A
Nationalist phoned in to the Nolan Show this morning during the debate on the
Loyalist Community Council letter to Boris Johnson. This republican said
Nationalist youth are not as war weary as the older GFA generation of republicans
were and continued “They would be up for a fight” should Loyalist
terrorist’s return to physical force violence. While that may be so and
they may be “up for it” I don’t think they would be silly enough to
go that route.
This statement came from someone who clearly doesn’t understand the youth in republicanism
or the majority of the youth I should say, or the circumstances under which the
Good Friday Agreement was signed. The Good Friday Agreement was signed
because people wanted peace. The IRA dumped arms and indeed
decommissioned because the majority of the people in this country said it was
time for a solely political struggle rather than a military one.
My dad did time in the Crum and in Long Kesh for that armed struggle. He also served in the Irish army. serving as a
peace keeper all over the world. At a time when I was becoming
increasingly politicised through no coercion from him or my mum, they drilled
into me that peace was the way forward for Ireland. It didn’t stop me
becoming an agitator, it didn’t stop me working for change and I would hazard a
guess that many other republican fathers and mothers drilled the same into
their kids.
I have always maintained the majority of republicanism and nationalism
generally have taken the Good Friday and St. Andrews Agreements more seriously
than unionism and loyalism. The letter from the LCC was also on behalf of
loyalist terrorists who claim the Northern Ireland Protocol
“undermines” their ceasefire, which is utter nonsense considering the NI
Protocol is not a constitutional issue but a trade issue and does not
constitute an orange and green issue but one which is an issue for all people
in the North….or so the DUP says. Loyalist terrorists continue to
terrorise day and daily; recent events cement this point. But the big issue
here is, should they go back to ‘physical violence’….who will that violence
be directed at?
Comments are closed.