The UVF and RHC are despicable terrorist organisations and both are "linked" to the Progressive Unionist Party. (PUP)
That Party holds its annual conference today amidst speculation that it too is "engaged in a debate about its future. Unusually, the party is refusing to allow journalists to attend. It is thought the party is attempting to persuade the UVF to follow the IRA's move to follow a purely political path."
Two points here.
First, The BBC is implying in this quotation that it is a matter of fact that the IRA is pursuing "a purely political path." This is, at best, unfounded BBC speculation and at worst, disgraceful BBC propagandising.
Second, if the PUP is only now contemplating "persuading" the UVF and RHC to abandon violence, this rather begs the question what EXACTLY has it been saying to these terror gangs since 1997?
Thankfully, most Unionists do not vote for the PUP. This party has sought to become a loyalist Sinn Fein - which is presumably why so many nationalists like Mr Ervine's "refreshing" style but his party has NO popular support. This PUP is a disgrace to Unionism and it would be best if all if it dissolved itself.
Totally agree David.
Posted by: Aileen | October 15, 2005 at 01:18 PM
Well spotted David.
Typical biased BBC.
Posted by: Howard | October 15, 2005 at 02:06 PM
When the state-sponsored national broadcaster uses well-known IRA/SF phrases such as "the armed struggle" and "the peace process", as well as that all-time favourite "weaponry put beyond use", as though they are the true word from the mouth of the oracle; instead of the parrotted sayings from the apologists for a bunch of gangsters, what else do you expect?
Posted by: Mike Cunningham | October 15, 2005 at 04:21 PM
Mike,
Quite right. It's their use of such language which fascinates but appalls me.
Posted by: David Vance | October 15, 2005 at 04:54 PM
David - the pedant in me says that they might just be OK in what they said - It could be argued that when they write "the IRA's move to follow a purely political path" they have only said that the IRA is moving but have not said they have arrived. But it's tenuous.
Any small chance that Loyalism could have any political future was removed with the killings of McMichael and Smallwood IMO.
Posted by: Madradin Ruad | October 15, 2005 at 06:55 PM
Has Mr.Ervine got a big black slug crawling between his upper lip and nose.
Someone tell him ;)
Posted by: Michael Collins | October 15, 2005 at 07:48 PM
It's been announced that the association will continue. http://www.breakingnews.ie/2005/10/15/story225657.html
Posted by: Madradin Ruad | October 15, 2005 at 11:36 PM
MR,
So, no change there. They remain a disgrace.
Posted by: David Vance | October 15, 2005 at 11:39 PM
Yes ...and Hain will continue to turn a blind eye. I think they have decided to accept that these bozos are at the same stage the provos were at 5 years ago and wait them out in the same way as they waited for SF and the IRA and turned a lot of blind eyes towards their crimes.
Posted by: Madradin Ruad | October 15, 2005 at 11:46 PM
David any luck on getting an honest radio or telivision show started that might be able to show the folly of some of the more assinine things said on the bbc and by the politicians
Posted by: The Troll | October 16, 2005 at 02:16 AM