Picture by vagawi
To have a distrustful nature is to carry a heavy burden. Your partner says they’re going to meet an old school friend, you hire a private detective to check his/her movements. Your doctor tells you to lay off cream buns, you ignore his/her advice because what do medical people know? You stand at the pedestrian crossing with the green man showing, transfixed, because you fear a car may crash the lights.
At the same time there’s the equally crushing load of being too trustful. If someone tells us the moon is made of green cheese and we act as though it were true, we may wander up some irrational pathways. If somebody rings you up and says they’ve got a £1 million prize for you, could you give them your bank details, you might one day regret coughing up the information.
In general, if people tell you something, you like to see the quality of their evidence. Which is why I welcome the unionist paramilitaries’ statement via Jonathan Powell yesterday, that they will have no time for criminality of any kind and will work for the regeneration of their communities. However, I’m not prepared to do a pirouette of delight and leave it at that. I’ll want to see this change of heart in action. Jonathan Powell said yesterday that this Damascene conversion of violent unionism had nothing to do with money; I will wait, as I’m sure many others will, until I see clear and irrevocable signs that this is so.
On Talkback yesterday, I tried to make it clear that this was my attitude, but for some outside and inside the studio, this was taken as a grudging, hypocritical response from the nationalist/republican side. I thought I made my stance as clear as possible: unionist paramilitarism has a bad reputation. If it is about to turn all that around, I am more than pleased and think they should be supported in it. But I would be simple-minded if I didn’t ask for some proof of this change.
In this I seem to be out of step with quite a number of people. For example, when a senior PSNI officer announced that Kevin McGuigan was killed by the IRA, a great number of people accepted him at his word. What need do we have of evidence, let alone a court of law? The police have said it. And when Chief Constable George Hamilton said the IRA had transformed itself into a body working in exclusively peaceful and political ways, and then added that the IRA killed Kevin McGuigan, no one asked him “Chief Constable, could you explain those two apparently contradictory statements, please? And while you’re at it, could you give us even a little bit of evidence to support one or both statements?”
We get the same kind of thing in newspapers. This morning I read a casual reference to the crimes committed against Mairia Cahill. She may well be a victim of rape and cover-up, as she says, but I would be more likely to endorse that view if some evidence were adduced to support it. And yes, I know Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness have said they believe she was a victim. But they likewise have produced no evidence that I know of.
“But trust is what we most of all need in this society!” I hear you cry. That’s true. But trust is built. It comes when we see people establishing a record that merits trust. Even as IRA decommissioning was verified by independent witnesses, so too we need deeds and evidence that will allow us to believe that what has been stated has in fact happened, and that what is promised will be delivered on. And I’m trying not to think of an Irish Language Act or development of the Maze/Long Kesh.
I understand your scepticism about loyalist paramilitaries I suspect most people in Northern Ireland are sceptical as am I.
However most unionists are equally sceptical about the IRA as well they may have stopped killing people (possibly) however have they stopped fuel laundering criminality money laundering. You want proof you say ok I will pose you a question most of the fuel laundering takes place in South Armagh so what group has effectively run South Armagh for the last 40 years? Do you believe its conceivable that a criminal gang could have just popped up there without the IRA knowing about it and doing something about it?
I think the flaw in your logic, neill, is that you start with assumption that the IRA still exists. I may be naive (I don’t think I am, actually), but like any nationalist or republican I talk to, I believe the IRA doesn’t exist any more. Think about it: as unionists often complain, former IRA people are working in Stormont now. A lot are involved in community work at local level. Besides, and maybe as important as anything : time. I don’t doubt there’s smuggling going on, fuel-laundering, etc, in border regions – but that was the case even before the Troubles. I should of course be indignant about this law-breaking, but somehow compared to physical assaults or killings, it seems pretty minor to me. Of course smuggling etc could be resolved at a stroke: have things costing the same on both sides of the border and smuggling would lose its entire raison d’etre….
Perhaps the flaw in your argument is that you deny the IRA exists and the idea that common criminality is ok because in the past it was a lot worse is a very hollow argument indeed.
Does anybody on this blog really believe the IRA just disappeared?
Those are questions you should pose to the PSNI Neill.
But don’t you believe your Chief Constable when he says that the PIRA are no longer involved in violence and are dedicated to peace and politics? As stated numerous times on the Nolan radio show this morning by one of the UVF’s victims: The PIRA is a much more disciplined force than the UVF/UDA. So its obvious, and this is backed up by the PSNI, that PIRA members obeyed the order to end violence from their Commanders.
When the UVF/UDA/RHC agreed to end and disown crime, violence, etc, within 24 hours in Carrickfergus, a family with an 8 year old child, had their home attacked by a gang of masked men. The PSNI said loyalist paramilitaries were behind it. Whether the leaders of Loyalism are liars when they say they are disowning violence, crime, etc or various fractions within Loyalism have already decided to ignore what their leaders have committed to, I don’t know but it shows that violence, crime, etc is still very much active within Unionism/Loyalism and that the leaders of Loyalism might not have any control over their own members.
Neill, I would say that smuggling along the border has been going on much longer than forty odd years. that’s for starters .anywhere you find a border anywhere in the world , you’ll find smugglers. i would say given nature of groups and families along a border like ours, it is very commonplace to smuggle whether or not you might have a political persuasion or not .I ‘m not saying I actually know , mind, but I think what we’re dealing with is “outlaws” fist and foremost and “republicans” or even “loyalists” second.Of course you could say criminals first and republicans/loyalists second but given that republicans by their very nature have scant respect for a set of laws they see enforced on them by an outside influence{ ie Britain} , they feel it is their right to kick against that enforcement in any way they feel.In this case case they can feather their nests and make a right little earner by kicking against a law they might never respect .
Loyalists …on the other hand , have bought into the idea that Britain and its monarchists and its Establishment is their idealistic government and the place where their respect and trust is supposed to ultimately rest and yet they make hypocrites of themselves by criminalising their position , stealing from that government and creating a cult of gangsterism which robs and threatens their own neighbours and people in their own community by demanding protection money , selling them drugs and adulterated cigareetes and alcohol…robbing their own exchequer of taxes and acting as enforcers so that they can maintain a criminal lifestyle. By doing this they are surely making and have made , hypocrites of themselves and their cries of loyalty to Mother Britain. The republicans on the border might also do this but they have an excuse at least . What has been the loyalists excuse? I can understand that it is all criminal behaviour but there is a subtle difference….Is this not all so?
Sorry about the typos folks …too much haste!!
Surely the law is the law paddykool?
The law is the law if it is respected ,Neill, but there are many criminal fraternities with no political axe to grind and they see themselves as literally outside the establishment’s laws anyway .They might see the law as something for the “straights” to worry about…and nothing much to do with them.. Think of the criminal gangs working in the background in any major city…like say the Krays or a modern day version of them , in London ….think of the like of the Ronny Barker character Fletcher in the TV series “Porridge” and his pals ….or Michael Caine, Sir Noel Coward and his cohorts in the film, “the Italian Job”. These might be comically -one -step- removed stereotypes but real versions of them exist in real-life. i know because many years ago I worked in the employ of a couple of these chancers for an entire summer surrounded by their minions in London…{just up near Wembley Stadium }. These scamsters saw and see “the law” as a very bendable concept full of “little earners”. I would say that much of the criminality we are talking about along the border or in the heart of east Belfast only plays lip-service to any notion or idea of “law” really ,.Now their political swayings might be something else entirely , of course….like the idea of “right and wrong”.What is it they say about locked doors and closed windows ?….They’re only for honest people …a criminal will break it down or break the glass, anyway.
Sorry but either nothing adds up or too many things add up.The leaders of the UDA,UVF ,etc concerned for and promoting the education of children in their controlled areas….the same children that they feed the drugs to !…..could any of them even spell education ? Am I honestly expected to swallow the guff,that after almost 50 years of controlling ,Mafia like , these Protestant areas ,earning undoubted millions from extortion ,drug dealing ,pimping and God knows what other unsavoury exploits that they’re suddenly ,,without the slightest pressure , going to metamorphose into Mother Teresa’s .Could it be that the forthcoming report on paramilitary activity has had some influence on their thinking…..I don’t think so …..the PSNI are never going to move against them ,they have big mouths and would reveal very unpalatable information …..going to the very core of Westminster and the heart of that ultimate oxymoron ” British Justice” . Have they had a ” Road to Damascus” conversion….I don’t think so …human nature tells me that when you’ve been Top Dog all your life wallowing in feigned admiration from the underlings around you ,you’re certainly not going to enjoy being an ordinary 5/8 again. No , I’m sorry ….I smell a rat or more precisely, a plague of rats…..I can’t as yet put my finger on it ,but it smells to high heaven !!! and I’m not buying into it.
So …in relation to Loyalism’s grand gesture yesterday afternoon ….trust and all that ..what was that hooded gang doing in Carrickfergus last night? ….the two car-fuls of thuggery that …etc etc etc etc…… Are these people and David McNarry seriously trying to tell us that they are somehow in control of a “community” when they can’t even get them to vote for them and the thuggery continues as though they don’t exist.?
Are they telling us that they won’t encourage street thuggery at every future moment when there is a dispute about flags or marching or whatever else pops into their heads.?
They’d really need to do some changing if we are all to see this leopard changing its spots.I’d say we’ll all know within the next twelve months whether this stunt is more hot air or not.
.If the roomful of people yesterday are the leaders of three illegal terrorist organisations , who are supposedly collecting protection money from all the local businesses…the money that keeps their wheels turning…., why weren’t they all arrested if the Chief Constable knows this ,Does he know any of this?
.I have no love for any of these bubbling, violent groupings on either side of the divide but the Chief Constable has spent this past few months shunting republicans in and out of their cells why is he not probing how loyalism is financed? If loyalism is to go legit ,how will these “leaders” finance themselves and their”soldiers” in future? It can only mean money being procured from somewhere else…where might that be?
Yesterday’s proposals, we were told, were the result of a disciplined process that has been ongoing for 18 months. That disciplined process did not prevent a petrol bomb attack in Carrickfergus at the weekend, perhaps the Chief Con will follow the evidence?
The BBC invited comments about the proposals from a well known Minister of Religion and he waxed eloquently on the proposals. The reality is that violent loyalist attacks are matters for the PSNI not politicians.
We ought not hold our breath on political initiatives either. NAMA and remuneration for Special Advisers were the main items on the menu in Stormont yesterday, while the proconsul remained busy at the back burner with legislation on legacy issues.
“…as I said at the Conservative Party conference, this government will never be party to a re-write of history or any attempt to give legitimacy to those who pursued their objectives by the bullet or the bomb…”
I have no doubt that many people in Ireland, Iraq and Afghanistan will need lots of salt when the Secretary of State emerges from the kitchen.
“…this Government will never accept equivalence between those who did their duty protecting people from terrorist attacks, and those who spent thirty years inflicting terrorist attacks…”
Ballymurphy, Mc Gurk’s Bar, Bloody Sunday, Belturbet, Monaghan, Dublin…dear Secretary of State have you even considered the De Silva Report?
International critics frequently make reference to the ‘conflict industry’ in the north of Ireland which spawns ‘security consultants’, ‘Directors of Communications’ and a plethora of ‘carefully selected independent quangos’. Lives could have been saved as well as millions of pounds if the state had addressed issues associated with partition, social and economic deprivation and sectarianism. The state and its agents opted for the bomb and the bullet. The state continues to thwart efforts to deal with legacy issues with all the vast resources at its disposal. Preventing access to documents until 2050 is proof, if proof were needed, that the state remains an impediment to peace and prosperity in Ireland.
To nationalists I would say, never trust a unionist they are incapable of change
To unionists I would say, never trust the British, they will sell you out when the time is right
To Jessica I would say the feeling is mutual on the former. That’s why on the Irish flag the two groups are kept far apart
And what of Nationalism Jessica?
Did Jonathon Powell ever ask himself why these organisations are still in existence?
In amongst the crowd of assorted veteran Loyalist hardmen where several younger men who can only have joined long after the “cessation” of activities was announced by Gusty Spence in the nineties. What was their reason for joining a paramilitary group or are they just a group of poor Protestant boys who were failed by the education system and had to make other career choices?
And how is it that a large group of men who are members of or affiliated to illegal organisations are free to roam at will and stand before the assembled media; surely Jim Allister and Nigel Dodds will have something to say about this?
Maybe I’m being too harsh, after all their “ownly loyalty is crime” or words to that affect.
We would appear to be luckier down here in the Free Southern Stateen, Esteemed Blogmeister, in the matter of trust.
Take The Unionist Times, for instance. So trustworthy is this august organ that its governing body is even known as (gasp) The Irish Times Trust.
One indeed can be as confident on what the official line will be on any given topic from this paper of record-breaking sales as one can be, say, on waking up and hearing a cockerel crow in St. Stephen’s Green on the Monday Morning after the Les Blues have played in Dublin.
For it is une ancienne coutume that Les Francais abandon their mascot Le Coq Sportif in that lark-occupied park in the centre of Downtown Dublin. Le petit poulet fait coc-o-rico cocorico-cocorico.
This very day we had the Professor of Communications, no less, at Dublin City University, one Colum Kenny, opine in a whine ‘Time to cap the pay of RTE’s ‘big names’.
Now, as this distinguished academic was once on the payroll of RTE (though not, alas, one of its ‘big names’) it is safe to skip the rest of the piece by assuming the predictable tenor. One line, however, for the purpose of this blog deserves a captain’s run out as the contemporary phrase has it:
-We are facing a deluge of tedious commemorations of 1916.
Sounds a tad gratuitous in the context of the topic under discussion in the piece. Hinting, perhaps, at the dissatisfaction which the writer feels at the inadequate title of his academic institution? Perhaps, his tone would be a tad les peevish if he could put,say, The Royal Dublin City University at the foot of his op article?
Still the quoted line above ought to acc-ent-u-ate the positive trustworthiness of this organ. Call it a spin of commission.
Ditto last week when The Unionist Times published a gushy report on the inclusive unveiling of a bust to the distinguished mass exterminator with the bushy mutton-chops, Field Marshal Frederick Roberts in the Viking city of Waterford.
Though in this instance it was more a case of a spin of omission.
Somehow, the paper of record, The Unionist Times (for it is it !) forgot to tut-tut at the failure of the otherwise excellent unveiler, His Excellency Dominic Chilcott, British Ambassador to West Britannia.. The distinguished Dommo quite uncharacteristically overlooked one of the most enduring contributions to humanity of the busted flush-faced Field Marshal: his invention of the (gulp) concentration camp during the Second Anglo-Boer War.
Incidentally, a number of women and children perished as a result of ‘Bob’s your Uncle’ (yes, it is also he !) and his ‘scorched earth’ policy. A five figure number, actually.: 26, 370,
Trustoworthy? It’s a very synonym of The Unionist Times, as they will be the very first to modestly agree. The Unionist Times: you are what you breast-feed.
So, is there a case where said sainted publication might be (gulp)a tad less than t for trustworthy?. Sadly, and it gives Perkie’s profoundly disappointed peruser, no satisfaction at all to point this out; but there may well be telltale signs.
Last weekend, for instance, ten Travellers perished in the inferno at Carrickmines. Last night the local residents blockaded an effort to provide an alternative site. So far that halting site of high-minded humanity, The Unionist Times has significantly failed to coin a word which would snapilly encapture the NIMBY-minded neighbourhood.
This is in rather stark contrast to a similar happening in a Galway suburb over a generation ago. The r-word coined overnight then rapidly reverberated around the globe: Rahoonery.
Redolent as it was, of such leprechauny sounding words as gobaloon, poltroon and buffoon. A fitting pre-addittion to another Galwegian pheonomenon: the DruidShakespeare.
But then, of course, Carrickmines is Rahoon, not.
Carrickickminotaurs?
A non-starter. Carrickmines is, of course, the sacred parish where St. Samuel a’Becket first saw the light of day.
Whose famous dictum might well appear on the placards of the local barricaders:: a novel way to send The Unnamblees on their way:
-You must go on.
–
The loyalist paramilitaries claim there is no pecuniary aspect to their new plans, but with their history, I will take my time about taking their word for anything.
I read some of Peter Robinson’s angelic innocence claim at today’s inquiry, but with his convoluted financial history, I will take my time about taking his word, especially where money is concerned.
You mention, Jude, the ‘crimes committed against Mairia Cahill. But again they are only allegations, as the people she accused faced a court of law and were found not guilty.
So do you believe the accuser or the judge?
Powell said that he doesn’t want the UVF/UDA/RHC to disband. On today’s Nolan radio show UKIP’s David McNarry said they might even be decriminalized. On this Stephen Nolan asked him does he then support decriminalizing the IRA as long as they disown violence, etc. Of course, in typical hypocritical Unionist fashion, David McNarry basically dodged the question and minced his words. He even kept referring to Loyalists as “paramilitaries” and to Republicans as “criminals” then stated that he himself was a Loyalist. The use of language is very important and reveals a lot of a person’s mind set and views but I don’t believe it would come as a surprise if Unionist politicians just admitted they were sympathizers when it came to Loyalist paramilitaries and maybe even more than sympathizers….as I always say it would be interesting what an investigation into loyalist paramilitaries and the unionist political parties would unearth….
If the leaders of Loyalism are genuine in their attempt to disown violence, murder, crime, etc then of course I would welcome that but I don’t believe many of them are genuine, I believe there’s money involved here, a few brown envelopes are being passed from hand to hand. And all of this going on just when a report on paramilitaries is about to be released. A coincidence? I think not.
When it comes to trust, we all have to trust people, its inevitable. God forbid if anyone were to have cancer then that person would have to place their trust in their doctors medical expertise and knowledge. When we order a taxi then we put our trust in the drivers driving ability. If we board a plane then we put our trust in the pilot. The list goes on.
When it comes to Norneverland’s political landscape I cant bring myself to trust political Unionism one iota (I’m not referring to Unionism/Unionists in general) I would place my trust quicker in the leadership of Loyalism before political Unionism, put it that way.
What’s with this sudden use of “Unionist” terrorists and terrorism now? Is it a way of implying that the UUP and DUP had their own private terror wing? Should the IRA now be called Nationalist terrorists and terrorism, implying that even the SDLP dipped their toes in murky waters along with Sinn Fein? Or why not just cut to the chase and call it Protestant terrorists v Roman Catholic terrorists? They do that on American TV news bulletins anyway.
Depends on your definition of terrorist. If your aim is to terrorise the population then I guess you are a terrorist. By my definition British policy and the loyalist activity equates to terrorism. The British used gun men who travelled around in civilian cars randomly killing Catholics. The RUC leaders who tried to ‘poison the water (nationalist communities) to kill the fish (IRA)’ The state agents who picked up Catholics and tortured and killed them seem to me to be an attempt to terrorism and create fear and mistrust in nationalist communities. Also I thought everyone knew the unionist had their own private armies- Isn’t this common knowledge?
By Unionist I take it you mean Protestant? It’s equally easy for me to reply with more whataboutery but should I use the term Republican, Nationalist or Catholic when describing those who inflicted terror on the Unionist or Protestant community? That was the point of the comment, not to start a never ending whataboutery thread. But when a person is on a point scoring whataboutery exercise, why are the victims “Catholic” but the violence perpetuated by ‘Loyalists/Unionists’ and not by Protestants? Or is it ok for foreign news channels to describe the violence in those terms but too close to the bone when it’s closer to home?
Jude
Once again you repeat the claim that the Chief Constable said the IRA killed Kevin McGuigan.
I cannot find that statement. Could you provide a link?