Archives For Terrorism

Statement by TUV leader Jim Allister:

“I have today written to the Chief Constable asking how many HET investigations have been impacted by the issuing of “comfort letters” to “on the runs”. It is essential that victims have clarity on this point.

“I have also written to the Attorney General, John Larkin QC, today asking if since coming to office he has been involved in any way in the “administrative scheme”. Continue Reading…

Sinn Fein Ghoulish Party for Downey

Admin —  February 27, 2014

Reacting to the news that Republicans are organising a party in Donegal to welcome John Downey home Jim Allister said:

“It is bad enough that the innocent victims of the Hyde Park bombing were betrayed by their government to prop up the grubby “peace process” in Northern Ireland but now Sinn Fein/IRA are rubbing their noses in it by organising a party to celebrate Downey’s return from London. Continue Reading…

Why Doesn’t DUP Pull Out Now?

Admin —  February 26, 2014

Statement by TUV leader Jim Allister:

“Peter Robinson’s threat to resign over the fallout from the Downey judgement is bluster.

“Many of the facts surrounding these get out of jail free cards have yet to emerge but it is evident that the Government saw dealing with on the run terrorists as key to getting Stormont back up and running. Continue Reading…

Downey Case – The Stormont Fallout

Admin —  February 26, 2014

Statement by TUV leader Jim Allister:

“First and foremost my thoughts are with those who lost their loved ones in the IRA’s Hyde Park bombing, and all other victims of the 187 afforded amnesty. They have been cruelly denied justice because of a sordid deal with a Government which evidently viewed keeping the corrupt “peace process” on track as more important than securing justice for the citizens whose primary duty it was to defend. Continue Reading…

Commenting on the judgment in the case of John Downey Jim Allister said:

“John Anthony Downey was accused of the most horrendous crimes. The Hyde Park bombing cost the lives of four people – Roy John Bright, Dennis Richard Anthony Daly, Simon Andrew Tipper and Geoffrey Vernon Young. Continue Reading…

Statement by TUV Leader Jim Allister:-

“The nigh hysterical chorus demanding the removing of flags from the Giro d’Italia route sets a recent reply from the DRD minister in an interesting context.

“I asked Minister Kennedy:

To ask the Minister for Regional Development what progress has been made in securing the removal of terrorist commemorations from his Department’s property, including that of its arm’s-length bodies. Continue Reading…

Statement by TUV leader Jim Allister:

“I am disappointed, but from previous experience not terribly surprised, that I have not been afforded the opportunity to question the Justice Minister about the proposed visit of an IRA escapee to a prison in order to discuss his book The Escape.

“While it is welcome that Gerry Kelly’s visit to a book club at Hydebankwood has been cancelled it is absolutely outrageous that this was ever contemplated in the first place. When I first heard of the plan on Friday morning frankly I did not know whether to believe it or not. Continue Reading…

Statement by TUV leader Jim Allister:

“When the Assembly debated the appointment of Douglas Bain as Assembly Commissioner for Standards I expressed my disappointment with the choice of someone who so neatly fitted within the quango circuit. My view that Mr Bain is completely unsuited for the role is reinforced by the fact that he has decided that a complaint made against Gerry Kelly following comments he made on the Nolan Show about his breakout from the Maze is inadmissible, a decision agreed to by the Committee on Standards and Privileges. Continue Reading…

An extract from Jim Allister MLA’s contribution to yesterday’s Haass debate:

Mr Allister: I am in this House unashamedly and unapologetically as a unionist.  Therefore, when I read the seventh document from Haass, I make no apology for asking this question:  what is in this document for unionism?  Sadly, I find nothing, effectively, for unionism.

I consider the issue of the national flag.  The document does nothing to restore the Union flag to its rightful place on Belfast City Hall.  It does nothing to give it more prominent display on this Building.  On flags, it delivers nothing for unionism.

On the past, this is a document that fails to even grapple with one of the most obscene, objectionable matters that touches upon the past:  the definition of a victim.  It does not at all address the issue of the equivalence that exists between the victim-maker and the victim.  In that, it is a gross betrayal of innocent victims.  I think that anyone supportive of innocent victims should have, within that process, made that the beginning and the end of the test of whether or not there was anything attainable.  That has been a scourge in this society that has been used by the victim-makers to validate themselves and provide equivalence with those they made victims.

I come to the document and look to how it will deal with terrorism.  I am still waiting for Mr Lyttle to put me right, but I find that it has nothing to say about the fact that, for 30 years and more, this Province was subjected to an unwarranted, vile campaign of terrorism.  Instead, it sanitises it down to “the conflict”.  It talks about actors.  Mr Speaker, it was no actor who firebombed the La Mon hotel; it was no actor who took 10 innocent workmen out of a van at Kingsmills and slaughtered them in cold blood; it was no actor who planted the bomb in Enniskillen; it was no actor who went into a public house in Greysteel.  They were terrorists, one and all.  Anyone who fails to address that fundamental foundational issue in dealing with the past is making no serious effort to deal with it.  On that, these proposals hopelessly flounder.

You then move, within that, to discover that innocent victims are meant to be exhilarated and encouraged by the fact that they might get some sanitised, self-serving version of Provo or Ulster Freedom Fighter (UFF) truth about why their innocent relatives died.  It can even be anonymous.  It is certainly untestable.  That is itself an insult to innocent victims, who suffered so much at the hands of terrorists.

Mr Lyttle: Will the Member give way?

Mr Allister: Yes.

Mr Lyttle: Does the Member acknowledge that there are innocent victims in Northern Ireland who have lobbied for, asked for and requested the very process that he has just so fundamentally objected to?

Mr Allister: If there are innocent victims who want to be satisfied with a self-serving, Provo version of the truth that they cannot test, that will raise more questions than it will answer and that might even come from an anonymous source, it is a matter for those victims, but, I must say that I do not know too many of them.  The innocent victims whom I know crave justice, and justice is someone being held accountable for the villainy that was visited on them and their family, not hearing some self-serving story that is part of the rewrite of history by perpetrators of terrorism.  That is the vehicle that the Haass proposals offer, in the diminution of, of course, and as an alternative to, the proper pursuit of justice.

On parading, the proposals open up a whole new vista, where anyone, anywhere can object to any parade anywhere and then require the parade organisers to subject themselves to negotiation with that individual.  We are meant to think that that is progress?  Like everything else that seems to be in the proposals, that is not progress and not an advance.

Mr Allister: What the proposals represent, and this is why it is so enthusiastic for them, is another opportunity to pocket what Sinn Féin sees as some advance until the concession meter next needs to be fed, and then it will be out demanding more.

TUV’s analysis of the Haass proposals

General observations:

1. Throughout the document there is not a single acknowledgement that for 30 years we faced a campaign of vicious terrorism; instead “terrorism” is sanitised down to “the conflict”, inferring the mutual responsibility of the terroriser and the terrorised. The IRA escapes even a single mention. The only time “terrorist” is mentioned is in the same breath as “freedom fighter” (p22). There is no acceptance that terrorism was wrong and never justified. Continue Reading…