Terrorism

America: In support of a Land of Terrorists or Freedom Fighters? 

I was drawn for this issue, to write about the recent events both at home, here in the USA and abroad. The bombing in Bali, a place where ordinary people go to relax, to the Congress and Senate giving their support to President Bush in his mission to bring Iraq to disclose their Weapons of Mass Destruction and the current event of a sniper in the Washington DC area, who has carried out 11 acts of violence, killing nine people, at the time of writing this article. 

Maybe more than writing an article on current events, in writing this article I wanted to try and understand what Terrorism really is and what it means to the ordinary man, woman and child and what it means to me as a Loyalist. 

Surfing the Internet and you could spend a great deal of time reading the articles regarding Terrorism. In my brief one-hour scan, I found a great many articles, which I have used to form these comments. Anyone who wants the Anti Terrorism Website Addresses please contact NAL. In my opinion, everyone should take the time to because I believe it will help you argue the point that Loyalism and being a Loyalist is a noble cause.

Starting with a definition of Terrorism from Webster’s Dictionary. 

 “THE SYSTEMATIC USE OF TERROR ESPECIALLY AS A MEANS OF COERCION’ 

It doesn’t bring you too much understanding, unless you go to the definition of ‘Reign of Terror’  

 “VIOLENCE (AS BOMBING) COMMITTED BY GROUPS IN ORDER TO INTIMIDATE A POPULATION OR GOVERMMENT INTO GRANTING THEIR DEMANDS”

Now this begins to make some sense as it relates to Ulster. But one-step further before we begin to think about the issue. The United Nations in 1993 defined Terrorism as: 

“ CRIMINAL ACTS INTENDED OR CALCULATED TO PROVOKE A STATE OF TERROR IN THE GENERAL PUBLIC, A GROUP OF PERSONS OR PARTICULAR PERSONS FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES ARE IN ANY CIRCUMSTANCES UNJUSTIFIABLE, WHATEVER THE CONSIDERATIONS OF A POLITICAL, PHILOSOPHICAL, IDEOLOGICAL, RACIAL, ETHNIC, RELIGIOUS OR OTHER NATURE THAT MAY BE INVOKED TO JUSTIFY THEM” 

Where does that take us?? Based on this definition anyone and everyone who utters a word, or lifts a hand or a gun against anyone else is a terrorist. Gangs, Snipers, Wife Beaters, Husband Beaters, Bombers, Football Fans singing sectarian and racist songs and so on. In other words we are all Terrorists. The interpretation covers all. No wonder President Bush has had enough.

There are over 100 definitions of terrorism that I have read today but all have one thing in common. In simple terms, Terrorism is an act by groups who want political or social change against innocent people of a society that want to live in peace.

The word ‘Terrorism first appeared in 1795 during the French Revolution. In essence the French Revolutionaries used terror to consolidate their regime and eliminate potential opposition. In the 20th Century, many would describe the acts of the Black population in South Africa Zimbabwe, Kenya and Uganda, the Israeli’s in Palestine, the Liberation Front in Algeria, the Viet Cong, in Vietnam as terrorists. Others defined them as freedom fighters. There is one fact though in this discussion that we should all come to grips with. In the majority of the cases mentioned above these so-called terrorists or freedoms fighters were subject to the rule of a foreign government. It was rightfully their land and the right to govern it was theirs.

Which comes to Ulster and the differences between those nations mentioned above and the acts of the IRA. 

One fact needs to be realized before we consider the issue of whether the IRA and their allies are Terrorists or Freedom Fighters.  The United Nations consider Ulster part of the United Kingdom and thus throughout the Free World those that fight against that fact with bomb and with gun, are in fact Terrorists. Reference the United Nations resolution 51/210 1999.

Commonly, in articles the IRA, PIRA, RIRA and the CIRA are mentioned as terrorists. Interestingly in Martin Walker’s article for the United Press International, he points out that the “PLO and the IRA have survived out of the early terrorist groups due to popular legitimacy that stemmed from their origins as national liberation movements” The British Government who only 20 years before had encountered the Israeli terrorists and lost against them, have throughout the bombing campaign in London, the acts of terrorists against British subjects in Ulster, have ‘strove to maintain the civil liberties of the IRA and their supporters’  This  however makes you wonder. Why would the British Government work with a Terrorist Organization against Loyal subjects of the Sovereignty?? 

Prime Minister Blair recently commented 

“This mass terrorism is the new evil in our world today. fanatics perpetrate it 

who are utterly indifferent to the sanctity of human life, and we the democracies of this world are going to have to come together and fight it together." 

Now where is Mr. Blair when the Sinn Fein and their armed allies continue to attack Loyalist areas of Belfast, Londonderry and Armagh? And make it clear in your mind, for every political wing there is an armed force behind it. So is Prime Minister Blair more interested in having tea with Mr. Adams and Mr. McGuiness, who are known terrorists or bringing the issue to a head. Ulster is British and as Mr. Blair decides to commit British troops to the future war against Iraq, maybe he should remember who supported the IRA and who have supported the British Government from the population in Ulster. I doubt very much Mr. Blair will see many IRA men running to help his cause in Iraq. After all they were allies in terrorism where they not. Reformed maybe, but nonetheless, Terrorists. 

But more to the point where is President Bush in this discussion? 

This week Mr. Blair has come out to demand the IRA disband. Where did that come from? Why now??  Politics or his belief that the people of Ulster want peace, we only have to guess?  And where does that leave President Bush and his dilemma that America not only harbors IRA terrorists but allows American Citizens to fund raise on their behalf. Or the fact that IRA terrorists are allowed to come to this country, some even get visas so that they can escape persecution by the British Government. A paper in the Terrorist Research Archives recently pointed out that today; “One country’s terrorist is another country’s terrorist” If this is the case when will President Bush come out and condemn the IRA, the PIRA and not just ban one wing of a terrorist organization (RIRA) Are the actions of the PIRA in Columbia not enough to convince the Bush administration?  But there again only 12 years ago the USA government were sponsoring terrorists in Columbia and other South American countries to act against the Governments who where not friendly towards the USA and their policies. When will America look inside and deal with those, who have political connections, and yet support terrorism??

Is terrorism alive and well in the USA? On April 19th 1995, the Federal Building in Oklahoma was bombed. Timothy McVeigh reported to be part of a White Supremacist group was convicted. In the years since we have seem the bombing of Black Churches, shootings at Jewish Temples and skin head beatings of Blacks, Jews and Immigrants.  We saw the attacks on the World Trade Center and the subsequent Anthrax mailings. And beside the day-to-day gang violence we have seen the sniper attacks in the Washington DC area and the school shootings by teenagers who have lost their way in the world. 

Maybe, President Bush should go after those that want to use Weapons of Mass Destruction against others in the World. He should go after those that want to take away the freedom of good, ordinary citizens of this Big World. And all freedom loving people can only in their hearts support this. But should we not expect that our World Leaders also look inside their own nations and destroy the terrorists from within. 

We have today a sniper that is killing innocent people. A terrorist or simply a nutcase? And yet in this age of technology, he or she can not be found. In America the police cannot use the Army and their spy planes to help out. Makes you wonder. In Ulster the IRA and their allies could have been defeated. Not by ground troops but by technology, not that hard, even in the 1970’s. But instead we sent in ground troops and we continue to do so. But by politics, why were the Catholics of Ulster not offered a chanced to move south. Simply the Ireland doesn’t want them. Maybe the Loyalists in Ulster feel as if the British Government has ignored them. Maybe they have but 30 years of troops in Ulster makes you think otherwise. 

So really why are we Loyalists and what does that mean to us all?  A definition of Loyalist from Webster. 

“ ONE WHO MAINTAINS LOYALTY TO AN ESTABLISHED GOVERNMENT, POLITICAL PARTY, OR SOVEREIGN, ESPECIALLY DURING WAR OR REVOLUTIONARY CHANGE.” 

America went through its Revolutionary War. And the Civil War. And us that live here benefit from it. But do we have a right to involve ourselves in the acts of others throughout the world. Whether on a personal level or on a Government Level I fear not. And we certainly have no right to influence changes in the world, which do not benefit the world at large. 

Ulster will be a place where a last stand for freedom will be made. Each one of us have to decide whether to act, in arms or in world, the latter is the better cause, to see a nation of Scots Irish live their lives in peace. We can pretend to do it in America, we can pretend to do to it in Scotland and we can watch our thoughts and heritage given up by many that we love. But rest assured there will be a few that will fight for the ultimate right of freedom.

Faith Hope and Charity

Thanks to one of the Faithful

Recently Tom Plunkett, a member of the Detroit LOL 434 was diagnosed with cancer. Tom recently went through a major operation and with Faith, Hope and Charity is on the road to recovery.

I first met Tom through the Glasgow Rangers Conventions. He is a man of great faith and a lover of his faith, his team, his flute but much more. He is a man who loves life and the people who are proud to be in his company. I count myself in that group. And for that I am thankful. I have never heard him demean another religion or person. All I have heard is a positive nature and an underlying caring for everyone.

Tom was a founding member of the North American Rangers Supporters Association. He is a past master of his Lodge. He spreads the word about issues that we as Protestants should be concerned about.

A great man who I feel privileged to have met and know as a friend. 

As I mentioned Tom is on his way to recover. But it won’t be easy. Celebrate the Man by sending his your thoughts and prayers. And ask him while you are at it how you can become as loyal as he as been.

American Independence 1775 - 1773

By the mid-eighteenth century, the population of the British colonies in America had been swollen by influxes of Germans, French and other European emigrants. They lacked the strong sentimental ties with the home country of the origional English settlers. There were also many Scottish and Irish. America was becoming a nation of 13 states and was beginning to resent being regarded as a profitable overseas possession.The expense of wars with France and Spain over the new territories, however, was raising doubts in England and increasing the national debt.

Britain's success in defeating the French in Canada gave the colonists confidence, as the threat of occupation by another foreign power receded and they began to resent the taxes levied by Westminister. This came to a head in Boston where ' in 1770, British troops fired on and caused the death of 6 protesters. Again in 1773 when the unpopular tea duty was rejected by Americans, dressed as Indians, they dumped the tea chests into the sea.

The war that broke out began in Lexington in 1775. The first phase ended at Saratoga, where a misconceived advance down the Hudson River by General Burgoyne was defeated.

Britain's defeat brought support for the American colonists from France and Spain and threatened Britain's naval supremacy. George Washington, in command of the American troops, was also having some difficulty in keeping his troops fed, paid and together. The southern states of America appeared to remain loyal to Britain, which encouraged Cornwallis to lead an expedition there. He was stopped at Yorktown where he surrendered in 1781, thus ending the War of Independence.

George Washington's role in gaining independence for the American colonies and later in unifying themunder the new U.S.Fereral Government cannot be overestimated. Labouring against great difficulties, he created the Continental Army, which fought and won the American Revolution( 1775-1783 ), out of what was little more than an armed mob. After an eight-year struggle, his design for victory brought final defeat to the British at Yorktown, Virginia, and forced Great Britain to grant independence to its overseas possession. 

Though to many of Britain's enemies this seemed to be a major blow to her overseas assets, this was not the case. Free of her costly American adventure, Britain was able to undertake the expansion  of other territories in Africa, Australia, New Zealand and the East.

Queen Elizabeth in Canada

The Queen's tour, at time of writing is almost half over, has been replete with so many multicultural groups, costumed ethnic dancers and aborigionals, that the stranger viewing this passing parade might fairly believe he was( a) in Asia, the Ukraine or Hong Kong or (b) had landed in Canada 300 years ago when Indians dominated the landscape.

There have been precious few references, cultural or otherwise, to those of British stock who settled Canada and brought with them the democratic tools, a justice system, Parliament, free elections and the like, that built this nation, not to mention the military system.

Her Majesty was in Hamilton , sw of Toronto and far enough removed from the Ontario capital that it suffers few of Toronto's ambitions or pretentions, to present the Argyll and Sutherland regiment their new colours. Queen Elizabeth being the Colonel - in - Chief.

That any serving minister of the Jean Chretian government, which has through longstanding policies of under-funding and neglect reduced the Canadian Military to the very brink of ruin, would dare to appear front and centre in this venue, in this honourable company, is nothing short of shocking.

The presentation of the new colours, and the formal trooping of the old, to the strains of Auld Lang Syne, is a profoundly important ceremony to a unit. That for the Argyll's, these are only the fourth stand of colours in their history, that The Queen presented the last stand herself in 1959. The fact that this regiment is celebrating its cenntenial has made this occasion more significant.

In the best seats were many war veterans. The Argylls served honourably in both world wars, winning 34 battle honours in Normandy and Vimy Ridge. Among the guests was Lieutenant - Colonel Bert Coffin, the regiment's last war time commander, now in his 92nd., year.

After the Queen arrived, dressed in a blue pleated boucle wool coat, she made her way down the red carpet and presented the new colours. They consist of two flags, one, the Queen's colour, which bears her cypher is basicaly a Canadian flag, the other a regimental one, in highland yellow with the units battle honours. The regiment marched their new colours for the first time past Her Majesty. It was a moving and stirring event and perhaps, for the first time on this tour, every movement and every word spoken, the fast march, royal salute, 3 hip hip hooray cheers for HM, even the exhuberant " OI " chants after she had left, really had some meaning and purpose.

I am not at all sure it is, reverance, Canadians, I feel, are starved for tradition for honest connections to their history. Perhaps the best moment of this fantastic visit was when our Queen entered the building. The band struck up God save the Queen and every one of the 17,000 plus audience jumped to their feet joined in and sang along. Most Canadians have been taken by surprise by the reverence shown to Our Monarch in this country. Her reception here has been warmer and more overtly  respectful than that accorded her in other Commonwealth countries. Many Canadians present were brought to tears only by Her Majesty's presence. GOD SAVE THE QUEEN.