Distraction alert: the topic below may get you thinking of something else – anything else – than the Cash-for-Ash half-billion bonfire. Resist this and keep Arlene’s Big Burn at the back of your mind at all times.
This morning I was on the Nolan Show talking about the fact that the Tipperary Peace Award committee has short-listed Martin McGuinness for the prize. Predictably, a number of unionists and Malachi O’Doherty ( I think there’s a distinction there but I’ m not sure) have raised their voices to complain at the very idea. Not often you get unionists interested in something happening in another part of Ireland, but they have in this case.
The reasons why McGuinness is short-listed are obvious: without his support, there would have been no peace process. At considerable risk to himself, he moved republicans from an armed conflict to a peaceful political path. The qualities this required have been acknowledged by several Protestant clergymen, notably the Rev David Lattimer.
Those unionist politicians declaring that he is undeserving cite his past in the IRA. You can see their point, if they were relatives of people killed or hurt by the IRA campaign. They argue that McGuinness’s past cancels out all his work over the last twenty years and more, when he has met open contempt from unionist politicians with courtesy and dignity, working for reconciliation even to the point where Ian Paisley became a friend. Previous recipients of the Tipperary Peace Award include Nelson Mandela, but clearly his violent past with the ANC (why do you suppose he was in jail all those years?) hasn’t led to criticism, by unionist politicians or commentators.
In fact many people in the past have had statues erected to them and their names have been honoured: George Washington, that well-known terrorist against the British forces; Winston Churchill, who arranged for hundreds of thousands of Indians to die in famine; Bomber Harris, who arranged the burning alive of 25,0000 – maybe a lot more – ordinary people living in Dresden. And so it goes. These people were considered great because of their violent acts. Martin McGuinness may be honoured because of his peaceful acts. But unionist politicians (and Malachi) don’t like that.
Malachi would argue that he, Malachi O’Doherty didn’t resort to violence, even in the face of fifty years of misrule, the beating of civil rights marchers from the street, the burning of Bombay Street, the killing of Peter Ward by the UVF, the beating to death of Sammy Devenney, an innocent man in the Bogside whose family have never had that injustice redressed. And we could go on. The point is, tens of thousands of young men didn’t suddenly suffer a mass seizure of psychotic violence, which they maintained for thirty years for no reason and then stopped.
What this whole issue is about is two-fold. (i) There are unionist politicians and commentators who want to paint the past as all the fault of the murderous IRA, who acted out of blood lust and refuse to say they’re sorry; and (ii) because unionist politicians, particularly the DUP , are desperate for anything that’ll take the spotlight off them and their shady financial dealings.
Sorry, guys. The spotlight has swung to Tipperary only briefly. It’s now back where it belongs. Hello again, Arlene. Hello, Jonathan.
GRMA Jude, perfectly stated. Very hard to comprehend the hatred Malachi and his ilk have for republicans/nationalists. They are the ultimate hypocrites when they side with the DUP etc
“GRMA Jude, perfectly stated. Very hard to comprehend the hatred Malachi and his ilk have for republicans/nationalists. They are the ultimate hypocrites when they side with the DUP etc”
This is a strange comment. The writer finds it hard to understand why O’Doherty and ‘his ilk’ hate republicans (I’ll ignore the reference to nationalists as it is patently untrue).
Most people would find it easy to understand why people hate republicans: because of the dreadful horror they inflicted on our society. So why can this writer not understand? Presumably it is because O’Doherty is from a nationalist background and the writer can’t understand how anyone could take a view other than to support his own ethnic group. For the writer, loyalty to the ethnic group always trumps reason or ethics.
The writer has a problem, however, because the majority of nationalists rejected republican violence.
While over the years that i have read and listed to the unionist talk about the horror inflicted on them by republicans , i can’t help but think back to my pre 1969 life in Belfast , and how every Sunday during the marching season we had to stay in our house’s for fear of being attacked for just being a catholic , or going for an interview for a job to be ask what school i went to which would define the chances of getting that job , where a nationalist city (Derry) would always end up with a Unionist controlled council where our deceleration of being Irish would most likely result in a beating at the hands of the RUC/B’Specials or jail where catholic /nationalist homes in the 1920’s /30s 50’s and 60’s where burned to the ground by the same RUC/B’Specials / LOYALIST MOBS , WHERE THE DISPLAY OF OUR NATIONAL FLAG IN A PRIVATE PROPERTY WAS FORCIBLY REMOVED BY THE RUC , where young men and women were forced to leave their home and emigrate to get any kind of decent life , where we had to depend on our church,teaching nuns and brothers to provide our education and teachers, our catholic nuns to provide medical care in hospitals which respected our catholic ethos So here MH are a few facts for you to chew on , my generation after 1969 promised our people that never again will the unionist / loyalist be allowed to do what they did then, we will rise up and destroy that orange state , we will meet their physical force and abuse with physical force we will meet their institutional force and abuse with education and political action and we will defeat them
That MT is why 30,000 republicans and nationalist went to jail, that is why 100’s of republicans gave their lives, that is why 10 brave brave men sacrificed their lives in the H blocks of long kesh , we took on their army of British soldiers ,their loyalist gangs of murders and the ulster defence regiment , the UDA , UVF, their Military Reaction Force their General Kitson AND ALL THE OTHER GARBAGE THEY COULD THROW AT US , WE STILL STOOD TALL, AND WE ARE STILL STANDING TALL !!
So, so true Philip Kelly: brilliantly stated facts. The Orange State is dead, all we need do now is, bury it!
“While over the years that i have read and listed to the unionist talk about the horror inflicted on them by republicans , i can’t help but think back to my pre 1969 life in Belfast , and how every Sunday during the marching season we had to stay in our house’s for fear of being attacked for just being a catholic ,”
Before 1969 how many people were attacked on a Sunday for being a Catholic?
“where our deceleration of being Irish would most likely result in a beating at the hands of the RUC/B’Specials or jail”
On how many occasions, when someone declared that he or she was Irish, was that person beaten by the police or put in gaol?
It must have been hundreds of thousands of times if it was the most likely outcome. Amazing that I’ve never heard about this. How did they keep it secret?
“where catholic /nationalist homes in the 1920’s /30s 50’s and 60’s where burned to the ground by the same RUC/B’Specials / LOYALIST MOBS”
How many homes during this period were burned to the ground by combined police and loyalist mobs? Why has this not been documented?
“where young men and women were forced to leave their home and emigrate to get any kind of decent life”
Forced emigration? How was this enforced? Did they use the same methods as the nationalist government in the south?
“where we had to depend on our church,teaching nuns and brothers to provide our education and teachers, our catholic nuns to provide medical care in hospitals which respected our catholic ethos”
Nobody had to depend on the church for education or medical care. There were non-church schools and hospitals available. But for those who chose Catholic education or to go to the Mater Hospital, these were generously funded by the state.
“So here MH are a few facts for you to chew on”
More like a grossly exaggerated claims.
“my generation after 1969 promised our people that never again will the unionist / loyalist be allowed to do what they did then, we will rise up and destroy that orange state , we will meet their physical force and abuse with physical force we will meet their institutional force and abuse with education and political action and we will defeat them.”
No it didn’t. Most of your generation rejected violence.
“That MT is why 30,000 republicans and nationalist went to jail, that is why 100’s of republicans gave their lives, that is why 10 brave brave men sacrificed their lives in the H blocks of long kesh , we took on their army of British soldiers ,their loyalist gangs of murders and the ulster defence regiment , the UDA , UVF, their Military Reaction Force their General Kitson AND ALL THE OTHER GARBAGE THEY COULD THROW AT US , WE STILL STOOD TALL, AND WE ARE STILL STANDING TALL !!”
They went to gaol because they were involved in terrorism. Thankfully they realised it wasnt working and gave up 20 years ago. Sadly they’d murdered 2000 people by then. Most people rejected terrorism and didn’t go to gaol.
Mackies engineering , the shipyard , shorts , the rope woks etc ,active discrimination against Catholics , catholic schools not supported by unionist governments until after direct rule , mater hospital was dependent on catholic church and catholic people donations to operate right up to the late 1970s
I was born and reared in the Carlisle circus area , where the orange marchers met up every Sunday from Easter until November at those times we were advised to remain indoors until after they left and to return to our home when they returned , which in most cases saw the back doors of our homes being used as toilets
on these Sundays we were harassed as we went to mass in St Patricks church in donegal street
Beaten off the streets by RUC/B’Specials as we asked for civil rights one man one vote
Remember the television broadcast by Captain O’Neill ulster at the cross roads 1968
remember the burning of catholic homes in the 1930’s , my mother does as she was burned out on the Hallidays Road in north Belfast 1933, remember the onslaught by the loyalist mobs paisley the B’Special’s /RUC 1964 and the west Belfast election , were Shortland armour cars ran at will up and down the Lower Falls road as they fired from their bren guns on the turrets AS THEY REMOVED THE TRICOLOUR FROM THE SINN FEIN ELECTION OFFICE remember the burning of Bombay street and the lower falls road ,1969 , the expulsion of 3000 catholic families from mixed and loyalist areas all over Belfast
remember that the speaking of the Irish language was banned and could carry a sentence of 6 month jail ,
Where as a boy I and many others where chased across Millfield and Brown Square by loyalists if we were seen to carry hurls or were in our school uniform (1950’s/60s)
I SUPPOSE ITS IN YOUR MIND THAT I IMAGINED ALL OF THIS , OR THAT YOU WHERE ASLEEP OR WAS NOT BORN OR HAS A CLOSED MIND AS YOU PREFER NOT TO KNOW YOUR HISTORY OF BIGOTRY AND HATE AS LOYALIST / PAISLEY AND THE ORANGE ORDER FULLY SUPPORTED BY YOUR FORCES OF LAW AND ORDER BACKED UP BY YOUR ARMED TERRORIST THE B’SPECIALS LATER TO BE THE UDR IMPOSED ON YOUR NATIONALIST NEIGHBOURS ,
KICK A DOG LONG ENOUGH AND HARD ENOUGH SOME DAY THAT DOG WILL RISE UP AND BITE YOU BACK ,
WELL THE NATIONALIST DOG HAS RISEN UP AND IS NOW BITING BACK
“catholic schools not supported by unionist governments until after direct rule, mater hospital was dependent on catholic church and catholic people donations to operate right up to the late 1970s”
This is untrue. Roman Catholic schools were supported by the government right from the start, and the Mater Hospital chose not to.join the NHS, preferring instead to retain its own management. It still received state funds. And it was in the early 70s not the late 70s that it finally chose to join the NHS.
“I was born and reared in the Carlisle circus area , where the orange marchers met up every Sunday from Easter until November at those times we were advised to remain indoors until after they left and to return to our home when they returned , which in most cases saw the back doors of our homes being used as toilets”
You didn’t answer the question. Before 1969 how many people were attacked on a Sunday for being a Catholic?
“remember the burning of catholic homes in the 1930’s , my mother does as she was burned out on the Hallidays Road in north Belfast 1933”
No I don’t. But, taking your word for.it, that’s one house in one year. Was it burned by a loyalist/police mob? You haven’t provided evidence for the homes ‘burned to the ground’ by police/loyalist mobs in the 1950s and 1960s before 1969.
“remember that the speaking of the Irish language was banned and could carry a sentence of 6 month jail ,”
This is also untrue.
“Where as a boy I and many others where chased across Millfield and Brown Square by loyalists if we were seen to carry hurls or were in our school uniform (1950’s/60s)”
And Protestant boys were similarly chased by nationalists.
I’m not sure what your argument is (are you trying to justify PIRA terror or arguing that most nationalists supported it?), but exaggerations and untruths merely distract from it.
They went to gaol because they were involved in terrorism. Thankfully they realised it wasnt working and gave up 20 years ago. Sadly they’d murdered 2000 people by then. Most people rejected terrorism and didn’t go to gaol.
IT WAS THE BRITISH WHO SCRAMBLED FOR PEACE AND THAT INCLUDED THATCHER AS SHE AND HER OFFICIALS HAD BACK CHANNEL MEETING’S WITH SINN FEIN AND THE REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT
IT WAS SOS BROOK WHO DECLARED THAT THE BRITISH HAD NO STRATEGIC INTEREST IN THE NORTH
IT WILL BE VERY INTERESTING TO SEE HOW THE BRITISH WILL REACT TO THE BREXIT AND THEIR NEEDS FOR AN ENTRY INTO EUROPE , WILL THEY DUMP YOU AND LEAVE YOU AS THEY DID WITH THE ANGLO IRISH AGREEMENT !!!
THE MAJOR GENERALS AS EARLY AS THE 1970 AGREED THAT THEY COULD NOT DEFEAT THE IRA MAYBE CONTAIN THEM BUT NEVER DEFEAT THEM THAT WAS WHY THEY SET UP THE ULSTERISATION OF THE SITUATION AND THE UDR /RUC ON THE FRONT LINE BUT NOT THEIR SOLDIERS FROM ESSEX OR SUSSEX OR MANCHESTER OR LIVERPOOL ETC
THEIR CASUALTIES WHERE SO HIGH THEY WERE RUNNING OUT OF EXCUSES FOR THE BRITISH PUBLIC
ITS NOT THOSE WHO CAN INFLICT THE MOST BUT THOSE WHO CAN ENDURE THE MOST THAT WILL WIN OUT , !!! THINK THE BRITISH CAUGHT ON TO THAT YEARS AGO BUT THE UNIONIST STILL HAVE NOT WOKEN UP TO THE REALITIES OF THE 21ST CENTURY
“IT WAS THE BRITISH WHO SCRAMBLED FOR PEACE AND THAT INCLUDED THATCHER AS SHE AND HER OFFICIALS HAD BACK CHANNEL MEETING’S WITH SINN FEIN AND THE REPUBLICAN MOVEMENT”
It wasn’t but naturally the government was open to channels of communication that might help bring the terror campaign to an end.
“IT WAS SOS BROOK WHO DECLARED THAT THE BRITISH HAD NO STRATEGIC INTEREST IN THE NORTH”
It was actually no selfish strategic or economic interest. A statement of the obvious.
“THE MAJOR GENERALS AS EARLY AS THE 1970 AGREED THAT THEY COULD NOT DEFEAT THE IRA MAYBE CONTAIN THEM BUT NEVER DEFEAT THEM THAT WAS WHY THEY SET UP THE ULSTERISATION OF THE SITUATION AND THE UDR /RUC ON THE FRONT LINE BUT NOT THEIR SOLDIERS FROM ESSEX OR SUSSEX OR MANCHESTER OR LIVERPOOL ETC
THEIR CASUALTIES WHERE SO HIGH THEY WERE RUNNING OUT OF EXCUSES FOR THE BRITISH PUBLIC”
It wasn’t the reason, and in the end they did help defeat them, though it was as much the will of the people that defeated terror as it was the security forces.
“ITS NOT THOSE WHO CAN INFLICT THE MOST BUT THOSE WHO CAN ENDURE THE MOST THAT WILL WIN OUT , !!! THINK THE BRITISH CAUGHT ON TO THAT YEARS AGO BUT THE UNIONIST STILL HAVE NOT WOKEN UP TO THE REALITIES OF THE 21ST CENTURY”
The PIRA didn’t win out. And nor did they endure the most. Their victims and those of the loyalists endured the most.
What it simply means MT, is that the indigenous Irish population will always be more determined than the foreign forces of occupation.
MT where is your little orange state or your wee country as you wish to call it , who allows unionist to be first minister ,(Think you got your answer last month on that one ) who now controls the Belfast city council who now controls Derry city council who now controls the west off the Bann , and you claim to have defeated republicans
Need to wake up and smell the coffee , but then again its people like you who live in denial of history and facts
“MT where is your little orange state or your wee country as you wish to call it , who allows unionist to be first minister ,(Think you got your answer last month on that one ) who now controls the Belfast city council who now controls Derry city council who now controls the west off the Bann , and you claim to have defeated republicans
Need to wake up and smell the coffee , but then again its people like you who live in denial of history and facts”
What point are you trying to make. I don’t have a ‘little orange state’.
It’s not me who lives in a denial of history and facts. On the contrary, I’m the one pointing out your mistaken understanding of history and your ‘alternative facts’.
“The writer has a problem, however, because the majority of nationalists rejected republican violence.”
Dunno how you can speak for the ‘majority if nationalists’. If that’s the case then I could also claim the majority of unionists welcomed unionist/British violence. Just saying.
“Dunno how you can speak for the ‘majority if nationalists’.”
Nor do I. I’ve never claimed to speak for anybody but myself.
What a strange comment.
“If that’s the case then I could also claim the majority of unionists welcomed unionist/British violence. Just saying.”
This makes no sense and isn’t true.
“Nor do I. I’ve never claimed to speak for anybody but myself.”
You could’ve fooled me.
“This makes no sense and isn’t true.”
Take your time.
What Malachi and his fellow travellers fail to recognise is that if they were to wait until unionists were to share power we would still be waiting. All you have to do is look around the unionist dominated councils.
This appears to be an argument that murdering 2000 people is a legitimate thing to do in order to persuade other parties to serve in government with you.
MT quite frankly at this stage I don’t really care what you think. Im not getting involved in whataboutery with you. We could all revisit the past. As I said take a look at the councils that are dominated by unionists and that tells you all you need to know.
“MT quite frankly at this stage I don’t really care what you think. Im not getting involved in whataboutery with you.”
Then why did you engage in whataboutery?
Unionist dominated councils. Dont try to deflect.
Do you know the song by Christy Moore ? ” only the very safe can talk about wrong and right, of those who were forced to choose, there are some who choose to fight”. I was listening Jude, you done well.
Mandela was considered a terrorist by the British Government.
Many wanted him hanged.
He remained on the US “watch list” nearly up until he died.
Look how that turned out.
To be fair to loyalists many of them do hate Nelson Mandela as well and not just because he was black but also because he was involved in trying to liberate his people from the oppression of the white South African elite.
As can be seen from the Israeli flags festooning lampposts in Loyalist enclaves of the North, their allegiance is with imperial powers and the militant colonial settlers.
The march of history has a habit of exposing the truth in all it’s glory. Native Americans are no longer seen as sub-human animals and their cultures are now celebrated in light of the fact that they were a persecuted people who had every right to defend their homelands.
It is difficult for people with no empathy for those with opposing viewpoints to look beyond the past. In truth these people are an impediment to peace.
As I write the plummy voice of Roof Double-barrel explains that the PIRA have never said sorry. They have never said that their unfinished efforts to give the English interlopers the heave ho is morally wrong. Poverty and unfairness were throughout Europe but what separated us from the rest was that the Irish wanted a United, sovereign country. In Roofs book that was wrong.
she sure did get away with some statements that went completely unchallenged by the host, if I was MMG i’d be on the phone to my solicitor right about now..
Pseudo intellectuals like her and Malachi O Doherty thrive on publicity. Famous for being famous only they’re not even famous.
If Martin McGuinness and Ian Paisley snr, posthumously, had jointly been nominated it might have made a difference to some. I am not convinced either by the portrayal of selfless provo facing death or prison for their community or country. Nothing in the history of human conflict is that noble or pure.
What about the selfless witless people who went out to butcher the Hun on the advice of the original shady Redmondite. As I said, when the troubles started in 69 you had to pick between the Stoops or the Provos. Those willing to fight and those willing to let them.
That really cuts out the fat fiosrach .Those were very, very different times and apparently Roof was weeping about civil-rights from far away London while the slum-dwellers over here were scuttling about . and running for their lives…….
“Those willing to fight” like blowing up Ken Fletcher’s shop because British paras murdered thirteen people in Derry. That’s not fighting that’s wrecking.
Are people not allowed to complain? McGuinness would be in good company like Clinton, Kerry, Giuliani. Why not Adams? It is really a slap in the teeth for families of deceased, maimed, threatened and tortured. The IRA were full of informers and at the end you wouldn’t know who was leading who. They were beaten and had to get or seemed to get something out of it and for Republicans that was very little.
The Tipperary Peace Prize or indeed any ‘peace award’ in my view is highly controversial. What gives them the right to judge? There should be a stipulation that anyone believes in violence as a means to an end, anyone associated in living memory with violent acts or controversies relating to active cases, or anyone paid to do a job should not be eligible.
How about an alternative e.g Shannonwatch, Bernadette McAliskey, Eamonn McCann. Oh I could go on but it is your page and you can be a biased as you want.
RDE , MO’D and Dominic are entitled to their opinions, although I doubt if they’ll have much impact even in Unionist or British circles with whom they seem to wish to ingratiate themselves.The fact is no-one ,not anyone else , tried harder these last 20 odd years to bring about a normal just society of equals ….he quickly moved on from his former role but has constantly been lambasted and harangued by the press , media etc …..everyone has a past and if a spotlight was shone ,very few would be without sin. It seems we haven’t left the auld ” sackcloth and ashes mindset ” yet ,which is why I’m in total agreement with Jessica on a lot of these blogs ……what the hell is the point in attempting reconciliation , lets move on to a UI .
The problem with republicans is they don’t really like people who ask questions of them.
A lot of people including Malachi,Dudley Edwards etc should be thanking militant republicanism. After all they made a career out of commenting on the conflict. Without it their names would be far less known. Just sayin’.
Without impugning the present incumbent, the Tipperary Peace People are a bit of a joke. A secret society with little to be secret about.
It’s fascinating that more store seems to be set by people who spent most of their lives working against peace, than those who spent all of their lives working for peaceful change. In Martin McGuiness’s case he spent most of his career as part of an organisation which killed almost 2,000 people, injured more and attempted to destroy the economy. In Ian Paisley’s case he spent most of his life engaging in rabble-rousing demagoguery, which undoubtedly encouraged many to join Loyalist paramilitary gangs and go out and murder their Catholic neighbours. Martin gave up his former career because he and others eventually realised that violence was never going to deliver the all-Ireland Socialist Republic they wanted. Ian gave up his former career when his party became the largest in Unionism and he saw the opportunity of becoming effectively P.M. of N.I., the alternative being joint authority.
Both were/are men of limited vision, if they had been real visionaries they would never have engaged in their former careers, but would have seized the first opportunity open to them to engage in cross-community government, i.e. in the executive of 1973-4, the present dispensation being but a tweaked version of that failed experiment. But back then Martin still thought violence would work and Ian still thought we could go back to majority rule. We might live in a less bitter and divided society if they had been real peace-makers and, of course, many people who are dead would still be here.
Nevertheless, I have little doubt that Martin will probably be given this prize, as sympathy for him is high in the wake of his recent retirement and the fact that he is seriously ill. Personally, if it were possible, I would award a communal prize to the Catholic and Protestant people of N.I. who, between 1970 and 1996, chose not to engage in “the conflict,” but kept society going and maintained decent, civilised relationships with their neighbours. They were the real heroes/peacemakers.
willie
Pretty much agree with that, although I do think McGuinness deserves recognition for the work he has done since the GFA.
I suppose like in the parable of the lost sheep there is more rejoicing (and more recognition) for the one sinner returning to the fold so to speak than for the many that never strayed.
Those who make a transition are deemed more notable than those who consistently worked away in peaceful mode all along.
How silly of Martin to assume violence ‘wouldn’t work’. Even though all around him politicians regularly used/use violence to reach their ambitions.
P.s just out of interest, how would the Irish people have removed British interference from Ireland? Sent them a polite letter? Let’s look at the causes not the symptoms, there’s a good chap.
wolfie
The Irish people haven’t removed British interference from Ireland or hadn’t you noticed ?
Glad you have at least acknowledged that Gio. Should we write a polite letter to Downing Street or Whitehall asking them to leave Ireland to the Irish or something like that?
yes,and tell them to leave the 800 yrs rent money they owe on the fireboard on the way out.
So you have noticed then.
So all that violence was for what?
Wasted lives.
Such a crock of shit Willie D.
Did the british state give a shit about peace when they allowed unionists to misrule here for 50 years, tolerating discrimination that would not be tolerated anywhere else in the so called UK?
Did the british state give a shit about peace when they sent their troops over to restore order after unionist mobs took to terrorising catholics seeking civil rights?
Did the british state give a shit about peace when thousands of catholic families had to flee their homes, when families were split up and sent into emergency accommodation resulting in siblings living apart in different countries among strangers as they did with members of my own family?
Did the british state give a shit about peace when they decided to side with the same unionist mobs who started the trouble when they met armed resistance?
Did the british state give a shit about peace when they allowed their forces to act without control and with impunity from the law in the 70s?
Did the british state give a shit about peace when their FRU were training and arming loyalist paramilitaries and encouraging them to murder innocent catholic civilians as a strategy against the IRA?
Did the british state give a shit about peace when they interned innocent catholics ,tortured them and destroyed some peoples lives as they did with 1 member of my own family?
Did the british state give a shit about peace when their agents made sure the 75 ceasefires failed and the conflict stakes were raised?
Did the british state give a shit about peace when they decided to cover up their past and pursue a criminalisation policy which they maintain to this day?
Do the british state give a shit about peace now, when they maintain their veto on denying existing documents, names and evidence necessary for the legal teams working for the families of the victims of state terror?
Do the british state give a shit about peace now, when they lie to cover up the truth of their role in the conflict here such as the inaccurate claims that state forces are being pursued more than other participants in the conflict?
Do the british state give a shit about peace now, when they support unionist corruption and intolerance over republican reach out and reconciliation?
Do the british state give a shit about peace now, when they would risk stability by even considering bringing back a hard border within Ireland?
Do the british state give a shit about peace now, while they refuse to honour commitments made in the good friday agreement, even basic principals such as respect as recently demonstrated by their SOS?
Why should we give a communal prize to the Catholic and Protestant people of N.I. who would allow such crass dictatorship to afflict our society and divide our people in our own country to accommodate any last dregs of a failing empire?
I will never have any respect for or even care to have peace with such a state or its supporters at such a heavy cost.
The pursuit of peace has been one sided and it is fast running out of steam.
There can and will be no peace without the truth.
Have the Catholic and Protestant people of N.I. any interest in finding out the truth or the courage to pursue it or do they care not how unclean the hand that feeds them might be?
If the Irish people do not have the courage to pursue an Irish nation, then quite simply we don’t deserve one.
No Ireland will give you the peace you’re seeking Jessica
Don’t talk rot Dominic
I can accept any Ireland who’s destiny is decided within the borders of this island by the people of this island working in the best interests of all the people on this island.
There is nothing unreasonable about that.
It is however very unreasonable to be expected to accept London deciding they can bring back a hard border within Ireland to suit the interests of their own island and indeed more accurately the interests of England
It is time you woke up and saw more than the sorrow of Ken Fletchers shop
We are still being treated like second rate Irish citizens
If we don’t stick up for ourselves, you can be damn sure no one else will.
It’s your way or no way Jessica from what I can see. You shouted at the people your whole life and your still shouting at them. Maybe you should learn to listen.
If you mean my way as in the whole truth must come out on all sides starting with the british state ending its veto on national security and covering up its past, my way as in respect has to start at the top and work down, i.e. both governments first, then elected parties, then civil servants and so on, not starting with commenters on blogs sites.
My way as in there damn well better not be a return to a customs border across this island no matter how frictionless they try to make it.
If that is my way then yes, these are very much red lines.
Perhaps it is you who needs to listen for not everything is about Ken Fletchers shop.
“My way as in there damn well better not be a return to a customs border across this island no matter how frictionless they try to make it.”
That reads like a threat. What are you going to do?
Any questioning of the status quo is a threat to you MT so that’s hardly a surprise.
I am sure both states are well aware of the risk it will impose, the return of a hard border will result in an anger among a majority of nationalists that will make everything that has gone before pale in comparison.
“Any questioning of the status quo is a threat to you MT so that’s hardly a surprise.”
No it isn’t.
“I am sure both states are well aware of the risk it will impose, the return of a hard border will result in an anger among a majority of nationalists that will make everything that has gone before pale in comparison.”
I asked what are you going to do. Why didn’t you answer?
Now you say there will be ‘an anger among a majority of nationalists that will make everything that has gone before pale in comparison’. What does this mean? How will this anger manifest itself?
It quite simply means what it says MT.
The outrage will go right to the Dail though.
They will be given the opportunity to decide if they wish northern nationalists to maintain an Irish identity in line with the Ireland they lead or if they wish to cast us off as a british colony external to the rest of Ireland.
For too long they have fudged this question. It will be time to let all of the people of this island know the official position of the Irish state on it.
As to how it will manifest.
I can only give you my opinion at a best guess basis, I have no crystal ball unfortunately.
It could be anything from a limp acceptance that we have been betrayed and nationalists will resign themselves to their fate and embrace the british union, pledge support to the monarchy and drop the tri colour and Gaelic games for the union flag, loyalist rag and to all become northern Ireland soccer supporters.
Or at the other end of the spectrum, there would be a very large group in the south equally as outraged at such behaviour who will rally behind outraged nationalists in the north and potentially another civil war could break out over all 32 counties which the Gardaí and Irish army would walk away from and abandon the southern state rather than give their lives to impose partition and uphold a british claim on Ireland.
Your guess would be as good as mine, what do you think would happen MT?
“Now you say there will be ‘an anger among a majority of nationalists that will make everything that has gone before pale in comparison’. What does this mean?”
“It quite simply means what it says MT.”
But the meaning of what it says isn’t clear. Are you suggesting that there will be a terrorist campaign worse in scale than that of the PIRA?
“The outrage will go right to the Dail though. They will be given the opportunity to decide if they wish northern nationalists to maintain an Irish identity in line with the Ireland they lead or if they wish to cast us off as a british colony external to the rest of Ireland.”
Whether or not people wish go ‘maintain an Irish identity’ is up to people themselves. Parliaments don’t decide on people’s identities.
“For too long they have fudged this question. It will be time to let all of the people of this island know the official position of the Irish state on it.”
What question?
“As to how it will manifest. I can only give you my opinion at a best guess basis, I have no crystal ball unfortunately. It could be anything from a limp acceptance that we have been betrayed and nationalists will resign themselves to their fate and embrace the british union, pledge support to the monarchy and drop the tri colour and Gaelic games for the union flag, loyalist rag and to all become northern Ireland soccer supporters. Or at the other end of the spectrum, there would be a very large group in the south equally as outraged at such behaviour who will rally behind outraged nationalists in the north and potentially another civil war could break out over all 32 counties which the Gardaí and Irish army would walk away from and abandon the southern state rather than give their lives to impose partition and uphold a british claim on Ireland.”
But you said it would be worse than anything that went before. How would a ‘limp acceptance’ be an anger worse than anything before? So you must be predicting a civil war, yes?
Who would start this civil war, against whom, and what would be their war aims?
“Your guess would be as good as mine, what do you think would happen MT?”
Not much. People will simply get on with their lives.
The IRA were not terrorists MT, they were a citizen army who fought an urban guerrilla campaign against the army of a global super power the only way they could have.
I think it is time the Irish citizens in the north were given the respect from the southern establishment as to whether they would be valued as citizens in a new 32 county Ireland or if they are considered less than the irish citzens in the south.
It is a reasonable question and deserves an answer.
The DUP thought also that they could just do whatever they wanted and that everyone would simply get on with their lives and let them away with it.
That worked out well for everyone
As Harry suggested before, you don’t see to get the concept of cause and effect
“The IRA were not terrorists MT”
Yes they were.
“they were a citizen army who fought an urban guerrilla campaign against the army of a global super power the only way they could have.”
They fought a classic terrorist campaign.
“As Harry suggested before, you don’t seem to get the concept of cause and effect.”
Harry never explained that strange comment. Why do you think I don’t get the concept of cause and effect?
I just hope the people use their vote wisely in this election. We’ve been fools for too long.
I’ve been out on the doorsteps all week trying to get those who didn’t vote last time to do so this time. If all those who are saying they will vote do so , Sinn Fein are guaranteed an increased vote.
Lets hope you are right, and as many people come out to vote as possible regardless who they choose to vote for.
“Maybe you should learn to listen.”
Great advice that. If only Irish people before us had ‘listened’ instead of asking,demanding etc then perhaps we would have, well, got nowhere. Brilliant. You should do talks on this wisdom………Norman Wisdom.
If they had listened to John Hume bloody Sunday would never have happened. On such things history turns.
How do you know capitulation would not have resulted in Catholics being driven out of the north in even greater numbers and a much more bloody and brutal conflict instead.
We are where we are Dominic, if you cant get over your if only melancholy then at least keep it to yourself.
If only is about as helpful as what aboutery.
I was responding to WT on his comment about listening.
“If they had listened to John Hume bloody Sunday would never have happened. On such things history turns.”
If who had listened?
John Hume counselled against the march in Derry after he saw the behavior of the paras on Magilligan Strand.
Ghandi called that cowardice Dominic
It might just have been good tactics given John Hume’s subsequent role in politics here
coulda, woulda, mighta is all you seem to have Dominic
We can mope over what could have been or deal with what actually happened.
Believe it or not, there are families out there still being treated appallingly by a callous british state having had family members suffer greater losses at the hands of british state forces than even the loss of Ken Fletchers shop.
“John Hume counselled against the march in Derry after he saw the behavior of the paras on Magilligan Strand.”
Oh right, so the protesters should’ve went home and wrote a well worded letter to the authorities then? Or waited till the paras went home? What if they came back? Btw, what about partition? Should the IRA have wrote more letters? After all if the Brits were willing to kill in order to frighten those demanding basic equality then how likely would a letter have impacted on those who wanted to maintain an even greater injustice, partition?
Hats off to the civil rights protesters. They bravely decided to take a stand despite knowing that there was the very real possibility of being met with violence and death at the hands of the state terrorists or its proxy unionist terrorists. It certainly puts the present day trump protesters in to the shade. The anti trumps know full well the state is on their side so the possibility of being met with violence is very very unlikely. Alas they probably think they are brave lol.
“Oh right, so the protesters should’ve went home and wrote a well worded letter to the authorities then? Or waited till the paras went home? What if they came back?”
Sounds like you are glad the parade went ahead and people were killed.
“Btw, what about partition? Should the IRA have wrote more letters?”
No, they should have accepted the democratic will of the people.
“After all if the Brits were willing to kill in order to frighten those demanding basic equality then how likely would a letter have impacted on those who wanted to maintain an even greater injustice, partition?”
‘Partition’ wasn’t an injustice.
As I said, I was responding to a comment by WT about listening. I’m not excusing the state but I’m not accepting the Republican analysis either. Are you suggesting a hierarchy of victims or making an impact statement for the Fletchers
I think we should put victims who lost family or those who were physically hurt a long long way above bricks and mortar.
You seem to have a preoccupation with letters WT just like some of your comrades.
Not listening again Jessica: It was a distraught Mrs Fletcher that stayed with me.
Must have been a traumatic experience for you both I don’t know you cope
Well Dominic I see you didn’t address the points I raised. Enough said.
WT, In spite of the ‘war’ the Brits are still here. Enough said
Yes bur so are we
Had it not been for the IRA that may not have been the case for a great many
Not much compassion for your fellow countrymen then Jessica.
Sorry Jessica but I just don’t accept that
I couldn’t care less if you accept it or not Dominic.
I may have been young but I remember the panic when the RUC and army vehicles lined up the street. I remember the bin lids clanging, women grabbing kids inside and shouting for someone to get the boys out.
I saw it all first hand. The cheers that went up when the masked men came out with their rifles.
You have Ken Fletchers shop, I have many years worth of my own bad memories.
I guess we all have our crosses to bear.
“WT, In spite of the ‘war’ the Brits are still here. Enough said”
Yip and if the Irish keep their heads down and don’t antagonise the Brits in any way they’ll be here for a lot longer still. Brilliant. Again, Dominic, one last time, how do you think Irish people should’ve addressed the greatest injustice, partition? Prayed? Lol
“Sounds like you are glad the parade went ahead and people were killed.”
Nope, because that would then make me a British/unionist terrorist or at least put me into the bracket of the vast majority of unionists. Please pay attention.
Btw, partition was indeed an injustice. Sure look what it has caused since. Please pay attention.
“Btw, partition was indeed an injustice. Sure look what it has caused since. Please pay attention.”
It wasn’t. On the contrary, it avoided the injustice of forcing an entire people.into.a state against its will.
If you’re referring to the Troubles, they were caused in part by unionist mismanagement and discrimination not by ‘partition’ itself.
That is a chicken and egg scenario MT.
If it wasn’t for partition, unionists would never have had such undemocratic control in the first place.
If britain had of stepped in to ensure british principles were enforced in Ireland and not simply washed their hands off us as second rate nobodies and allowed an artificial unionist majority they helped to create to run amok.
We could go on forever with what ifs, if only we listened to such and such, if only this hadn’t happened.
The reality is it did and we are where we are.
But since you now acknowledge the troubles conflict was caused in part by unionist mismanagement and discrimination which is in itself a surprise from you MT, and you have previously dated it to have started on August 1969, which is before PIRA ever existed.
You have in effect acknowledged that PIRA did not start the conflict but was brought into it by the actions of unionist paramilitaries, RUC and the british army who acted as one in the 70s.
And would you not support the ending of the veto on truth and making documents, names and make existing evidence available to the families of innocent victims of british state terror and their counsel in the name of a better future than our past?
There can be no hope until they do so.
“That is a chicken and egg scenario MT.
If it wasn’t for partition, unionists would never have had such undemocratic control in the first place.”
But undemocratic control wasn’t a necessary condition of ‘partition’.
“If britain had of stepped in to ensure british principles were enforced in Ireland and not simply washed their hands off us as second rate nobodies and allowed an artificial unionist majority they helped to create to run amok.”
Exactly. You make my point.
“But since you now acknowledge the troubles conflict was caused in part by unionist mismanagement and discrimination which is in itself a surprise from you MT, and you have previously dated it to have started on August 1969, which is before PIRA ever existed.”
I don’t understand the use of the word ‘now’, nor why you expreas surprise .Unlike you, I have always recognised the multiple causes of the Troubles.
Of course it wasn’t a condition to misrule MT, but by dividing a country the way britain did, do you not think they had a responsibility to ensure it wasn’t abused in their name in the way that it was?
They failed to do this MT and now republicans have given it another chance and Sinn Fein have undeniably worked hard over the past 10 years to make it work, but unionism through its elected representatives has proven they still have not changed, they will still abuse any power they are given and reconciliation is not even in their vocabulary.
And now we face the return of a customs border and deeper division once again in our country.
Well, enough is enough, it is time to start talking about a new Ireland and what relationship it wants with itself and the world.
“Of course it wasn’t a condition to misrule MT”
Perhaps you can explain that to WT.
“but by dividing a country the way britain did, do you not think they had a responsibility to ensure it wasn’t abused in their name in the way that it was?”
I think all governments have a responsibility to ensure fairness. Where borders are drawn is irrelevant.
Where borders are drawn is only irrelevant to those who benefit from it.
Where families, friends and kin are divided as a result to appease bigots, it is far from irrelevant and often leads to conflict.
Your point that it wasn’t a condition to misrule when partition was legislated for is too idiotic for me to try to explain to anyone.
I expect WT gets it also, it is just, well what do you say to such stupidity and ignorance?
“Where borders are drawn is only irrelevant to those who benefit from it.”
That doesn’t make sense. If they benefit then it’s relevant.
“Where families, friends and kin are divided as a result to appease bigots, it is far from irrelevant and often leads to conflict.”
You seem to be missing the point. The location of a border is irrelevant to a state’s duty to promote fairness. The duty is there regardless of the borders of the state.
“Your point that it wasn’t a condition to misrule when partition was legislated for is too idiotic for me to try to explain to anyone.”
How come WT is struggling to understand it, then?
“I expect WT gets it also, it is just, well what do you say to such stupidity and ignorance?”
I don’t know. Hence why I asked you to try and explain it to him.
You said it WT “the Irish people” were they lead I’ll follow. So far I see no real interest. Sad, but there it is.
My apologies MT …I hadn’t realised you still needed an answer to “cause and effect”.I possibly missed that one or assumed you knew already.It’s sometimes referred to as “causality “.It’s the the agency or efficacy that connects one process, which is usually referred to as “the cause” with another process or state which is known as “the effect”…, the first is understood to be partly responsible for the second, and the second is dependent on the first. In general, a process has many causes, which are said to be “causal factors “for it, and all lie in its past….that is temporally .Time is a component quantity of various measurements used to sequence events, to compare the duration of events or the intervals between them, and to quantify rates of change of quantities in material reality or in the conscious experience. Or you might say in “historical life” . An effect can in turn be a cause of many other effects. Such cause-and-effect relationships are also observed in nature. Lightning is always followed by thunder. The cause-and-effect relationship can be seen clearly between heavy rain and consequent flooding. Lack of rainfall leads to drought; excessive exposure to direct sunlight causes sunburn. The cause-and-effect relationship is present whenever one event could not have occurred without a preceding event.Just apply that line of reasoning to history and Bob’s your uncle ….”Cause and Effect”.
You’ve misunderstood. I know what cause and effect is. What needs explanation is why you think I don’t.
“If you’re referring to the Troubles, they were caused in part by unionist mismanagement and discrimination not by ‘partition’ itself.”
Unionist ‘mismanagement and discrimination’ would never have been if partition hadn’t been forced upon all the people of Ireland. Take your time, denial isn’t a river in Egypt.
“Unionist ‘mismanagement and discrimination’ would never have been if partition hadn’t been forced upon all the people of Ireland.”
You’ve missed theI point, which was thst they weren’t a necessary condition of ‘partition’.
“You’ve missed theI point, which was thst they weren’t a necessary condition of ‘partition’.”
I think the signs were there MT
If Margaret Thatcher can accept that and acknowledge it was wrong, why cant you?
“I think the signs were there MT”
The signs of what, and how is this relevant?
“If Margaret Thatcher can accept that and acknowledge it was wrong, why cant you?”
Accepted what, and how is this relevant?
Signs that unionism would misrule, since they had discriminated in the north since before partition already.
Margaret Thatcher claimed they got it wrong in partitioning Ireland.
Partition was and is wrong MT.
“Margaret Thatcher claimed they got it wrong in partitioning Ireland.”
She was wrong.
“Partition was and is wrong MT.”
You’re against all birders? One single global state?
PK
What about the choices people make in the face of events: The Blacks in America faced violence but never turned to full scale war. Some people here did though the majority didn’t and were vindicated in the end. So people’s personal choices must be a factor. History is a factor but not a determining factor surely?
Dominic, had the same blacks faced the same discrimination from the same people, not in America, but by enforcing such undemocratic and unjust control at home in their nation of origin.
Under those more accurately reflective circumstances, do you think it still would not have turned to a conflict the same way as it did here?
The black people in the US were inspirational in seeking equality in their new home among the American people.
The Irish people have likewise been inspirational in their determination to refuse to accept foreign rule in our own country.
I am certain the same proud people would not have tolerated foreign dogs to misrule in their home nation same as wont in ours.
“Dominic, had the same blacks faced the same discrimination from the same people, not in America, but by enforcing such undemocratic and unjust control at home in their nation of origin.”
You’re suggesting America isn’t the home of black Americans? What an appallingly racist suggestion.
“The black people in the US were inspirational in seeking equality in their new home among the American people.”
So black people in the US were not part of the American people but we’re living among the American people? More appalling racism.
They were brought to America as slaves MT and have struggled to be treated as equals ever since.
That was the only racism.
Their roots go back to Africa I believe. I don’t believe they would consider it racism to suggest this.
They deserve equality in the US, as to whether that have it yet or not is another thing.
You do also realise that the british identity is not native to Ireland – its roots also go back to another country.
“They were brought to America as slaves MT and have struggled to be treated as equals ever since.
That was the only racism.”
I was referring to your racism in not considering blacks to be part of the American people or America to be their home.
“You do also realise that the british identity is not native to Ireland – its roots also go back to another country.”
‘Identities’ aren’t ‘native’ to anywhere: people are.
Dominic, and where did it get the black people of America for not fighting? Do you think discrimination has ended in the US? Maybe you are one of these people who gets sucked in by the optics such as a first black president elected means the US isn’t racist? Take a look at the prison population in the US. You will find it has more people in prison than any country in the world. Then take a look at the black people amongst the prison population figures. Once you do that you will realise the US is still indeed racist. Unless of course you believe black people are simply born as criminals?
Btw, the civil rights movement in the US was teetering on the brink of all out violence. And just like India the oppressors had to accommodate those within them movements who were of a non violent ideology I.e King and Ghandi simply to be pragmatic rather than any great wish to grant equality and fairness to the people they represented. They knew that if King and Ghandi lost their control of their respective causes then in all likelihood armed struggle would ensue. An all new ball game for the oppressors.
After they had managed to get King to quell the rumblings of discontent the oppressors went to work in making sure the black community would never present such a threat again. They bought off some of the intelligentsia, killed others and endeavoured to flood their communities with drugs in order to criminalise,dumb down,tame and get them to kill each other. Job done.
Btw, some would say, since the ceasefires, the British state has done the same here in Ireland, but that’s an other story.
No I don’t think I have “missed thel point” at all. It’s you that’s in denial(not the Egyptian one).
“No I don’t think I have “missed thel point” at all. It’s you that’s in denial(not the Egyptian one).”
You did miss the point, and appear still not to have understood it.
“You did miss the point, and appear still not to have understood it.”
Eh?
“You’re against all birders?”
No, in fact I was a member of the R.S.P.B at one time.
WT
I’m not fooled by a Black President but I think you’re watching too many Bourne movies. You should go and see La La Land for balance, take Jessica with you.
“I’m not fooled by a Black President but I think you’re watching too many Bourne movies. You should go and see La La Land for balance, take Jessica with you.”
Thanks for the advice and although I would welcome Jessica’s company any time I would have to respectfully decline your proposal as I normally take advice from leaders rather than self confessed followers such as your good self. But just out of interest is La La Land, that you recommend about the Vatican at all?
Just having a little joke WT, I haven’t seen it myself but O don’t think so, probably more of an escapist film.
Well …”Cause and Effect”…this is in reference as to why an event might happen in a given moment of time and what results from that event itself. There has to be a context. It might be the right or the wrong thing to do and the right or wrong result ,depending on any number of opinions. The “morality” or otherwise of the result would be dependent on the particular brain -chemistry of the individuals involved and possibly also localised social- conventions of thought .I would argue thta the situation we find ourselves in the year 2017 has a very long period of creation ever since Irish lands were invaded in the 12th century by Normans…leading to enforced English rule when Prince John Lackland(the clue is in the title!) was made Lord of Ireland by his father Henry 11 of England .Kings tend to steal what they want .You could say the Irish have been fighting to retrieve their land ever since and you couldsee the “cause and effect” right down the centuries from incident to incident.
In more contemporary times …or say within this past fifty years ,there is a fairly well-researched record of small and large events since the mid-1960s and if anyone has time to relive every long day of their past lives there are newspaper articles in the archives , written to explain every side of the argument.in those there might be an inkling as to why one incident led to another .
The question as to why one person might take a violent route , a political route or no route at all is as individual a choice as a person’s personality and background circumstances .I was never involved in any violent activity , but then again nothing violent actually happened to me ,personally ,or my family.Why the schoolboy sitting at his desk in the same classroom would join a paramilitary organisation and go out to fight and bomb instead of going to university or entering politics, is as individual a choice as why one man might become a printer or another a postman. If the police forces had terrorised your street or had your father been interned or your brother murdered , you might think differently .That’s a possibility.Many who were involved in violence saw it as the just thing to do and in their minds it was obviously a reaction to an event or simply a continuation to long old war that stretches back some eight centuries.
The conditions were certainly ripe for the violence to happen …and happen it did.
As for the blacks in America during the 1960s.Well I do remember after Martin Luther King was murdered there was a lot of rioting and the Black Panthers became more prominant .Why it did not grow from that is possibly because of what similarly happened to the republican movement in Ireland in that Hoover’s FBI saw them as a threat to the state and they were villified in the establishment press. Public support for the party waned among the blacks and newspaper readers, and the group became more isolated. Then In-fighting among then Party leadership led to the party crumbling.America might wel have gone on a very different path ….
“Well …”Cause and Effect”…this is in reference as to why an event might happen in a given moment of time and what results from that event itself. There has to be a context. It might be the right or the wrong thing to do and the right or wrong result ,depending on any number of opinions. The “morality” or otherwise of the result would be dependent on the particular brain -chemistry of the individuals involved and possibly also localised social- conventions of thought .I would argue thta the situation we find ourselves in the year 2017 has a very long period of creation ever since Irish lands were invaded in the 12th century by Normans…leading to enforced English rule when Prince John Lackland(the clue is in the title!) was made Lord of Ireland by his father Henry 11 of England .Kings tend to steal what they want .You could say the Irish have been fighting to retrieve their land ever since and you couldsee the “cause and effect” right down the centuries from incident to incident.
In more contemporary times …or say within this past fifty years ,there is a fairly well-researched record of small and large events since the mid-1960s and if anyone has time to relive every long day of their past lives there are newspaper articles in the archives , written to explain every side of the argument.in those there might be an inkling as to why one incident led to another .
The question as to why one person might take a violent route , a political route or no route at all is as individual a choice as a person’s personality and background circumstances .I was never involved in any violent activity , but then again nothing violent actually happened to me ,personally ,or my family.Why the schoolboy sitting at his desk in the same classroom would join a paramilitary organisation and go out to fight and bomb instead of going to university or entering politics, is as individual a choice as why one man might become a printer or another a postman. If the police forces had terrorised your street or had your father been interned or your brother murdered , you might think differently .That’s a possibility.Many who were involved in violence saw it as the just thing to do and in their minds it was obviously a reaction to an event or simply a continuation to long old war that stretches back some eight centuries.
The conditions were certainly ripe for the violence to happen …and happen it did.”
If this is directed at me, I’m at a loss as to why. It’s mostly pretty obvious stuff. What point are you trying to make and why?
No MT .This one is nothing to do with you at this moment in time .If it had been , I’d have mentioned your name.
PK
That Cause and Effect could be used to excuse any bad behavior then because there is no bad behavior only cause and effect. No one is morally responsible because they are only acting out of the local conventions and circumstances of their particular time and the chemical interactions going on in their brain?
It’s not really about morality at all, Dominic.It’s an explanation as to why a course of action might actually be taken .The cause of the action taken in fact.
Most rational people will not wake up some morning and simply decide to go out and shoot people for no good reason, unless they are in some way insane .The fact is most of them are not. To the person taking the action they may have an excuse that suits them and /or their group ,that seems perfectly reasonable and the right direction to go in.
They might be reacting to violence previously meted out to themsekves and are reacting to it in this way or think that the powers that be are corrupted. For someone else outside of that group , looking in, or with an entirely different agenda to protect, it might appear as the wrong thing to do or be in fact “criminal”. We hear that all the time where both the civic authorities and revolutionary groups both use terrorism on each other for opposing reasons, each arguing that they have the “right” to do so.They each believe that to be the case.You see that all over the world.
We make up the “moralities” and laws to suit our own sense of safety within a specific society but when the society or its agents starts killing its own people as happened here and in America or South Africa ,then it seems that sense of morality breaks down.What is “morality” when it doesn’t work fairly for every single person?
It seems a valid enough reason why there has been so much violence in Ireland ovethe centuries .It’s not carried out by everyone . It never has been , so how can we otherwise explain how perfectly normal , upstanding people sometimes get involved in it? .
What about the case were violent resistance becomes almost a sacred tradition in a country which is passed from one generation to the next. It then takes on an orthodoxy that is almost a religious belief. I have heard the IRA, the same goes for other groups, described as sons of fathers. There is no cause and effect there just keepers of the holy grail or sacred tradition. Rationality doesn’t really come into it. Plenty of people have looked for justice and fairness and used civil disobedience tactics: Chartists, Suffragettes, Trade Unions and have not resorted to war. Also the poverty and injustice levels in S Africa, S. America and Palestine are a lot worse than they ever were here so there is no real comparison.
Oh my god, I thought MT was bad,
You are a loon.
Well Dominic.Just to start with…” the poverty and injustice levels in S Africa, S. America and Palestine are a lot worse than they ever were here so there is no real comparison.”…
You can’t really ever compare “like- for- like “anywhere in the world. Most people don’t know what it is like to live in the Calcutta slums but they know how it feels not to have as much as someone else. Every situation is unique and self-contained. Everyone and every race think there is nothing like themselves anywhere else.They feel unique and self-contained in the world. …even though , for example , Irish Nationalists in Ireland could readily identify with blacks in South Africa and blacks in Alabama USA. They knew what oppression was in their own lives and that is enough.
We were and are not the same even in the towns, cities and villages across Ireland .you might live a different life from a family at the other side of town.The same was evident back in the 1950s before the “Troubles” .My own family , who were educated working -class ,moved into a new-build housing complex after the war , in time for me to be born in 1952. A comfortable home with an actual inside bathroom and three bedrooms , sitting -room , kitchen and living -room. Clean and comfortable . …not too big but with a patch of garden at the back.Ten years later, my father was part of a self-build scheme which allowed him to build and buy a slightly bigger terraced home where he lived until he died a few years ago and in which he raised his family, myself and my four sisters. I followed in his footsteps with some more education and work and also set out and built my own bungalow in another self-build scheme when I was about thirty . Damned hard work in any spare time i had. Like i say …we are not all the same .During those same years between 1950 and the present , many people grew up in homes without indoor bathrooms or toilets …in slum conditions and worse, with maybe a wee gas hot- water geyser in the kitchen for every need and a tin bath in the yard , possibly …if at all. .It’s the luck of the draw, in many cases…lack of opportunity …lack of drive ….oppression maybe … but these are the kind of households that shaped the various families of Ireland back then.
If violent resistance becomes a sacred tradition in a family …violent republicanism or violent loyalism…and almost becomes a religious belief, it is really little different to that adherence to superstition, folklore and religion itself .You could see it as a familial habit that is passed from one generation to the next…. from the cradle to the grave ….unquestioned .I have to say that I jettisoned any religious belief in my early teenage years and my three children …. and now my grandchildren have none of that to deal with at all .There are plenty of families where that kind of thinking is their driving force and each generation constantly reinforces that same narrative..
Not surprised at that comment from you Jessica, I known your kind all my life.
Of course you do
Just like MT, you know everything
Two peas in a pod
“I’ve”
Not sure whether you’re agreeing with me or not PK. I’m from a working class Catholic background so you’re not telling me anything I don’t know. The bullies come from every community and so do the good people. Unfortunately the good people are too quiet and now is the time for shouting from the roof tops. I will never accept negativity.
A peace prize has already been given to the real peacemakers of the Troubles.
Trimble and Hume in 1998.
“A peace prize has already been given to the real peacemakers of the Troubles. Trimble and Hume in 1998.”
Trimbles is only temporary, when the truth comes out in time, which it will, his will be withdrawn over his direct links with british intelligence and their relationship with billy wright which ome of us wont forget.
“Trimbles is only temporary, when the truth comes out in time, which it will, his will be withdrawn over his direct links with british intelligence and their relationship with billy wright which ome of us wont forget.”
Jude may hope that Lord Trimble doesn’t refer this paragraph to his solicitor.
I would dearly love to see him try MT, timing couldn’t be better to draw more attention to the state evidence being denied as the pressure continues to mount
If only he would
“I would dearly love to see him try MT, timing couldn’t be better to draw more attention to the state evidence being denied as the pressure continues to mount
If only he would”
Not only has he tried, but he has succeeded, winning substantial damages.
Could be more than his nobel prize at stake then
I only hope the truth comes out while he is still around to see it
“Previous recipients of the Tipperary Peace Award include Nelson Mandela, but clearly his violent past with the ANC (why do you suppose he was in jail all those years?) hasn’t led to criticism, by unionist politicians or commentators.”
I’m surprised, for my entire life in NI lots of people dismissed Mandela as a peace maker and instead saw him as a terrorist, to the point that when I arrived in Glasgow to live I was annoyed at the ‘Nelson Mandela Place’ in the city centre (where I went to church once or twice, funnily enough).
why try and tell people their voting about rhi,surely they can vote for whoever they feel best represents them.or better still dont vote.
Malachi O’Doherty was one of the first alumni of the erstwhile Belfast College of Business Studies Journalism course – he got taken on by the Irish News and presumably reported the Civil Rights agitation. Possibly he reported the 1969 pogroms, but he may have been in England at the time.
He, and the other Taig who did that first course , were intending to travel overland to India, due to Leo’s taste for – relatively – soft drugs they remained in Heyshem for two years (I calculated they’d get to the Indian border in 2002 years at that rate). The rest of the story is in Mal’s autobiographical books. Why is he a crazed Unionist? Heaven knows, he says it is rebellion against indoctrination.
I’m not much older that he is, but Belfast Taigs were never heavy-duty Nationalists, they voted Labour and were not fussed about what breed of Labour it was, in 1943 they helped send a two-fisted (he had to be in Belfast) Labour man to Westminster, Jack Beattie. He got re-elected in 1945. But the Unionists mobilised the Order – and some Catholics started a Red Scare – a Reverend won in 1950.
Beattie wanted to join the Labour Party of Attlee and Ernie Bevin but was refused, so he applied to and was accepted by the Irish Labour Party. What else could he have done? So he wasn’t just a Red, he was a rotten-Prod Shinner.
My memory of schooling was that Irish history was taught in a very distanced, deodorised, antiseptic manner – and stopped at the Land Wars.
The Tipperary Peace Prize or indeed any ‘peace award’ in my view is highly controversial. What gives them the right to judge?
Your first paragraph seems to indicate that you have appropriated to yourself the right to judge.
Have you rights that you don’t think others should have?
Just what I was thinking myself, Sherdy.
Heard Jim Wilson this morning complaining that nobody had put forward the name of David Ervine.
I’m surprised Nolan didn’t think to ask Wilson why he himself hadn’t put the name forward!
“Predictably, a number of unionists and Malachi O’Doherty ( I think there’s a distinction there but I’ m not sure) have raised their voices to complain at the very idea.”
This is a very revealing comment.
Jude is implying that to be a nationalist one must also be an apologist for PIRA terror. O’Doherty therefore, being an outspoken critic of PIRA terror cannot be a nationalist. Indeed (horror) he may even be a unionist.
“The reasons why McGuinness is short-listed are obvious: without his support, there would have been no peace process. At considerable risk to himself, he moved republicans from an armed conflict to a peaceful political path.”
The flaw in this argument is obvious. He helped create the need for a peace process in the first place by the leading role he played in starting, increasing and sustaining the violence.
“Those unionist politicians declaring that he is undeserving cite his past in the IRA. You can see their point, if they were relatives of people killed or hurt by the IRA campaign.”
You can only see their point if they had relatives killed or hurt? So someone who didn’t have relatives killed or hurt may not reasonably object to a terrorist-leader-turned-peace-processer being nominated for a peace prize?
“Previous recipients of the Tipperary Peace Award include Nelson Mandela, but clearly his violent past with the ANC (why do you suppose he was in jail all those years?) hasn’t led to criticism, by unionist politicians or commentators.”
Because the context in South Africa was entirely different to that in Northern Ireland.
“Malachi would argue that he, Malachi O’Doherty didn’t resort to violence, even in the face of fifty years of misrule, the beating of civil rights marchers from the street, the burning of Bombay Street, the killing of Peter Ward by the UVF, the beating to death of Sammy Devenney, an innocent man in the Bogside whose family have never had that injustice redressed. And we could go on. The point is, tens of thousands of young men didn’t suddenly suffer a mass seizure of psychotic violence, which they maintained for thirty years for no reason and then stopped.”
Why is that the point? Surely the fact that they didn’t suffer a seizure of psychotic violence would be a mitigating factor that may excuse their violence? The fact that they made conscious choices to engage in terrorism is the very reason why they ought not to be honoured.
“What this whole issue is about is two-fold. (i) There are unionist politicians and commentators who want to paint the past as all the fault of the murderous IRA, who acted out of blood lust and refuse to say they’re sorry; and (ii) because unionist politicians, particularly the DUP , are desperate for anything that’ll take the spotlight off them and their shady financial dealigns.”
(i) is a fallacy: objecting to McGuinness being honoured does not necessitate believing that everything was the fault of the IRA.
(ii) may be true, but not relevant here. It wasn’t the DUP who arranged for McGuinness to be honoured and this become a need item.
Sorry, guys. The spotlight has swung to Tipperary only briefly. It’s now back where it belongs. Hello again, Arlene. Hello, Jonathan.
Violence existed in these counties well before MMcG got involved.
He didn’t start the violence.
He reacted to the violence that already existed against the catholic/nationalist community perpetrated by various Unionist factions and even state forces.
“Violence existed in these counties well before MMcG got involved.”
That doesn’t excuse it.
“He didn’t start the violence.”
That doesn’t excuse his role in continuing it.
“He reacted to the violence that already existed against the catholic/nationalist community perpetrated by various Unionist factions and even state forces.”
Again, that doesn’t excuse his crimes and certainly doesn’t make him a worthy nominee for a peace prize.
I’m not excusing anything I’m simply correcting you’re falsehood.
You said MMcG played a leading part in starting the violence.
I’m pointing out that violence started long before MMcG got involved.
Your statement is incorrect.
‘I’m not excusing anything I’m simply correcting you’re falsehood.
You said MMcG played a leading part in starting the violence.
I’m pointing out that violence started long before MMcG got involved.
Your statement is incorrect.”
I didn’t say that you were excusing it. I’m pointing out that whether he started it or not, what he did was wrong.
I’m glad that you agree.
Britains very presence in Ireland in a ruling capacity is wrong MT.
In fact there is precious little right about northern Ireland.
“Britains very presence in Ireland in a ruling capacity is wrong MT.”
‘Britain’ is an island. It is not possible for it to be ‘present’ in Ireland.
If only that were true MT
You kinda did MT.
That’s beside the point anywho.
I’m glad you agree that your original statement was incorrect.
It is not today nor yesteryear, Esteemed Blogmeister, that the Norneverland Trubs impacted upon the tranquility of Tipperary.
Take, say, the Battle of Kinsale (which took place during the Winter Transfer Window of 1601/02). Hard, very, to get away from footie analogies when one is dealing with a county which is known as the, erm, Premier County.
Indeed, it might even be posited that the concept of joint managers was pioneered during this campaign. One has but to think of those Nordies, the two Hughs, O’Neill and O’Donnell. One cagey, the other too prone to wage w. in a ragey.
It’s a long way from Ulster to Munster, via Tipperary. And indeed it is a long time since the Long March of the Two O’s took place. That a minority of the marchers did the moonlit flit in the dominion of the Devil’s Bit, however, is indubitable.
Surnames of an Ulster origin, like Carr and (gulp) Doherty (and variations thereof) linger on in Tipperary and date from this time. There is linguistic proof to back this theory. Take this word which is still to be heard in the vernacular, particularly in rural pockets of the Northern Riding:
-Owltock.
This is a yoghurt-word which is a (gasp) curry-uption of the Leprechaun original:
-Ultach.
Thus, when a Carr or a (double gulp) Doherty (or variation thereof) is called an Owltock he knows which genealogical-geographical box is being ticked, none in possession of said surnames being what might be described as, erm, thick.
What is unclear, however, is whether those of the checked surnames were descended from them what broke ranks on the way TO the Battle of Kinsale or on the way FROM. Two seemingly harmless prepositions; one would have thought they were a long way from the proposition that they could cause such mayhem in the past.
Yet for a Carr to suggest to a Doherty (or vice versa) that his ancestors went AWOL on the way TO rather than on the way FROM Kinsale has been the cause of, erm, wholesale hurlamabuck involving the hurling of abuse and, on occasion, just hurling. Indeed, one school of linguistics traces the common sobriquet of Tipperarians to this very bone of contensh:
-Stonethrowers.
While another school of Premier pacifists claim this TO and FROM of flimflammery in Toomevara has led, by a commodious vicus of recirculation, to the surprising phenom known as the Tipperary Peace Prize.
Though these claims, linguistic and pacifistic, are open to debate or even conservation itself, nonetheless there can be NO doubt about the last three lines of the following five-line verse from the neighbouring county of Limerick which is only known for one Stone, the Treaty one..
STONETHROWERS v THRONE STOWERS
In Tipperary one finds folks called Owltocks
Whose origin has been d’cause of flummox
North ‘n South Yunes
Store the same tunes
Of moral superiority in a safety deposit box.
One would almost think from this and other blogs that Jude considers the PIRA terror campaign to have been justified.
One would almost think from your utterings that you consider British interference campaigns(murder,rape,pillage,colonialisation,famines etc etc) in foreign countries, including Ireland to have been justified too? Ach hey ho.
“One would almost think from your utterings that you consider British interference campaigns(murder,rape,pillage,colonialisation,famines etc etc) in foreign countries, including Ireland to have been justified too? Ach hey ho.”
No one wouldn’t.
What do you think were the causes of the conflict here, MT?
“What do you think were the causes of the conflict here, MT?”
They were many. Obviously deficiencies in civil rights, discrimination, one-party rule etc, but also sectarianism, hatred, segregation, fear, the existence of an anti-democratic ‘physical force tradition’ among republicans, paranoia among unionists, the failure of unionists to build an inclusive state and of nationalists to seek to participate in it. And, of course, the ratcheting factor of each act of violence provoking another.
How about you?
Possibly you’ve forgotten the N Ireland murder and bombing campaign by John McKeague and Gusty Spence of the UVF predated the existence of PIRA by a number of years.
Or does loyalist violence not count?
They always tried to excuse their actions as ‘reactionary’ to the Provos, which as you realise, was patently untrue!
“Possibly you’ve forgotten the N Ireland murder and bombing campaign by John McKeague and Gusty Spence of the UVF predated the existence of PIRA by a number of years.”
No, I don’t think that was a particularly important cause. It was the violence around the anti-civil rights protest that was an immediate cause rather than the 1966 murders.
“Or does loyalist violence not count?”
Of course it does. I wasn’t referring only to nationalist violence.
“They always tried to excuse their actions as ‘reactionary’ to the Provos, which as you realise, was patently untrue!”
No they didn’t. As you have said the Provos didn’t exist in 1966.
‘They were many. Obviously deficiencies in civil rights, discrimination, one-party rule etc, but also sectarianism, hatred, segregation, fear, the existence of an anti-democratic ‘physical force tradition’ among republicans, paranoia among unionists, the failure of unionists to build an inclusive state and of nationalists to seek to participate in it. And, of course, the ratcheting factor of each act of violence provoking another.’
Can’t really disagree with much of that, MT although there’s a touch of cognitive dissonance to your assertion re ‘the failure of unionists to build an inclusive state and of nationalists to seek to participate in it’. How is a deliberately created underclass within a society expected to participate in it? By knowing their place? One also suspects that the, eh ‘physical force tradition’ within British Imperialism may have had a certain role to play in things as well.
“How is a deliberately created underclass within a society expected to participate in it?”
There are a couple of obvious missed opportunities. The biggest one was rejecting (in concert with the Orange Order) the Unionist government’s attempt to create an integrated education system.
Another was boycotting Stormont and refusing to take the role of Opposition.
More generally, retreating into itself and creating its own segregated society.
But the point was that both communities were equally to blame, not that the onus was solely on nationalists.
“One also suspects that the, eh ‘physical force tradition’ within British Imperialism may have had a certain role to play in things as well.”
I’m not aware of any interventions by the military until the Troubles had begun.
I think my point re the violence of the British Empire related more to the longue durée, rather than looking at the Troubles in isolation. The shelling of Dublin by the Helga, the execution of the leaders of the Easter Rising, Bloody Sunday (1920), the brutality of the Black and Tans etc were all still very much in living memory by the late 1960s. Once Troubles-era British military intervention began, it didn’t take much for the British state to revert to type as Bloody Sunday (1972), the Ballmurphy Massacre and more sadly attest.
My understanding of nationalist antipathy towards integrated education is that it stems from a rejection and distrust of the non-inclusive state you mention. If one does not believe that the state has one’s best interests at heart, then a state education for one’s children does not hold much appeal. Hearts and minds and all that. The perception still exists (rightly or wrongly) that state education in NI is a further means by which to quell nationalist sedition, and that’s before you take religious factors into account. Again if we look at the broader picture – Penal Laws, Hedge Schools and the dreaded bata scóir are not quickly forgotten.
The history of the British in Ireland is not a pleasant one, and whilst harking back to grievances of centuries past doesn’t necessarily get us anywhere we’re all of us stuck with it. Anyway, about that Flight of the Earls…
RCJ
Gone do us a favour and keep your chips to yourself. We’ve enough on our plate. Anyway didn’t the GFA and the Queen’s visit not deal with all that.
I wonder if the views of Rev David Latimer are shared by all of his Presbyterian colleagues.Maybe his fawning comments on Martin are sincerely held but might not be unrelated to the financial assistance that the D F M was able to channel to the restoration of his church on the walls of Derry.The quid pro quo was an appearance at a subsequent Sinn Fein Ard Fheis!
I had no idea Martin McGuinness helped with the funding to restore a Presbyterian church in Derry. Perhaps that’s one of the reasons he’s been nominated for a peace prize ?
“I wonder if the views of Rev David Latimer are shared by all of his Presbyterian colleagues.Maybe his fawning comments on Martin are sincerely held but might not be unrelated to the financial assistance that the D F M was able to channel to the restoration of his church on the walls of Derry.”
Surely you are not suggesting people would forsake principles for money? Well it would explain the RHI scam. You would think all those who claim to be proud Britishers, in stormont, would endeavour to show their fellow Britishers in England etc how upstanding and eager they are to ensure ‘the union’ isn’t compromised are weakened by draining its funds? I know in a United ireland I would redden if I was draining funds at the expense of my fellow Irish people, but hey ho each to their own.
MTs version of history only goes back to 1965 or so. He never , as far as I can remember, engages in any discussion of anything that happened in the preceding centuries which clearly showed that the British establishment was beholden to and fearful of the ascendant powers of societyprimarilly in the northeast of the island.
Each generation had its unsuccessful physical force efforts to dislodge the invaders. Less violent movements over the centuries were also failures.
John Redmond and his Irish Party spent decades attempting to gain Home Rule status through peaceful methods only to be defeated by the threats of violence of an armed force of conditional and situational loyalists.
Little wonder that it was concluded that the only thing the governing classes understood was physical force.
“John Redmond and his Irish Party spent decades attempting to gain Home Rule status through peaceful methods only to be defeated by the threats of violence of an armed force of conditional and situational loyalists.”
Redmond wasn’t defeated: his Home Rule Bill was enacted in 1914. It waa the war, and then the anti-democratic 1916 men of violence, who ntervened prevent it coming to fruition, not loyalists, who had been defeated at that point. Redmond was later defeated by SF but by then all has changed.
None of this justifies Provisional IRA terrorism, as the writer appears to imply.
“Unionist dominated councils. Dont try to deflect.”
I don’t understand. I’m not trying to deflect. I’m trying to stay on topic.
You bring up unionist-dominates councils. If this is on topic it means you think this is a justification for PIRA terror (otherwise how is it relevant); if it’s off topic then it’s deflection/whataboutery by you.
RJC, I think you’ve set it out perfectly to be honest.