One theory being floated is that the Libyans were MI6 informers. It explains the cover up better than a possible Irish connection. It would be a major scandal that a British police constable is shot dead on a London street by people on the payroll of MI6.

That doesn't negate the possibility of an Irish, or rather IRA, connection with Libya. These "comfort letters" were being dished out when Tony Blair was negotiating with both Sinn Fein and Ghaddafi. Some body had to be supplying the provis. Still, there is always the Boston underworld.

Blair is sordid enough he would find a way to profit from some thing involving the IRA, Ghaddafi, our secret services AND a bunch of Mick American hoodlums.

No one, including the Libyans or the IRA denies the connection. also your reference to the Boston mob is correct, they supplied arms to the IRA, which were readily accepted. And why not? there was no quid pro quo, the IRA had to do nothing in return other than say thank you. South Boston remains heavily Irish, with decidedly republican sentiments.

But none of this really gets me thinking of why the killers of PC Fletcher are being shielded because of some connection of her killers to the Libyan effort to ship weapons to the IRA. It doesn't wash. The issuing of "comfort letters" to IRA suspects and also to the Libyan seems more coincidental than anything.

There's a big difference between knowing there was a connection, and the public knowing who/what that connection was. Especially if it turns out that connection has been virtually pardoned before trial and conviction, in fact their trial made impossible, by a former priminister already under a dark cloud.

You're not thinking hard enough.

I'm doing a lot of reading on this, as you said earlier, I'll keep an open mind.

Since the mention of the Boston mob connection came up, a couple of interesting facts. Their first method of smuggling arms to Ireland was in the caskets of deceased Irishmen who had died in the US but wished to be laid to rest in their home soil. Up to 7 assault rifles could be placed under the deceased, no one ever caught on. The IRA/Boston connection came to halt when the mob made an overly ambitious shipment of an entire boat load of weapons. The Irish navy intercepted it, resulting in a number of arrests. The IRA personnel who went to the US to act as liaisons were absolutely stunned by that high quality, military grade firearms were so readily available for sale in any sporting goods store. A bit like kids in a candy shop. One other myth, Whitey Bolger, the head of the Irish mob in Boston, went on the run in 1994 and eluded capture for twenty years despite being on the FBI's most wanted list. There was a persistent rumor that the IRA had him tucked away somewhere in Ireland in return for the arms. He was actually pretty much hiding in plain sight in southern California the whole time, where he was eventually arrested.

The British Isles is obviously the most interesting place on Earth. Not just because I'm there either. ;) As a republican, what would you think if EIRE decided that its best interest was to leave the European Union and form some sort of political, and/or economic union with the United Kingdom, after Brexit? After all, it is an accepted fact that Ireland only joined the EU to maintain an open border with the United Kingdom, its biggest trading partner (apart from possibly the Boston underworld).

There is growing sentiment in the Republic for what's being called an Irexit. Primarily to avoid the introduction of a "hard" border but also because of lingering ill will that Brussels gave Ireland one up the ass during the Irish financial crisis. but there is no guarantee, still a substantial remain opinion.

But assuming the Republic were to leave the EU I could see the benefit of a free trade zone, and open borders between Ireland and the UK. Anything that lessens Irelands independence or suggested an even loose political union with Britain would likely ignite a firestorm of Irish nationalism. The wounds of Irish treatment pre 1921 are just a bit still too raw.

Irish Republicanism is a bit like the villains in American teen slasher films. You can shoot it, hang it, lock it up but it just won't die. Going back beyond the origins of the IRA in 1919, there were the Fenians of the 1800's and the United Irishmen of the 1700's.

United Irishmen, that's hilarious! Completely ignoring the inconvenient truth about Irish unity for a moment....

Oh wait, I can't, because it will never go away, no matter how much Irish nationalists refuse to acknowledge it. Ireland was only ever united under British rule. It is a bit like the idiots up north hating Tories and insisting every one should vote Labour, even though more coal mines were closed by Labour governments, and greater economic damage was done under Labour governments, and well, socialism basically fucked every one that ever voted for it!

Moving on, is Jeremy Corbyn just an IRA sympathiser, or is there some thing more sinister going on there?

You've mentioned numerous times that Ireland was only united under British rule, which is true. But it's not as though you won an election, Ireland was taken by brute force, and British rule was sustained at the point of a gun.

Are you really so naive that you think that the Irish would ever accept a union with the UK after Cromwell, the penal laws, the indifference of the crown while millions starved during the famine?
The United Irishmen was the name of an organization, not a claim to the state of mind of the Irish people. But it's worth remembering that when they launched the revolt of 1798 the bulk of the leadership were northern protestants

You do realise that Ireland was first invaded by the Catholic Normans by invitation of an Irish king? Then the occupation was augmented by the instructions of a Roman Pope? The English aren't the villains in this piece. Henry VIII, great grandson of Glyndwyr was the first "English" King to declare Ireland part of England, and long before William of Orange, Ireland was subjugated by those questionably Catholic, but undeniably Scottish Stewarts.

And right up to this century, you've had the support of that Scottish Arch Papist, Tony Blair. Don't be moaning at me about how hard done by you've been by the British. Ireland IS British, they just talk a bit funny and insist on not being part of the United Kingdom.

Well, in part you've answered your own question on how a post EU Ireland might behave, political union with the UK is an impossibility. Low or no trade barriers is a real possibility. Once both Ireland and the UK are out from under Brussels, then they can agree to anything they like.

If you want to persist in calling the Irish British, that's up to you. I can say with certainty that's not how they consider themselves.

Corbyn and Blair are old news for republicans. Blair had an impact on ending the violence, Corbyn less so. He does seem to be rising in the polls though.

a new controversy popped up over comments by DUPs Arlene Foster on Sinn Feins Michelle O'Neill's blonde hair.

Maybe the whole the whole thing could be settled once and for all by a steel cage ,no holds barred ,winner take all cat fight. O'Neill is younger and looks more fit, but Foster has that junk yard dog meanness about her. Too close to call, but might be entertaining.

Perhaps it would be more appropriate to refer to Irish as Britons, as collectively that is what natives of the British Isles are.

There is no denying Tony Blairs role in bringing about peace in Northern Ireland. Interesting quote in the press today, it is 20 years since the Provisional IRA exploded a bomb. Is Corbyns support then really relevant now? Still, Blair. OK, so he helped broker peace, but what was HIS price? A man like Tony Blair does not do a thing, unless there is some thing in it for him. That is why I am so suspicious of these letters of comfort, and what the Libyan involvement really was/is.

Apparently Sinn Fein, who returned four MPs at the last election, and are determined to fight Brexit tooth and nail, despite refusing to take their seats in the house of commons, are campaigning for a referendum on Irish unification. Of course, if they insist on ignoring the result of the last national referendum, we should let them have their silly little provincial one, and return the favour if they win it.

From what I've read, a vote on reunification is part of the Good Friday agreement. It's probably about time for it, about 20 years after the deal.
A condition for a vote is that the Northern Ireland Home Secretary has to see a perceived need or demand for a vote on reunification, and if the vote is a no (Ulster says NO! as usual ;) ) then in a few years he looks at the situation again to decide if another vote is needed.

Right, so, what the Good Friday Agreement requires is two seperate referendums, on both sides of the border. These both have to result in a for vote, for unification to happen.

I wonder on what basis it is "about time" for a referendum? There doesn't seem to be any noises coming out of the Republic about a referendum. They are more occupied with Europe at present. There is certainly nothing more than post-Brexit whining coming from Sinn Fein.

Once we leave the EU, things may change, depending on how it works out in the short or long term. At present, a pro-Europe stance shouldn't be confused with a pro-Nationalist one.

Obviously, I would like to see a reunification. But I think Sinn Fein's timing is wrong on this. If a referendum were held today a majority of nationalists in the north would vote for unification. But this majority is far from overwhelming. On the other side, the unionist vote will be very likely close to 100% against. Even unionists who voted to remain in the EU will never vote for a united Ireland, its in their DNA. As late the 1980's Ian Paisley denounced the pope at the European Parliament as the anti Christ. Think about that for a moment, he didn't denounce the IRA or Sinn Fein, but the pope! And it's not empty rhetoric, these people believe this stuff. (just for the record, I was raised Catholic, I stopped taking it seriously many years ago)

And then there is the Republic. The latest data I've seen was a three way even split between yes, no and undecided.

So while the Brexit vote has moved the needle slightly towards reunification, a referendum today could easily result in a no vote on both sides of the border. That would be a huge set back for Sinn Fein, the likely beneficiary being the SDLP.

The wiser course for Sinn Fein is to take the long view. Demographics is in their favor, the population of the north is very nearly at the tipping point, within a generation, two at the most there will be a firm nationalist majority.

A little discussed wild card is the immigrant community in the north. Primarily from eastern Europe, especially Poland, these people don't carry the historical baggage of either the loyalist or the republican.

What is being brushed under the carpet at the moment is that many Eastern European migrants would probably qualify for British citizenship by the time we leave the European Union, under current rules. So it is going to boil down to a simple choice between having dual citizenship with the United Kingdom and their home country, or living in a country subject to all the EU laws. That is what a unification referendum would mean to those migrants in Northern Ireland.

Twenty, forty years down the line, Northern Ireland may be ordered along more political and less sectarian lines. The Republic, if it remains in the EU, could have been swallowed up by a Federal European state and not really exist any more, except as a regional parliament like Wallonia. I wonder how keen currently Nationalist communities would be on unification then? More like the Provis would be trying to bomb their way back in to Britain if they had any fucking sense! ;)

As the June election gets closer no major shake ups. Sinn Fein has a shot of taking Fermanagh/South Tyrone from the UUP to up their total to 5. Quite a few seats are foregone conclusions, 0 chance for a unionist in west Belfast, same for Sinn Fein in Antrim.

The interesting contests are between Sinn Fein and the SDLP and to a lesser extent DUP vs UUP. Personally, I've never had much use for the SDLP. They should drop the SD and own up to what they are, a pale green Irish extension of the British Labour party.

I wonder how long it will be before IS bring the ghost of the troubles back to Northern Ireland, and what effect that may have on the peace process, and on the UK and Ireland in general.

I wonder if there is a chance at all that with time the sectarian parties may be replaced with traditional political parties. Not that it would do people much good of course....

Curiously, the fractured, tribal nature of society in the north may actually have a positive effect in preventing a mass causality terrorist attack.

Given that neighborhoods are highly segregated and the deep mistrust of strangers might set off alarm bells sooner tHan might happen in a more open society.

I can't see even the more fringe elements of the dissident republicans having common cause with Isis.

And if, as some claim, the Provos are still around and they uncovered any thing, likely would be handled themselves rather than a call to the authorities. Probably the same for the UDA.

I'm not suggesting a common cause between any faction and IS.

Your comments on segregation suggest a lack of understanding of the situation on mainland Britain. There are areas in some towns and cities that are almost no-go areas. Walking through Manningham in Bradford for example is like entering a foreign country. If that sort of situation arises in Northern Ireland, or in Dublin or larger towns and cities in the south for that matter, there aren't going to be any Prods or Taigs around to scrutinise.

Honestly, it is like a creeping disease, but the PC brigade forbid us from saying so. As I have already stated, the attack in Manchester this week, the killers friends knew where he was off to and posted all over Facebook. Yet our government is criticising Donald Trump for leaking information to the press!

Despite Enniskillen, and a few other incidences, at least the IRA did have some grip on who they were fighting, these fuckers have no grip at all. I don't think the Provis are really equipped to take them on, because they are not quite like any one we have seen before.

I'll have to admit that you were right on my not knowing how bad things had gotten in the mainland of the UK. I knew there were whole areas in France that the government had virtually lost control off, I didn't realize it had gotten that bad in Britain as well.

The republic has a substantial and growing Muslim population. They seem to be assimilating a bit more than in Britain and the rest of Europe, but the trend of high concentrations in small areas is present there as well. There are areas west of Dublin that have become Muslim enclaves.

Ireland has escaped Islamic terror attacks to date, three possible reasons: 1) Irelands non aligned status, 2) it had never been a colonial power, 3) luck, the Jihadists simply haven't got around to Ireland yet.

the north has a relatively small muslim population, 4 to 5 thousand, primarily centered in Belfast. they are already bitching about ethnic intimidation from some of the loyalist gangs. Not that the republicans would be above this as well, just didn't see any reports of it. My earlier comment about the Provos and the UDA handling the situation was made tongue in cheek, but that would be a very bizarre partnership indeed.

No more bizarre than the Rev and the Guinness being best mates.

Well, following on from the Manchester bombing, which had links with the rebels in Libya that got rid of Ghaddafi, I've just seen an interview on Sky Television News with an Irish (ginger hair and every thing) jihadist that has fought both in Libya and Syria, and now lives in Tripoli, that has links with Abedis family.

Only a matter of time....

Ireland is on the verge of electing an openly gay Taoiseach. Muslims won't care for that. And from Fine Gael no less ( irish tories, sort of). He is also Dublin born, son a immigrants.Irish society has come a very long way in a very short time.

I suspect it is simply keeping pace with Western society in general. The United Kingdom parliament isn't exactly brimming with openly gay members. There is even a suggestion that Tim Farron, Lib Dem leader, is all but openly homophobic. Still, good to see our fellow Britons not being left behind in a fog of medieval thinking. Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition in 2017. Not even Stephen Fry. ;)

Well, the Unionist paramilitaries seem to be following the same path as the Nationalists. Without an enemy to fight, they seem to have taken to killing each other.

Haven't they been feuding among themselves for years already?

Yes, UDA and UVF feuds have been going on for years. The Republicans had some as well, mainly between the officials and the Provos after the split

There is usually an element of sarcasm involved whenever I write about how dedicated to their religion the prods and taigs are. Sectarianism was seldom more than a protection racket.

Of of the great myths of the troubles was that it was a religious war. It was simply a coincidence that the people on either side hapen to be Protestants and Catholics. There were exceptions, Ian Paisley for one for a while was more worried about an elderly Italian than the IRA.

The only time most IRA volunteers spent inside a Catholic Church was inside a pine box covered with a tri colour.

Martin McGuinnes was unique in that he actually was a devout Catholic, he also never touched alcohol. Maybe that's why he and Paisley hit it off.

I think you'll find that The Rev was actually worried about an elderly Pole in the end. Or was it an elderly German? Or even an Argentinian? I get confused some times. He was certainly worried about an elderly cross dresser! I wonder how he felt about Mohammed?

It seems that we agree that whatever the merits of the Unionist and Seperatist causes, their methods were pretty fucking despicable.

As I posted earlier, it was a vicious little war. Plenty of atrocities to go around on all three sides, if you can count the security forces and the loyalist gangs as separate. The UDR in particular were more or less the UDA in a Government issued uniform.

Whether or not one agrees with the goals, there is a difference in a guerilla war where armed soldiers and police were the targets as opposed to deliberately going after civilians. The IRA had the technical expertise to inflict mass civilian causality attacks on a scale that could have rivalled 9/11, they chose not to. That doesn't make them heroes, it was a pragmatic decision because they realized that such attacks would be met with revulsion by the nationalists of the north, and even more so by their supporters in the US. At Enniskilen in particular both the IRA and Sinn Fein saw major drop offs in support that they didn't recover for a very long time.

The bombing campaign was always riskier than gun attacks precisely because it was so much harder to limit civilian causalities. Its a problem that even modern conventional forces face. If the US air force, or the RAF for that,matter bombs ISIS, there is always a chance that innocent civilians will be killed.

Before I get any howls of outrage I'm not equating the US or the British actions against ISIS with the IRA bombing campaign.

I'm looking forward to seeing how Sinn Fein will react when the British government finally gets around to suspending civil rights for the Islamist fifth column in our society. We are at present spending £250 000 a year to "treat" one of the killers of Lee Rigby. That, for want of a better expression, is fucking mental.

I'm a little suprised that hasn't happened already. The British government wasn't shy about doing it in Ireland. Internment without charge or trial, the special criminal courts, the SAS turned loose with shoot on sight orders...

I was (again) being sarcastic. The British government has long since handed control over to cheese eating surrender monkeys.

I think you'll get far more outrage from your own left.There is a significant part of Sinn Féin that would consider protesting what happens on the UK mainland meddling in the domestic affairs of a foreign government.

Actually I think some of extraordinary security response is necessary and justified. As bad as Manchester was, the next could be far worse. While you and I can debate whether Britain belongs in the north, the British government certainly needs to be able to govern their own cities. Having no go areas in south Armagh and the bogside is one thing, having them in Birmingham and Manchester is something else.