Siobhan O’Hanlon dies
Our sympathies to the family and friends of Siobhan O’Hanlon who lost her battle with cancer last night. She was key backroom player with Sinn Fein negotiating team in the run up to the signing of the Belfast Agreement.
Advertise
-
Books
-
The Earl Bishop
Interesting BBC article on an upcoming presentation and talk [Roe Valley Arts and Cultural Centre, 17 August] by lecturer and broadcaster Stephen Price on the subject of his new book – The Earl Bishop. The 18th Century ”Earl Bishop” was Frederick Augustus Hervey, fourth Earl of Bristol and Church of Ireland Bishop of Derry. Hervey was also elected [...] read our review »
-
Have we Learned our own Lessons? Book Review of John Brewer’s Peace Processes
Northern Ireland’s peace process has been promoted as an international success story. The Republic’s Department of Foreign Affairs has its Conflict Resolution Unit, which aims to disseminate the ‘lessons’ of the Northern Ireland peace process. And some of the prominent players in our peace process have travelled abroad to other troubled spots to share their [...] read our review »
-
Lessons in Cute Hoorism: “Graft was accepted, for you were taking from the British…”
I’ve been catching up on some reading, recently. Most pleasantly surprised by John Drennan’s latest opus from Gill and Macmillan, Cute Hoors and Pious Protestors… It’s early days yet, but I was struck by this paragraph, part of a dissection of Fianna Fail near the beginning: One of the more fatal consequences of our colonial [...] read our review »
-
To my knowledge it was only me doing the cutting. I have to defend my right to do it, even if I over do it on occasion. The responsibility for hitting the right tone is the contributor’s.
One contributor asked me to ‘do my job’ the other evening and take off something they objected to. Well, it isn’t a job. And it really is up to contributors to keep within the one simple rule we have: play the ball and not the man.
I generally have to let things trundle through here on Slugger – I just don’t have the time or inclination to watch everything that everyone says. But nor have I any interest in political censorship.
Karl, I would agree with you that if Slugger were to lose its independence to the degree you suggest, I’d be inclined to simply pack up and let someone else have a go.
Mick,
Not one commentor or poster on Slugger denies you the right to wield the axe on your blog, you are the person who runs it and the person who has to suffer the consequences if something goes adversely wrong, however no such senario has yet arisen and that has to be reasoned by the direct action taken by yourself or your adinistration staff at the earliest possible convenience.
Slugger has been an unqualified success for you and you have basked in its glory Mick, but at times Mick one could be forgiven for making the assumption that the participation of the Blogs regular posters are not seen as an nessessary ingredient for this success.
When a Thread is posted it is there for Sluggers posters to make comment on or to interact with others on this forum in a form of debate as to any given view, this did not happen with the Siobhan O’Hanlon thread.
I first questioned the necessity of the post on grounds that the deceased was irrelevant to larger picture of “the peace process” and was not well known enough to merit the original posting, she was not an elected representative or political commentator, she did not do TV or Radio interviews either as a republican or as an individual. She did not hold the position of a party spokesperson or party press officer and did not write articles for public consumption on any given topic and it was therefore my belief that she was elevated to a position that she clearly did not hold.
Keith M who also posted making the very valid point of how slanted our vision has become of the entire “peace process” and how any criticism of it is met with a Tsunami of abuse. Almost immediately we were both accused of making fun of a dead person and joking about her, at no point did Keith M or I joke about the deceased or make little of a horrible illness yet with innuendo and smear this is exactly what we were accused of by a group of individuals who obviously did not possess the patience to read the first post let alone consider it.
The important point that both of us were trying to make in the clearest of clear language was if Danny Morrison had passed away or Padraig Wilson or Richard McAuley or even Tom Hartley we would expect.. no we would probably demand a thread be opened because of the high positions they held either real or immaginary within a particular movement.
Where as the choice of the thread held niether
I think the party affiliations of the moderators on this site should be made clearer, if not thoroughly re-examined.
Fair Deal appears to be DUP, Gonzo works for the Alliance Party and Chris Donnelly is a Shinner. Have I left anyone out?
On the contrary, I think people should judge moderators by their words and actions alone.
The Devil, you were a much more interesting character in that book you were in with the Palestinian Communist. Is this really what it’s come to?
What a dreary thread this turned out to be. To object to the very fact of the thread because Siobhan O’Hanlon wasn’t well know enough is bizarre enough but berating Mick for some perceived agenda and demanding details of his political affiliations is grotesque.
I think this thread could have led to an interesting discussion on families and political influence. The fact that Siobhan and her sister were both public figures from a republican background who who came to wildly different conclusions is in itself interesting.
I’d certainly be curious to hear about posters own experiences in that regard.
Maybe Mick was hoping for a similar outcome. It could have been something a bit different but it turned out to be the same old same old.
My condolences to Siobhan’s sister Eilas and the rest of the O’Hanlon family.
Henry,
I just think the experience of the politically committed is a fundamentally interesting story, and one that’s largely untold.
If I’m going to play ref on Slugger, I don’t mind taking s few knocks to the shins every now and again, but the demand to have ‘agendas’ in the open is a hopeless case of ‘man not ball’.
Not the point of the rule is not save me, my shins or my ego, but to talk about interesting and real stuff.
The result is that dreariness.
shame on you who write horrible and untrue comments, you are ignorant and heartless. siobhan was such a great person and helped so many people no matter what religion, background etc. think of her family and real friends before you make such useless comments.
a special person who none of you would have been worthy to know. and who the hell is eilis anyway?
There is some very obvious retort to this (probably trolling) allegation of ‘heartlessness’ in relation to comments on this thread. But I cannot for the life of me think what it could be. Now think Rove, think. Paula has condemned people on this thread for saying disobliging things about a late member of Sinn Fein/IRA: now what would the snappy comeback be? What is it that one should make reference to? What is the exact point of moral comparison here between, supposedly, saying unpleasant things about someone, and . . . what? There must be some other moral act here I could bring into the equation, but, oh, I just cannot remember it. I’ve feeling though it sounds ever so slightly like weevil turdering smastards, and that the expression, ‘slot in fell for clever’ isn’t a million miles away either.
Vote Sinn Fein
We feel our pain, and really couldn’t give a flying f*ck about yours, that we caused.
“We feel our pain, and really couldn’t give a flying f*ck about yours, that we caused.”
Rove, see Unionist response to the latest IMC report.
Particularly the long and expansive and comprehensive condemnation of the section where it is claimed the UDA and UVF are still targeting me, my family, my neighbours, etc…
Remind me, the UUP & DUP response to a government quango’s report – quite how does that fit into anything happening in this particular plane of reality? Seriously dude, I’m not smoking the same sh*t you’re on, so help me widen my portals of perception. Are you going to be so silly as to claim that instead of, as they say time after time after time, being opposed to ‘Loyalist’ terrorist groups, the 2 main Unionist parties actually, secretly, known-only-to-you, support them? I know you’d like to think that, and that you have in your possession evidence you cannot yet share with a wider world, but which proves it unquestionably, but would you listen to yourself even for a moment? Sinn Fein/IRA murdered people, the UUP and the DUP did not. You can whinge away as much as you want, but not one thing is going to alter that profound moral imbalance.
Two words: Ulster Resistance.
Two more words: Third Force.
Here’s more: Loyalist Commission.
But let’s not go there, it’s all in the past, man.
Let’s concentrate on this: you say Sinn Fein is focussed only on its own pain, to the exclusion of all else.
Are you seriously suggesting that Unonist representatives are any different?
The parse and pick at the IMC report on non-existant IRA terrorist activity against their constituents yet turn a blind eye to the UDA UVF’s murderous and criminal actions against those same consituents.
THAT, my friend, is a fact.
And no amount of hectoring, eyewash and fancy semantics can camouflage it.
As an aside, maybe you need to start smoking something given the hysterical reaction to my original post.
Methinks I touched a nerve.
Yeah, the nerve you touched is my much overworked ‘boredom muscle’. And by flip am I bored of hearing about ‘Ulster Resistance’ and ‘Third Force’. Were they part and parcel of the UUP? No. Were they part and parcel of the DUP? No. Do both the UUP and DUP, without hestitation, condemn so called Loyalist terrorists? Yes. And even if your fantasy world of, ‘oh, but look, Third Force, Davidtrimblewasamassmurderingcriminalmastermindwhokilledtonnesofpeople’, blah, made-up blah, bore any relation to fact, just remind me again of the numbers you’re claiming, since you’re so fond of facts. How many murders tallied up for Third Force/Ulster Resistance vs the Provo’s score, please, if you would, there’s a good chap?
You are ignoring the main thrust of my argument which is this: Unionists ignore loyalist violence. That is what I am saying.
And the reason you are ignoring it is, quite simply, becasue you cannot argue against it.
I’ll go one further, in certain situations, they have sought to ‘explain’ it or even put it in ‘context.’
What is the difference between this and what Sinn Fein did for years?
For frick’s sake, I am not ignoring your sodding assertion: I am telling you that you are making it up!
You say Unionists ‘ignore’ Loyalist violence (which is a big step down from your previous implication that Unionists are violent Loyalists . . .); I say quite the reverse, they condemn. And if you are tedious enough, do try Google, which you’ll find replete with Unionist condemnations of ‘Loyalist’ terrorism.
Then, beautifully, you rave:
You see that thing ‘Google’ I mentioned up there? Off you go and back up that nonsense.
It really doesn’t take very much to understand why some people are so desperate to claim, ‘awck shure, you’re just as bad as us uns’. We’re not: face up to it.
Her sister was Eilis O’Hanlon?? My sympathies to Eilis, then, the only civilised apple in the whole rotten bunch.