Ballymena Loyalists have said the cross-community deal that saw the removal of a UDA mural opposite a Roman Catholic chapel is off. Republicans have failed to deliver on their promised reciprocation of removing Irish tricolours.
Extract from Greg McLaughlin and Stephen Baker: The Propaganda of Peace: The Role of Media and Culture in the Northern Ireland Peace Process. Bristol: Intellect Books. 2010. Political opponents Ian Paisley and Martin McGuiness were confirmed as First Minister and Deputy First Minister of a new executive in May 2007, closing yet another chapter in [...] read our review »
John Laird (Lord Laird of Artigarvan) is unionism’s jester. His memoir A Struggle To Be Heard ” by a True Ulster Liberal” (from Slugger’s shop on Amazon here) might serve more as a heavy stocking filler than anybody’s idea of a main present. In it he wears the masks of comedy and tragedy to turn the [...] read our review »
Idiots. They have no conception of claiming the moral high-ground. Harryville was looking better for this replacement mural, but nothing like cheapening your own area to get back at the taigs.
I fail to see how they are idiots. They made an agreement, the other side have not stuck to it and they are rightly annoyed. What would you have them do?
And presumably you don’t feel tricolours hanging on every street corner is “cheapening” your respective area?
This was an opportunity missed. And knowing some of the people in Ballymena it will not be offered again. Rightly so in my opinion.
So ‘officials’ say that a UDA mural could be reinstated. What sort of ‘officials’ are in a position to place murals in public in support of an illegal terrorist group, and why are murals like these permitted.
Are they really comparing a mural of a sectarian murder-gang opposite a church with the flying of the national flag symbolising peace and unity?
The comparison was agreed in the deal
“I fail to see how they are idiots. They made an agreement, the other side have not stuck to it and they are rightly annoyed. What would you have them do?
And presumably you don’t feel tricolours hanging on every street corner is “cheapening” your respective area?
This was an opportunity missed. And knowing some of the people in Ballymena it will not be offered again. Rightly so in my opinion.”
Clearly they should re-erect a disgusting paramilitary mural once again. That’ll teach the republican residents of Dunclug or Fisherwick a real lesson.
Whether republicans choose to fly flags or not has little to do with paramilitarism in Harryville and a tricolour or two elsewhere in the town doesn’t make it more excusable.
These loyalist ‘officials’ are obviously proud of their Ulster-Scots heritage. So much so that they want to paint over it with a UDA mural. Just to annoy taigs. Priceless!
Colm: “So ‘officials’ say that a UDA mural could be reinstated. What sort of ‘officials’ are in a position to place murals in public in support of an illegal terrorist group, and why are murals like these permitted. ”
What sort of officials? Take your pick — scared/intimidated ones or sectarian ones.
They are permitted because the artist’s patrons have a propensity for registering their displeasure in a fashion somewhat more dangerous than simple harsh language.
Ziznivy – good point
Dunclug and the Cushendall road don’t need or want these flags (Dunclug does have a significant Nationalist / Republican community but these flags have been put up by dissident republicans) In no way am I in favour of cheapening the irish flag like loyalists by flying it on a stick from a lamppost. That said Loyalists did have the ability to claim the moral high ground here but through their own stupidity they let it slip. Regardless of the deal, Harryville was better off without these murals why can’t they see that.
That’s right Ziznivy, flying flags has nothing to do with the issue. Oh wait, it was part of an agreement. Let’s not worry about that though, agreements are made to be broken right? Amazing. Truly amazing. And the lemmings on the forum wonder why Unionists are reticent about going in to deals with Sinn Fein.
It’s ridiculous that the agreement had to be made in the first place, as the only tricolours I’ve seen in Ballymena are in catholic/republican areas. Why are the loyalists in Harryville bothered about a piece of fabric on a lamp post well over a mile away?
As ridiculous as it may seem it was at least a small step in the right direction and presumably was seen as a ‘confidence’ building measure in the run up to the ‘oh so contentious because we want it to be’ marching season. In the real world of course it means diddly squat but there you go. Think UPRG representatives and other Loyalists will try this again in the area? Me thinks not.
I’m certainly not supportive of the flying of tricolours anywhere in Northern Ireland, although I’m realistic enough to recognise that it isn’t a major issue. I’m also not particularly supportive of hanging the Union Flag like a rag from a lamp-post.
But as for acting preciously over an agreement between dissident republicans and loyalist paramilitaries ……. Christ on a bike! The mural shouldn’t have been there in the first place. The fact that a culturally significant replacement was erected was enriching to the entire unionist community in Harryville and Ballymena. To take a step backwards from something positive because “themmuns never took their flags down” is utterly pathetic!
I still have trouble with the words ‘Ballymena’ and ‘republican area’ in the same sentence. Then again I haven’t spent a lot of time in the ‘City of Seven Towers’, its reputation as the buckle of Ulster’s Bible Belt being enough to deter me.
Obviously Ian Paisley’s ‘assiduous constituency work’ on behalf of north Antrim Catholics is reaping rewards.
Loftholdingswood: “Think UPRG representatives and other Loyalists will try this again in the area?”
Being honest I was surprised that the Neanderthals behind the Harryville Church Protests where capable of this deal to begin with. Loyalists have only reverted to type and risen to the equally stupid actions of dissident republicans in Dunclug and Fisherwick. I only hope that Loyalists and in particular the moonlighters at WrightBus don’t want to come up to Dunclug again and take down the flags.
Incredible to see how many posts are focusing on the notion that the mural might be replaced,and completely ignoring or dismissing the fact that the flags are still there.
I guess what loyalists might do is always more important than what republicans are doing.
TAFKABO,
Reverse the scanario. Loyalists put up some Union Jacks in a mainly unionist area. So in revenge, republicans paint an IRA mural outside a Protestant church, painting over a mural commemorating the famine in the process.
I agree, the flag stuff is unnecessary – I wish unonists would take a tough stance against the hideous and threatening flags which disfigure our streets – but the ‘retaliation’ defies logic.
TAFKABO: “Incredible to see how many posts are focusing on the notion that the mural might be replaced,and completely ignoring or dismissing the fact that the flags are still there.
I guess what loyalists might do is always more important than what republicans are doing. ”
Not for nothing, but the flags do not glorify an illegal organization. The mural did.
That said, if it was a quid pro quo, then its an open question what *ought* to happen.
Then again, can you enforce a contract between illegal organizations?
Of course, in the true spirit of local bureaucracy, wouldn’t it be grand if the “local officials” had the spine to actually A) paint over the offending mural and B) take down the likely unpermitted banners and just be done with it. But then, it would be grand if the yahoos on both sides of the divide didn’t provide their rebuttals in the form of violence…
Yesterday on the radio, the Republicans Version was: Flags were put up for an Apprentice Boys march. Loyalists stated that the weren’t UDA flags, so it was okay. Republicans said the deal was all or nothing and put the flags back up. Now the mural is coming back.
So it could be just as well “Loyalist fail to implement cross community deal”, and that is a misleading title. It should be “Everyone needs to wise up and just get rid of the things”.
Not for nothing, but the flags do not glorify an illegal organization. The mural did.
Leaving aside the fact that we both know exactly what the flags signify, a deal was supposedly struck.
Given that so many are so knowledgeable about the Loyalists and loyalism, what does it say for anyone who would deliberately antagonise them in this way?
Let’s be absolutely clear, I think the Loyalists are ultimately responsible for whatever the Loyalists do, but can we at least admit that republicans have acted in bad faith here and needlessly excacerbated the situation?
Rather than wait until the Loyalists repaint the mural, why don’t they just live up to their part of the deal as soon as possible?
What is so offensive about a UDA mural in a protestant town anyway ???. If they dont like it move the chapel to somewhere it is wanted. The church should not build Contentious chapels where they are clearly not wanted in a protestant area stirring up tensions.
ncm
“It’s ridiculous that the agreement had to be made in the first place, as the only tricolours I’ve seen in Ballymena are in catholic/republican areas. Why are the loyalists in Harryville bothered about a piece of fabric on a lamp post well over a mile away?”
It may well be ridiculous that an agreement had to be made in the first place. But an agreement was made and therefore shouldn’t it be implemented by the two sides equally?
The only place that tricolours may be flying are nationalist areas, but the only place that the UDA mural is/was is Harryville, an area that despite having a chapel is probably 100% prod/unionist. The issue of why the chapel is there is one for another day.
There was an agreement made by which they would make a move which would be reciprocated by republicans. I seem to remember numerous plaudits being heaped on them at the time for this – surely they are allowed to be p*ssed off that it has been broken – however, immediately moving to replace the offending mural is probably still not the best way forward.
confused on Apr 24, 2006 @ 04:37 PM
The ugly face of unionism.
kensei
“Yesterday on the radio, the Republicans Version was: Flags were put up for an Apprentice Boys march. Loyalists stated that the weren’t UDA flags, so it was okay.”
Surely it all turns on what the detail of the deal was. The deal that I seen reported was that Tricolours would be removed after the UDA mural – no mention of any other issues. Maybe there was an agreement on the wider flying of flags. But if not then republicans seem to be moving the goalposts and demanding more and more…… ironic innit!!!
In my opinion the salient point is being glossed over here. Who are these people to be making “deals” on behalf of their communities? Where does their mandate come from?
There is only one councillor who represents a party with paramilitary connections in Ballymena and she is from neither of the wards concerned.
The fact that scum from either side can muscle their way to having any input in what is displayed in their areas is disgusting.
Confused – you certainly are.
Harryville was built over 30 years ago and only became contentious when loyalists in a fit of pety rage decided that if Dunloy Orangemen couldn’t march through Dunloy then Catholics can’t go to Mass in Harryville.
“What is so offensive about a UDA mural in a protestant town anyway ??”
well it may be a protestant town but there are several thousand Nationalists/Unionists in the town who take great exception to Murals glorifying the UDA.
“move the chapel to somewhere it is wanted”
its quiet ironic, the Church of Our Lady was probably the niciest building in Harryville (before it had to adopt the barriers and fencing etc). Harryville is grim and ugly beyond compare but as ever Loyalists are happy to ruin their neighbourhoods and for what……….
TAFKABO: “Given that so many are so knowledgeable about the Loyalists and loyalism, what does it say for anyone who would deliberately antagonise them in this way? ”
Depends on which version of events you subscribe to, TAFKABO. Do you acknowledge that the Apprentice Boys march, what with their flags, would be an instigation to the Republicans? Why would anyone knowledgeable of the Republicans and Republicism deliberately antagonize them in this way?
TAFKABO: “Let’s be absolutely clear, I think the Loyalists are ultimately responsible for whatever the Loyalists do, but can we at least admit that republicans have acted in bad faith here and needlessly excacerbated the situation? ”
No, you don’t — you’re already building an excuse for them. As for bad faith, it depends on whether you wish to count the Apprentice boys as an instigating factor or not. As I said above, wouldn’t it be grand if the local officials to simply take the bull by the horns and not kow-tow to illegal organizations or permit provactive actions? But then I would get some loyalist going on about the “central role in Unionist culture” that these marches and flags hold.
confused: “What is so offensive about a UDA mural in a protestant town anyway ???. ”
Oh, I dunno — how about their an illegal paramilitary organizations with ties to drug gangs and the like? Will that do for starters?
ziznivy
“n my opinion the salient point is being glossed over here. Who are these people to be making “deals” on behalf of their communities? Where does their mandate come from?”
That may be a fair point – the answer probably is. The people making the deals are probably the same people who have either put up the murals or the flags. I suppose there is a certain logic there that if they have put them up then they are the people who should negotiate to bring them down.
More often what does happen is that some do-gooders from either side come to a terribly nice agreement about ridding the community of the vestiages of these nasty individuals. They then take them down only for them to be replaced immediately with more of the same from the people who erected them in the first place.
That makes the do-gooders feel good but achieves precious little in the longer term. The other option may not be terribly nice that it does happen or have to happen. But surely they achieve the same result as the do-gooders, but it usually is more successful in the longer term.
That all works of course, so long as both sides stick to the deal.
Dread Cthulhu
“Do you acknowledge that the Apprentice Boys march, what with their flags, would be an instigation to the Republicans? “
And do you really suggest that republicans in Ballymena thought that there would be no more parades there or no more flags erected? However, they didnt seem to include this in the deal they did regarding the removal of tricolours. It seemed that the deal centred around the mural and a bit of a clean-up around the chapel in Harryville – all of which has happened.
If the flags erected for the ABOD march weren’t included then they may moan about their poor negotiation but they dont have grounds to go back on their initial deal.
Qubol “Harryville was built over 30 years ago and only became contentious when loyalists in a fit of rage decided that if Dunloy Orangemen couldn’t march through Dunloy then Catholics can’t go to Mass in Harryville”
You are quite right, the residents of Dunloy denying the orange their right to walk resulted in the Harryville problem being escalted. If due to demographic changes the orange can march then whats good for the goose i say, and personally feel Sectarian GAA matches should also be challenged.
observer: “And do you really suggest that republicans in Ballymena thought that there would be no more parades there or no more flags erected? However, they didnt seem to include this in the deal they did regarding the removal of tricolours. ”
Is this an assumption on your part, or were you privy to the negotiations? If the information imparted by kensai and others is accurate, it was enough of a gray area for the Apprentice Boys to inquire of the UDA if it was permissable for the AB to post flags.
observer: “If the flags erected for the ABOD march weren’t included then they may moan about their poor negotiation but they dont have grounds to go back on their initial deal. ”
Then should not other nationalists, not privy to the deal, have the right to mount their own tricolours? If we’re going to play “split the fly” over every point, its got to go both ways.
Although its a pity if the new mural does come down ,the reconciliation work of the local Father (Symonds), and of local Presbyterians, will continue.
Disappointing. If they’d any sense they’d have taken the moral high ground and done their own community a favour by retaining the Ulster-Scots mural instead of some abhorrent paramilitary one.
But why let a sense of community pride come between a bigot and an opportunity to goad ‘the enemy’?
If Republicans have to bring down the Tricolours then the Loyalists should bring down Union Flags, not just murals.
confused
As a Unionist I am offended by UDA murals, so god only knows what catholics and nationalsts think of them.Especially people who have had to endure intimidation as they tried to go to their place of worship.
Why does the Housing executive not just vest the Chapel flatten it and build much needed houses on it… problem solved.
The people need housing not superstitious nonsense from the dark ages, flatten the fucker now!
It’s ironic that you post under the name ‘The Devil’
I have spoken to an old colleague of mine who lives not too far from these republican flags. It appears that they were indeed removed, but then were replaced in greater number! The tricolour has now been joined by the starry plough.
I believe the reappearance in particular, after they thought that this nonsense was finished with, has annoyed alot of the people who live in the area, Catholic or Protestant.
I’ve found more irony in certain people calling themselves Christians to be honest.
TAFKABO: “I’ve found more irony in certain people calling themselves Christians to be honest. ”
Ain’t that always the way… people always wanting *other* folks to act Christian, in some cases even as they’re demonizing someone else.
Well I posted a well argued few points, clicked the button and it has disappeared! Isn’t that always the way? I bet Shakespeare never had this problem.
Loftholdingswood: “Well I posted a well argued few points, clicked the button and it has disappeared! Isn’t that always the way? I bet Shakespeare never had this problem. ”
Happens… I’ve taken to copying whole posts to the clipboard before hitting “submit,” just in case. I’ve also noted the “submit the word you see below” mechanism can be a little twitchy from time to time.
Dread Cthulhu, Loftholdingswood,
“Well I posted a well argued few points, clicked the button and it has disappeared! Isn’t that always the way? I bet Shakespeare never had this problem”
There’s nothing wrong with the submit button, it’s the software Slugger uses the new Intelli/software which reads posts as they are being submitted and if they are particularily boring automatically deletes them.
It is something that has happened most posters on Slugger though I have never experienced it myself, very smart software indeed
“Is this an assumption on your part, or were you privy to the negotiations? If the information imparted by kensai and others is accurate, it was enough of a gray area for the Apprentice Boys to inquire of the UDA if it was permissable for the AB to post flags.”
Spirit of the deal and all that. Do you really think they would have agreed if they knew Apprentice Boys flags were going up a few weeks later?
I have no time whatsoever for the UDA or any of their fellow apologists. However, if they have reached an agreement which reduces sectarian tensions in an area in which that was high, agreed upon the removal of a mural celebrating their own organisation in favour of one which instead supports the cultural existince of the majority of people in that area, then that deserves recognition. If the nationalist people have decided to renege upon that agreement then they deserve what happens.
With opinions like these, no wonder he got a job with Brit intelligence. C’mon dont be so hard on the UDA, II. They were useful once upon a time.
I try not to be an apologist for anyone least of all an organisation that has such varied views and is currently undergoing a period of consultation and change. I do contribute to their overall analysis via the UPRG and this is, I believe, the way forward. There are progressive elements in all groupings no matter how distasteful you may or may not find them. I prefer to listen and learn, prod (in the nicest sense) and poke and act as a conduit for ‘what’s happening on the streets’. Most importantly is to listen to the youth (or ‘yoof’ if you are with it – I’m not) in working class Loyalist areas and focus on the positive points. It is way too simplistic and sheer folly to castigate with a single swipe the thousands (and I mean thousands) of decent hard working people in the Protestant community that do want to see change, are working toward that end and want to see the end of certain practices within. Things take time. People do change, they just need to see where that change will take them. End of sermon.
Thedevil, you are probably right – slugger has a secret computer tool that censors my ramblings and consigns them to the bin.
Elfinto,
They may have been useful, or even ” use fool”, but never, ever, as useful as those within all the different IRA’s! Be it OIRA, PIRA, CIRA, RIRA, all have a majority in their senior command structures who pass on all of importance to someone in the British Intelligence network, be it Special Branch, MI5/6, or FRU.
And, Elfinto, they haven’t gone away you know!
Aye Aye,
Go and write a book about it. Years of experience has told me to believe nothing the British government or its agencies have to say on Ireland.