There’s some anticipation as to what the Haass talks will finally produce tomorrow (or will it be New Year’s Eve?). Part of the anticipation is the nature of what is agreed and part is what kind of gains or losses unionists/republicans have made. On one issue, however, there’s no need to wait. Even before the final whistle has blown, the DUP have told the world their sticking point.
Which is? Investigation of the past. WHA’? No, no, no – don’t worry. There’s investigation of the past and then there’s kicking sleeping/well-hidden dogs.
The latest document produced by Haass suggests setting up a body to recover details about deaths during the Troubles. This body could compel witnesses to co-operate. It’s that last bit the DUP can’t take. They’re concerned that it would mean former police officers and British army intelligence officers would have to discuss top secret security matters. This, they say, is a red line they will not cross.
But it’s not all negativity. “We would welcome the shining of a light into the murky worlds of the IRA, the UDA, the UVF and all the other terrorist groups which murdered most of the people who died in the conflict.”
Mmm. So is the DUP anxious for no police/army investigation because they fear that top secret information will be spilled? That’d be odd. The British government has a better record for holding back on information than spilling information about their secret activities. Or maybe it’s that police and British army being compelled to open up would reveal the murky depths they’ve plumbed during the conflict.
One thing emerges from their objection, however. We’re back where we started pre-1998. Back then, the DUP were attributing the bloodshed to terrorist murderer bad-guys, with the RUC/UDR/British army good guys trying to protect people. Fifteen years later, that’s still the picture they’re determined to present. In this they have at least two valuable allies: the southern government and the southern media.
God help Haass, trying to struggle with that kind of locked-down mind-set.
One thing emerges from their objection, however. We’re back where we started pre-1998. Back then, the DUP were attributing the bloodshed to terrorist murderer bad-guys, with the RUC/UDR/British army good guys trying to protect people. Fifteen years later, that’s still the picture they’re determined to present. In this they have at least two valuable allies: the southern government and the southern media.
God help Haass, trying to struggle with that kind of locked-down mind-set.
So the terrorist murder bad guys are now to be equated with the RUC/UDR/British army a cunning attempt to dilute the blame from the terrorists.
It seems that the DUP are not the only ones who suffer from a locked down mind set?
Steady there, Neill, steady – I don’t think you’ll find that I’ve suggested that the opposite obtains – that violent republicans/loyalists are the good guys and the RUC/UDR/British army the ones in black hats. That’d be like having a state run on sectarian lines for 50 years and then, when the minority became a majority, doing as was done unto you. I don’t zero-sums add up to much – do you?
Read what I typed Jude and not what you think i meant.
That’d be like having a state run on sectarian lines for 50 years and then, when the minority became a majority, doing as was done unto you. I don’t zero-sums add up to much – do you?
Come on that is your stand default position!
Maybe you’d like to give me an example where I’m saying nationalists should get into a position where they treat unionists in an unjust or sectarian fashion?
In the eyes of many people the main villain of the troubles was a man who incited and fomented hatred of Catholics and did his best to prevent equality and civil rights being granted to nationalists. He and his henchmen in the B Specials, UVF, OO and RUC ensured that civil strife would once again return to the streets of Belfast and Derry in 1969. Now as the Haas talks stutter along the road to failure the monsters created by Paisley thunder Not An Inch and No Surrender. God Save Ireland
You could try this for a start
In 2011, while Minister for Regional Development, Murphy appointed Sean Hogan, a Catholic, as head of Northern Ireland Water, turning down applications of four Protestants on the shortlist. A tribunal subsequently awarded £150,000 damages for discrimination to one of these applicants, Alan Lennon, judging that Hogan was appointed because “he was not from a Protestant background and because he was known to the minister and his ministerial colleagues”, Sinn Féin’s Catriona Ruane and Michelle Gildernew.[11] The tribunal also found that Murphy’s evidence was “implausible and lacking credibilty”, and that, during Murphy’s tenure at the Department for Regional Development, there was a “material bias against the appointment of candidates from a Protestant background”.[12] Murphy disputed the finding which he said branded him “sectarian”.[13] Deputy First Minister Martin McGuinness defended Conor Murphy saying he does not have “a sectarian bone in his body”.[14]
I’m not sure you’ve answered my question, Neill. I’m fact I’m fairly sure you haven’t…
A very valid point Neill. Perhaps Jude can explain where the media got the reporting of the tribunal.findings all so horribly wrong as was the case with Smithwick. Lethal allies indeed.
Look a little more closely : )