Blair says NI progress 'possible'

Progress is possible in the Northern Ireland process but the IRA must stop all violence, Tony Blair has said. The prime minister was speaking after PSNI Chief Constable Hugh Orde said he believed the IRA was behind December's £26.5m Northern Bank raid in Belfast.

Sinn Fein has rejected the claim. The DUP is calling on the government to move ahead without republicans.

Mr Blair said there must be "a definitive end to all forms of paramilitary or criminal activity".

He told the BBC's Breakfast with Frost programme: "There cannot be a proper comprehensive deal for peace in Northern Ireland unless the IRA clearly and definitively give up not just terrorist acts of violence, but criminal acts of violence."

It is critical that Blair standup to Paisley though.

It is more important that he stand up to Sinn Fein. In recent times there has been an implication of moral equivalence between Paisley and Sinn Fein which is totally false. Paisley has said some pretty distasteful things, but has always refuted violence, the entire leadership of Sinn Fein have been members of the I.R.A.

Check out the picture of the Rev. Ian Paisley in "The IRA A History" written by Tim PAt Coogan. In the photos between pages 142 and 143 you'll see your man of "non-violence" with his club ready to beat the unarmed Irish Civil Rights Marchers.

Paisley is also regarded as the leader of the violently inclined DUP and has very close ties to one of the most violent terrorsist groups on the Protestant side. In all honesty, his hands are redder than Gerry Adam's hands ever were.

Likewise, even St Thomas Aquinas taught we are allowed to resist tyranny with violence when necessary. The general rule for Catholics to follow according to Aquinas is to answer the question whether violence will make matters worse. If the tyranny is already using violence, then the question becomes a moot point and defending yourself and your people becomes a moral obligation even to the point of executing the tyrant.

Adams is not the problem. The IRA has decommissioned most of its weapons. The problem is Paisley will never be anything but an anti-Catholic bigot and common murderer.

Paisley is also regarded as the leader of the violently inclined DUP and has very close ties to one of the most violent terrorsist groups on the Protestant side.

Now let's leave fantasy aside and return to reality. Teh D.U.P. whilst being run by rather distasteful characters (such as Dr. Paisley) is not a terrorist party like Sinn Fein. The Loyalist terrorists have their own parties (such as the Progressive Unionists). The D.U.P., the U.U.P. and the U.K.U.P. are all peaceful parties from the unionist side; the S.D.L.P. is a peaceful party from the nationalist side.

Likewise, even St Thomas Aquinas taught we are allowed to resist tyranny with violence when necessary.

I have no problem with that statement. It is, however, utterly irrelevant to a discussion of Northern Ireland.

The IRA has decommissioned most of its weapons.

The I.R.A. is now more involved with its drugs dealing business and general thuggery than politics admittedly; but it claims a right to keep weapons just in case it wishes to restart its murderous attempt to create a united Marxist Ireland.

The problem is Paisley will never be anything but an anti-Catholic bigot and common murderer.

I agree with the former part, his views on the Holy Father and the Church are ghastly in the extreme; but to call him a common murderer is to enter the lalaland of Sinn Fein/I.R.A. which is alien to reality as their marxist terrorist friends in Libya and Central America.

"Now let's leave fantasy aside and return to reality. Teh D.U.P. whilst being run by rather distasteful characters (such as Dr. Paisley) is not a terrorist party like Sinn Fein. The Loyalist terrorists have their own parties (such as the Progressive Unionists). The D.U.P., the U.U.P. and the U.K.U.P. are all peaceful parties from the unionist side; the S.D.L.P. is a peaceful party from the nationalist side."

In reality, the DUP is the Sinn Fein of the Protestant side.
The UUP is in between Sinn Fein and the SDLP as far as its severity goes. (The DUP and the UUP have close ties to organizations on the terrorist list. To deny it is dishonest.)

My Statement: "Likewise, even St Thomas Aquinas taught we are allowed to resist tyranny with violence when necessary."

Your response: "I have no problem with that statement. It is, however, utterly irrelevant to a discussion of Northern Ireland."

You must have missed the point. It followed in the rest of the my statements below it.

"but to call him a common murderer is to enter the lalaland of Sinn Fein/I.R.A. which is alien to reality as their marxist terrorist friends in Libya and Central America"

Don't underestimate him. He and his friends have plenty experience murdering Irish Catholics. The real difference is that the Unionists killed "legally" in their eyes and therefore are not murderers nor criminals nor terrorists. The problem over in North Ireland is the same as it has always been. Unequal treatment before the law.

You must have missed the point.

No I did not, I merely refuse to accept your premise.

The problem over in North Ireland is the same as it has always been. Unequal treatment before the law.

There we have it. This is not about the people of Northern Ireland, it is not about Catholicism, it is not about political affiliation. It is all about attacking the British.

"No I did not, I merely refuse to accept your premise."

Odd. The premis is fine. The part I don't like is the conclusion but then Chesterton said logic by itself would drive a man insane. Thus, while the conclusion and the whole argument including the premis are logically sound I still like to point out that only an insane person would think more violence will solve the problem in North Ireland.

My comment:"The problem over in North Ireland is the same as it has always been. Unequal treatment before the law."

Your response: "There we have it. This is not about the people of Northern Ireland, it is not about Catholicism, it is not about political affiliation. It is all about attacking the British."

As a descendant of Admiral George Dewey and as kin to many of England's finest Admirals I'm not inclined to attack the British people. As a person of Scottish descent I'm not inclined to attack the Scottish people (whom I would love to see peacefully independent) of the British government.

I could read Chesterton all day long if my eyes could take it; he is my favorite. I enjoy reading Cardinal Newman's various essays and sermons too. I have a copy of Magna Carta in the Latin and the English translation and like to reread it occassionally to refresh my memory of the document.

I have a great deal of admiration for the Queen and think she has done a wonderful job of making Britain more civilized.

All that being said you will understand why I'm not anti-English (Newberry, Dillingham, McClean, Fowler, Brown, Young, and Henry are just some of the English surnames you will find in my family tree besides Dewey.). It isn't about hating England because I don't. It is about social justice and having a sound legal philosophy.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.