Skip to comments.82 police injured in Northern Ireland's 2 nights of Catholic riots; politicians plead for calm
Posted on 07/13/2010 10:24:53 AM PDT by Stayfrosty
click here to read article
From the BBC:
Recent historians of the famine, while not neglecting the baleful role of the doctrine of laissez-faire, have been inclined to stress the potent parts played by two other ideologies of the time: those of 'providentialism' and 'moralism'. There was a very widespread belief among members of the British upper and middle classes that the famine was a divine judgment-an act of Providence-against the kind of Irish agrarian regime that was believed to have given rise to the famine. The Irish system of agriculture was perceived in Britain to be riddled with inefficiency and abuse. According to British policy-makers at the time, the workings of divine Providence were disclosed in the unfettered operations of the market economy, and therefore it was positively evil to interfere with its proper functioning.
This mentality of Trevelyan's was influential in persuading the government to do nothing...
A leading exponent of this providentialist perspective was Sir Charles Trevelyan, the British civil servant chiefly responsible for administering Irish relief policy throughout the famine years. In his book The Irish Crisis, published in 1848, Trevelyan described the famine as 'a direct stroke of an all-wise and all-merciful Providence', one which laid bare 'the deep and inveterate root of social evil'. The famine, he declared, was 'the sharp but effectual remedy by which the cure is likely to be effected... God grant that the generation to which this great opportunity has been offered may rightly perform its part...' This mentality of Trevelyan's was influential in persuading the government to do nothing to restrain mass evictions - and this had the obvious effect of radically restructuring Irish rural society along the lines of the capitalistic model ardently preferred by British policy-makers.
Finally, we come to 'moralism'-the notion that the fundamental defects from which the Irish suffered were moral rather than financial. Educated Britons of this era saw serious defects in the Irish 'national character'-disorder or violence, filth, laziness, and worst of all, a lack of self-reliance. This amounted to a kind of racial or cultural stereotyping. The Irish had to be taught to stand on their own feet and to unlearn their dependence on government.
Famine fatigue...This set of ethnic prejudices, which have now been abundantly documented, had the general effect of prompting British ministers, civil servants, and politicians to view and to treat the Catholic Irish as something less than fully human. Such prejudices encouraged the spread of 'famine fatigue' in Britain at an early stage, and they dulled or even extinguished the active sympathies that might have sustained political will - the will to combat the gross oppression of mass evictions, to alleviate the immense suffering associated with reliance on the poor-law system, and to grapple with the moral indefensibility of mass death in the midst of an absolute sufficiency of food.
This is just sickening. I am having to ‘prove’ the IRA killed women and children?. Anyone with even a passing knowledge of the IRA knows they did!. Perhaps you would do well to read the history, perhaps starting with the links I provided.
OK, what about Bloody Friday, Omagh, Enniskillen, Le Mon, Claudy, The Shankhill Furniture bomb...And that just in NI. Add to that the women and children murdered by the IRA on mainland Britain: Harrods,
Hyde Park, Regents Park, the Brighton bombing, Warrington....
I tell you you ‘know little’ because your knowledge and your posts are astonishingly ignorant of the terrorism in NI.
155 children and 322 women murdered in NI during the terrorist troubles, and almost all of those were murdered by the IRA. ADD to that the dozens of dead women and children killed by the IRA on mainland Britain by IRA bombs.
The IRA didnt kill women and children?. Give me a f*cking break.
The most outspoken opponents of unification with Ireland are the Ulster Scots (in the U.S. known as the Scots-Irish). They tend to prefer Independence.
Do you? If you have other information, please share it with links. Otherwise, keep the smartass comments to yourself.
Incomptence, error and yes even callousness.
But what DIDNT happen is the British ‘letting’ the Irish die deliberately. As I have pointed out, the British govt bought huge amounts of corn and sent it Ireland.
Also that large amounts of Protestants in Ireland died of the famine. So the notion of deliberate starvation/genocide is a nonsense.
But I also understand that state spnsored paras, especially when the paras aren't fromm your state, murdering 13 civilians has deleterious effect on common sense and decency.
Read the Saville Report.
Catholic witnesses on the Bogside stated on a TV documentary in 1997 that the first shot came from behind them. That inc. a priest. The same TV show also had still footage of IRA gunmen in the flats.
The Saville Report ignored this evidence.
Whatever you say.
You denied English callousness in your previous post. I'm glad to see your subsequent acknowledgment.
But what DIDNT happen is the British letting the Irish die deliberately. As I have pointed out, the British govt bought huge amounts of corn and sent it Ireland.
Not nearly enough of "Peel's Brimstone", with all its attendant problems. Then there were the huge amounts of exports shipped out of Ireland under guard...while the people were starving.
Also that large amounts of Protestants in Ireland died of the famine.
Can you provide a citation?
I can understand that. Cultural and linguistic differences from the Irish.
Three words: Fire for Effect.
That’s funny because the family stories of the British going farm to farm and rounding up the animals during the famine must just be a fable?
“Please do not try to justify the IRA by using the Black and Tans. You do not justify an evil by quoting another.”
I suggest you stop lying about what I am or am not doing. Can you do that?
Very well stated, and I would like to add, that this
same sentiment that I have concerning the Protestant
English coming over and taking a portion of Ireland
for themselves. If the Irish don’t like it, get an
Army and kick the limeys out. But it looks like
they only have enough balls to blow up women
and children on a public bus. How macho is that?
“But my references do at least show that the 17thC Irish native-Scottish Prot. relationship is far more complex than the myth states.”
No, actually it doesn’t. What it shows is that some Catholic became Protestants (perhaps to escape persecution just as some were induced to become Protestant in the 1840s to avoid starving to death) and that some of the invaders were Catholics themselves. None of that, however, changes the fact that the issue that divided Protestants and Catholics was religion. What you call a myth is not a myth. It is simple fact. All your measely quotes did was shows that some historians believe the events to be more nuanced than most people think. They do not show that the history is wrong along its general lines.
“This is just sickening. I am having to prove the IRA killed women and children?.”
What is sickening is how you repeatedly lie about what has been said. I asked you to show that women and children were deliberately targeted in a bombing. I already even said that such a bombing may have taken place but that I can’t think of it. Can you think of one or not.
“Anyone with even a passing knowledge of the IRA knows they did!.”
Alright, then name the bombing and the date it happened in which the IRA deliberately targeted women and children. Can you do it or not?
“Perhaps you would do well to read the history, perhaps starting with the links I provided.”
I have read the history. Now, can you name the bombing and the date it happened in which the IRA deliberately targeted women and children? If you know so much about “the history” and your assertions (and at this point that’s all they are) are true then you should be able to name that bombing.
“OK, what about Bloody Friday, Omagh, Enniskillen, Le Mon, Claudy, The Shankhill Furniture bomb...And that just in NI.”
Which one of those DELIBERATELY targeted women and children as the primary victims as opposed to being “collateral damage” and please present evidence that shows it was DELIBERATE. Can you do that or not? Remember, I am not even denying it happened. I am just pushing you to actually prove your assertions. Can you do it or not?
“Add to that the women and children murdered by the IRA on mainland Britain: Harrods,
Hyde Park, Regents Park, the Brighton bombing, Warrington....”
Well, as I expected, you are floundering. Take Harrods, for instance. Six people were killed. Three were police officers. Two killed were women - one of whom was a cop. That makes it unlikely on the face of it that women and children were the DELIBERATE targets. Also, the IRA said the bombing was not authorized. Now, I know you’ll whine about the fact that I have said all that. You’ll fret and carp like a soccer player who wants the ref to believe his better deserves a red card. Fine. Just man up and prove your assertions. I’m not asking for much.
“I tell you you know little because your knowledge and your posts are astonishingly ignorant of the terrorism in NI.”
No, actually they’re not. So far I clearly know more than you do. Now, can you answer my question or will you continue to flounder? Remember, I freely admit you might be right that there has been such a bombing, perhaps several, but which ones? Unless you can prove your assertions, I will have to believe that Islamists are far worse than the IRA.
“The IRA didnt kill women and children?. Give me a f*cking break.”
Please show me where I ever claimed the IRA did not kill women and children. Can you do that? No, you can’t. You can’t do it because I never said it. Lying simply doesn’t help your case.
“155 children and 322 women murdered in NI during the terrorist troubles, and almost all of those were murdered by the IRA. ADD to that the dozens of dead women and children killed by the IRA on mainland Britain by IRA bombs.”
Now, please post evidence of the following two things you claimed without any evidence whatsoever:
1) Name a bombing where the IRA DELIBERATELY targeted women and children.
2) Post evidence that shows the IRA DELIBERATELY targeted women and children in that bombing.
Such a bombing might have taken place. Can you name it, however, or not?
Please do not continue to lie about what I have or have not said.
SEPTEMBER 2001 : (AFTER SPENDING 2 MONTHS IN COLUMBIA'S FARC-CONTROLLED ZONE OF CAGUAN, 3 IRAQIS SUSPECTED OF ARMS SMUGGLING ARE ARRESTED IN MIAMI, OTHER IRAQIS WITH FORGED DOCS WERE ARRESTED SIMULTANEOUSLY IN CHILE) Three Iraqi nationals suspected of arms smuggling were caught entering Miami last month after spending two months in Colombia's FARC-controlled zone of San Vicente del Caguan, according to the FBI. Other Iraqis using forged travel documents were simultaneously arrested in Chile. - "Search for Bin Laden links looks SOUTH, " By Martin Arostegui, http://www.autentico.org/oa09505.html , Organización Auténtica . October 2001
SEPTEMBER - OCT 2001 (COLUMBIA : RADIO INTERCEPT OF FARC LEADER JOJOY CATCH HIM CALLING FOR MORE ATTACKS ON THE USA) Following the September 11 attacks, Colombian police revealed radio intercepts in which FARC leader Mono Jojoy calls for attacks against targets in the United States. - "Search for Bin Laden links looks SOUTH, " By Martin Arostegui, http://www.autentico.org/oa09505.html , Organización Auténtica . October 2001
JUNE 6, 2002 Thursday : (DUBLIN, IRELAND : CLINTON, IRA, SEIN FEIN : "ACHIEVEMENT SUMMIT") A BIZARRE veil of secrecy and iron-clad security last night shrouded an "achievement summit" in Dublin attended by former US president Bill Clinton and Sinn Fein leader Gerry Adams. Scores of gardai, backed up by a Secret Service-type personnel equipped with earpieces, sleeve microphones and polite smiles, ringed the Four Seasons Hotel in Ballsbridge, where the summit was being held. The event, organised by the US-backed Academy of Achievement, was hosted by Taoiseach Bertie Ahern and attended by "200 of the world's most outstanding graduate students". - The Irish Independent, http://18.104.22.168/search?q=cache:teOuYJ-nbHcJ:www.unison.ie/irish_independent/index.php3%3Fissue_id%3D7558+%22BIZARRE+veil+of+secrecy+and+iron-clad+security+last+night+shrouded+an+%22achievement+summit%22+in+Dublin%22&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
OCTOBER 2002 : (COLUMBIA : EVIDENCE HEARING FOR CAPTURED IRA MEMBERS-- See FARC, IRELAND) Three Irish republicans charged with training Colombian rebels have issued a statement insisting they were in the country to observe the peace process. In the statement which was read during an evidence hearing in Bogota, the alleged IRA members complained that they could not get a fair trial in Colombia because of the highly political nature of the charges. James Monaghan, Niall Connolly and Martin McCauley are accused of training Farc insurgents in explosives and other techniques for about a month. The three were arrested at Bogota's airport 14 months ago [Aug 2001] after visiting a rebel stronghold in southern Colombia. If convicted they face between 15 and 20 years in prison. "We visited Colombia to get to know the people, the natural beauty and the peace process between (former) President Andres Pastrana and the FARC guerrillas," the statement said. The three men did not appear at the hearing, where the judge set the next court session for December 2. The statement went on to accuse Mr Pastrana and current President Alvaro Uribe of politicising the case. "In view of this, it is clear that we will not get a fair trial, taking into account the serious pressure being exerted on the trial judge from the highest authority in the state," the statement said. A handful of protesters greeted lawyers for the three men as they entered the courthouse. "Strangers, whether they are from Ireland or Mars, have no right coming here to improve the ability of the Farc for mass destruction," said Rodrigo Obregon, a Colombian actor who lives in Los Angeles. Mr Obregon was in Bogota leading a dozen protesters in front of the heavily guarded courthouse. Some were carrying placards reading, "Ireland please keep your terrorists home."-------- "IRA suspects 'were studying peace',"The Daily Telegraph ^ | October 17, 2002
MARCH 12, 2004 : (BOSTON, MASS : US SENATOR JOHN KERRY MEETS WITH IRA / SINN FEIN LEADER MARTIN MCGUINNESS) [Photo Caption] John Kerry and Martin McGuinness, the IRA's and Sinn Fein's chief in Boston on March 12, 2004. McGuinness was second-in-command in the IRA in Londonderry at the time of Bloody Sunday on 30 January 1972. He served two prison terms in the Irish Republic, and was denounced by Mr Merlyn Rees - a former Home Secretary - as a terrorist. 'The Observer': He was "widely held to have headed the IRA Londonderry Brigade." ---------AP, 3/13/04, via (Observer 17.4.83).
JULY 13, 1997 : (IRELAND : REPORT : OKC BOMBING -----see 19950419 OKC BOMBING CASE) On July 13, 1997 the Dublin Sunday Times reported that [German soldier Andreas ] Strassmeir had moved to Dublin and was associating with Sinn Fein, the political arm of the IRA. Earlier, informant Carol Howe had reported that Strassmeir had received detonators for the OKC exlposive charges from his IRA blasting buddies. Completely independent of Howe, federal informant Cary Gagan had stated (in July of 1995) that he had met in Mexico City with his Middle Eastern bombing co-conspirators and a "former" member of the IRA who was providing expertise and detonators for the planned bombing operations in the U.S. ------ "Black and Red Terrorist Internationals," by William F. Jasper , ?, via 70 posted on Friday, January 09, 2004 6:58:42 PM by Tailgunner Joe
“Very well stated, and I would like to add, that this
same sentiment that I have concerning the Protestant
English coming over and taking a portion of Ireland
for themselves. If the Irish dont like it, get an
Army and kick the limeys out.”
And some would say they had an army - the Irish Republican Army.
“But it looks like
they only have enough balls to blow up women
and children on a public bus. How macho is that?”
How successful is that? I don’t believe that people who believe they are oppressed care about being macho so much as killing and overthrowing their oppressors. If America was invaded tomorrow and millions of people stole the land and oppressed us, you can bet that many Americans would be more than happy to resort to blowing up women and children to change that. I still have not seen evidence - not at all - that blowing up women and children was actually a policy or tactic of the IRA or even their more violent step-children. Do you know of any such evidence?
>> If the Orange order would just grown up and knock off the marches through Catholic neighborhoods things might have kept moving that way.
“British culpability on the Famine is one of incompetence, of error, NOT of deliberate callousness.”
Not quite, the British knew how to cure the blight years before it ended the ‘did not let a crisis go to waste’ and used the Blight to tighten their control..
You’re worse than an MSNBC liberal..
Point out an Obama Flaw... and they can’t defend it they just say ‘Bush had the same flaw or worse... yadda yadda”..
“Youre worse than an MSNBC liberal..”
And that comment is a sure sign you have no argument.
“Point out an Obama Flaw... and they cant defend it they just say Bush had the same flaw or worse... yadda yadda..”
I am not defending anyone’s flaws. I am just accurate all around. I wish the same could be said for some other posters here.
My post or their marches?
My post just said things were moving in the right way but the OO pokes the bear every year with their ill advised marches..
>> I hate it when Roman Catholics start acting like Muslims.
That is one dumbass remark.
No i’s not its a sign I’ve watch you talk down the seriousness of IRA terrorism the whole thread ignoring the dead innocents as ‘minor’ compared to other groups.
I’ve watched you justify the IRA by pointing at groups on the other side. It’s like wathing someone attack Obama for his part of the debt..
>> Thirdly, well leave Ireland when you give America back to the Indian. Fair enough?.
No more Guinness for you.
>> My post or their marches?
LOL - the marches.
I’ve got Irish Catholic friends in the Republic of Ireland. They’re wonderful people, gregarious, garrulous, would cheerfully argue with a brick wall and very intelligently, over a pint or two. I love them dearly.
I’ve got ancestry tangled up in the whole Anglo-Irish plantation era, on both sides. English and Irish. So, I tend not to get as angry about it as some do. It happened, and the repercussions continue to reverberated down to this very day.
It’s a pity, though, such a beautiful country and such nice people, until they get at each other. It’s not as if the majority of the Protestants sent there had that much choice, not much more than the Irish upon whom the whole scheme was imposed.
I understand the anger, but I don’t like it. If I thought the people of the Republic would be fair to the Northern Irish Protestants, I’d be all for England ceding the land back to them. What I’m not about to advocate is some forced removal.
Well, that’s my tangled up two cents on the matter.
“I hate it when Roman Catholics start acting like
I hate it when dumb@sses talk about things they obviously know little about.
yep, that left a mark.
“No is not its a sign Ive watch you talk down the seriousness of IRA terrorism the whole thread ignoring the dead innocents as minor compared to other groups.”
That’s completely false. It’s an outright lie in fact. I never talked down any terrorism. I did, however, say the IRA were like boy scouts compared to Islamist terrorists. That is irrefutably true. On one day, a group of 19 Islamist terrorists murdered about 3,000 innocent people. The Provos (IRA) never killed that many in their entire existence. Again, what I said is irrefutably true.
“Ive watched you justify the IRA by pointing at groups on the other side.”
False. I never justified them ever. I did point out that any people who believes they have no other recourse for establishing their freedom or survival will resort to terrorism. Americans would in a heart beat. Sad, but again, irrefutably true.
“Its like wathing someone attack Obama for his part of the debt..”
Watching you post is like watching a liar. Oh, wait, you are a liar.
Did you see the programme, see the evidence?. No.
Then why have a go at me?.
The IRA fired first, the Paras overreacted.
’ UNTIL very recently, scholars have neglected the Great Famines impact on the northern Irish province of Ulster and especially its impact on Ulsters Protestant inhabitants. This neglect stemmed in part from historians reading of published census and other data indicating that the Norths general experience of excess mortality and emigration in 1845-52 was indeed less catastrophic than that of southern and western Ireland. Thus, whereas between 1841 and 1851 the populations of Munster and Connacht declined by 22.5 and 28.8 percent, respectively, that of Ulster fell “only” 19.8 percent. (2) To be sure, Joel Mokyr and other scholars have noted that several counties in south or “outer” Ulster—Monaghan, for example, and especially Cavan—witnessed high rates of famine mortality, but this is commonly understood by reference to the fact that their populations were composed predominantly of Catholic petty farmers and cottiers. (3) By contrast, conventional wisdom holds that Northeast Ulster or, even more broadly, the six counties that later became Northern Ireland—and particularly their Protestant inhabitants—escaped the famine with comparatively minimal damage, whether measured in excess mortality or in abnormally heavy out-migration. To explain this apparent phenomenon, historians often have cited socio-economic and cultural factors relatively unique to Northeast Ulster, such as industrialization and urbanization, the prevalence of tenant right and comparatively congenial landlord-tenant relations, and, among the rural populace, a greater variety of income sources and less dietary dependence on potatoes than prevailed in Munster and Connacht. (4)
However, some scholars may inadvertently have repeated contemporary claims by Irish unionists, who argued that “Ulster”—i.e., its Protestant inhabitants—eluded the famine because of the provinces superior “character” for industry, virtue, and loyalty. But in reality, many Protestant as well as Catholic Ulstermen and -women suffered grievously. Between 1841 and 1851 Ulsters population fell by nearly one-fifth—significantly more than the 15.3 percent decline that occurred in heavily Catholic Leinster. During the same period the number of inhabitants of the future Northern Ireland fell 14.7 percent (or 13 percent if Belfasts burgeoning population is included), and in the four northeastern counties that in 1861 had Protestant majorities (Antrim, Armagh, Down, and Londonderry), the comparable decline was 12.1 percent (or, including Belfast, nearly 10 percent). (5) Of course, it is likely that northeastern Catholics suffered more severely than did Protestants, and it is probable that population losses in the region, particularly among Protestants, were primarily due to out-migration rather than to the effects of starvation and disease. (6) However, as David Miller has argued, in the prefamine decades the contraction of rural weaving and spinning had created in Ulster an impoverished Protestant underclass whose members vulnerability to the crisis of 1845-52 can be compared with that of Catholic cottiers and laborers in the South and West. Furthermore, Miller points out, some poor Protestants in Northeast Ulster did perish of malnutrition or “famine fever,” even in areas adjacent to thriving industrial centers. And Mokyrs estimated excess-mortality rates for heavily Protestant County Antrim, as well as for the roughly half-Protestant counties of Armagh, Fermanagh, and Tyrone (all four in the future Northern Ireland), exceed those in most parts of Leinster.’
What is your obsession with ‘deliberately targeting’ women and children as opposed to murdering and maiming women and children along with everyone else?.
What is your point?. What twisted moral point are you trying to make?.
I am Scottish. I have grown up with the IRA. I have had a family member murdered by them. I have Irish relatives, both Catholic and Protestant, by blood and marriage, in both Irelands.
And I am history graduate with an honours degree from Glasgow University, and have studied Irish history since I was 10. Thats 30 years ago.
I KNOW my Irish history, from ancient times to modern day. Backwards and forwards.
So dont think for a second that you know more than me.
Referring to the IRA as ‘boy scouts’ (in comparison to....) is utterly offensive. Offensive to anyone who has ever suffered from them, frankly anyone who simply lived through, even anyone anywhere who opposes terrorism.
Do you understand how offensive your remarks are?. Do you care?.
Perhaps you should ditch the family myths and learn the REAL history.
Whilst that still may find the British wanting, you will at least learn the real story and not myth.
There will never truly be peace in Ireland until Northern Ireland, which was stolen from Ireland, is returned to Ireland’s jurisdiction. Sorry but that is a fact.
If Mexico somehow grabbed Texas from the US the situation would be the same.
Watch for the sneaky little turns of phrase, though.
“I did, however, say the IRA were like boy scouts compared to Islamist terrorists. That is irrefutably true.”
Bill Ayers and the weather underground targeted a few peace officers I guess they’re even better than the IRA right?
“What is your obsession with deliberately targeting women and children as opposed to murdering and maiming women and children along with everyone else?.”
I have an obsession with the truth. You apparently don’t know what that is.
“What is your point?. What twisted moral point are you trying to make?.”
I am merely asking you to back up what you said. If you think backing up what you say is twisted, well, that tells us a great deal about you does it not?
“I am Scottish.”
Irrelevant. Can you back up your earlier claims or not?
“I have grown up with the IRA.”
No, you grew up with the threat of their violence. Can you back up your earlier claims or not?
“I have had a family member murdered by them.”
That’s a shame. Can you back up your earlier claims or not?
“I have Irish relatives, both Catholic and Protestant, by blood and marriage, in both Irelands.”
Irrelevant. Can you back up your earlier claims or not?
“And I am history graduate with an honours degree from Glasgow University, and have studied Irish history since I was 10. Thats 30 years ago.”
Irrelevant. I have a PhD in history. Can you back up your earlier claims or not?
“I KNOW my Irish history, from ancient times to modern day. Backwards and forwards.”
Then back up your earlier claims. This should be easy for you. Why are you failing time after time.
“So dont think for a second that you know more than me.”
Apparently I do know more than you.
Can you back up your earlier claims or not?
“Referring to the IRA as boy scouts (in comparison to....) is utterly offensive.”
Irrelevant. The truth is often offensive. Can you back up your earlier claim or not?
“Offensive to anyone who has ever suffered from them, frankly anyone who simply lived through, even anyone anywhere who opposes terrorism.”
I don’t care if the truth is offensive to anyone. This just seems like your latest tactic to avoid backing up your claim. If you can’t back it up, why would you make it?
“Do you understand how offensive your remarks are?. Do you care?.”
No. I do not care in the least if my truthful comments are offensive to anyone. Anyone offended can feel free to email me and tell me they are offended. I will simply respond that offending them was not my intention, but I won’t lose any sleep over someone being offended by the truth.
Can you back up your claims or not? Stop making excuses. Stop avoiding it. Just back up what you calimed. For someone as skilled in history as you claim to be it should be child’s play.
“Bill Ayers and the weather underground targeted a few peace officers I guess theyre even better than the IRA right?”
Who was worse - the Nazis or the IRA? Pick one. Be honest. Which group was worse? It’s pretty obvious is it not? Thus, any honest person can see that some groups are less threatening and less dangerous than others. I don’t see how pointing that out is a problem.
If the IRA did not target women and children in their public pronouncements, what does that prove?. They still murdered plenty of them by proxy, as IRA bombs killed anyone in the area, irrespective of gender, race, religion, sexuality....
I am really at a loss to understand what point you are trying to make. I assume that it is to suggest that the IRA are several rungs on the ladder of moral evil lower than AQ.
And that therefore there is a sliding scale of moral evil attached to terrorists.
Perhaps if you would take a step back, you would see just how offensive that argument is and how morally repugnant it is.