Given the history and nature of the state we live in, it’s not surprising that every so often we run into contradictions and absurdities that take the breath away. Calling this state ‘Ulster’ or ‘The Province’ is one. Referring to it as ‘this wee country’ is another. Implying that soccer players from the north who elect to play for the Republic of Ireland team are guilty of duplicity is another. And then there are memorials.
A website I visit from time to time is nuzhound. It brings together articles from a range of publications which deal with events in Ireland, particularly the north. So I clicked my way there this morning and I found two articles, one directly after the other, which suggested somebody had had their ironical gene removed.
The first was from the News Letter and is headed ‘Naming a park after McCreesh was a highly insensitive move’. It tells how 88-year-old Bea Worton, whose son died in the Kingsmill massacre, has secured a judicial review from the Equality Commission over the decision to call McCreesh Park after Raymond McCreesh, one of the ten men who died on hungerstrike in the 1980s. The link is that McCreesh is said to be one of the Kingsmill suspects.
It’s clear from the rest of the editorial that the News Letter has no doubt about what it believes the judicial review should find – that the naming was wrong and must be changed. Implicit in this is the clear assumption that Raymond McCreesh, believed to be one of the Kingsmill suspects, was in fact one of those who killed the innocent Protestants at Kingsmill. Irony, in case you missed it: unionist inversion of the usual innocent-until-proved-guilty into guilty-and-damned-sure-he’s guilty. Another cornerstone of British justice bites the dust at the hands of those who are loud in their identification of themselves as British.
The second article, immediately below the News Letter editorial, is from the (irony alert) Ulster Star and is titled ‘Council marks UDR freedom of the city’. It tells how Lisburn and Castlereagh City Council had a ‘Tree Planting (sic) Ceremony’ to mark twenty-five years since the Freedom of Lisburn was conferred on the Ulster Defence Regiment. The fact that most nationalists and republicans saw the UDR as not just the successor of the infamous B men but guilty of collusion in the sharing of arms with loyalist paramilitaries and even the killing of Catholics in joint operations. The best-known of these is probably the killing of over 100 Catholics by the infamous Glenanne gang, led by former UDR man Robin Jackson.
It could of course be argued that many of these cases involved suspicion rather than conviction, just as Raymond McCreesh was believed to have been involved in the Kingsmill massacre but wasn’t convicted of it. But there is no doubt that the average nationalist/republican at the time believed that such collusion existed, and that the tree-planting, the freedom of the city to the UDR, and the prominent statue honouring the UDR erected some years ago in the heart of Lisburn, show little regard for nationalist/republican sensitivities.
Those who condemn the naming of McCreesh Park might well consider the prominent place given in Lisburn to a regiment which was seen as worthy successors to the B men of old.
well put and hear hear !!!!!!
maybe Kenny will put the UDR men on the wall in Glasnevin!!!!!! AS HE BOWS HIS KNEES IN GENUFLECTION TO HIS BRITISH MASTERS
Yes it’s very true Jude Unionists don’t do irony but they certainly do hypocrisy.
Given the approach of another sectarian headcount, we can but expect attempts to orchestrate public opinion. Nigel Lawson (Vote Leave) is already advocating border controls in order to prevent illegal immigration. Nothing like a bit of sectarianism and racism to deflect attention form bombing campaigns in the Middle East and offshore accounts. Yes, let us argue about swings and roundabouts and forget about the involvement of faceless politicians and civil servants complicit in the deaths of many innocent civilians.
The Hunt review abolished the exclusively Protestant Ulster Special Constabulary in 1969, however, many members of the USC simply became members of the UDR. Over 3,000 UDR members were deployed when internment was introduced in 1971. Some British politicians had no problem with members of the UDR also being members of the UDA. The problem was not so much about loyalists being trained, armed and having access to ‘British intelligence’ rather that such duplicity would be exposed on the world stage.
It was once argued that the word “collusion” was coined by republicans. Evidence of collusion emerged with the theft of UDR fire-arms, uniforms and the deaths of Catholics, 83 rifles, 21 Sub-machine guns and ammunition were stolen in one night alone in October 1972. British civil servants regularly met with with ‘Supreme Commanders’ of the UDA during the Ulster Workers’ Council strike in 1974, the same year as the Dublin and Monaghan bombings and the year before the Miami Showband Massacre.
In 1977 the UDR was investigated for fraud, corruption, subversion and paramilitary activity. UDR soldiers appeared in court as civilians with membership of the regiment hidden from the courts and the public. It was argued that there were “bad apples and a cheese operative” in some barrels.
The de Silva Report 2012 reported that 85% of all information acted upon by loyalist paramilitaries came from the security forces. There was, however, one glaring flaw in the report. Some who pulled triggers went to jail while some politicians engaged in a Pontius Pilate routine.
Perhaps all of this could have been avoided had parks remained closed on Sundays?
Unionists are probably hopeful that the name remains and they can continue to use it to claim that republicans don’t just tacitly endorse IRA actions like the Kingsmills executions – they actively celebrate them.
Take this with Sinn Fein’s objections to a Kingsmills commemoration event and people being allowed to hold pictures of the dead (imagine that at a Bloody Sunday memorial) and it’s a gift for unionist PR.
Also, as you’ve brought up football Jude, people from Killyleagh proposed that some football pitches be renamed Healy Park for our wee country’s top scorer David. The SDLP stopped that because it’s divisive to name shared space after individuals. Leaving aside the shinners for once – how does unionist hypocrisy on this even compare with that of the SDLP?
Btw. The park in Lisburn’s named after Richard Wallace. He’s famous for his charity and for saving lives.
So I looked at Newry on Google Maps to see what the parks were called – as you do – and the biggest piece of space is called … Jennings Park. After Pat. Pat Good, David Bad. SDLP councillors have apparently pledged themselves to defend it. According to the Examiner “The local community feels a sense of ownership and pride in the importance of Jennings Park due to its association with the famous Newry-born footballer Pat Jennings.”
Also regarding Google Maps. Google still think Raymond’s Park is still called Barcroft Park eight years after the council motion to rename it. I read that it’s the council’s job to update Royal Mail and that’s what Google use for the data underlay for their mapping. So is someone in the council not sure the name’s staying?
“Google still think Raymond’s Park is still called Barcroft Park eight years after the council motion to rename it.”
Don’t rely on Google maps so much.
Raymond McCreesh Park was never called Barcroft Park – ever. Google has never called it Barcroft either. You are mistaken, BYC.
Ok. I’ll take your word for it.
I’m looking at it right now though on google and there’s a green “Barcroft Park” right in the middle of the football pitch. Pull down the wee yellow man for street view and there’s a big “Raymond McCreesh Park” sign.
Although if it used to be Barcroft Park on a road called Barcroft Park that must have been confusing. Needed a new name….
The play park was never called Barcroft Park. What you are looking at, and if you used street view correctly, is the large estate called Barcroft Park. It has been there over 50 years.
Raymond Mc Creesh Park is less than 2 minutes’ walk away from Barcroft – beside John Martin Gardens, Michael Mallin Park and James Connolly Park.
The area has a long history of naming places after people they view as heroes.
Yes. Thank-you. Got that. I was acknowledging my mistake and attempting humour when I said it must have been confusing to have a park called Barcroft Park on a road called Barcroft Park. Now where can I learn how to use maps properly? I thought you looked at the words and the things they were written on and generally that told you what the things they were written on were called.
No problem but I was merely pointing out the evidence for my first statement: “Don’t rely on Google maps so much.”
I thought I was being of assistance to you.
Jude
As one who thinks the naming of the Raymond McCreesh playpark highly insensitive (what’s your own opinion by the way?) I agree that we do not need any more memorials or street furniture named after controversial groups, and the UDR was controversial.
Clearly we have a long way to go here when it comes to consideration for the sensitivities of others
To be honest, I can’t make up my mind. Part of me believes McCreesh, as one of the hunger strikers, is rightly honoured by republicans for his selflessness and courage, and so a memorial to him makes sense. On the other hand, I can see how, if someone believes that McCreesh was involved in taking innocent life, they’d find it hard to bear such memorials. I think the thing that would tilt me towards OK-ing the McCreesh park thing is that republicans are forever being urged to be sensitive, while unionists have memorials to the British army in virtually every town in the north and statues to people nationalists/republicans would see in a negative light, in pretty much the same way some unionists might see McCreesh. And of course there are all those place names and street names and bridge names and town names. There does seem to be one standard for republican commemoration, another for unionist.
Do not forget about Jack Straw’s attempts to change the name of Bobby Sands Street in Iran. It was once named after Winston Churchill.
“To be honest, I can’t make up my mind. Part of me believes McCreesh, as one of the hunger strikers, is rightly honoured by republicans for his selflessness and courage, and so a memorial to him makes sense. On the other hand, I can see how, if someone believes that McCreesh was involved in taking innocent life, they’d find it hard to bear such memorials.”
So for you the only argument against naming a play park after this individual relies on a belief that he was a murderer.
Presumably that means that you think naming play parks after terrorists is OK so long as they didn’t murder? Being guilty of other criminal offences short of murder would not make you consider the honouring of such a person unreasonable?
MT, one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.
Take Winston Churchill, voted the best Briton of all time. Churchill deliberately caused the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent German civilians in Dresden, most of them were burnt to death, men, women and children. The reasons he did that is debatable but most historians agree it was to create a scene for the Red Army to see when they arrived from the East. Basically Churchill and the Americans wanted to show off their air power by murdering tens of thousands of civilians. And no, there was no concentration of German Army Forces in Dresden at the time, there was no tactical purpose in bombing the city at all.
Churchill was also the first man to authorize the first use of chemical weapons. He did this against Kurdish tribes. Again, against civilians. Men, women and children were gassed and died.
Churchill was also a devout British Imperialist. He didn’t believe in the rights of nations to have self determination. Indeed Churchill flew into a rage when Franklin D Roosevelt said in a private meeting that one of the conditions of the US entering the war and helping Britain with material aid was the self determination of British colonies after the War. Hence how the British Empire was utterly finished after WW2, not only due to American conditions but because the Empire was bankrupt.
I could quote other stuff but I’ll end there.
Now MT, I know you don’t agree with McCreesh Park in Newry, an area 99% Republican but do you agree that everything named after Churchill should be renamed? He did FAR worse than Raymond McCreesh or the whole IRA ever did….
“MT, one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter.:
A meaningless cliché since, for example, it’s possible to be both.
But in the context of Ireland, society accepts that the Provisional IRA and other nationalist and loyalist organisations were terrorist organizations and that their members were thus terrorists.
The worlds greatest terrorists are states MT.
May they reap what they sow.
Meaningless? How is it meaningless MT?
MT, if society accepts that the Provisional IRA were terrorist organisations then why did Bobby Sands and a few other Hunger Strikers get elected to Parliament and the Dail? Bobby Sands got 10,000 more votes than even Margaret Thatcher got when she stood. Why would Bobby Sands in particular be honoured by the Indian Opposition and Nelson Mandela if they were “terrorists”?……
I notice you refused to answer my question on Winston Churchill MT and I know that you didn’t forget to, so why don’t you answer? Taking Churchill’s actions into account, do you agree any place/street/etc named after Churchill should be removed/renamed? That’s definitely your stance when it comes to the McCreesh Park and your not shy of letting everyone know…..
“Meaningless? How is it meaningless MT?”
Because it’s a false dichotomy, and also because we should seek to assess things objectively.
“MT, if society accepts that the Provisional IRA were terrorist organisations then why did Bobby Sands and a few other Hunger Strikers get elected to Parliament and the Dail?”
Because a small minority of people voted for then.
“Why would Bobby Sands in particular be honoured by the Indian Opposition and Nelson Mandela if they were “terrorists”?……”
Presumably because those people supported him.
“I notice you refused to answer my question on Winston Churchill MT and I know that you didn’t forget to, so why don’t you answer?”
I didn’t bother reading it. It was too long-winded and I assumed a facile argument.
“Taking Churchill’s actions into account, do you agree any place/street/etc named after Churchill should be removed/renamed?”
Of course not. He was an elected democratic leader who helped save the world from Nazism.
“Because it’s a false dichotomy, and also because we should seek to assess things objectively”
How is it false MT? because you said so?…..Are you seriously saying the PIRA didn’t have any substantial support? Or other paramilitaries around the world?
“Because a small minority of people voted for then”
Having 30,000 people vote for you in Fermanagh alone is a small minority of people MT? Not to mention 100,000 people turned out at Bobby Sands funeral, that’s roughly 7% of the North’s entire population then….at one funeral. And that was just those who were able to make it to the funeral. Not counting the events that happened worldwide, French students storming the British Embassy shouting “The IRA will conquer!”, the Indian Opposition standing for a minutes silence, etc. Your deluded if you think a small minority supported the Hunger Strikers MT.
“Presumably because those people supported him”
Of course but, yet again, you miss the point. They didn’t regard him as a terrorist but a freedom fighter. Even the Rev. Jesse Jackson said Gerry Adams was a Freedom Fighter.
“I didn’t bother reading it. It was too long-winded and I assumed a facile argument.”
You didn’t bother reading it? or maybe it was too much truth for you to handle? What are you doing commenting and debating if your not even bothering to read people comments? lol?…..
“Of course not. He was an elected democratic leader who helped save the world from Nazism”
Well then, you cant speak out against McCreesh Park, to do so would make you an utter hypocrite, as everyone knows you are anyway. Indeed that’s why I support this Park named after McCreesh: he was saving Ireland from British oppression.
Churchill was elected? And? So was Adolf Hitler…..whats your point? He may have helped just a tiny bit to save the World from Nazism but he sided with the Soviet Union who were just as brutal and oppressive, if not more, than Nazi Germany even was. 90% of the entire German Army was defeated on the Eastern Front. The British Army fled at Dunkirk as the German Panzers advanced into France. It wasn’t until the Americans joined the party that the British were back on the European continent hiding behind the USA. The reality is Joseph Stalin saved the World from Nazism but he wanted to replace it with Communist oppression instead of Nazism. Churchill was just the same, only he wanted the World to be ruled by British oppression, as it was previously. Instead the Americans were the big winners, as we can see today with their far reaching influence.
Your logic is MT Churchill is a good tyrant because he was YOUR tyrant, which makes your argument no better than any Nazi’s or Communists.
Of course, lets not mention Churchill’s support of a United Ireland…..awkward….
“How is it false MT? because you said so?…..”
It looks like you don’t know what a false dichotomy is. It means the two options presented aren’t mutually exclusive. It’s possible to be a “freedom fighter” and also use terrorism.
“Are you seriously saying the PIRA didn’t have any substantial support? Or other paramilitaries around the world?”
Not sure how the question is relevant, but it depends what you mean by substantial.
“Having 30,000 people vote for you in Fermanagh alone is a small minority of people MT?”
It was Fermanagh and South Tyrone. And, yes: 30,000 out of a population of over 5 million is a small minority.
“Not to mention 100,000 people turned out at Bobby Sands funeral, that’s roughly 7% of the North’s entire population then….at one funeral.”
7% is a small minority. But PIRA purported to represent the people of Ireland, not Northern Ireland, so it’s actually a much smaller minority still.
“Of course but, yet again, you miss the point. They didn’t regard him as a terrorist but a freedom fighter. Even the Rev. Jesse Jackson said Gerry Adams was a Freedom Fighter.”
As I said, it’s a false dichotomy. Being a “freedom fighter” doesn’t mean one isn’t a terrorist.
“You didn’t bother reading it?”
No.
“or maybe it was too much truth for you to handle? What are you doing commenting and debating if your not even bothering to read people comments? lol?…..”
No I just didn’t read it. I regularly skip through your ramblings.
“Of course not. He was an elected democratic leader who helped save the world from Nazism”
“Well then, you cant speak out against McCreesh Park”
Why not?
“, to do so would make you an utter hypocrite, ”
How?
“Indeed that’s why I support this Park named after McCreesh: he was saving Ireland from British oppression.”
He wasn’t. In fact, his actions provoked “repression”.
“Churchill was elected? And? So was Adolf Hitler…..whats your point?”
Adolf Hitler was the dictator of a totatilatarian state. Churchill was the elected leader of a democratic state, who stood alone on behalf of democracy against the greatest evil of the 20th century.
” He may have helped just a tiny bit to save the World from Nazism but he sided with the Soviet Union who were just as brutal and oppressive, if not more, than Nazi Germany even was. 90% of the entire German Army was defeated on the Eastern Front. The British Army fled at Dunkirk as the German Panzers advanced into France. It wasn’t until the Americans joined the party that the British were back on the European continent hiding behind the USA. The reality is Joseph Stalin saved the World from Nazism but he wanted to replace it with Communist oppression instead of Nazism. Churchill was just the same, only he wanted the World to be ruled by British oppression, as it was previously. Instead the Americans were the big winners, as we can see today with their far reaching influence.”
Dear me. Words fail.
“Your logic is MT Churchill is a good tyrant because he was YOUR tyrant, which makes your argument no better than any Nazi’s or Communists.”
Not it isn’t and no it doesn’t.
“Of course, lets not mention Churchill’s support of a United Ireland…..awkward….”
Why?
So should Connolly Station be renamed also gio?
You mean they’ve stopped calling it ‘Amiens Street Station’, jessica? OUTRAGEOUS…
What a difference 50 years makes
And what about Aiken Barracks just down the road? Frank Aiken sent his troops to wipe out the men and boys of Altnaveigh and got a whole Barracks named after him. Raymond just got two sets of swings, a slide and a roundabout.
“And what about Aiken Barracks just down the road?”
Indeed BYC, you can be sure FG would be happy to rename all such buildings, roads.
They should keep the revisionism going and rename the lot.
And what about the anthem, surely you would like to see it changed also.
And what about the flag, once referred to as the flag of SInn Fein, surely that should be changed also
And whats with all this Irish language? Surely if they want to entice unionism into sharing this island, they should just stick to English
And don’t forget parading. We cant have a united Ireland without a traditional orange march up oconnell street.
I wouldn’t put it past either FG or FF in implementing any of the above.
jessica
I am not really talking about renaming things here. I am simply trying to say it was an insensitive decision when living relatives of the victims of Mccreesh’s brigade are still around.
All I see here is what about Churchill what about Cromwell whatabout whatabout…
Any attempt at debate is a waste of time on this site.
I wouldn’t want that Jessica. People should know that Kingsmills wasn’t exceptional in the IRA’s operational history and that the men involved were just following the example of local hero Frank Aiken. No airbrushing.
“I wouldn’t want that Jessica. People should know that Kingsmills wasn’t exceptional in the IRA’s operational history and that the men involved were just following the example of local hero Frank Aiken. No airbrushing.”
Well it is actually exceptional for a few reasons BYC, involvement of robert nairac and British intelligence is being officially investigated as a line of inquiry.
He had wanted SAS involvement and that’s what came out of kingsmill and some say that it is why it was so brutal.
There were anomalies such as clear evidence that police new something was happening to keep away much longer than would be expected.
The IRA council refused to approve the action as they were on ceasefire and a sub unit took it on themselves to organise, some believe including the police that that countermand had British intelligence involvement.
The act was unique throughout the troubles for the IRA in terms of there being an English accent from one of the gunmen and it was possibly the most sectarian attack they carried out.
I don’t think the full story of kingsmill has yet been understood.
Hopefully one day, all of the truth will be known to all.
“I am not really talking about renaming things here. I am simply trying to say it was an insensitive decision when living relatives of the victims of Mccreesh’s brigade are still around.”
gio, that is a consequence of partition which created a divided society here on sectarian grounds.
Partition was wrong and we are still dealing with the consequences.
There are victims of the British state still around, still being treated poorly by their denials and cover ups which I find offensive.
I would see it as insensitive if they were naming it for the wrong reasons, such as naming a park where it would cause offense in that area but they didn’t and there is strong support in that area to keep the name as it is.
This is nothing more than further attempts at selective vilification which must be opposed vehemently.
When will you understand, there are those of us who will never accept this false narrative, and we will always here also.
You are right though, it is looking more and more like there is no point in talking.
So much for your non violence alternative. You dot even believe in it yourself unless you get your way.
jessica
It is not about getting my way
it is simply about having a debate without recourse to personal attacks, whataboutery, rumour, straw men and all the rest.
Are you now advocating a violent solution?
If not then you are also looking for a non violent alternative. Like me.
I am not advocating anything.
I am agreeing with you that there is no point talking when both sides are so entrenched in their views.
I think the good Friday agreement is for smug bastards to blow their trumpets and pat themselves on the back.
It is meaningless.
Britain will leave eventually, but Ireland has been divided and it isn’t along the 6 county border.
Tell me, what is the problem that you are seeking a solution to gio?
jessica
It is you that seems to have the problem.
“So much for your non violence alternative” That certainly sounds like you think non-violence is not effective?
I am content to wait for a referendum, which I believe will come in due time.
But I am glad you are not advocating violence.
Yes Jude, certainly seems to be a case of Irish Nationalists = baddies and British Unionists = goodies.
Well, thankfully, at least there’s nothing named after Cromwell in the northern part of the country.
Now that would be totally and utterly indefensible and, in fairness, I imagine there is no Unionist in his right mind would propose to name a street or park after that monster who was responsible for the slaughter of thousands of civilians.
So, at least there is some limit it would appear.
I assume you’re being ironic, Kinvara, or else you haven’t been an inhabitant of that most scorned of Belfast spots, the Holy Land…Btw, a man/woman on a galloping horse might have mistaken your name and thought it to be Kincora. Now there’s a name to conjure with…
Jude, I was just keeping in step with the ironic tone of the thread.
Do any Unionists have anything to comment on the naming of a street in Belfast after one of the greatest murderers Britain has ever produced and who murdered thousands of civilians in this country…?
Glad you picked up on the Kin – – – – reference Jude – would not like to rub it in too much as what kind of people the Unionists are putting their trust in but it truly is deeply depressing if some of them think that’s the best available option – and that is not irony I can assure you.
Norneverland doesn’t have a monopoly of the I-word on the Islands of Ironyland, Esteemed Blogmeister. Down here in the capital of the Free Southern Stateen we are no slouches either when it comes to the I-word. Call it –ouch ! – a duopoly, perhaps.
Indeed, as recently as only yesterday, we got as capital a demonstration of same on Liffeyside as one could ever hope to hear in a day’s talk. Call it, erm, A Tale of One City, two venues.
The first venue was the globally-acclaimed Abbey Theatre (one almost slanted in Amharclann na Mainistreach) where a new dimension was given to the old tune – ouch ! – ‘After the Wrecking Ball was over’.
That would be Rising and Reconciliation, a Journey in Music, Poetry and Song, a cultural event thingy to celebrate reconciliation on the island of Ireland in the last 100 years and the 18th Anniversary of the Good Friday Agreement.
In fairness, going backwards, it did not come without a mental Health Warning on the tin thingy. Marked as it melodramatically was with the mandatory illustration of the truly scary variety:
-A joint production by (cue the Skull) Poetry Ireland and (cue the Crossbones) Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.
Needless to report, all the usual suspects with the usual suspect gems of wisdom were there. Giving the event a real Casablanca vibe, with the, gulp, concomitant feel of The Unionist Times going by.
Dah dah da dah de dum.
And as the names of the participants were scrolled across the screen one’s heart , unlike the putts of Ernie Ells, sank and continued to sink till the final nine over par appearance of the Foreign Minister who, despite his comedian’s face, has never been known to crack wise: Charlie ‘je suis Charles Flanagan.
First suspect up to the podium was the wise old owlette Olivia O’Leary herself , not entirely unknown in that parish and its broadcasting wing, RTE. Scarcely had she positioned her somewhat ill-fitting and unruly spectacles on her nose but a suspect quote, perhaps even THE suspect quote was uttered.
The favourite quote indeed of the homogeneous hackitariat South of the Black’s Dyke whose only rival is the one featuring (yawn) the slow learners of Sunningdale. Need one go on? Alas, needs must.
-Confusion is not (stretch ) an ignoble condition.
As one Samuel Bekett never quite said:
– Friel again, but Friel better.
Personally, one would have opted for a more fitting quote involving the C-word, one inserted by the Brian Friel of Engerland into his drama universally known as The Scottish Play. It is put into the mouth of Macduff when he comes into the bedchamber of the late slaughtered Duncan:
-Confusion now hath made its masterpiece.
One will scurry hurriedly on, with your permission, EB, to the other event which was simultaneously staged at a venue roughly (very )an Irish mile, as the crow flies, to the north in (gasp) Crow (spelt Croke) Park.
This is where the Paddy Stinks and Mickey Mucks were gathered to watch teams from the 4 Ps play in the two semi-final of the National Football League.
If the Approved Unshabby ones were in the Abbey ‘holding hands and pitchin’ woo’ (a darling phrase, Merle, a daaaaarlin’ phrase) then the Crokies from Muscogee were there in huge numbers – 31 thousand.
Which was a truly extraordinary attendance, considering the Section 31-type broadcasting ban which had been self-imposed by the homogeneous hackitariat during the non- build up to these semi-finals.
The reason being that there was a far more important game of massive significance being played in rugby’s Third Division South in Grenoble. Featuring as it did such strapping Connacht gallowglasses with the so romantic names, aka Bundi Aki, Koolman, Roux , Bealham and Adeolukum who are (temporarily at least) reconciled to parking their wallets of flesh and moola alike wesht of the rising waters of the Shannon. Till a better offer from the greasy till came along, in anyways.
The same sporty hackitariat who will, in the coming two weeks , in the knock down build up to El Gaasico, will diss the dreary duopoly of Dublin and Kerry while simultaneously describing with oily obsequiousness as fantastico the duopoly of the duelists of El Clasico, Barca and Real in La Liga.
If one were to pick one moment of risible effrontery from the second irreconcilable event, it would be Man of the Match / Laoch na hImeartha, Ciaran Kilkenny, aka the Duracell Bunny of the Dubs doing his pitchside postgame interview completely in fluent, unapologetic, untranslated, bucklepping Leprechaun.
Was it for this the wild vulture capitalists ventured ?, one found oneself asking oneself.
Even his surname insisted on getting in on the act. For it was in that vey surnamed city that the Statues were enacted in 1366.
650 years on, they still haven’t quite achieved their intention, amongst other things, to ethnically cleanse the island of Ireland of its own language and games.
Certainly an occasion to celebrate, not. By either the potty trained Poetry Ireland or its prosaically drippy diplomatic wing.
No Girl even of the, erm, Haggard variety was, alas, on view here, either to MC the event or conduct this interview.
Once again, as the sainted man, St. Samuel a’Bekett almost said:
-Friel again, only Friel better.
“-A joint production by (cue the Skull) Poetry Ireland and (cue the Crossbones) Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.” and “Certainly an occasion to celebrate, not. By either the potty trained Poetry Ireland or its prosaically drippy diplomatic wing” – how do you do it, Perkin? Soooperb…
Hi Jude,
I was the Chairperson of the ‘Newry 1981 Hunger Strike Commemoration Committee’ in 2001.
Our committee facilitated the campaign to name the then unnamed park, situated in Patrick Street, Ballybot, Newry, to respectfully mark the 20th anniversary of the death of Raymond McCreesh on Hunger Strike.
Due to an engineered protest last year I have, for your followers attention, attached below a copy of the letter, as sent to the local newspapers on the 2nd March 2015.
The narrative of the letter is based mostly on a rebuttal to a Slieve Gullion UUP Councillors council chamber outburst where he stressed the terms “controversy” & “morally corrupt decision”. Ironically as the date shows this was also in a run up to an election.
I hope the letter helps your readership understand the overwhelming view of the people of Ballybot.
Raymond McCreesh Park, Newry (2nd March 2015)
“My Brother is not a Criminal”
A bronze bust to Margaret Thatcher stands proudly in Westminister. This is the woman who decimated mining communities in England. She also agreed the request to sink the Belgrano naval ship which was retreating from potential conflict and was outside the British declared militarized zone. Over 300 Argentinian sailors were killed or drowned.
Winston Churchill, who is commemorated in a statue outside BBC HQ advocated total war in Ireland if the Treaty was not accepted and gave the order to carpet bomb the undefended city of Dresden in 1945 which claimed the lives of 135,000 people. There is a Prince Charles Way in Belfast. He is Commander-in-Chief of the Parachute regiment which gunned to death 25 civilians in Belfast and Derry in just 2 incidents in the early 1970’s.
Does anyone seriously believe these sculptures etc. were created to illustrate Thatcher, Churchill and Charles’ connection to the history I have instanced?
As far as I am aware nobody from the greater Newry, south Armagh area has objected to these two statues and roadway.
Nearer to home; to date, no one from this population is demanding the renaming of Victoria Locks or Albert Basin – called after the two ruling royals during the period when Britain was plundering India or raping the peoples of Africa.
No one is pulling down street names referring to Francis Needham (Kilmorey) who butchered civilians at Vinegar Hill in Wexford after the United Irish army had escaped or Isaac Corry who, because of his tax tyranny, had to get a special road (Chancellor’s) built for him to travel safely through Newry.
Indeed no groups of angered citizens marched on Newry Museum when it was named after Nicholas Bagenal in 2006. Bagenal was an On-The-Run from England having carried out a killing there and who attained ignominy years later as an English commander defeated by Irish forces at Wicklow and Rathlin.
I would safely say that few, if indeed any, of the above are remembered or honoured for the examples I have given. Nor should they be, I’m sure many would say.
There is also a meticulously cared for monument at Fords Cross in south Armagh to the 1981 Hunger Strikers which says ‘My Brother is Not A Criminal’. That is the expressed sentiment of the vast majority of the population of this area who supported the 1980 & 1981 Hunger Strikes against the British Government’s policy of criminalisation of the political prisoners and by extension the criminalisation of the struggle for self determination.
With regards to the so-called controversy around the park in Ballybot where I and many of the Hunger Strike Commemoration Committee were from, I will try and provide the sentiment of our committee at the time of the 20th anniversary of Raymond’s death back in 2001, expressed and outlined as follows:
During the conflict I don’t know what Raymond Mc Creesh was involved in but I know he was captured by British soldiers whilst preparing an ambush on them in the 1970s. I also know he was a Volunteer in the South Armagh Brigade of the IRA which had built a fearsome reputation, even within the ranks of the British army, as a worthy adversary. That is all I know, I believe it is all that the vociferous Slieve Gullion Unionist councillor knows. I believe it is all that the group he voices for, namely the Newry Orange Order, knows also.
But one very important point we all know about Raymond McCreesh was his selfless sacrifice on Hunger Strike in 1981 against the British Government’s criminalisation policy of that time. It was because of this sacrifice that the people of Ballybot, through the 1981 Hunger Strike Commemoration Committee in 2001, campaigned for the park to be named in his honour. 14 years later that same Ballybot community reiterated this viewpoint.
The same Unionist councillor said it was ‘a morally corrupt’ decision. I would say the morally corrupt decision came via a challenge to the name from one of the most sectarian organisations in western Europe namely the Orange Order in 2008.
I would also assert that the entire Raymond McCreesh Pk “controversy” has been created by the Orange Order as an ongoing election ploy for the UUP in an attempt to sectarianise a situation that isn’t there.
I would also highlight the action taken by the SDLP hierarchy in south Belfast for forcing one of its south Armagh Councillor’s to withdraw her support for the retention of the name as tantamount to bullying.
The park is named in memory of Raymond McCreesh because the good people of Ballybot have voted for it . They have voted for it three times between 2001 & 2015. They will not easily forgive anyone who ignores this democratic process.
Ewan Morgan
Chairperson of The 1981 Hunger Strike Commemoration Committee
Thank you, Ewan. You’ve provided a clear and helpful insight into the whole affair.
Well done Ewan for getting the park named after McCreesh. The only issue many Republicans would have is why this blunt imbalance in places being named after British Royals, etc compared to Irish Republicans figures isn’t being rebalanced by Nationalist majority councils around the North? Why isn’t there streets named after Bobby Sands here? Like there is in Italy, France, USA and Iran? and other countries.
Mccreesh.is.a.hero.jude.
To. many.people.Jim.Yes.
Another irony is Bea Worton was a member of the UDR and she’s currently a member of Willie Frazers “FAIR” (or should that be UNFAIR?…) group. Lets look at some facts about “FAIR”.
FAIR was set up by Willie Frazer to represent the “Innocent Victims” of IRA violence. They don’t represent the innocent victims of Loyalist or State violence and have been repeatedly criticized for not doing so when it was first set up but if you listen to the Newsletter or Belfast Telegraph you’d think this group was legitimate and truly “fair”….
The bulk of FAIR’s “Victims” are UDR/RUC that were killed or injured by the IRA. On the “Victims” List is Robert McConnell, UDR and Glenanne Gang member, who is one of the chief suspects behind the no warning Dublin and Monaghan Bombings which killed over 30, including children and a pregnant woman with twins. Bea and Willie aren’t too bothered about this uncomfortable little fact, indeed Willie has often used McConnell’s name in his videos and repeatedly says hes a “Victim”…..I’ve also heard that Billy Wright was listed as a “Victim” but I’m certain there are other UVF/UDA men listed as “Victims”.
Lets look at Willie Frazer, the founder of “FAIR”. Willie Frazer was born into a family with a history of involvement with the “security forces”. His mother Margaret is interviewed in Susan McKays: “Northern Protestants”, where she praises the Black & Tans, the B Men and the UDR. She repeatedly says they were “betrayed” by the British Government and “weren’t allowed to do their job”. What she means is the B Men weren’t allowed to go on terrorizing the local Catholic population and murdering people.
Willie Frazer himself was in the Territorial Army and is an open Loyalist paramilitary supporter. He said that UVF and UDA members should “never have been locked up in the first place”. He said he had “a lot of time” for Billy Wright and that “he understands him”. Willie was a big supporter of the Orange men at Drumcree and was often seen there on the hill at Drumcree. Willie also supported collusion between the UDR/RUC/British Army and Loyalists and said “If a Paki comes from India and kills a Provo I’m going to shake his hand”. What Willie likes to turn a blind eye to is the fact 85% of Loyalist murders were of innocent Catholic civilians. Willie was also the manager of a bar where two young Protestants were beaten and took away by the UVF and had their throats cut, he was confronted on live Radio by the father of one of those who was murdered. Willie has often applied for a legal firearm and has been repeatedly turned down. The reason the PSNI gave is Willie has “been known to associate with Loyalist paramilitaries”. The Garda has also stated that they had intelligence Willie was “a member of the Red Hand Commando”, something he denies. There has also been allegations made against Willie Frazers father, Bertie Frazer, who was killed by the IRA. Bertie has been accused of being apart of the infamous Glenanne gang, he certainly was based in the same UDR barracks where the Glenanne gang operated. One Journalist said he had evidence to back up he was.
So this is the kind of people in FAIR. I forgot to add Robert McConnell’s nephew is a senior member in FAIR and many allegations have been made against him too.
I can understand why some people might consider McCreesh Park insensitive but those who say the Park is insensitive are the same who don’t consider or care about the insensitivities around UDR/RUC memorials, especially in places like Lisburn. This is not surprising since they support Orange parades that demand to march and parade where ever they like. Indeed in “Northern Protestants”, its quoted from another book that when asked what is the point of these Orange parades one Orange man replies “to let Catholics know who’s master”.
If McCreesh Park is forced to be renamed, then surely Sinn Fein or the SDLP or some private citizen should take a court case against UDR and RUC memorials, places named after British Royals, etc, to get them removed on the basis of promoting good community relations, that’s exactly the same argument being used against McCreesh Park. Sinn Fein and the SDLP seem to be very inactive when it comes to promoting equality in emblems, names of streets, etc in society.
Talking obviously doesn’t work with Unionists when it comes to this topic. We have Nationalist councils implementing Power Sharing, putting up Unionist Mayors, etc and this is not being reciprocated. Look at the Easter Rising commemorations when Unionist councils refused to give funding to the commemorations but gave funding to known sectarian bonfires on the 11th July on the same day. Lisburn and other Unionist Councils have never had a Sinn Fein (or to my knowledge an SDLP) Mayor.
Unionism doesn’t want to move into the 21st Century, they still think its the 16th and run their councils like the Protestant Ascendancy.
Jude’s complaint depends on the premise that a regiment of the lawful and legitimate army of a legitimate democratic state is equivalent to a convicted member of a proscribed terror organisation. An entirely unreasonable premise.
Don’t confuse legality with morality MT. Something that is “Lawful” means nothing. The Penal Laws were once legal. Apartheid South Africa was once legal. The Atlantic Slave Trade was once legal. They were all morally wrong but yet they were legal for many, many decades, centuries even.
Indeed today its still legal in Britain to disallow a Catholic from being the British Monarch. A Muslim, a Hindu, a Sikh, a Buddhist, etc can be the British King/Queen but a Catholic cant due to the Act of Settlement which is the last penal law to still be in force. Is that right? Of course its not and yet its legal.
Something that is legal or lawful has nothing to do with legitimacy or morality, aka if something is right or wrong. Indeed Parliaments the world over are full of the most corrupt, evil and morally bankrupt people you will ever come across MT. Remember that next time you say some organisation or group was “lawful” as if that makes it OK…..
“Don’t confuse legality with morality MT. ”
I’m not (though the two are connected, and legality is relevant). That’s why I stated lawful AND legitimate.
“Something that is “Lawful” means nothing.”
That’s untrue. In a parliamentary democracy where the laws are made by the people’s representatives we must generally assume that lawful is meaningful.
“The Penal Laws were once legal. Apartheid South Africa was once legal. The Atlantic Slave Trade was once legal. They were all morally wrong but yet they were legal for many, many decades, centuries even.”
Indeed but those laws all pertained in entirely different contexts to that of late 20th century western Europe.
“Something that is legal or lawful has nothing to do with legitimacy or morality, aka if something is right or wrong.”
It does have something to do with it, since our law reflect our morality. That’s why, for example, we have laws outlawing child pornography: because as a society we find it morally repugnant.
Poor attempt at distraction, Ryan.
The British parliament chooses to cover up murders, child abuse and state direction of terrorism under the guise of national security, redactions or locking files away for long periods. That says a lot about their morality and I find it morally repugnant.
“I’m not (though the two are connected, and legality is relevant). That’s why I stated lawful AND legitimate”
Yes you are, read your previous comment lol They aren’t connected at all. No Government has a monopoly on legitimacy and morality MT.
“That’s untrue. In a parliamentary democracy where the laws are made by the people’s representatives we must generally assume that lawful is meaningful”
No, its not untrue lol Just because people vote in a democracy doesn’t make them right MT. By your logic then the White Supremacists which ruled the USA were right when they made discriminating policies against Black people because they were “elected”. Again, your confusing a political ideology, in this case democracy, with morality, as if everything done by democratic vote must be “right”. But of course everyone reading our comments can see your only taking this stance because you think it helps your argument. It doesn’t. If the shoe was on the other foot and law makers made laws which disadvantages you your respect for democracy would suddenly vanish. Indeed the so called “Law abiding Protestant community”, to quote Unionist politicians, often turned violent when the Law made laws which they didn’t agree with. Drumcree and the Parades Commission is just one example but they weren’t upset when the Law was used against Catholics, that’s when Unionists advocated “Law & Order”. Again, when it was to their advantage.
“Indeed but those laws all pertained in entirely different contexts to that of late 20th century western Europe”
Are you justifying the penal laws MT? No matter what the context was all those laws were all wrong and immoral. There was no “context” that made Slavery, that made the penal laws, that made Apartheid South Africa moral and right. They were all wrong then and they are wrong now. As was many laws even during the troubles. One prime example is the UDA being “legal” for two decades while it was murdering innocent Catholics under a cover name of the UFF. Of course the UDA/UFF was aided by the RUC and UDR in many of these murders. The RUC and UDR were under the control of the makers of the “Law” and so were the bulk of the UDA because so many in the UDA were informers and agents…..
“It does have something to do with it, since our law reflect our morality. That’s why, for example, we have laws outlawing child pornography: because as a society we find it morally repugnant”
Your missing the point MT. Just because you think something is moral doesn’t mean it is. Homosexuality was once (and still is by many people) considered repugnant but its now legal because no one has the right to say two consenting adults of the same sex cant have sex together but many, especially in the DUP/UUP, would still outlaw homosexuality tomorrow if they could get away with it.
Speaking of child pornography, many of the law makers in Westminster, especially prominent members, were part of the Westminster paedophile ring. I’m sure your aware of Kincorra and the activities that went on there. Of course I’m not saying all the MP’s are paedophiles but they are, in general, a bunch of sordid corrupt fat cats. That’s a generalization I have no issue with stating because its true. The majority of politicians are immoral and corrupt.
If that’s the type of people you consider bastions of morality because they make laws MT then I suggest you check your moral compass…..if you even have one…..
“I’m not (though the two are connected, and legality is relevant). That’s why I stated lawful AND legitimate”
“Yes you are, read your previous comment lol”
I’m not and reading my previous comment demonstrates that I’m not because, as I already said, I stated ‘lawful and legitimate’.
“They aren’t connected at all.”
They are. In fact there’s a very strong connection.
“No Government has a monopoly on legitimacy and morality MT.”
I know.
“No, its not untrue lol ”
You think the it’s untrue that the law is meaningful? What a strange opinion.
“Just because people vote in a democracy doesn’t make them right MT.”
I never said it did.
“By your logic then the White Supremacists which ruled the USA were right when they made discriminating policies against Black people because they were “elected”.”
That’s not my logic.
“Again, your confusing a political ideology, in this case democracy, with morality, as if everything done by democratic vote must be “right”. ”
I’m not.
“But of course everyone reading our comments can see your only taking this stance because you think it helps your argument.”
I’m not.
“It doesn’t. If the shoe was on the other foot and law makers made laws which disadvantages you your respect for democracy would suddenly vanish.”
It wouldn’t.
“Indeed the so called “Law abiding Protestant community”, to quote Unionist politicians, often turned violent when the Law made laws which they didn’t agree with. Drumcree and the Parades Commission is just one example but they weren’t upset when the Law was used against Catholics, that’s when Unionists advocated “Law & Order”. Again, when it was to their advantage.”
I didn’t support violence at Drumcree or in relation to any parades.
“Are you justifying the penal laws MT?”
No. Are you?
“No matter what the context was all those laws were all wrong and immoral.”
That doesn’t mean that the democratic system we have today is wrong and immoral. As I already said, the context today is entirely different.
“There was no “context” that made Slavery, that made the penal laws, that made Apartheid South Africa moral and right.”
I never said there was, though many at the time believed that slavery and the penal laws etc were right.
“They were all wrong then and they are wrong now. As was many laws even during the troubles. One prime example is the UDA being “legal” for two decades while it was murdering innocent Catholics under a cover name of the UFF. Of course the UDA/UFF was aided by the RUC and UDR in many of these murders. The RUC and UDR were under the control of the makers of the “Law” and so were the bulk of the UDA because so many in the UDA were informers and agents…..”
That doesn’t call into question the entire democratic system nor does it make terrorist gangsters like the UDA or PIRA the equivalent of the lawful and legitimate armed forces.
Are you against democracy?
“It does have something to do with it, since our law reflect our morality. That’s why, for example, we have laws outlawing child pornography: because as a society we find it morally repugnant”
“Your missing the point MT.”
I’m not. On the contrary, I’m directly addressing it.
“Just because you think something is moral doesn’t mean it is.”
I never said otherwise.
“Homosexuality was once (and still is by many people) considered repugnant but its now legal because no one has the right to say two consenting adults of the same sex cant have sex together but many, especially in the DUP/UUP, would still outlaw homosexuality tomorrow if they could get away with it.”
It’s legal because society’s moral stance in relation to it changed and thus we changed our laws. You make my point for me.
“Speaking of child pornography, many of the law makers in Westminster, especially prominent members, were part of the Westminster paedophile ring. I’m sure your aware of Kincorra and the activities that went on there. Of course I’m not saying all the MP’s are paedophiles but they are, in general, a bunch of sordid corrupt fat cats. That’s a generalization I have no issue with stating because its true.”
That doesn’t alter the fact that our laws in relation to child pornography reflect our moral stance I’m relation to it.
“The majority of politicians are immoral and corrupt.”
How do you know?
“If that’s the type of people you consider bastions of morality because they make laws MT then I suggest you check your moral compass…..if you even have one…..”
I don’t consider people involved in paedophilia to be bastions of morality.
MT –
Cromwell – would he be one of “lawful” ones who you admire so much ?
The list of British “lawmakers” who terrorized our country and murdered our people over centuries is quite a long one – but we can get around to naming them all if you so wish.
“Cromwell – would he be one of “lawful” ones who you admire so much ?”
Cromwell is from an entirely different era and it’s facile to try to justify honouring someone like McCreesh with reference to people from.the 17th century.
But no, I don’t think it would be appropriate to name something after him today.
MT :
Considering that Cromwell murdered thousands of Irish civilians, would you be in favour of having all streets/roads etc. in the north of Ireland that are named after him to be re-named ?
Yes or No ?
“Cromwell is from an entirely different era and it’s facile to try to justify honouring someone like McCreesh with reference to people from.the 17th century”
MT, you seem to have this view if something was done in the 17th century then it was OK but if its done now then its not OK??…..
Of course I’m sure its just a coincidence that these things are all stuff that Unionists would agree with or disagree with….Like its not OK for McCreesh to fight against Unionist oppression but it was OK for the penal laws because of “context”……
One gets the feeling that something is moral as long as you and Unionists agree with it MT. And Unionists why Norn Iron is a failed state and why the Troubles broke out here……
“MT, you seem to have this view if something was done in the 17th century then it was OK but if its done now then its not OK??…..”
Why do you think that?
“Of course I’m sure its just a coincidence that these things are all stuff that Unionists would agree with or disagree with….Like its not OK for McCreesh to fight against Unionist oppression but it was OK for the penal laws because of “context”……”
Eh? Who said that?
“One gets the feeling that something is moral as long as you and Unionists agree with it MT. And Unionists why Norn Iron is a failed state and why the Troubles broke out here……”
This paragraph doesn’t make sense. Something is “moral” if it accords with contemporary morality.
As for the wider point you come across like a sixth-former writing a substandard A Level essay. History is not judged by transposing today’s values on to the past. Events are assessed in their own contemporary context.
Kinvara, you’ll find if the Law were to make laws which MT didn’t agree with then his admiration would vanish quicker than a fart in the wind.
Its the typical Orange Order type stance: We’re law abiding people……as long as we agree with the Law.
Ryan :
Thought it was more like :
“We’re law-abiding as long as we make the laws thus ensuring the law is on our side – and if for some reason it’s not, then we’ll simply threaten civil war.”
That’s pretty much the perception of the relationship of the Orange Order to “law and order” in Ireland – of course, times have changed and the Orange Order does not control the North now as it did during the Orange statelet Apartheid ** years.
** Even the architects of South African Apartheid were envious – the former South African Minister for Justice Mr. BJ Vorster, went on record to say that he “would be willing to exchange all the South African legislation for one clause of the 1963 Northern Ireland Special Powers Act.”
High praise indeed.
Anyway, as to the future, in the inevitable Re-United Ireland, the Unionists have nothing to fear as Nationalists have zero interest in lording it over Unionists – that’s more of an Orangey Colonial thingy and has no place in modern Ireland.
100% agree Kinvara.
As Unionist commentator Alex Kane said to me: “Unionists are their own worst enemy”.
the north was never a lawful or legitimate state and the British /udr where never the legitimate army of Ireland but an army of oppression and suppression to impose by force of arms against the wishes of the total Irish nation a treaty that was imposed by the British conservatives at the point of British guns both north and south
“the north was never a lawful or legitimate state”
If you refer to Northern Ireland, it is part of a state and yes it was and is lawful and legitimate.
“and the British /udr where never the legitimate army of Ireland but an army of oppression and suppression to impose by force of arms against the wishes of the total Irish nation a treaty that was imposed by the British conservatives at the point of British guns both north and south.”
If you refer to the British Army, it was and is the legitimate army of the UK, which included all of Ireland until 1922 and continues to include Northern Ireland. The UDR was a regiment of that army.
Raymond McCreesh was never a suspect for Kingsmills .Possession of a weapon which could have been used by scores of people over a period of years in scores of incidents is no link.
Thanks, Michael. Is that the only link involved?
michael c
Come on in to the real world with the rest of us.
Possession of a weapon used in the murder of several people together with membership of a gang known for their activities in the area would be enough to make him a suspect at the least.
In naming the park such considerations must have entered the thought process of those who voted for it.
Yet they chose to do so ignoring not just Unionist politicians who are often just as stupid,but also the ordinary people of Newry and the relatives of those murdered.
Now if the killers were to come forward and clarify who was involved then maybe we would know if McCreesh was involved or not.
Can I ask you,if you found that he had been involved in Kingsmill would you then consider the naming of the park to have been misguided or insensitive?
Your right Michael. Indeed the IRA had strict rules when it came to weapons. Even losing a weapon on an operation could have carried sincere penalties, such as death. So weapons were always returned and passed around to numerous different brigades of the IRA. The weapon McCreesh had could’ve potentially have been in the hands of scores of different people before it came into his.
Yes Jude,that is the only link.
Jude
That and the fact he was a member of the group suspected of the murders.
I would have thought concealing the weapon used in multiple murders might be considered to make one complicit in those murders but then again maybe he found it in a hedge!
Now gio – you know there is a considerable difference between being in possession of a weapon used in a killing and being involved in that killing directly. Follow that through and the people of Derry today would be responsible for the Siege of Derry, since Derry’s walls are decorated by several cannon.
Jude
I dd not mention being involved directly I referred to a link.
If you really believe possession of a murder weapon does not constitute a link to the actual murder I can only shake my head in despair!
As for the cannon in Derry I will assume that was a joke.
No it wasn’t. It makes as much sense to say ‘You possess a cannon that was (probably) used to kill people’ as it does to say ‘You possess a gun that was (probably) used to kill people’ -and in both cases that makes you complicit in the killings. That, frankly, is rubbish. If I’m in possession of a weapon that was used to kill, I’m in possession of a weapon that was used to kill. Sin é – that’s it. I had as you know sympathy for the woman whose son, she believed, was killed by McCreesh; I have less sympathy if that belief is based on the fact that McCreesh was in possession of the weapon. We know from other cases that guns were used by a series of people for a series of different killings.
Jude
I don’t mean to be rude but you are being ridiculous.
If the police found the murder weapon under your bed you are saying they would not consider you a suspect?
It does not constitute guilt but no police force in the world would dismiss it, therefore it is a link. Clearly.
Yes, it’s a link in that I have the murder weapon. If on the other hand they’d found the same weapon under ten other beds in other places, you think they’d blame me for the murder? Check the comment about the paratrooper and Bloody Sunday, gio. Far from ridiculous – and I’m astonished that you either don’t see the point I’m making or saddened that you’re pretending not to see it.
A paratrooper would have a legitimate reason for possessing a weapon. What legitimate reason would McCreesh have had?
Jude
I did not say you would be blamed I suggested you would be a suspect.
Are you seriously saying that should not be the case.?
The paratrooper analogy is not a good one,since that authorities would already know who weapons were issued to. If a soldier involved in bloody Sunday had given his weapon to another soldier to hide or dispose of then yes that second man would be complicit. Not rocket science.
Forget about McCreesh for a moment.
Are you telling me that a person found with a murder weapon should not be considered a suspect in that murder?
S/he certainly should be part of the investigation. But as I remember it, this discussion came out of the mother of her son, with the clear implication that R McCreesh was the one wot dun it. My point is that the reasoning behind this conclusion – the gun – is an example of what AG has rightly raised: that we tend to come to a conclusion and then work back to find something to support it. McCreesh: hunger-striker:IRA:has gun: McCreesh probably dun it. Not good
You are assuming that law and justice are impartial and fair gio.
That is not the case. If there is evidence of state murder or worse, evidence is routinely conveniently lost by the police, redacted by state, protected by national security or filed away for long periods.
Such is british rule in Ireland. What can we do about it?
Jude
“S/he should be part of the investigation”.
Yes as a suspect.
I never said McCreesh done it at all.
My argument was that his clear links made him a suspect, which you now seem to accept,and that in turn made it an act of insensitivity to name a playpark after him only a few miles from Kingsmill.
If it turned out that he was involved in Kingsmill would it alter your view about the playpark? Or would it still be worth it to stick two fingers up to Unionists?
“made him a suspect, which you now seem to accept,and that in turn made it an act of insensitivity to name a playpark after him only a few miles from Kingsmill”. Uh-uh – the place a few miles from Kingsmill considered McCreesh an unambiguous hero as a hunger-striker. And wasn’t there a thing in British justice about ‘innocent until proved guilty’? One last point: virtually all media reports of this matter as good as say ‘McCreesh was involved in the Kingsmill killing’ when in fact the sole evidence is a gun that was used. Impartial reporting? I think not.
Whether or not he was involved in Kingsmill, it is still wrong to honour him. He was a member of the Provisional IRA, and thus supported and presumably took part in or aided in murderous and other criminal actions.
I think you’ll have to get used to the fact that not everyone thinks along your neat lines of good/bad, MT. Difficult perhaps but necessary.
“I think you’ll have to get used to the fact that not everyone thinks along your neat lines of good/bad, MT. Difficult perhaps but necessary.”
I’m well used to the fact that those like you don’t consider members of the Provisional IRA to have been bad. Indeed such people appear to consider them to have been good, given the support for honouring this particular member. (One wonders if the same assessment applies to loyalist terrorists.)
Nonetheless, society as a whole does recognise that terrorism was wrong and thst terrorists should not be honoured.
Terrorism is a methodology, MT, not a philosophy. It’s like condemning batons or guns.
“Terrorism is a methodology, MT, not a philosophy.”
Obviously.
Not sure how that’s relevant to what I’ve said.
“Nonetheless, society as a whole does recognise that terrorism was wrong and thst terrorists should not be honoured.”
I am certain there are loyalists who believe they were doing the right thing MT and are just as proud of their past as republicans.
Society does not as a whole accept that the IRA were terrorists, as I am part of this society and neither myself or the majority of people I know would agree with you on this.
I accept it is your opinion and a section of our society would support you, but those who refuse to accept that the britain managed terrorism, encouraged the murders of many innocent people and are now covering it up are no better than we are and if anything are worse.
“I am certain there are loyalists who believe they were doing the right thing MT and are just as proud of their past as republicans.”
I’m sure there are, but I was wondering about those people here who, as Jude alludes, disagree that PIRA terrorists were bad. Would they also disagree with those who believes loyalist terrorists were bad?
“Society does not as a whole accept that the IRA were terrorists,”
Yes it does.
“as I am part of this society and neither myself or the majority of people I know would agree with you on this.”
You and the people you know aren’t representative of society as a whole.
Jude
You seem to have avoided the points I was making,perhaps by accident.
He was a suspect and that in my view made the naming insensitive.
I don’t know that you can be sure the entire population of Newry considered him a hero so there was no thought for the feeling of those who may have disagreed including the relatives of Kingsmill.
And again I was asking if it was found that he was involved in Kingsmill would it change your view of him and the wisdom of naming a playpark after him?
I think I’d leave the naming of the park to those who live in the immediate area – i.e., whose kids might be using it. I fully accept that some people would see R McC as a bad person but equally there are some people who see him as a hero. I think even those who detest him would have to concede that the park was named after him, not because he was in the IRA, but because he was a hunger-striker. In which role, uniquely, he harmed no one but himself.
“I think even those who detest him would have to concede that the park was named after him, not because he was in the IRA, but because he was a hunger-striker. In which role, uniquely, he harmed no one but himself.”
His participation in the hunger strikes was because he was a convicted PIRA member. The two are directly linked.
And his participation, by boosting and sustaining the PIRA terror campaign, did harm many, many people.
Jude
In your opinion piece you expressed concern for republican sensitivities over the UDR statue in Lisburn.
Yet you have no view on the sensitivities of people in the Newry area who consider McCreesh something less than a hero.
Even if he was found to have been involved in Kingsmill you would have no view on the naming.
It is ordinary people like Bea Worton who are hurt by this and saying the other lot do it too is a poor justification in my view.
Personally I think all new public facilities in N.I., particularly those used by children and young people, should be named after former Loyalist and Republican paramilitaries. After all, they set such a positive example and were role models that the youthful would do well to emulate. I’m being facetious, of course, but can you imagine this happening in any other part of these islands : a council naming a play park after a member of an illegal paramilitary group that had murdered and maimed many members of the local community, it would be regarded as surreal, too far fetched as a piece of political spoofery. Even if McCreesh wasn’t at Kingsmills, he was a very active member of a group which carried out one of the worst purely sectarian massacres of our “Troubles”.
You could almost understand it if the people who took the decision were a bunch of imbeciles, but this was clearly a calculated move, designed to say to all the people of their area,”its majority rule folks, we’re in charge now, he was one of our lads, right or wrong, and we don’t give a **** for the sensitivities of the people his organisation may have hurt or killed.” If they were determined to name something after him perhaps a hospital, or undertaker’s car park, would have been more appropriate, as his activities inevitably led to much unwanted work for these institutions.
How do you feel about Pearse Street in Dublin, Willie? And Connolly Station?
“You could almost understand it if the people who took the decision were a bunch of imbeciles, but this was clearly a calculated move, designed to say to all the people of their area,”its majority rule folks, we’re in charge now, he was one of our lads, right or wrong, and we don’t give a **** for the sensitivities of the people his organisation may have hurt or killed.” If they were determined to name something after him perhaps a hospital, or undertaker’s car park, would have been more appropriate, as his activities inevitably led to much unwanted work for these institutions.”
And what of those of us who see the British state as equally abhorrent as you see paramilitaries WD?
We can either tolerate one another or we have to put up with one another, and if we cant do either, then we must fight one another.
Talking doesn’t seem to be getting us anywhere.
If a paratrooper was issued with a weapon used on Bloody Sunday six months after the event,is he complicit in Bloody Sunday?
I don’t think any person with half a brain has to think twice about that one, michael c. NO….