In the Sunday Times journalist Peter Taylor, looks back at 35 years of covering Northern Ireland as well as the last week, which included an appearance on Talkback, and he begins by wondering if a new mural is being planned.. [to coincide with the March for Half-Truth? - Ed]
I share many of the concerns of Andy Pollak, whose recent post ‘My Response to the Slugger Begrudgers’ zeroed in on the ‘relentless flow of negativity’ of some Slugger commentators. Pollak’s post was largely concerned with the medium of the blog. Indeed, I think the anonymity of the online world encourages extreme discourse and allows [...] read our review »
The new mural is a copy of the Guernica, by Danny Devenny and Mark Ervine (son of the late David).
If it’s a copy of Picasso then that’s a shame.
I don’t believe anything could compete with the original.
The famous anecdote of the painting ‘Guernica’ dates from 1941 when Picasso was living in occupied Paris. During a search of his studio by the Gestapo an officer finding a copy of ‘Guernica’ pointed to it asking Picasso “Did you do this?”
To which he replied, “No, you did.”
I can’t imagine the artist’s on this ocassion pointing to the mural saying the same to the Brits with the same conviction. Then again…
Joe C:
If ever one painting opened consciousness to interpretation, the Guernica did. We don’t all see the same things, at least not in the same sequence nor for the same purpose. The original artist had an agenda, so do the modern pseudo equivalents (possibly not to the same extent and original creativity). It makes you think though?
While I don’t understand these comments to this completely dishonest post, I must remind posters of what Peter Taylor wrote about the culls at Loughgall and on The Rock earlier:
About the former, he quoted ‘Anna’, a ‘Det’ operator, claiming that the killings at Loughgall would stop similar ones, concluding: “But ‘Anna’ was wrong.” (The Brits: The War against the IRA, p. 277)
About the latter cull, Taylor concluded: “The Court (of Human Rights) ruled by ten votes to nine that the killings were unnecessary and that Farrell, Savage and McCann could have been arrested. That was the bad news for the ‘Brits’. The good news was that it ruled that those involved had not been operating a ‘shoot to kill’ policy.” (p. 285)
In sum, Taylor, like Mark Urban, had determined that ambushes by the BA were totally counter productive, so why maintain the opposite now when the shooting has apparently stopped?
And for even more dubious ambushes and assassintions – like the killing of PIRA ‘nutters’ John Dignam, Greg Burns, and Aidan Starrs, especially when Dignam’s parents are trying to get the Police Ombudsman and the PSNI to indict Freddie Scappaticci aka ‘Stake knife’ for the murder of their son, why is there no possibility to discuss it on this site – especially when it seems that Dignam’s killing was the result of their having murdered Margaret Perry a year earlier, and her battered body having been discovered the day before they were killed rather than any special agenda Brigadier Gordon Kerr might have had regarding ‘Steak knife’?
In short, there is no way that Scap is going to be indicted for allegedly killing Dignam, no matter what ‘Martin Ingram’ manages to claim now.