Orde’s unapproved list?
Bob reckons Sir Hugh may have been covertly criticising someone specific in his raft of interviews yesterday. Surely not.
Advertise
-
Books
-
Hearing the Other Voice from the Grave: Why Should we Listen to David Ervine’s Stories?
Ed Moloney’s Voices from the Grave: Two Men’s War in Ireland has received considerable attention in the press and in the public realm since its publication earlier this year. Although the book relates the experiences of the Provisional IRA’s Brendan Hughes and the PUP/UVF’s David Ervine, much of the discussion has focused on Hughes’ stories [...] read our review » -
Eamon Nancarrow’s misadventures in Rock…
It’s the quiet ones you have to watch, they say. When I last saw Eamonn Namcarrow, back in the mid 1980s he was a congenial, good-natured and highly sociable young lad. The next time was 26 years later, in Lavery’s Gin Palace in Bradbury Place. He’d just brought out his first book, Holywood Star about [...] read our review »
-
The Irish political journalist’s problem with partial disclosure…
The nod and wink politics of Ireland’s last two or three decades as practised par excellence by Bertie, Albert and Charlie is ultimately what has the Republic in the stew it’s in. Don’t get me wrong, the effective monitoring of those exercising of power does not demand full disclosure of everything all the time. But [...] read our review »
-
“We [the police] will continue to push edges in terms of what we can do, but it’s hugely disappointing the Shared Future strategy is not right at the top of the public agenda. It hardly seems to be on the agenda at all,” he [HO] said.
It seems not to have dawned on Hugh and other commentators that a ‘Shared Future’ here is not compatible with the 50%+1 constitutional arrangement. It’s the Border Question, stupid.
Is ‘pushing edges’ the new ‘pushing the envelope’? What was wrong with ‘going the extra mile’ – or should that be inch
While you I agree you have a point with regarding the DUP and SF, do you recognise the entrenched sectarianism of your party? Do you recognise that part of the reason that this place is the way it is is in some small part down to the governments in charge over the last four decades, which your party played a leading role in and did damn all to try to stop sectarianism in society, after all you relied heavily on it to get you elected.
Even today the UUs can’t shake the pavlovian desire to flex their orange muscles from time to time, what with wee watery Reginald giving off at the possibility that a non-Unionist might be represented on the P & J portfolio when it rolls around? Can you imagine, the affrontery of it all, a Non Unionist dear me whatever next.
Or do you feel it’s acceptable to suggest that the 46% Protestants have a God given right to deny the 40% of Catholics the possibility of a specific position in government?
Did you hear they have a black guy as President of the US now? I’m sure wee Regie lies in bed at night chuckling and shaking his head at the thought of how that could have happened.
here < dont worry about our wee nevin
he has little to do with his time and hes from about bushmills >>>>>
“Even today the UUs can’t shake the pavlovian desire to flex their orange muscles from time to time”
Indeed
http://www.uup.org/news/general/general-news-archive/bbc-s-promotion-of-all-ireland-agenda.php
H/T Mick
“It strikes me that this is just another example of the BBC’s preference for moving NI viewers towards a more Irish agenda. The World Championships’ Finals, which have been running all week, are sacrificed for a GAA semi-final being held in another country!
So what do you think Michael? Does David McNarry have a case?
Neil, I’ve proposed shared sovereignty, the merger of strands 2 and 3 and no hiding place for loyalist and republican paramilitary godfathers. If you can find Reg’s endorsement please put up a quote or a link.
I’d also point out that pan-unionism and pan-nationalism are more likely to embrace their own extremists than the moderates of each are to embrace each other.
IMO political and religious sectarianism are symptoms of the constitutional conflict not the cause.
IMO political and religious sectarianism are symptoms of the constitutional conflict not the cause.
But there was political and religious sectarianism long before there was a constitutional conflict.
Andrew, I’m just thinking of the past few generations of conflict.
Nevin,
You can’t divorce the last few generations of conflict from that which came before. Independence and partition did not wipe the slate clean any more than Poynting’s Law or the Act of Union did.
Let me put it this way: do the young lads throwing bricks in the street do it because they are motivated by fine constitutional ideals, or because they enjoy throwing bricks at the other lot? Do you think they will all go home and stop throwing bricks if the constitution is changed?
Actually, on reflection I should add:
The constitutional question does have an input into sectarianism, in that it gives a veneer of legitimacy to baser instincts (we’re fighting a noble cause!), but I would consider that a compounding factor rather than the root of the problem.
An PSNI internal review seems to have Orde’s tenure as CC on the unapproved list neither does it mention the lack of a policy paper as the problem.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/foyle_and_west/8223225.stm
Andrew, the degree of clodding seems to ebb and flow in relation to the proximity of the constitution question. That’s why I’d imagine that the build-up to 2012 and 2016 will need to be handled with foresight and prudence.