• Due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software, some users were "banned" when they tried to change their passwords at the end of February. This does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you were affected by this, please us viua the Contact us link in the footer.

1974 Harold Wilson and the unionist "spongers"


SlabMurphy

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 14, 2009
Messages
1,701
Website
www.dublin.ie
Interesting clip from Youtube on British PM Harold Wilson's views of unionists. He accuses them of " spending their lives sponging on Westminister and British democracy ".

Do you think that Harold Wilson was just about summing up the feelings of the vast majority of ordinary, decent English people ?


[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1XbfR-yaqA"]YouTube - British PM Harold Wilson calls Ulster Loyalists "Spongers"[/ame]
 


Fides

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 6, 2010
Messages
4,441
Actually Slab I don't think I've ever agreed with you on anything before but Wilson had a point and that point is still relevant today. The NI state relies on bureacracy funded by Westminster to exist. They need to be weaned off it and are about to be anyway by budget cuts.
 

picador

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
21,045
Interesting clip from Youtube on British PM Harold Wilson's views of unionists. He accuses them of " spending their lives sponging on Westminister and British democracy ".

Do you think that Harold Wilson was just about summing up the feelings of the vast majority of ordinary, decent English people ?


YouTube - British PM Harold Wilson calls Ulster Loyalists "Spongers"
The downside of that famous speech (which I have never heard before) was that the unionists got ultra-paranoid and went on a killing spree (with the encouragement of MI5 elements who thought Wilson was a KGB agent). Even Cosgrave, Fitzgerald, Cruiser and co flipped out cos they thought the Brits might withdraw.
 

Sync

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
28,765
He very much summed up the mood at the time. The speech came after some of the worst violence NI and the Republic had seen in years, caused by the loyalist strikers. There was obvious united anger in Labour and the Tories at this, and they viewed it quite rightly as a direct challenge to Westminster's authority.
 

Sync

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
28,765
The downside of that famous speech (which I have never heard before) was that the unionists got ultra-paranoid and went on a killing spree (with the encouragement of MI5 elements who thought Wilson was a KGB agent). Even Cosgrave, Fitzgerald, Cruiser and co flipped out cos they thought the Brits might withdraw.
The speech was partially made in response to the Monaghan bombings, and the extended ongoing violence. They'd already started their spree.

What the speech actually did was improve the support for the loyalists amongst the public. In the end of course the UWC won the day. Not a proud chapter for Rees or Wilson.
 

SlabMurphy

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 14, 2009
Messages
1,701
Website
www.dublin.ie
The downside of that famous speech (which I have never heard before) was that the unionists got ultra-paranoid and went on a killing spree (with the encouragement of MI5 elements who thought Wilson was a KGB agent). Even Cosgrave, Fitzgerald, Cruiser and co flipped out cos they thought the Brits might withdraw.
Cosgrave, Fitzgerald, Cruiser and co were only quislings anyway. The fact that they participated in the coverup of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings in their own juristicion says it all the 'independence' of the govt of the 'Republic'.

Wilson actually was pressing for a British withdrawal in 1974 but didn't gain cabinet approval due to the influence of Callaghan and Healy.
 

ne0ica

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
8,446
Nothing new here. I thinks its in the Ulster Scot genealogy. Just like in the US where the states that largely live off the largess of the federal government and taxes from New York and California coincidentally elect so called small government Republicans. Just like in NI where the DUP is the most hostile party to the EU in Westminster with an official policy to leave the EU, yet happily takes handouts from the EU. Time for Billy to pay his own way.
 

Sync

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
28,765
Still relevant today:

The people of Northern Ireland and their democratically elected Assembly and Executive have the joint duty of seeing this thing through on the only basis on which true unity can be achieved - democratic elections, constitutional government and the spirit of tolerance and reconciliation. And in doing that they will have the support of the British Government, with our responsibilities within the United Kingdom and our responsibilities in world affairs, for law and order in Northern Ireland. We intend to see it through with them.
 

SlabMurphy

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 14, 2009
Messages
1,701
Website
www.dublin.ie
He very much summed up the mood at the time. The speech came after some of the worst violence NI and the Republic had seen in years, caused by the loyalist strikers. There was obvious united anger in Labour and the Tories at this, and they viewed it quite rightly as a direct challenge to Westminster's authority.
The loyalist violence was orchestrated by Brit military intelligence and actively participated in by the myriad of secret forces such as 14th Intelligence, RUC Special Branch, SAS, FRU etc. The whole period was planned, organised and abetted by the upper echeleons of British administration in Westminister, Whitehall, Sandhurst etc
 

cricket

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 7, 2009
Messages
13,959
The speech was partially made in response to the Monaghan bombings, and the extended ongoing violence. They'd already started their spree.

What the speech actually did was improve the support for the loyalists amongst the public. In the end of course the UWC won the day. Not a proud chapter for Rees or Wilson.

Agree, it was music to the ears of the loyalists death gangs. It was a long , slow, process for Irish Taoisigh to get British PM's to " get " the north. Started with Lynch , who in fairness , eventually got Heath to see that the Irish government would have to buy in to whatever settlement arose.
There was a very telling interview with Garrett Fitzgerald a few years ago where he said that , after the signing of the Anglo Irish agreement in the 1980's , he tried to impress upon Thatcher the need for immediate massive investment in the North to create as many jobs as possible and wean people away from the paramilitaries. She gave him short shrift . Fitzgerald famously said it was then he realised she was not a UK prime minister , not even a British or English one but a prime minister for the south east of England.
 

Sync

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
28,765
The loyalist violence was orchestrated by Brit military intelligence and actively participated in by the myriad of secret forces such as 14th Intelligence, RUC Special Branch, SAS, FRU etc. The whole period was planned, organised and abetted by the upper echeleons of British administration in Westminister, Whitehall, Sandhurst etc
And the Templars. Don't forget the Templars...
 

SlabMurphy

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 14, 2009
Messages
1,701
Website
www.dublin.ie
Nothing new here. I thinks its in the Ulster Scot genealogy. Just like in the US where the states that largely live off the largess of the federal government and taxes from New York and California coincidentally elect so called small government Republicans. Just like in NI where the DUP is the most hostile party to the EU in Westminster with an official policy to leave the EU, yet happily takes handouts from the EU. Time for Billy to pay his own way.
As was once said, the relationship between unionism and Britain is not found anywhere in nature. It is a case of where one type of parasite breeds off another type of parasite. And then they used to gob off about the " Ulster Protestant work ethic " !!!!!!
 

SlabMurphy

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 14, 2009
Messages
1,701
Website
www.dublin.ie
And the Templars. Don't forget the Templars...
I don't think the survivors and families of the victims of the Brit dirty tricks dept find it amusing as you do. But then Sync your just yet another 'moderator' doing his bit for Queen and country aren't you.

" Justice for the Forgotten believes there is compelling evidence that collusion occurred in the perpetration of many other genuinely appalling atrocities across the island of Ireland including the Dublin and Monaghan bombings. "Justice For The Forgotten
 

Sync

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
28,765
I don't think the survivors and families of the victims of the Brit dirty tricks dept find it amusing as you do. But then Sync your just yet another 'moderator' doing his bit for Queen and country aren't you.
This is why people think you're crazy. You think the British government created Sunningdale, then the British Government engaged in a costly exercise to destroy Sunningdale, which involved attacking a foreign country, sponsoring thousands of strikers, sending in police against those strikers and killing lots of innocent people. It would seem simpler to just....not set up Sunningdale wouldn't it?
 

picador

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
21,045
This is why people think you're crazy. You think the British government created Sunningdale, then the British Government engaged in a costly exercise to destroy Sunningdale, which involved attacking a foreign country, sponsoring thousands of strikers, sending in police against those strikers and killing lots of innocent people. It would seem simpler to just....not set up Sunningdale wouldn't it?
Think of it in terms of the Curragh Mutiny - except darker and more complicated.

Clockwork_Orange
 

SlabMurphy

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 14, 2009
Messages
1,701
Website
www.dublin.ie
This is why people think you're crazy. You think the British government created Sunningdale, then the British Government engaged in a costly exercise to destroy Sunningdale, which involved attacking a foreign country, sponsoring thousands of strikers, sending in police against those strikers and killing lots of innocent people. It would seem simpler to just....not set up Sunningdale wouldn't it?
And what was the purpose of Sunningdale - to take away support for the IRA from the nationalists They ran it for a few months and when Sunningdale wasn't acheiving it's purpose the Brits concocted the UWC strike and loyalist campaign with it. The Brits have a long history of using the threat of unionist violence to renege Irish nationalist demands. Just like the Larne gunning running, the dropping of the Home Rule bills 1886, 1893 with " Ulster will fight and Ulster will be right " etc Just remember the unionists are only 2% of the population of the British state, 2%. Don't give me this BS that the British govt were ' afraid ' of taking on the unionists.

Think of it in terms of the Curragh Mutiny - except darker and more complicated.

Clockwork_Orange
Exactly. Or another historic example, the Larne gun running in 1914 whne the unionists could land 1,000's of rifles and not one single attempt to capture one weapon or even make a single arrest. Contrast that with the 10,000's of British soldiers sent into nationalist Ireland 1919 - 1921, martial law, executions, mass arrests and imprisionment etc
 

SlabMurphy

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 14, 2009
Messages
1,701
Website
www.dublin.ie
It certainly is, but in the end the UWC and the Loyalists inflcited a defeat on the UK govt.

It was a turning point IMO.
No the spongers didn't inflicte a defeat on the UK govt no more than their predecessors did with the Larne gun running, the Home Rule bills etc. The Brits were orchastrated the scenario to drop the Sunningdale agreement as it was failing in it's purpose of winning nationalist support away from the IRA. 2% defeating 98% ? It's not even a case of the tail wagging the dog but more like the tip of the tail allegedly wagging the dog. :rolleyes:

Tell me if say, miners in England tried to do the same as the UWC - do you think the Brit govt would have stood back and given in to it ? Or if the nationalists had tried to do the same in the north ?
 

picador

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
21,045
No the spongers didn't inflicte a defeat on the UK govt no more than their predecessors did with the Larne gun running, the Home Rule bills etc. The Brits were orchastrated the scenario to drop the Sunningdale agreement as it was failing in it's purpose of winning nationalist support away from the IRA. 2% defeating 98% ? It's not even a case of the tail wagging the dog but more like the tip of the tail allegedly wagging the dog. :rolleyes:
I don't think there's any doubt Heath and then Wilson, Rees and co wanted Sunningdale to succeed. Elements in the military and MI5 and of course the RUC didn't. However unionist opposition to power-sharing and the Council of Ireland cannot be under-estimated.

Tell me if say, miners in England tried to do the same as the UWC - do you think the Brit govt would havve stood back and given in to it ?
Bad analogy. One of the reasons Heath failed to be re-elected was because he'd given into the miners.
http://www.agor.org.uk/cwm/themes/events/1972_1974_strikes.asp
 
Last edited:

New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top