Thoughts on Purvis’s resignation and the PUP
There has been much analysis of Dawn Purvis’s resignation from the PUP so far. I posted this on Open Unionism a few days ago but thought I might as well put it up here as well.
Purvis has been being lauded as a woman of integrity in multiple sections of the media with only Mark Devenport and a few others willing to make anything other than wholly supportive comments. This eulogisation of Purvis and Ervine before her has been a feature of most outside of mainstream unionism for many years. This seems to have reached its zenith now that Purvis has left the PUP. She joined in 1994; it is unclear whether this was before or after their ceasefire but at the time she joined what was clear was the the UVF had shown absolutely no sign of decommissioning, let alone going away. She stuck with the party through a total of 28 murders by the UVF until leaving after this one. In addition of course she remained with the PUP despite the UVF’s overwhelming involvement in drug dealing, prostitution, racketeering and assorted other organised crime including the loyalist feud which as well as involving multiple murders also resulted in about 600 people being forced to leave their own homes.
Purvis and the PUP have been repeatedly described as the authentic voice of working class unionism by a number of commentators. She has always been popular with the media and indeed many liberals, nationalists and republicans, just as Ervine was before her. Part of the reason for this support may have been the media’s desire to keep the process moving forwards. The NI media, especially the BBC, have always had a fairly unashamedly pro process agenda and to be fair they may have felt that giving the PUP time and space reduced the chances of the UVF and assorted other members of the alphabet soup going back to violence (provided one ignored violence against people whom those sections of the media seem to regard as unimportant like working class unionists). Republicans may have had a somewhat different agenda in their at times quite warm words towards the PUP. For one thing the PUP were always keen to talk to republicans and at a time when the UUP had grave difficulties talking to SF and the DUP simply refused to, it was useful to republicans’ agenda to have a unionist party with whom they could talk. An additional and more subtle benefit for republicanism was that the PUP, being a party heavily involved with terrorists, was not going to be able to denounce their sectarian murder campaign with the credibility the UUP and DUP were. In addition the PUP gave a degree of credence to the republican lie that everyone now involved in politics had been involved in “the conflict” (ie had been terrorists or colluded with them). Furthermore when Ervine made claims such as that he knew the colour of the wall paper in unionists leaders houses it chimed with the whole unionist collusion narrative so beloved of republicanism.
The mainstream unionist parties of course had very little time for the PUP (or UDP) apart from the disgraceful episode of the UUP co-opting Ervine into their ranks to gain an extra ministry. Unionism’s distrust was largely driven by the revulsion they felt for the UVF’s murdering ways but in addition was not helped by Ervine’s comments about them having been involved in talks with them when they opposed the UVF ceasefire etc. The fact that Ervine (a convicted criminal and liar) was never taken to task by the media over these remarks and made to put up a name, time, place and the subjects supposedly discussed or told to shut up is a further example of the media’s sycophancy towards him.
Mainstream unionists politicians, however, were not the only ones with contempt for Ervine. The working class unionist electorate for whom he supposedly spoke were fairly clearly going to decide he was not speaking for them at the next assembly elections. However, Ervine suffered from the cleverest political death since Jack Kennedy; was lionised by the press, and hence, in his death, helped ensure the election of Purvis. Apart from in East Belfast, however, the PUP have singularly failed to make any credible impact. In the large working class unionist areas of North Belfast, the smaller ones of South and West Belfast; apart from the very odd councillor, their support is very poor. Even those areas are positive hotbeds of PUP support, however, when compared to the working class areas of large unionist towns: Craigavon, Coleraine, and Ballymena have not a single PUP representative between them. Moving out into the rural parts of Northern Ireland where there are of course still large numbers of working class unionists, one finds a complete dearth of PUP councillors, members or supporters.
The reasons why working class unionists do not vote PUP seem to be a mystery to some of the supposed cognoscenti but are actually remarkably easy to explain. Working class unionists like their middle class counterparts tended to have very little time for terrorism and as such did not support the murders of their Catholic counterparts. Furthermore during the Troubles the UVF (and UDA) were actually much more dangerous to working class unionists than the IRA ever were. When the ceasefires came, although the loyalists may have ceased fire on Catholics, they continued to prey, vampire like, on the working class unionist communities they infest and continued to be the major reason why these areas have degenerated into sink estates and urban wastelands. Clearly this depressing dynamic of criminality is not limited to Belfast. Throughout large urban areas in the UK and beyond there are major problems with criminality: both antisocial behaviour and organised criminality. In those areas, like in Belfast, the working class population do not tend to vote for their oppressors and as such surprise that working class unionists do not vote PUP is grossly misplaced.
Having said all that there is a significant problem with working class unionists being disenfranchised. Fair_deal has patiently and in my view accurately put forward the suggestion that the garden centre unionist is indeed a non existent unicorn and that instead the problem is non voting amongst working class unionists. This is a major problem and one which has become more serious in recent years. The UUP once contained many working class based representatives some very senior such as Harold McCusker (deputy leader) and once the DUP had very large numbers of them: whilst there are still some within both parties, the gentrification of the UUP and DUP has progressed rapidly over the past two decades and been accompanied by a fall in the working class unionist vote. This is in danger of becoming a vicious circle with decreasing numbers of working class unionist voters and politically involved grass roots resulting in unionist parties always chasing the middle class vote further alienating the working classes who are left with no constructive voice within unionism.
To come back to Puris; the reasons for her resignation have been chewed over in some detail (although I have a very different analysis from him, I do have significant areas of agreement with Horseman here). Her claim is that she was annoyed by the murder this week and it was the final straw. This is possible but odd considering the number of other murders there have been before. Mark Devenport has suggested her desire to protect her Stormont allowances. However, another fractionally more subtle suggestion might be worth entertaining. The East Belfast Westminster election demonstrated that many working class unionists were willing to vote Alliance in order to punish the DUP: it has been reported that the Dee Street ballot box, probably the most solidly working class area in inner East Belfast, was very solidly for Naomi Long.
As such Purvis may well have seen what she and most commentators already knew: that her assembly seat was in grave danger. Hence, a chance for her might be to leave behind the taint of loyalist terrorism and try to become another Naomi Long: a working class soft unionist albeit with a bit more unionism. The PUP have never been exactly hard line on the union: their hard line views have tended to be on the necessity of helping loyalist terrorists rather than holding the line on the constitutional position. They might be summed up as: Weak on support for the union: strong on support for criminality; a sort of violent, marginally less self righteous version of the Alliance Party.
Purvis may have felt that jettisoning the support for violence might help her and that if she could take even a third of Long’s first preferences she might get back in. Indeed if Long dumps the double jobbing as she almost certainly will have to, Purvis might see herself as a sort of assembly Long. That might hold out some hope of keeping her snout in the trough if not as close to the truffles of power as the Alliance’s.
As a final thought if Purvis is such an upright person for finally, belatedly, having realised that she could no longer support the PUP in view of the UVF’s actions: where exactly does that leave the Christian GP John Kyle? If Purvis could no longer stomach the PUP and is to be lauded for her decision: how is it that Kyle can remain? I have previously suggested that Kyle is maybe a decent but deeply naïve man. However, there comes a point where naivety is no longer a defence for support of the indefensible: at that point it ends and becomes dishonesty. Kyle may be proclaimed as a decent man and may suggest that he will not rule out a complete break with the PUP. However, someone needs to point out that when it comes to integrity the new PUP emperor’s clothes look remarkably see through and unless and until he does break the link completely most will see him as being stark naked. Even if he does the question will be why did it take so long? I know it offends against Godwin’s Law but Kyle sounds rather like Albert Speer: the Nazi who said sorry, was regarded as a decent man in some quarters and most now view as just as complicit as the others.
Driftwood, There was only two patients in the ward, Nigel Dodds child and the child of the man that was murdered less than a week after the attempt on Nigel Dodds, they met each other frequently during the period their children were in the ward but I cant remember Nigel being at his funeral or sending his condolences.
“Might I remind you that the RUC and the British army handed over files on innocent Catholics to unionist terrorists”
What would be the possible point in doing so? It’s not exactly as if “innocent Catholics” are hard to find, they were 4 in 10 of the population, and tend to live in particular areas.
Your conspiracy theory lacks a motive. Unless your definition of “innocent” and that of RUC and soldier alleged collusionists is at odds or you are talking about errors on the part of the collusionists.
You need to say what you are saying with more clarity.
Might I remind you that the RUC and the British army handed over files on innocent Catholics to unionist terrorists, who in turn carried out executions on the those names contained in the files. Unionist terrorists did not target anyone, the RUC and British army did the targeting, the unionist terrorists did the shooting……….
LOL uncle gerry been telling you bedtime stories , or maybe it was Gerrys brother…were u sittin on his lap when he told you this?
Goggle Pat Finucane the solicitor, all those who were involved in his murder were working for RUC special branch………..
god, why didnt we think of this, we could have save 200 million of Saville if we just googled it
British troops in ulster deserve our praise , they did an amazing job given that the nationalist community collectivley worked to murder many of them, even voting for murderers in their tens of thousands.
All yet more nails in the coffin of unification. Why on earth would Ireland want to incorporate such a mess into its state?
Pat Finucane was shot dead by two masked men on 12 February 1989 in front of his wife and three children. One of the weapons used in the attack was one of 13 weapons stolen from a British Army barracks in 1987 by a serving member of the British Army’s UDR regiment. Brian Nelson, the British military intelligence agent who also served as chief intelligence officer of the UDA, alleged after his conviction on other charges that he had directly assisted in the targeting of Pat Finucane. *
The Report of the International Human Rights Working Party of the Law Society of England and Wales in 1995 states:
There is credible evidence of both police and army involvement. We cite the most significant items below. There is further evidence in the hands of the police which we have not been given access. The Goverrnment told the UN Special rapporteur that the DPP directed that there should be no prosecution against any officer in connection with Patrick Finucane’s death. Significantly the Government did not deny that there was collusion by the government or the security forces in relation to the murder.
Driftwood
“It simply would not lower itself”
So what, in your opinion, did the British army do on ‘Bloody Sunday’, other than lower itself to get involved in a sectarian squabble?
Slimmer
Previously I made the following statement “the RUC and the British army handed over files on innocent Catholics to unionist terrorists“. I did not add that they also handed over files relating to Sinn Fein and the IRA. But, because I didn’t submit this does not make my original statement any less true.
It happened, it’s not alleged, the British establishment is a terrorist umbrella group; always was; always will be!
Jimmy Mack
The British army, the US army and the Israeli army are the new axis of evil. They all took lessons from the Nazis on how to be as fascist as the Nazis themselves.
They will rot in hell with Thatcher and Hitler.
i thought they went away after surrendering their weapons. ack must be just gerry telling more lies
Turgon,
I got to take my hat off to you because your vile un-christian remarks about the late David Ervine must keep you in the running for the Leadership of the TUV. Saying that, your TUV twin David Vance is way ahead of you on that score.
Its obvious that my posts on another thread recently did not penetrate into your closed narrow mind. Your disgraceful attack on Dawn Purvis is totally unjustified and it proves to me that with all the media coverage dedicated to this subject you never heard a word Dawn said – why am I not surprised at that?
“i thought they went away after surrendering their weapons”
They have gone away, away to Stormont to keep collective unionism in check. Sinn Fein and its leadership, the leaders of the former Provisional IRA, are still here and here to stay.
They have turned this once ‘Protestant Province’ into a republican heartland, where they rule the roost and hold all the aces.
Don’t forget the IRA. They caused a few deaths in their time.
The topic is about Dawn Purvis and the PUP , lets try to keep it on topic.
(As always with NI politics we can go back through centuries. of blood feuds)
I have posted this before and make no apology for posting it again as no-one has answered.
From Wikpedia:
“On 16 June 1994, UVF members machine-gunned a pub in Loughinisland, County Down on the basis that its customers were watching the Republic of Ireland national football team playing in the World Cup on television and were therefore assumed to be Catholics. The gunmen shot dead six people and injured five”
From PUP website:
“Dawn is Leader of the Progressive Unionist Party, appointed by the Executive Committee after the death of David Ervine. She joined the party in 1994″
From Dawns point of view what broke the camels back?
The fact that it was no longer Catholics being murdered?
Or is it even more venomous and its all about money after all , the generous MLA salary and allowances?
The whole thing stinks to high heaven , she’s either an opportunist using the murder of someone to further a political career or thinks its ok murder as long as its along her own defined sectarian lines.
Funny how you say that the British army would not lower itself to our sectarian squabble Driftwood.
Did the findings of the HET re. the murder of Mr Greanery in Derry in ’72 not show you that they will sink to any level for self interest?
Just to remind you. This was a man walking with his mates when a soldier fired from a secure sanger shot and murdered him.
The soldier involved was supported by the British M.O.D in his lie that the victim was carrying a weapon. A lie that they perpatrated for 39 years mind and cast an aspertion on a totally innocent man.
I put it to you Driftwood that there is little beneath the security forces as we have seen with what they have done to Iraqis
Sorry to post twice.
From the horses mouth itself:
10/10/09 PUP website:
“That’s what this party offers. This party offers a vision for Northern Ireland. A society at peace with itself and its neighbours, where people can live together, go to school together, work together and socialise together.”
Doesn’t sound like the camels back was even hurting eight months ago (out of fourteen yrs in the PUP) never mind near breaking point.
Where to begin?
How about Andy Tyrie. Have you read Tim Pat? According to Tim Pat, Andy was known for slamming the gun and the list of names and addresses of known PIRA men down on the table and saying, here’s a gun and there’s more if you need them, and here’s men that you want, but there’s no point in shooting Catholics just because they’re Catholic. And do you know that these organizations are not regular organizations, and so there isn’t nearly the same internal discipline as there is in the US Army? And so Loughinisland was not sanctioned by the UVF leadership. And as I related elsewhere on Slugger, by his own admission, worst day of Mr. Ervine’s life.
And, here, starting at the 6:40 mark:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nyZH7KLKLpA
Is the UUP’s John Taylor good enough for you? He’s from one of those “respectable” Unionist parties, yes? His remarks flatly contradict yours.
Next:
(2:16-47)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2qvo0YhvBA
(beginning-3:07)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_YpbCkZjg04
So, the one soul who was judged credible, the late Mr. Ervine. Yet you would would call the human not here to speak in his defense, a liar. And so what does that make you?
By the way, loved your prognostication as to the late Mr. Ervine’s electoral fate, if he hadn’t died. About as credible as your prognostication re the TUV’s electoral chances in the last election, which is to say, not credible at all.
And for why they talked, well, see the excerpts from Gusty’s one letter from Long Kesh, kindly posted by Mr. Blacker. In particular, Gusty’s use of the word, fascist. Now for yet more cruel irony, do you recall when Mr. McGregor posted Ciaran Murphy on Youtube? Note the “fascist hovel” at 0:39-0:41:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMO6GpVG_Xw
And so there’s reason for them to talk, as they both recognize the fascist hovel for what it is. And for the patent absurdity here, if Big Ian hadn’t decided to make all smiles with Uncle Marty, you wouldn’t be in the TUV. In case you missed the better part of your life history, for most of that period of time that some call The Troubles, Big Ian was a walking, talking incitement to terrorism. In other words, he, like more than a few others, was a coward, as he preached that others do what he himself was not prepared to do.
Next, in start contrast to your noted contemptible remarks, I can’t help but note that Albert Reynolds, Peter Hain, George Mitchell, Tony Blair, Bertie Ahern, Gerry Adams, Martin McGuinness, Hugh Orde, and Peter Robinson all had kind words to say, and most of them managed to attend his funeral service. Big Gerry even gave his widow a hug. A truly singular moment, apparently lost on you.
Lastly, here is why you write what you write, in other words, here’s the late Mr. Ervine calling you out on your pathetic attempt to deflect the blame and responsibility that is yours and Mr. Allister’s and Mr. Vance’s, and so on(courtesy of the UK’s Timesonline):
“The UVF’s response at first to the Anglo-Irish Agreement was clear unadulterated anger and… street responses, but it didn’t last and they didn’t try to sustain it,” he said. “I think that the UVF were listening, if not accepting 100%, our [the Progressive Unionist party’s] analysis that the unionist leaders ‘got us into this pile of s**** and effectively they’ve a responsibility to get us out of it’.”
And for your and Jim’s continuing lies:
“We were all summoned, as part of the 1986 committee, to a meeting in the DUP’s headquarters in the Albertbridge Road,” Ervine recalled, still marvelling at how paramilitary leaders were invited. “Did they not know who Billy Elliot [the Ulster Defence Association’s East Belfast brigadier] was representing that night? Not know who I was representing that night? Of course they did.
“Strangely enough, Sammy Wilson and Peter Robinson came into the room, no Paisley or Molyneaux — they’d been delayed — but what we got from them was ‘we put backbone into them’, and I’m listening to Robinson and Wilson talk about how ‘they put backbone’ into that great charismatic figure, Ian Paisley, who in the view of the unionist community is all backbone. The next thing, they announced the meeting would have to be in Glengall Street [the Ulster Unionists’ headquarters], that there had been a change of plan.”
There they met Paisley and Molyneaux, who now said they would support the strike. It was supposed to be a private meeting, but when the doors of Glengall Street opened, Ervine was met by banks of cameras. “The headline in the News Letter next morning was ‘Hard men change minds’,” he recalled. “It was a total f****** fabrication to… give the impression that our politicians were trying to do a deal with Thatcher but, look, these hard men wouldn’t let them.
“It was absolutely shameful, totally designed and orchestrated” by the unionist parties, he believed.
“I wish I had a pound for the number of times Ulster Unionists would say: ‘Oh, watch for the Protestant backlash. Oh, I don’t know how we’re going to sell this to the hard men’. Meanwhile, back at the ranch, us hard men had policies that were 20 years ahead of their own. It was incredible, cynical, manipulative and dishonest.”
And so you and Mr. Allister and Mr. Vance remain to this very day. Again, see the excerpts from Gusty’s letter from Long Kesh that were kindly posted by Mr. Blacker. Gusty’s letter speaks for itself, and makes plain that the likes of Gusty and Dave were talking about reaching across the divide and making peace, so that they might make a better world for all concerned, and that while the likes of you and Jim Allister and David Vance kept and keep preaching on the merits of the fascist hovel. So you can’t help but get the point, Gusty’s letter proves who the liar here is. It ain’t Gusty and Dave.
I think Dawn his done an excellent job representing the working class people of East Belfast and I hope she continues for many years to come.
Unionist/Loyalist community need many more figure like Dawn. There is a huge percentage of working class Loyalists who feel forgotten by the peace process and these people must be rengaged if the men of violence on the Loyalist side are to be moved permanently away from crime.
Mainstream Unionists should seize the day and ask dawn to join there parties as she would be a wonderful addition to either party.
To all those who do not beleive there was ever direct contact between Unionist politicians and Unionist terrorists I suggest you read “The Committee” by Sean McPhillemy…. Oh no you can’t because over a decade after peace decended on this region I’ts still on a british government black list of banned publications!
Chewbacca: The author had a ring of truth to me and the story he uncovered seemed astonishing at the time,although confirming other stories. Am I wrong in thinking that it was Trimble who had it banned or am I thinking of another one? And didnt McPhillemy go bankrupt and couldnt get work becuse his reputation was tarnished as a consequence of the legal action?
So much for free speach.
McPhilemy had to pay an out-of-court settlement to the Prentice brothers and apologise for saying they were in the committee, so I suppose that didn’t do his credibility much good, even tho he won a case against the Sunday Times for libel prior to that.
Daisy: many thanks,its coming back to me now (once a book is banned I just gotta read it so I did). But am I wrong in ‘remembering’ that the Prentice brothers AND David Trimble were involved in the legal action?
I think ultimately McPhilimeny suffered long term because his integrity as a film maker was put in doubt aFTER losing the court case and having his book banned. I followed it all at the time and thought he sounded like a genuine bloke.
slappymcgroundout,
Very well put together post, very educational with a good bit of research. Just a wee correction, the post I published with the words of Gusty Spence was taken from a book called “Unchartered Waters” by Henry Sinerton which is about David Ervine, it is a speech Gusty Spence made on the 12th of July 1977 in Long Kesh. The original speech is held by the Linenhall Library in Belfast. His words were ground breaking in 1977, something that the mainstream politicians never attempted to say.
There is no Wikipedia entry for McPhilemy or the book.
Maybe neither really existed at all.
Turgon
Your attack on Dawn Purvis is pretty pathetic. I happen to know a number of PUP members and these people are there to try and change things in this little country of ours. I am not a supporter of the UVF or any grouping. I wish everyone of them would disappear ASAP. I am no lover of groups who have been responsible for thousands of deaths. I struggle with the fact that provos are in goverment at Stormont. I think of the innocent people they murdered for no good reason. But there you go – that’s democracy. I also struggle with the goverment of the ROI having a say in NI after them turning a blind eye to the provos campaign along the border for decades. Their lack of action in extraditing provos back to NI to stand trial was breath taking. But I have to give them credit for helping to rein in the republican killer gangs here in the 90′s. They have accepted that unionists have a right to be unionists and are not going to be persuaded by threats to become citizens of their country.
Dawn Purvis and the PUP were not afraid to call a spade a spade especially when it came to the leadership of the mainstream unionist parties. They (DUP/UUP) allowed working class unionist areas to become fertile ground for paramilitaries by not giving leadership to the people there during the early part of the troubles. Their constant use of negative politics was a disgrace. In fact the UUP who were the party of goverment here for 50 years used and abused the urban working class unionist people throughout that time. They let many of them live in squalor even though many of them were fellow orangemen. They were ok in their big fancy houses. My grandfather, who is long dead, called them the biggest bunch of parasites ever to live on the island of Ireand. He was pro union but voted Labour all his life. His song wasn’t the Sash it was the Red Flag. My grandfather would have liked Dawn and her politics.
FJH: I see what you mean (although McPhilemy and his book are referred to on Wikipedia but that is all).
Amazon’s “The Committee” is not McPhilemys book. However goggle throws up much relevant info, in particular an account of the twists and turns of court cases in
The Independant. There is no mention of Trimble which either means that my memory is playing tricks or something dark at work. Probably the former but in a week or two I will be talking to someone who will remember.
Sorry to everyone to be going off tack. Humbling that my memory which I thoght was sound, is not.
Have solved the puzzle and want to clear that up but for legal reasons that will be it. An Phoblacht was the only source from goggle which mentioned that “a leading political figure within unionism,prominent during Drumcree crisis ’95 and whose name is known to An Phoblacht is named as an “Committee Assocaite”. It acuses this person of various things.
Never thought I would be using An Phoblacht as a source …but in the absence of other sources just had to.
Not sure what I believe now.
Granni Trixie,
reading you for the last 5 years.
between you and Malcolm Redfellow for best commentator on here IMO.
”Follow the trail behind every single Unionist terrorist and at the very back you’ll find a handler with an English accent.”
I seem to have heard that somewhere before and thought it was nonsense then and still do.
Maybe I should just pluck up the courage and go and ask some of the tough looking guys in the Shankill Road bars just up the road. As an Englishman, maybe they’ll go easy on me.
On Dawn Purvis – can’t say I know that much about her, but just watched this youtbe of her on a PUP election broadcast from 2007, and wondered what they had actually done since then.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ix6mV36_B_w
All this talk of working class this and that.
Has there been so much as a Falls Road vs Shankill Road darts match been organised since that time?
I walk up and down between the areas and it seems that there is no contact whatsoever.
The same could be said for every Republican terrorist!
It’s a good thing The Committee exists. It allows us to spot complete idiots like chewbacca a mile off. Despite possession of this book allegedly being a capital offence, I have had a copy for a long time, imported from the US, and there are a few police officers who have seen it. Granni Trixie, let me know if you want to borrow it. You’re not missing much.
A few points :
1. There is no “British government blacklist of banned publications”, not for books. There may be books banned which contravene the official secrets act. Have you noticed that neither the author nor the publisher has claimed that their book was banned in this way ? That is probably because :
2. The reason we can’t get the book in the UK is because the publisher chose not to publish it here, or in Ireland, or anywhere in Europe. Can you guess why that might be the case ? Can you think why the publisher would refuse to put out a book about Northern Ireland in the country it is about ? Even if the British government *did* have a “blacklist” why isn’t it available in Ireland ? The usual clueless idiots don’t bother to ask themselves that question, and won’t have asked themselves why plenty of other books about collusion and loyalists do exist. Reasonable people might conclude that :
3. Perhaps the publisher felt that the allegations in the book wouldn’t stand up in court in the event of the publisher and the author being sued for libel. In other words, the publisher didn’t have confidence that the allegations could be substantiated. Of course, he might have had good reason for this given that :
4. Almost all of the allegations made in the book come from a single source. It’s about ten years since I last read the book but my recollection is that the name given is “Source B”. Subsequently, we found out via a number of court cases that this person was a minor-league loyalist paramilitary who loved to spin yarns about all the high-level stuff he was mixed in. He came out in public a few years after the book came out and claimed to have made the whole thing up. I can’t rememeber his name – was it James Sands or something like that ? The crux appears to be that McPhilemy didn’t take the time to corroborate the allegations with any other sources. If he did, he didn’t provide details of this in his book. This lack of rigour probably has a lot to do with the subsequent problems in McPhilemy’s journalistic career.
I know it suits a lot of people to claim that there was a massive conspiracy around the book. I don’t want Slugger getting sued, but the book is really nothing other than a long list of unsubstantiated allegations.
I don’t personally believe that unionist politicians, outside a few isolated cases, sat around a table with other people and agreed on who should be assassinated. What they did was to act as cheerleaders. They’d make the speeches and then get out of the way when the shooting started. They certainly never did much to discourage loyalists or assist the authorities with their prosecution. I’m sure a lot of them probably told loyalist paramilitaries that what they were doing was right, normal and understandable and that they had no problem with it (in some cases they said as much in public). They probably slapped them on the back the odd time and said “well done”. But I don’t think they ever participated directly in the targeting process.
As for the idea that every loyalist shooter has a person with an English accent somewhere up the chain, that’s the kind of rubbish that discredits people very quickly. I suspect most of the collusion was at the hands of Special Branch and pretty much all of those accents would have been distinctly local.
What exactly has Dawn Purvis done for the working class people of East Belfast? Please I’d really love to know as I’ve yet to hear of her doing a single damn thing for anyone out of her office that wasn’t a paid and tattoo’d member of a paramilitary organisation. In actual fact my own older sister went to the east Belfast constituency office seeking help to be rehoused and was told by the office manager Maureen Wilson that they wouldn’t help her as she was not “known” to anyone in that office.
Stevie H,
I’m astonished to read your post because I have seen for myself, first hand, Mrs. Wilson helping people get houses, fill in claims form and general advice with not a tattoo in sight. As regards Dawn Purvis, she has helped to push for new housing and re-generation, helped people after flooding and racist attacks along with general MLA problems.