Friday 28 May 2010

Boo hoo!

So Bobby Moffat, a member of the Red Hand Commando, has been shot dead.

Matthew verse 26:52 is the appropriate biblical quotation for those of a religious nature.

This blog is irreligious, but shares the sentiment.

One less blood-stained loyalist scumbag on the streets of Belfast can only be a good thing. The reporters who reported on his death knew who he was and what he was - why were they so silent while he was alive? Whose deaths was he responsible for? Which families still grieve because of his sadism? Journalistic collusion is no better than police collusion.

Who killed him? Which loyalist group kept the guns that they claimed to have decommissioned? Will Moffatt's brothers in brutality respond in kind? Hopefully. But hopefully they will kill only other loyalists. Lots of them.


Anonymous said...


Begs the question,how many more weapons do they still have in their possession? Judging by past history there will be consequences for this.
Furthermore,if this was an "officially"sanctioned attack by one group upon another,then I have to conclude that there are deep tensions within "loyalism".
Not surprising really because as usual the working-class Protestants count for nothing.They were just there to be used and abused when it suited the unionist overlords


google account still not working,any solutions.

Mrle said...

Horseman, you are so much anti militant unionism and anti British that you are slowly turning into one: arrogant and ruthless. Ease up, stick to your reputation, do not waste it.
Greetings from southern Europe.

Anonymous said...

Careful there Horseman.
Certainly no loss to the gene pool here, but history shows us time and time again that when they are done with any internal feud the guns will be turned on innocent Catholics as part of the making up process.


picador said...

I have zero time for loyalist paramilitaries but really, do you have to publicly gloat about a man's brutal murder?

Horseman said...

picador et al,

Try to see my post as a pre-emptive counter to the almost inevitable eulogies that will no doubt be spoken about this man. people will say that he was a valued member of the community - to which I say 'nonsense', he was a murderer and a destroyer of lives and communities. People will say 'he had a family too', to which I say 'then he should have had some understanding of the damage he was doing' and 'surely his family knew what kind of a man he was - why did they stand by him? Did they also support his actions?'

I'm not in favour of the death penalty per se, but like a lot of people I have mixed feelings when a clearly evil person is executed. Moffett (Moffat?) was evil - his membership of RHC shows that. Had he left that organisation? No. Had he turned his back on violence? Who knows? Had he become a political player? No.

My distaste extends to the media, who clearly knew who he was. How long had they known? Do they know who he killed? Why were they so pathetically silent then? The collusion between the media and many loyalist groups is disgusting. Sure, they don't want to become Martin O'Hagans, but if they won't do their job then quit and get another one.

Do I feel sorry for Moffett? Tbh, no. I feel sorry for his victims, but unfortunately his death won't bring them back. If his killers are caught and imprisoned then Belfast will have lost at least a few of its remaining loyalist thugs. That can only be a good thing.

People will throw this post back at me when a republican is killed, of course. So be it. The various alphabet-spagetti groups on the republican side are always killing (ex)members, but the media never makes much of a deal of it, and mostly the people were unknown (since the media rarely moves out of Belfast, so don't know people in, EG, Strabane).

Why should I have greater condemnation for groups like RHC than for the IRA, one could ask? Both killed people - usually innocent people. But on the loyalist side the strategy was to kill innocent people, women, children, old people. To its small credit this was never the main objective of the IRA. Yes, there are exceptions, but for loyalism it was the main intention. They were purely evil organisations - yet funded, armed and supported by the British and unionists. And colluded with by the media.

So when I see one less of them on the streets I can only be thankful.

Wiz said...

Well said Horseman!

picador said...


I am not aware of the media trying to eulogise this man. Nor am I aware of any reports alleging that he was a notorious gunman.

You demean yourself (and detract from what you have to say) by crowing over such depressing fare.

Watchful said...

Horseman - as an admirer of your work, I would have to agree with the comments above. I think you should consider removing the entry. Not to do so damages your credibility and allow some to stereotype you.

Daithí said...


I have to agree with Watchful. Your blog is excellent, and I wouldn't want it to be dragged down to street level.

hoboroad said...

Anonymous said...

Sammy Mc Nally says,

I agree with Watchful et al. Most of your arguements are obviously ideological but well thought through and well written but this graffitti style offering is a departure from those standards.

hoboroad said...

DAN KEENAN Northern News Editor

THE GRAND Orange Lodge of Ireland has made its second call for more unionist unity in as many weeks.

Deputy grand master Edward Stevenson said: “The one sure way to maintain the union is for unionists to forge a better working relationship and ultimately they can create one big powerful party that will have strength and a shared vision.”

Addressing Curryfree True Blues Loyal Orange Lodge in Co Derry, Mr Stevenson endorsed a call made last weekend by Robert Saulters.

“The grand master said he believed there should be one big unionist party which was big enough and modern enough to allow people with conflicting opinions to work together for the common purpose of maintaining the union,” said Mr Stevenson.

“He said there must be a drive towards unionist unity or at the very least better joined-up thinking between unionists. I agree totally with his comments.”

He said the Orange Order viewed itself as “first and foremost a religious and cultural organisation”, but added that it would be wrong to assume that Orangemen do not take an interest in politics.

“One of the many aspirations shared by Orangemen is to maintain the union with the rest of the United Kingdom. The union is bigger than the Orange Order or any single political party.”

He said when senior figures such as himself and Mr Saulters made calls for unity “they were a true reflection of what Orangemen the length and breadth of this country are telling us”.

He added: “When people like the grand master and I call for unionist unity we are not making party political points. In fact the opposite is true. We are saying that, as leaders of the Orange institution, we would be failing our membership if we did not flag up what Orangemen are telling us.

“The Orange Order has a responsibility to articulate the views of its members and it is then up to the politicians to work out the best way forward.”