2007 Here We Come
Gerry Adams noted the irony that the first public speech he made since the Ard Comhairle meeting, was to commemorate an attack on the RUC barracks in Brookeborough on January 1st, 1957. The attack was one of the most significant of the 1950′s border campaign ‘Operation Harvest’ and saw Sean South and Feargal O’Hanlon killed in the battle. Today’s freezing weather was eerily reminiscent of that ‘dreary New Year’s Day’, but about 1500 hundred people came out to commemorate and listen to Adams.In his speech, he said that while he acknowledged the irony, he didn’t see a contradiction in honouring the sacrifices made in the raid against the RUC while at the same time recommending acceptance of the PSNI. He said that ‘ignoring policing is simply not an option’ and sees the acceptance of policing as a means of taking control away from London and into Irish hands. Adams argued that Republican ideals are more achievable in the framework of the GFA, and feels that huge political advances have been made. However, he cautioned that Sinn Fein does not have sufficient political strength at present to progress those ideals.
Interestingly, he placed great emphasis on the fact that ‘there are no short cuts and no easy way to independence and a United Ireland.’ He urged the audience to ‘mobilise, organise and strategise’ and ‘secure a peaceful accord with Unionists. A United Ireland cannot be achieved simply on our terms.’
Over the next few weeks, he said that a review of all of the issues will be undertaken, the achievements to date will be set out, what is needed will be identified and he urged that all activists start to engage in the strategic process that is unfolding. At this point in the speech, he emphasised that everyone would have to be included in these talks, including republican veterans, those affected by State violence and collusion, and everyone with a stake in republicanism. Once a decision is made, ‘we need to move into the structures as this is the only way forward.’
Battle? Tell me if I’m wrong but didn’t they take a hammering?
A complete f**k up of an attack so well done for commemorating a failure. What a start to a campaign that was.
From the Adams speech
“Sinn Fein has pursued a relentless negotiation strategy since 1999. Significant progress has been made on key policing and justice issues in this period.”
Anyone able to tell me the “significant progress” which has been made.
.
Glan Taisie
A lifetimes unsigned immunity from prosecution for him and his mates?
If I was in their position, thats progress to me though I thought they had it already.
translation: we’ll all have a debate and include as many people as we can and then when that’s over you’ll all do what i have already decided to do – and the stupid sheep say ‘baa!’ and meekly follow
About 1500 came out to listen to adams?
How many did they bus in?
Perhaps Adams should have used this opportunity to “come clean” and admit that South and O’Hanlon were both actually murdured by the ira. A report I have seen on the matter was quite clear that knowing that both were quite badly injured after their usual botched up job their “friends” didn’t want to risk them talking so finished them off.
‘About 1500 came out to listen to adams?’
Excellent turnout.
Is that the total amount of their support in Fermanagh.
Sounds like a good speech about the next step forward, and a good turnout.
The usual trolls show up to criticize. If there were 100,000 people there someone would say “how many did they bus in”, so whatever.
I wonder which one in the truck was pretending to be Sean Garland?
Great photos by the way Miss Fitz.
Gari
THey werent assigned identities, but Sean Garland featured in the speech.
There was one bus, for the record, and it was from Monaghan. I assume it was the O’Hanlon contingent. It was a very local affair, with no press that I could see.
Given the weather which was appalling, I thought it was a massive turnout. Certainly, you couldnt have fit too many more in the locality
‘Is that the total amount of their support in Fermanagh.’
The electoral results for the constituency are pretty clear on SF support in the area.
Pat how come only 1500 votes turned out? If the weather keeps them in today, it may keep them in on March 8th.
Interested too by the photos of the berets and I think uniforms. I thought green blazers had replaced the militarism.
I would have thought this was a high turn out on new year’s day in the freezing cold.
Gari
Have to say it really was a ‘dreary’ day. The attendees had to walk 2 miles to Moane Cross, and then 2 miles back. They said you warmed up as you walked, but that was a lie.
In terms of uniform, you tend to see less of the green jackets and more of the black and berets. You should not that there were no sunglasses or balaclavas or boots, so theoretically it could be argued that it was not ‘militaristic’.
I’m wondering where the estimate came from? That crowd didn’t look like 1500. and no PSNI about when the shinners are flashing fake guns. Thats definitely a sign of changed times.
Miss F,
Sounds depressing. Not sure that berets can be interpreted as non-militaristic though. Certainly not a message concomitant with reassuring people that things have genuinely moved on. Given everything else that has been given up, seems a little childish to continue with it.
‘Not sure that berets can be interpreted as non-militaristic though. ‘
I must put away that red beret I bought in Next last week in case I get shot:-)
I always suspected you for a closet supporter of Ulster Restistance Maura.
Gerry
Estimate is mine, and I’m not too bad at it. The pictures dont show the huge crowds to the right and left of the event.
Gari
I guess the way I saw it, funnily enough was that the colour party was almost as anachronistic as the lorry load of volunteers. Two pieces of the past colliding, if you like!
Good to see so much attention been given to SF on this site.The leadership must be doing something right.
Keep up the good work.
Ach Pol, where were you for my coverage of the 11th night bonfires, and the 12th of July? Happy to direct you to that coverage if you feel you need to see it.
Otherwise know of what you speak afore you spake
Thank you for your replay sheila.
Even though i haven’t a clue what you are talking about.
But it is nice that you care enough to replay.
just where exactly did the figure of 1500 come from? if it was from the shinners then odds are this is a lie; you would need independent verification of this and on the face of it, the claim is just not credible – spin city once again, chuckie lies everywhere
If you read the entries, you’ll find Miss Fitz gave her personal estimate from having been there.
It isn’t very nice to call her all those names.
JC
Once again, the figure of 1500 was a conservative estimate of mine. I;ve been estimating crowds for about 7 years now, and am generally quite excellent at it.
I’m sorry if this doesnt fit your agenda, but its the best you are going to get.
Pol!
My reply was simply meant to tell you that I have had an interest in commemorations and parades for quite some time now, and can be found at a fairly eclectic range of events.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/missfitz/sets/72057594085142069/
I added this to another thread, but it seems appropriate to this discussion too
It’s worth noting the criticism by Peter Robinson of Gerry Adams’ speech
And that the debate on the target date relates to conditions Sinn Féin set for themselves.
I’m a little unclear as to the point and the newsworthiness of Robinson’s remarks. Of course he’s going to cast aspersions on SF’s actions and unfavorably contrast them with the principles of the DUP, that’s just standard operating procedure for any party leader. I guess my question is, if SF endorsing and supporting policing is really in no way “a step towards a united Ireland”, then why does the DUP care about how Adams spins it for republicans? After all, by Robinson’s own admission apparently SF now poses no threat to the union.
Why doesn’t the DUP just recognize and accept the concession and then move on to get something they supposedly want, namely devolved government? Maybe Mick’s theory is correct?
Miss Fitz
You replied to a exchange between me and sheila. Now i am confused.
Are you and sheila the same person.
G-Am
Perhaps because, as Peter Robinson indicated, Sinn Féin haven’t yet taken the necessary step [ie actually called an Ard Fheis, and given a date for it, and taken a decision].. whatever way you want to interpret that.
Instead what SF have said is that an Ard Fheis would be called if everyone gave a positive response to the as-yet-unseen motion that might be discussed at the as-yet-uncalled Ard Fheis.
Ambiguity anyone?
Pete
Would that life was so simple.
In my opinion, both Adams and Robinson are playing different sides of the same coin. Adams needs to sell policing as a legitimate pathway to a United Ireland. If you read my report on the commemoration, you’ll note Adams was clear and unequivocal about this issue.
There are micro and macro issues here. On the macro front, the intention to proceed with an Ard Fheis has been signalled, and that is of great significance. It shows an acceptance of the rule of law and a willingness for the very firs time ever to bring this to the membership of SF for approval.
On the other hand, Robinson has to balance his need to sell the SF backing of policing with their reasons, ie a United Ireland. He must assure the DUP heartland that it is nothing more than an acceptance of the rule of law, and nothing to do with a UI.
I think that such mischief making in the midst of efforts to make progress is regrettable
peteb
the process is simply clattering along; like a tinkers wagon on a bumpy road.
Nothing new in that; but “all shall be well, and all manner of things shall be well”,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_of_Norwich
Sorry, didnt finish my train of thought above!
I said there were micro and macro issues. The macro issues are the ‘big picture’ and this is where I see the great significance.
The micro issues are the nuts and bolts, and yes, I fully agree it could all still go tits up at this stage, but we have passed a rubicon at this stage. In my opinion, the current leadership of SF have deviated from a core principle. Now while I think that was a realistic and pragmatic choice, it is none the less a very significant movement, and one that can not be rolled back.
“Perhaps because, as Peter Robinson indicated, Sinn Féin haven’t yet taken the necessary step …”
This is the issue I commented on previously, namely the DUP contention that because of the ambiguity the AC motion isn’t really a concession, just a tease that could be pulled back at will. As I noted, if it really is a tease and nothing more then a lot of republican activists seem to be weeping and wailing about nothing; Gerry Adams might as well have kept his mouth shut and saved himself a lot of trouble.
My interpretation is rather that the distraught republican activists are not stupid, and that the SF leadership is indeed well down the road of compromising on traditional republican principles. Obviously by making this conditional on a positive DUP response SF is trying to win the “blame game”, but I’m not sure why the DUP would take that bait so energetically. Why not just take the more neutral position that Sammy Wilson apparently took: characterize it as a positive step, and then wait for follow-through?
Sheila
“If you read my report on the commemoration, you’ll note Adams was clear and unequivocal about this issue.”
And if you read the actual detail of the Ard Comhairle meeting, and the subsequent press statements, you’ll note that Adams is, in fact, engaging in a classic example of futuring on that issue
The rubicon has yet to be crossed. The, much trumpeted, consultation may just be about building pressure on the waverers within the ranks.
But it is a decision that has yet to be taken.
Sorry Pete, I disagree with your assessment, and for the reasons I outlined above.
I am not saying that things will evolve the way you seem to be speculating. Indeed, I would argue that what the SF leadership is doing is the opposite of futuring, They are taking things very slowly and a step at a time.
I stand very firmly by my judgement that what we are witnessing is indeed by itself a significant and radical indication within republicanism.
Focusing on the detail may be a fun past time, but it belittles the significance of what we are witnessing.
*shakes head*
Sheila
I’m not futuring. I’m describing events as they stand.
If you interpret the statements by the various groups differently then you need to state what you think they mean and state why you think they do so.
peteb,
with respect all you do is highlight and play on SF’s difficulties; in every other post, with all the “added emphasis” mullarky.
Mark McGregor spots it, I do, now sheila, and many more.
Republicans will not be limited by your limitions.
“Republicans will not be limited by your limitions.”
Indeed.
Just focus on the actualité.
Pete
Please don’t use that condescending ‘shake head’ crap with me. I have a right to hold my opinions, and I have been solidly underpinning all of my arguments on this.
If Adams was ‘futuring’ as you suggest, it means that he has pre-judged the outcome. Once again, I draw your attention to the speech he made today where he made it clear that the future is anything but certain or assured. As a leader, he has a right to place arguments in front of his party, and I suspect that this is going to be happening with increasing intensity over the next 8-12 weeks.
I will say it only one more time. The point I am making is that I am separating out the various strands of what is transpiring. I am well aware of the staging requried with the Ard Comhairle, the creation of the motions, calling the Ard Fheis, etc. You would have to be incredibly naieve to believe that this could all be done and dusted in a day.
This is momentuous in that the leadership of the Republican party have signalled their support for policing in Northern Ireland. And Pete, that is without doubt a rubicon
Sheila
I don’t doubt your right right to hold an opinion.
My *shakes head* was directed at the ignoring of the actual reality.
Which is the state of play of the calling of the Ard Fheis.. which has not yet happened.
That’s where Peter Robinson’s comments come into play.
When SF have held that Ard Fheis, and decided on their policy on policing, then, and only then, will they have been deemed to have moved on that issue.
Until then.. it’s only futuring.
Pete
It is clear that we are not going to have an agreement on this. However, I am a bit concerned that you are accusing me of ‘ignoring reality.’ Again, my opinion is well grounded and argued. I have identified the intention to alter a fundamental core of republicanism as highly significant and historic.
You seem not to understand how political moves play out, and I think you need to take that under consideration. Politics is not about taking your deck of cards and spreading them on the table, its about carefully making your moves and choregraphing them.
Finally, you say that this is futuring. Well, your own contribution to this definition is:
future (verb). Definition: (in politics) to speculate on what might happen, in order to encourage the belief that it already has.
So, you are saying that SF are speculating on holding an Ard Fheis in order to encourage the belief it has happened? That is called fantasising
Miss fitz you said there was no press there, yet I was able to read it on utv text? does your figure of fifteen hundred include the non exsistent press, the shinners, including the actors in the lorry as well as the bus. makes you wonder how many ordinary people were there who were unconnected to the party. i’m sorry it still doesn’t look like fifteen hundred in those pictures. utv didn’t comment on the crowd.
Why does SF need to have an Ard Fheis? Shouldn’t support for policing and the law be a non-debatable part of the platform of any political party seeking entry to government and the making of law? Can anyone name another place on earth where a political party would even have such discussion and debate?
New Yorker, no no no. It doesn’t matter about normal democratic principles everywhere else. Ask many people in New York including probably some of your Reps & Senators in that very state.
It’s special here and different…reallyt it is.
Facts were this particular event was a comemoration of a failure. They role played, for that is what it was, a failure.
Why don’t we celebrate Dunkirk again into the bargain………
The Brookeborough raid was doomed to failure from the start because intelligence had inside knowledge …..
Gerry
Gosh, this can get boring. When I said there was no press, I meant that there was an absence of reporters. Often at events like this you have the great and the good present. For instance, at the commemoration in the Markets following the SAA, there was a very large contingent of well known press people.
On this occasion, there were 2 cameras operated by camera men, which I presume were the Beeb and UTV.
Frankly, I dont give a damn whether or not you accept the crowd number, and I fail to see why its important.