Fein's. Red Action's was a measured response to the political process, as opposed to much of the left and 'dissident republicans' who had remained silent throughout the war but were falling over themselves to denounce the process. The alterations made to the political process and movement away from its original stated intentions is testament to the machinations, political somersaults and naked careerism of the Shinners, not to any failure(s) by Red Action to analyse events at the time.

With respect comrade, every single last article youve linked to there is an assertion that from the very outset sinn fein are winning, that every aspect of the sinn fein strategy is a success, that the brits are leaving, that their naked careerism and absolute sell out of the whole fucking thing is actually cunning subversion and undermining of the state . Every rotten betrayal a strategical masterstroke. Every last article and every last line in them could have been written by one of the hacks in Connolly house, thats how bad the analysis is . Im sorry but its an absolute load of old bollocks, every last word of it . And I say that as someone who respects the record of Red Action quite highly and who has absolutely no axe to grind against them whatsoever or anyone in them.
In fact most republicans that I know respect them and their record on anti fascism as well but on encountering embarassing stuff like that heads are just shook . RA got it very badly wrong in this regard, sadly . Instead of analysing the actual political positions of the parties to the conflict and what theyd signed up to or forced others to sign up to they instead merely embraced and then indulged in Sinn Feins spinning of the process instead and have ended up looking less than credible in their analysis, to put it mildly . And Im not saying that with any bitterness because theres literally thousands of republicans today openly admitting to have gotten it very wrong back then too .
As regards the securocrat agenda lets be very clear on this point . A securocrat agenda is by definition a British military intelligence agenda . Accusing those who politically opposed this complete and utter fucking treachery..for thats what it was ..and is..of opposing it on the basis of a securocrat agenda is to state that their political opposition to that absolute fucking sell out was a result of British military intelligence machinations against the complete fucking sell out . It was also a phrase uttered by absolutely nobody other than Sinn Fein spokespersons in order to demonise those who disagreed with the complete and utter fucking sell out , a long winded way of calling them touts. They dont use it any more however as its absolutely impossible to stand alongside a British cheif constable in front of television cameras and call for the republican community to come forward as informers and agents against republican activists, as Sinn Fein do , and accuse them of working to a securocrat agenda in the same breath .
In refreshing my memory however the memory of the specific allegation of dissidents being a bunch of British agents stems from a read through the Red Action forum many years back, when a senior figure in the group was outlining where RA stood on the process . Whoever it was put that position, which was straight out of the sinn fein handbook at the time . I clearly remembering reading it in Liamos house at the time because I didnt have the intenet back then, aaand I got a bit angry . Liamo agreed with it though, the cunt . But hes like that , specially back then .

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, I'm only sorry that we weren't wise old soothsayers and fortune tellers like you, or there'd still be a republican movement in Ireland worth speaking of today. Funny how all these clairvoyants have failed to make good on their predictions by building a viable political alternative to SF, innit?

Its got fuck all to do with hindisght, fortune telling or soothsaying . Its about analysing actual political positions . Up until 1997 the sinn fein position couldnt even be analysed because its members and supporters simply werent allowed to know what it was, while the Brits and everyone else where , and were very happy with it. That did not stop RA from blindly supporting it though, as can be seen in the article of the time, and the ones after it . However John Humes position could be analysed, and as Adams was in agreement with him then the necessity for keeping the republican base completely in the dark on what their strategy actually was was blindingly obvious . When it was finally revealed in 1997 Sinn Fein were telling people its just a ruse to allow the Brits to quietly leave . RA embraced that load of old bollocks too instead of actually analysing what was in the Mitchell principles or the Belfast Agreemnt itself . Instead it spun Sinn Fein spin rather than analysing their position and what theyd agreed to . A complete fucking sell out is what they agreed to . The Brits are going nowhere and never where .

 

[framed]

I'm a little confused about the chicken-box bomb segment in the documentary.

They said that Red Action favoured those types of bombs. What does that mean?

It means it's bullshit... a load of concocted shite that no-one gave any credence to at the time it was written, or now.

There were never any discussions within Red Action about 'favoured' bombs, explosives, guns or bullets. Not in any branch, anywhere.

 

[framed]

Its got fuck all to do with hindisght, fortune telling or soothsaying. Its about analysing actual political positions...

Perhaps you can show us something along those lines of analysis that you wrote yourself at the time? I must have missed it, but if the analysis was as glaringly obvious as you claim, surely you must have put pen to paper, or finger to keyboard?

 

[Casually Red]

Funny how all these clairvoyants have failed to make good on their predictions by building a viable political alternative to SF, innit?

Actually its not funny in the slightest, its a tragedy . I dont understand why your sneering at people for being correct in their analysis at the time..and defending an analysis that plainly got it very wrong.. but plainly some very simple facts and history need pointing out to you . On many occasions in the last century Irish republicanism has been laid very low indeed . The lack of sucess at those various times to rebuild republicanism hasnt been a reflection on either the character or ability of those who took that task on, but rather the political and physical environment in which they had to conduct that task .
The Belfast agreement itself signalled the complete political defeat of republican seperatism as a political position and set us back almost 100 years, pre 1916 in a political sense . British rule was now legitimised, the Irish people led politically astray by very cunning people indeed . Alongside that republican activists who arent onside have had to endure virtual internment by another name and worse . All it takes in the south for you to be banged up for years on a membership charge is for a garda to stand up in a witness box and tell a no jury court that he believes your a member of a terrorist organisation and thats accepted as evidence and off to jail you go . You cant challenge an opinion, he doesnt have to explain why he has that opinion. Portlaoise was packed to the gills by this method and still is. In the north political activists are being interned by other means . Such as being accused of serious offences and held on remand sometimes 3 or 4 years . And then the charges being dropped before it goes to trial because either there was never any evidence to begin with or its so badly tainted they cant proceed with it . Ex prisoners with the wrong opinions are being returned to jail having their licenses revoked without any explanation , no means of challenging it . Off to the nick for god knows how many years on the whims of the Britih secretary of state .
Alongside all that the sinn fein whispering campaigns that they were working to the securocrat agenda, abductions, interrogations, being stripped and beaten, death threats and in one case actual assassination at the hands of the provos . People who agreed with their analysis having their homes picketed, death threats, poor souls being made stand up in social clubs to read out prepared statements in front of their neighbours and apologising for criticising the leadership .
So those are just some of the political conditions in which theyve been striving to resurrect republicanism for years .

Just the other week in Belfast I stood alongside literally thousands of republicans from an array of groups and none as we took to the streets in protest against the ongoing political internment of our people by a foreign force of occupation in our country . There must have been more than 3000 people there marching from Ardoyne to Andersonstown . As we stopped outside the felons club some senior shinners and some ex internees who preferred standing drinking to protesting internment came out for a nosey and the marchers spontaeously erupted into singing Take it down from the mast . They were gutted, the tide has turned politically and emotionally . Revolutionary republicans have now mobilised an activist base on the streets in sufficient numbers not to be dismissed or sneered at any more . Not that itll stop some though .

Finally Im not sure what you mean by a viable political alternative, hopefully not a bandwagon that might be big enough to jump on someday . Id suggest of you do actually want to see an altenrative you play a part in building one, rather than sitting waiting for one to come along and sneering at those trying to build it .

 

[LiamO]

.

 

[Casually Red]

Perhaps you can show us something along those lines of analysis that you wrote yourself at the time? I must have missed it, but if the analysis was as glaringly obvious as you claim, surely you must have put pen to paper, or finger to keyboard?

I wasnt a writer back then and didnt have a computer , sorry . But I can assure you I was actively opposing it politically and getting a very serious amount of grief over that . As were the handful of others who agreed with me . We could have taken refuge in the same phonebox back then .

 

[framed]

....Finally Im not sure what you mean by a viable political alternative, hopefully not a bandwagon that might be big enough to jump on someday . Id suggest of you do actually want to see an altenrative you play a part in building one, rather than sitting waiting for one to come along and sneering at those trying to build it .

You seem perfectly at ease with a bit of 'sneering' yourself.

Who are you and what are you building? Pray tell, because there's nothing in your posts but bile. I've rejected your interpretation of the RA analysis, if you interpret that as 'sneering' it's your problem 'comrade'.

How do you know, or why do you make the assumption, that I'm not involved with any organisation that is trying to build an alternative political strategy to that of Sinn Fein?

 

[Casually Red]

I would like to apologise for my temerity in disagreeing with 'The only Jihadi in the village'.

View attachment 40019



1 who are you even arguing with?

2 are you drunk?

Im arguing against an analysis that got it well wrong . Im not personally having an argument with a person .

eta

whoops a daisy, mebbe I am and didnt know it

 

[LiamO]

.

 

[LiamO]

.

 

[framed]

Im arguing against an analysis that got it well wrong . Im not personally having an argument with a person .

You are arguing with an analysis, the last article of which was written in 1997, yet you seem incapable of offering one of your own, apart from repeating all the old cliches.

16 years seems a long time to wait to crow about us being 'wrong'...

 

[framed]

You still could... and give Joan a big sloppy kiss while you are in there

just seen 'show ignored comment' in the corner of your box so i can guess who you are ranting at/with. You are welcome to each other.

 

[Casually Red]

You are arguing with an analysis, the last article of which was written in 1997, yet you seem incapable of offering one of your own, apart from repeating all the old cliches.

16 years seems a long time to wait to crow about us being 'wrong'...

My apologies for not having my own internet site back in 1996 that I can link to for you . The old cliches happen to be true though . Im more than capable of offering my own analysis but that would be a complete derailment of the thread . Im happy to do it on another that addresses those issues, as opposed to the one at hand, Red Action .
And Im not crowing about RA being wrong, Im actually quite disappointed reading that stuff again . And the only reason Ive even mentioned it is because the thread itself pertains directly to RAs links to, actual and fabricated, with Irish republicanism and their analysis of Irish republicanism . A criticism of an analysis that was wrong is perfectly valid and shouldnt be taken personally by anyone . Only a fucking crank takes criticism of analysis personally .

 

[Casually Red]

You seem perfectly at ease with a bit of 'sneering' yourself.

Who are you and what are you building? Pray tell, because there's nothing in your posts but bile. I've rejected your interpretation of the RA analysis, if you interpret that as 'sneering' it's your problem 'comrade'.

How do you know, or why do you make the assumption, that I'm not involved with any organisation that is trying to build an alternative political strategy to that of Sinn Fein?

Listen cheif, I couldnt give 2 fucks if your in the Legion of Mary or the boys brigade . Thats your business . However from a number of your comments its quite clear you take a quite disparaging attitude towards Irish republicans who dont support the Sinn Fein strategy and analysis. You pointed to their failure thus far to build an alternative to sinn fein that you yourself regard as viable as indicating there was something morally and politically deficient in their opposing it in the first place . And given your agitated defence of an analysis that was praising the sinn fein strategy and what they signed up to the whole way down the line I dont see why youd oppose it now . If youve changed your mind theese days good . But again thats your business , none of mine.

And as for bile fuck off with that . Ive no axe to grind against RA whatsoever . Ive plenty of bile for what Sinn Fein did though so if thats what your referring to I have to say I would find it odd for someone to take offence at Sinn Feins actions being denounced as a fucking sell out to be trying to organise an alternative to their fucking sell out and utter treachery .
But yet again, thats your business .

 

[framed]

My apologies for not having my own internet site back in 1996 that I can link to for you . The old cliches happen to be true though . Im more than capable of offering my own analysis but that would be a complete derailment of the thread . Im happy to do it on another that addresses those issues, as opposed to the one at hand, Red Action .
And Im not crowing about RA being wrong, Im actually quite disappointed reading that stuff again . And the only reason Ive even mentioned it is because the thread itself pertains directly to RAs links to, actual and fabricated, with Irish republicanism and their analysis of Irish republicanism . A criticism of an analysis that was wrong is perfectly valid and shouldnt be taken personally by anyone . Only a fucking crank takes criticism of analysis personally .

I didn't write it, so why would I take it personally? That's a silly point.

There's no doubt that, in hindsight, some of the RA analysis is 'off the ball', but we weren't the only ones who didn't foresee what was to come, or how rapidly the Shinners would politically deteriorate. Many of their own former supporters and members who now fill the ranks of anti-GFA organisations didn't see it coming either.

 

[framed]

Listen cheif, I couldnt give 2 fucks if your in the Legion of Mary or the boys brigade . Thats your business . However from a number of your comments its quite clear you take a quite disparaging attitude towards Irish republicans who dont support the Sinn Fein strategy and analysis. You pointed to their failure thus far to build an alternative to sinn fein that you yourself regard as viable as indicating there was something morally and politically deficient in their opposing it in the first place . And given your agitated defence of an analysis that was praising the sinn fein strategy and what they signed up to the whole way down the line I dont see why youd oppose it now . If youve changed your mind theese days good . But again thats your business , none of mine.

And as for bile fuck off with that . Ive no axe to grind against RA whatsoever . Ive plenty of bile for what Sinn Fein did though so if thats what your referring to I have to say I would find it odd for someone to take offence at Sinn Feins actions being denounced as a fucking sell out to be trying to organise an alternative to their fucking sell out and utter treachery .
But yet again, thats your business .

You are confusing me with someone else 'chief'.

I don't support the Sinn Fein strategy.

So your analysis was right. I'm sure that must be affirming for you, but apart from that, so what?

Interventions by the likes of LiamO only serve to further confuse and portray Red Action as unquestioning SF cheerleaders. That was never the case. He can chip in with his well-rehearsed 'Jihadi' soundbite against anyone who questions the SF strategy, but the jibes and insults are an avoidance of political reality. That's an unquestioning fellow-traveler for ye...

 

[Casually Red]

I didn't write it, so why would I take it personally? That's a silly point.

There's no doubt that, in hindsight, some of the RA analysis is 'off the ball', but we weren't the only ones who didn't foresee what was to come, or how rapidly the Shinners would politically deteriorate. Many of their own former supporters and members who now fill the ranks of anti-GFA organisations didn't see it coming either.

thats what I said in my posts, some very good freinds of mine supported it back then . Dont now . Im not having a go at Red Action themselves . An awful lot of good people..best of people.. who made the mistake of trusting a bunch of snakes were taken in at the time .
The point ive been trying..and obviously failing..to get accross is that as that remains their stated analysis and its so abundantly clear now to have been the wrong one, it would be a timely move for them to revise it . Because as it stands thats the record and it doesnt reflect well on them as regards their analysis on Irish affairs . And as their an outfit I respect I dont like to see that type of stuff reflecting poorly on them .
Because they generally do have a very good political analysis . Its the very reason afterall why theres this attempt to smear them with those Warrington killings in the first place . Some bunch of spooks dont like what their saying and want to make sure it doesnt resonate . Hence the smear .

What is good about it though is its a very good historical record of the political arguments that were used to con the vast majority of republican support at the time .

 

[TopCat]

...

 

[framed]

thats what I said in my posts, some very good freinds of mine supported it back then . Dont now . Im not having a go at Red Action themselves . An awful lot of good people..best of people.. who made the mistake of trusting a bunch of snakes were taken in at the time .
The point ive been trying..and obviously failing..to get accross is that as that remains their stated analysis and its so abundantly clear now to have been the wrong one, it would be a timely move for them to revise it . Because as it stands thats the record and it doesnt reflect well on them as regards their analysis on Irish affairs . And as their an outfit I respect I dont like to see that type of stuff reflecting poorly on them .
Because they generally do have a very good political analysis . Its the very reason afterall why theres this attempt to smear them with those Warrington killings in the first place . Some bunch of spooks dont like what their saying and want to make sure it doesnt resonate . Hence the smear .

What is good about it though is its a very good historical record of the political arguments that were used to con the vast majority of republican support at the time .

Fair doos.

 

[Casually Red]

Id like to add here that my robust remarks about the articles in question were not intended to be abusive, either to RA or the chap that wrote them . A chap Ive never met but of whom Ive heard nothing but positive things . My intent was simply to convey bluntness , not any kind of personal or political attack on anyone in RA .

Sincerest apologies of it came accross like that .

 

[framed]

Id like to add here that my robust remarks about the articles in question were not intended to be abusive, either to RA or the chap that wrote them . A chap Ive never met but of whom Ive heard nothing but positive things . My intent was simply to convey bluntness , not any kind of personal or political attack on anyone in RA .

Sincerest apologies of it came accross like that .

You're entitled to criticise an analysis that you didn't agree with then or now...

I wasn't defending the indefensible, though it may have appeared that way initially. I think we were wrong to put so much faith in the Shinners' strategy, which in the end has amounted to a full scale retreat from republican principles.

 

[TopCat]

a full scale retreat from republican principles.

I would be interested in more on this.

 

[framed]

I would be interested in more on this.

Another time for that one I think TC, ma heid's pickled the now.

 

[Casually Red]

Red Action didnt do anything different than the vast majority of the republican base in that regard . Its very easy to see how republican supporters based in England and Scotland, faced with a daily media barrage of how Gerry Adams and others were the devil incarnate and how much the establishment supposedly despised them would instinctively be protective of them rather than taking a hostile or critical eye to them . It was little different in Ireland either , even up until relatively recently . They had a united movement behind them, alternative criticisms seemed almost non existent . And to top it all those guys were very charismatic and persuasive and seemed to be getting somewhere, things seemed to be changing . 99 percent of republicans werent prepared to believe the provos were giving it up after all that with nothing in return, it seemed totally preposterous as a notion. An impossibility . So as its an impossibility then its obvious the strategy ..whatever it was..had to be supported as it was going to deliver objectives.
Some good freinds of my own absolutely cringe today about the shenanigans they got up to back then, making sure certain off message ex prisoners got de invited to speaking events, that certain voices and views were censored..all that type of shitty behind the scenes stuff and much worse .

But anyways, back to the original point of the thread and the smears . Plainly Red Action today are either saying or doing something that the establishment have taken heed of for some reason . Or the establishment fear they may say or do in the near future . Theres definitely a game afoot with dragging all this shit up to smear them . And a nasty little game at that . The point of it would appear to be the most interesting thing . Its probably good to know also that your political positon is considered somehow threatening or unwelcoming by the powers that be , otherwise they wouldnt be at it .

 

[Casually Red]

just out of interest is there any indication that toerag MacIntyre has had any input into that programme

 

[miktheword]

just out of interest is there any indication that toerag MacIntyre has had any input into that programme

When the narrator mentioned the PO Box for initial contact with RA would probably be in Hulme, I was expecting the Noonan link to come up that was in McIntyre's 'At Home with the Noonans'; namely that he said he did the reccy for Warrington. (and had the 32CSM, I think, doing a tribute at his grave, stating he was a volunteer)

That it didn't come up isn't, of course, proof of his (McIntyre's) non involvement. It does seem to point to further sloppiness of the programme makers though, that they didn't include it. Our security forces...no joined up thinking!

 

[Casually Red]

When the narrator mentioned the PO Box for initial contact with RA would probably be in Hulme, I was expecting the Noonan link to come up that was in McIntyre's 'At Home with the Noonans'; namely that he said he did the reccy for Warrington. (and had the 32CSM, I think, doing a tribute at his grave, stating he was a volunteer)

That it didn't come up isn't, of course, proof of his (McIntyre's) non involvement. It does seem to point to further sloppiness of the programme makers though, that they didn't include it. Our security forces...no joined up thinking!

I seem to remember that came as a bit of a surprise to one or 2 32csm people I spoke to in Ireland about it at the time. Dont remember any mention of it on any of their sites and stuff either and they usually give good coverage to any commemorations they authorise . Im absolutely flabbergasted theyd permit any of their people to either make such claims, and to that scummer of all people given his record of hatchet jobs against themselves . He even once posed as a RIRA man running about the balkans a number of years back to do a story aimed at blackening certain quarters.
With the stuff he was previously alleging about Noonan and Warrington i was pondering a possible linkage. MacIntyre is a busy little bee these days back over in the aul sod trying to stir up a lot of shenanigans on republicans on pretty much a weekly basis . Some really vile stuff from the same rag of a paper hes writing for currently is being published with no reporters name attached to it , while hes been making slightly less vile claims on roughly the same issues . It has a distinct whiff of him and his style though .

 

[Casually Red]

edit