Would this be where it is considered "unpopular" to mention that the IRA often trained at training camps in various locations in north africa and the middle east?
All the terrorist orginizations have connections with each other at some level, like hollywood actors or proffesionals of any stripe, terrorists and criminals move (more discreatly of course) in the same ciricles.
Trading notes on avoiding dection, possible targets, yes they hold their cards close to their chest, but they share intelligence frequently.
The origins of these terrorist groups is known, and it wasnt originaly islamic, Hamas, Islamic brotherhood, others all had their starts not as religious groups but more marxist groups, although one could argue the real reason for that was that they were clients of the Soviet Union and had KGB assistance.
In 1970 the so called "Dawsons Field" hijackings occured. It was what security experts should have been rembering WAY before 9/11.
On september 6th 1970 members of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, simultanious hijacked four aircraft from europe from the USA, they managed to take control of three of them, 2 of which they flew to Jordan, the fourth plane was an El Al plane, and El Al security thwarted the attackers.
In that attack there were non muslims and non arabs involved, at least one Hijacker was from Nicaraugua.
In the 1976 hijacking of Air France flight 193, there were 8 PLO members and two germans from the Baader-Meinhof Gang. This incident is known as Operation Entebbe, because after the terrorists released all the non jewish passengers (save the crew who refused to leave) the Israelis snuck into Uganda, raided the airplane, killed all the terrorists, and 45 ugandan soldiers who's goverment was mostly supportive of the hijackers.
Incidently the the two groups tried it again the next year with a Lufthansa flight, which german spec ops troops stormed in mogadeishu.
Its known that ETA, IRA and PLO operatives were all training in libya as late as 84, in the same camps.
I could if I really wanted start tying other terrorist orginizations togeather, in a more informal manner, again, they are like any other group or proffession, they have their conferances and ways of talking about what they do and how they do it with each other, even if they have different agendas. As long as those agendas dont obviously overlap, they can get along.
Well I get home from work and Tyver said what I was going to say. I Just wanted to add the Libya tried "to be true" once the invasion of Iraq started knowing full well they were next. And as an American Irish Catholic I would say that any North Irishman Catholic that bombs kids and not attacking military targets without a uniform is just as bad as Al Quieda and isn't even Christian at all. I think since Libya turned, the IRA were at the bargining table since they could get no more money from the Islamo-Fasicts.
As with the Anglo-North Irish relationship as complex as it is. I found an interesting chart that shows how many factions are involved. Both Caths and Prots extremest add to distruction. It appears that caucasions still did not behead captors for the video camera. No where in the cold war or previous wars did this happen.
Its odd that the groups who have become Al Queda were originaly in the 80's the "odd men out" of the terrorist picture due to their anti soviet stance while many other groups were clients of the soviets. The situation did start to change with the Syrian Brotherhood seeking to undermine the Assyrian goverment, a firm soviet client state. The late 80's you can see many middle eastern arab terrorist groups going from pro soviet, to neutral on the issue, and after the collapse of the Soviet Union they abandoned the "marxist" ideology completely and wrapped them selves up in either pan arab nationalism (the PLO is largly made up of such individuals) or Islamic rhetoric.
While Iraq may not have been in league with Al Queda it was certainly a haven for other groups. Such as the remenents of the above mention Assyrian brotherhood
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by PSI-KILLER [/i]
[B]I think since Libya turned, the IRA were at the bargining table since they could get no more money from the Islamo-Fasicts.
[/QUOTE]
Actually I think you need to look at lot closer to home, although how many years passed from the start of your "global war on terror" until Sinn Fein were banned from fund-raising in the US?
[QUOTE]
As with the Anglo-North Irish relationship as complex as it is. I found an interesting chart that shows how many factions are involved. Both Caths and Prots extremest add to distruction. It appears that caucasions still did not behead captors for the video camera. No where in the cold war or previous wars did this happen.
[/QUOTE]
I'm well aware of the situation in Northern Ireland. You have to remember, we've been the victims of terrorism for quite some time now, and what was America doing at the time? Funding them. I was simply highlighting how ludicrous, and racist, you're "Interesting" profiling test was. All you have to do is remember, just because the majority of suicide bombers are Muslim, doesn't mean the majority of Muslims are suicide bombers.
And Tyvar, do you know of any links between them and the Contras? The same contra's that Reagan illegally funded. Reagan (or should I said Reagan's staff) was no hero, he was a traitor.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Jambo [/i]
[B]Actually I think you need to look at lot closer to home, although how many years passed from the start of your "global war on terror" until Sinn Fein were banned from fund-raising in the US?[/B][/QUOTE]
Hear hear.
Fund-raising for the IRA in the US should have been outlawed decades ago. I can still remember that sickening coverage of Bill Clinton et al at a dinner with Jerry Adams singing "When Irish Eyes Are Smiling" during the last administration.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Jambo [/i]
[B]
And Tyvar, do you know of any links between them and the Contras? The same contra's that Reagan illegally funded. Reagan (or should I said Reagan's staff) was no hero, he was a traitor. [/B][/QUOTE]
Between who and the Contras?
Links between the Mujahadeen in the contras in the 80's yeah, just like the PLO and PFLP (many members of whom ended up in Hamass after the shakeups in the palestinian groups in the 90's) had link to the sandanistas in the 80's and before, One of the PFLP hijackers in the Dawson Field incident was a sandanista.
The US involvement with the Afgan mujahadeen reached its hight in about 1986, and was wrapped in in 1990 or so.
If you mean links between the IRA and the contras no, the IRA despite raising a shit pot full of money in the US north east (almost all of it from Massachussets and New York, in fact both Ted Kennedy and John Kerry have acted as IRA appologists over the years) Were tied into the terrorist groups that ultimatly worked with the KGB and soviets, they were suspicious of too many entanglements with the CIA. The one case I know of where it is claimed of CIA involvment is a 1982 arms shipment, and its farily obvious that claim was merely a defense tactic in order to help secure an aquittal.
Part of the reason why I highly doubt the CIA supplied arms to the IRA is the IRA was working with various groups that were known to be hostile to US interests. If the operation had sanctioned by the CIA it would have been done with the idea of planting a mole inside the IRA who could get data on other orginizations.
And if that HAD been the case, it never would have even made it into public record, let alone court.
And I find it ironic that a foreigner would refer to an american president as a traitor. A traitor is more then a criminal, a traitor works for his own advantage or the advantage of another nation state at the expense of his own. While in the long run, helping the mujahadene has caused us some trouble, at the time it allowed us to do great damage to our major advessary.
Maybe I should refer to Churchill, FDR, Truman and definatly Clement Attlee as traitors also?
They allowed weapons and materials to go to the Soviet goverment (and a regime under stalin which was more brutal and bloodier then Hitlers, including ethnic genoicide against various groups) which it used not only to defend itself against the germans, but then turned around and used to do great damage to western interests post WWII, hell Attlees people let the Rolls Royce Nene fall in the hands of the Soviets and if it had not been for that the soviets might not have developed a decent jet aircraft for an additional 5 or 6 years post WWII. But at the time the decision was made from stratgic necessity.
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Morden279 [/i]
[B]Hear hear.
Fund-raising for the IRA in the US should have been outlawed decades ago. I can still remember that sickening coverage of Bill Clinton et al at a dinner with Jerry Adams singing "When Irish Eyes Are Smiling" during the last administration.
Regards,
Morden [/B][/QUOTE]
Problem is that frankly the supporters of the IRA were all tied up with the democratic party, which had a grip on at least one house of the legislature or the executive till 1994. The whole mess was tied up in US domestic politics.
"America" was not funding the IRA but the Irish American community in Boston was, and their political elietes such as Ted Kennedy, John Kerry and a host of others. In fact the Irish American support for the IRA is one of the reasons why you will rarely find an "IRISH-american" in the republican party, because the repubs were pretty much anti IRA.
Hell you didnt have many catholics in the republican party till the 80's come to think of it.
Anyways due to democratic party politics the support of the irish americans was percivied as critical, and the Massachussets delegation was the center piece to the north eastern democratic block, they were able to keep the issue on the back burner.
In fact Bill Clinton and Gerry Adams little meeting caused a bit of a backlash, probably was one of the reasons the repubs picked up more seats in 1996, especially since even then US awareness of terrorism was on the rise.
Tyvar, owing to my political sentiments, I tend to be pro-Republican, especially in the face of what you've described. (I've always known of the pro-feinianism and support for the IRA amongst the Democrats and their supporters.) Whilst I have certain reservations on the Bush Adminstration's foreign policy, the US Government's stand on the IRA is extremely gratifying and a long time coming in fruition.
As an end-note, sectarianism itself in Northern Ireland is become more and more blurred, and is far less sustained and clear-cut than it was. People are sick to death of the violence and murders, and just want the situation there to end. Waning support for the paramilitaries, (especially the IRA) in the region can only be a good thing.
Comments
All the terrorist orginizations have connections with each other at some level, like hollywood actors or proffesionals of any stripe, terrorists and criminals move (more discreatly of course) in the same ciricles.
Trading notes on avoiding dection, possible targets, yes they hold their cards close to their chest, but they share intelligence frequently.
The origins of these terrorist groups is known, and it wasnt originaly islamic, Hamas, Islamic brotherhood, others all had their starts not as religious groups but more marxist groups, although one could argue the real reason for that was that they were clients of the Soviet Union and had KGB assistance.
In 1970 the so called "Dawsons Field" hijackings occured. It was what security experts should have been rembering WAY before 9/11.
On september 6th 1970 members of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, simultanious hijacked four aircraft from europe from the USA, they managed to take control of three of them, 2 of which they flew to Jordan, the fourth plane was an El Al plane, and El Al security thwarted the attackers.
In that attack there were non muslims and non arabs involved, at least one Hijacker was from Nicaraugua.
In the 1976 hijacking of Air France flight 193, there were 8 PLO members and two germans from the Baader-Meinhof Gang. This incident is known as Operation Entebbe, because after the terrorists released all the non jewish passengers (save the crew who refused to leave) the Israelis snuck into Uganda, raided the airplane, killed all the terrorists, and 45 ugandan soldiers who's goverment was mostly supportive of the hijackers.
Incidently the the two groups tried it again the next year with a Lufthansa flight, which german spec ops troops stormed in mogadeishu.
Its known that ETA, IRA and PLO operatives were all training in libya as late as 84, in the same camps.
I could if I really wanted start tying other terrorist orginizations togeather, in a more informal manner, again, they are like any other group or proffession, they have their conferances and ways of talking about what they do and how they do it with each other, even if they have different agendas. As long as those agendas dont obviously overlap, they can get along.
As with the Anglo-North Irish relationship as complex as it is. I found an interesting chart that shows how many factions are involved. Both Caths and Prots extremest add to distruction. It appears that caucasions still did not behead captors for the video camera. No where in the cold war or previous wars did this happen.
millnet.com article below:
[url]http://milnet.com/ira/Irish-Troubles.html[/url]
While Iraq may not have been in league with Al Queda it was certainly a haven for other groups. Such as the remenents of the above mention Assyrian brotherhood
[B]I think since Libya turned, the IRA were at the bargining table since they could get no more money from the Islamo-Fasicts.
[/QUOTE]
Actually I think you need to look at lot closer to home, although how many years passed from the start of your "global war on terror" until Sinn Fein were banned from fund-raising in the US?
[QUOTE]
As with the Anglo-North Irish relationship as complex as it is. I found an interesting chart that shows how many factions are involved. Both Caths and Prots extremest add to distruction. It appears that caucasions still did not behead captors for the video camera. No where in the cold war or previous wars did this happen.
[/QUOTE]
I'm well aware of the situation in Northern Ireland. You have to remember, we've been the victims of terrorism for quite some time now, and what was America doing at the time? Funding them. I was simply highlighting how ludicrous, and racist, you're "Interesting" profiling test was. All you have to do is remember, just because the majority of suicide bombers are Muslim, doesn't mean the majority of Muslims are suicide bombers.
And Tyvar, do you know of any links between them and the Contras? The same contra's that Reagan illegally funded. Reagan (or should I said Reagan's staff) was no hero, he was a traitor.
[B]Actually I think you need to look at lot closer to home, although how many years passed from the start of your "global war on terror" until Sinn Fein were banned from fund-raising in the US?[/B][/QUOTE]
Hear hear.
Fund-raising for the IRA in the US should have been outlawed decades ago. I can still remember that sickening coverage of Bill Clinton et al at a dinner with Jerry Adams singing "When Irish Eyes Are Smiling" during the last administration.
Regards,
Morden
[B]
And Tyvar, do you know of any links between them and the Contras? The same contra's that Reagan illegally funded. Reagan (or should I said Reagan's staff) was no hero, he was a traitor. [/B][/QUOTE]
Between who and the Contras?
Links between the Mujahadeen in the contras in the 80's yeah, just like the PLO and PFLP (many members of whom ended up in Hamass after the shakeups in the palestinian groups in the 90's) had link to the sandanistas in the 80's and before, One of the PFLP hijackers in the Dawson Field incident was a sandanista.
The US involvement with the Afgan mujahadeen reached its hight in about 1986, and was wrapped in in 1990 or so.
If you mean links between the IRA and the contras no, the IRA despite raising a shit pot full of money in the US north east (almost all of it from Massachussets and New York, in fact both Ted Kennedy and John Kerry have acted as IRA appologists over the years) Were tied into the terrorist groups that ultimatly worked with the KGB and soviets, they were suspicious of too many entanglements with the CIA. The one case I know of where it is claimed of CIA involvment is a 1982 arms shipment, and its farily obvious that claim was merely a defense tactic in order to help secure an aquittal.
Part of the reason why I highly doubt the CIA supplied arms to the IRA is the IRA was working with various groups that were known to be hostile to US interests. If the operation had sanctioned by the CIA it would have been done with the idea of planting a mole inside the IRA who could get data on other orginizations.
And if that HAD been the case, it never would have even made it into public record, let alone court.
And I find it ironic that a foreigner would refer to an american president as a traitor. A traitor is more then a criminal, a traitor works for his own advantage or the advantage of another nation state at the expense of his own. While in the long run, helping the mujahadene has caused us some trouble, at the time it allowed us to do great damage to our major advessary.
Maybe I should refer to Churchill, FDR, Truman and definatly Clement Attlee as traitors also?
They allowed weapons and materials to go to the Soviet goverment (and a regime under stalin which was more brutal and bloodier then Hitlers, including ethnic genoicide against various groups) which it used not only to defend itself against the germans, but then turned around and used to do great damage to western interests post WWII, hell Attlees people let the Rolls Royce Nene fall in the hands of the Soviets and if it had not been for that the soviets might not have developed a decent jet aircraft for an additional 5 or 6 years post WWII. But at the time the decision was made from stratgic necessity.
[B]Hear hear.
Fund-raising for the IRA in the US should have been outlawed decades ago. I can still remember that sickening coverage of Bill Clinton et al at a dinner with Jerry Adams singing "When Irish Eyes Are Smiling" during the last administration.
Regards,
Morden [/B][/QUOTE]
Problem is that frankly the supporters of the IRA were all tied up with the democratic party, which had a grip on at least one house of the legislature or the executive till 1994. The whole mess was tied up in US domestic politics.
"America" was not funding the IRA but the Irish American community in Boston was, and their political elietes such as Ted Kennedy, John Kerry and a host of others. In fact the Irish American support for the IRA is one of the reasons why you will rarely find an "IRISH-american" in the republican party, because the repubs were pretty much anti IRA.
Hell you didnt have many catholics in the republican party till the 80's come to think of it.
Anyways due to democratic party politics the support of the irish americans was percivied as critical, and the Massachussets delegation was the center piece to the north eastern democratic block, they were able to keep the issue on the back burner.
In fact Bill Clinton and Gerry Adams little meeting caused a bit of a backlash, probably was one of the reasons the repubs picked up more seats in 1996, especially since even then US awareness of terrorism was on the rise.
As an end-note, sectarianism itself in Northern Ireland is become more and more blurred, and is far less sustained and clear-cut than it was. People are sick to death of the violence and murders, and just want the situation there to end. Waning support for the paramilitaries, (especially the IRA) in the region can only be a good thing.
Regards,
Morden