Monday, July 10, 2006
Commission issues clarification on Dunloy…
Earlier today the Parades Commission met on the tightest regulated parade in Northern Ireland, the wreath laying service in the tiny burial grounds of Dunloy Presbyterian Church and decided to clarify the second paragraph of its original determination, it now states:
B. The organiser, participants and supporters of this procession shall not hold, or attempt to hold, a public procession on any part of the notified route for this procession other than as directed in paragraph A
Despite the speculation beforehand, it seem that the Commission has no power to stop people from assembling, its purpose is to focus on marches. The Commision’s statement continues:
Following a review, the Parades Commission has come to the conclusion that it may be beneficial to clarify its original determination. Specifically, the Commission wishes to remove any element of doubt about the effect of its original determination on a planned wreath laying ceremony in the grounds of Dunloy Presbyterian Church. The Commission does not seek to restrict or in any way interfere with this ceremony.
It is also thought that there were concerns that tensions were raised last year when a rumour spread through the village that the Orange were planning to walk to the church. The riot sit-down protest featured in Fair Deal’s post above ensued.
Mick Fealty @ 06:02 PM
‘It is also thought that there were concerns that tensions were raised last year when a rumour spread through the village that the Orange were planning to walk to the church.’
I wonder who spread that rumour?
Provo Sinn Fein presumably.
Just more of their ongoing campaign of causing trouble.
Is this to be the latest method of them causing trouble? Spread rumours about what the OO is going to do, or not going to do, so that the local populace is wound up and then riots?
If nationalists were concerned about this, why not turn up to see what the facts are before rioting? If the feared event happens then that’s one thing, but if it doesn’t happen what is the justification for rioting?
Posted by on Jul 10, 2006 @ 07:15 PMMick
There wasn’t a riot in Dunloy. The road was blockaded with a lorry and a sit-down protest.
Posted by on Jul 10, 2006 @ 07:31 PMThere was no f****** riot, it was a peaceful protest!
Posted by on Jul 10, 2006 @ 08:10 PMI stand corrected. Twice!
Posted by on Jul 10, 2006 @ 08:13 PMAnother dunloy resident (usually).
to repeat, there was not riot. All of the news shows clearly showed that.
anyways, apparently (and note, i heard this on the grape vine) the rumour about a march started in another near-by village. The residents of that village (well some of them anyway) traveled the 5-10mins over to offer support. when they got there they informed the dunloy residents about the planned march. a sit-down protest of middle-aged activists with bad backs ensued.
further scandal included reported that the police were egging youngsters on, not for bigoted reasons, but because they wanted some fun. Again, just rumours!
but yeah, dunloy!?!? what can ye do!!!
Posted by on Jul 10, 2006 @ 08:27 PMIt’s interesting to see PSF objecting to the Dunloy orangemen forming up outside their Church to commemorate their war dead.
How EXACTLY does this fit with the ‘Building an Ireland of Equals’ mantra? And why the hell does no one call them on it?
Dunloy is an almost exclusively RC town - surely this is one of the few places where they could be seen to offer a hand of friendship and demonstrate how they would treat the orange minority in a new Republic?
The truth, of course, is that PSF have no interest in anything like that - better to keep telling us Catholics that a handful of geriatric orangemen marching means we’re second class citizens and keep the old blood boiling.
There are no provo votes in good relations…
Posted by on Jul 10, 2006 @ 08:53 PMUrquhart,
Republicans have been shown on our television risking their personal safety to protect Orange marchers against thugs. There are thugs in every community. Moreover the PSNI have acknowledged their assistance in keeping order.
The Commission stated what Orangemen already know. ‘No Talk - No Walk’
The people who protested were decent citizens who want no trouble. It’s them you need to talk to.
Posted by on Jul 10, 2006 @ 09:24 PMIt’s interesting to see PSF objecting to the Dunloy orangemen forming up outside their Church to commemorate their war dead.
Urquhart, Sinn Féin are not objecting to any commemoration for war dead, but it is clear that this practice of Dunloy LOL commemorating war dead by standing in Dunloy’s Main Street and playing music (without consulting with residents) is NEW and is designed to gain ground in the parades dispute rather than commemorating the dead. It also gives them a good PR angle in terms of “those nasty residents opposing a wreath-laying ceremony” - What a load of boll**ks.
Posted by on Jul 11, 2006 @ 12:24 AMDunloy, small village, no express purpose, no express need. I say remove the village from the map then no arguments.
Posted by on Jul 11, 2006 @ 08:53 AMYokel,
Your suggestion sounds a little, well, ... Yugoslavian.
Posted by on Jul 11, 2006 @ 09:00 AMRos
Alternatively, maybe Sinn Fein really are so nasty that they oppose a wreath-laying ceremony? After all they refuse to go to Rememberance Day and showed their tolerance of such events by bombing one of them in Enniskillen. Take of the green-tinted glasses.
Posted by on Jul 11, 2006 @ 09:04 AMloyalist,
‘Refusing to go’ to a remembrance day ceremony is not the same thing as trying to stop other people from going.
In Dunloy, as far as I can understand, nobody (neither SF nor the residents) is trying to stop a wreath-laying. What they object to is the manner in which that wreath-laying is being done - with marches, bands, and whatever. A simple, and solemn, laying of a wreath by normal people acting like normal people the world over, is not going to bother anyone. A wreath-laying ceremony that involves a sectarian organisation marching in a militaristic manner through a village whose residents they refuse to even speak to, is obviously not the same thing.
The message for the OO is simple, and its coming in surround-sound, is: ditch the b1gotry, act like normal people, talk to your fellow-citizens, and we can all move forward.
Posted by on Jul 11, 2006 @ 09:14 AMStephen
Nice try. And what is their objection to remeberance day, as manifested best in the Enniskillen bombing? Why should we be surprised that people who bombed a wreath-laying ceremony, who insult the memory of the men who died fighting fascism by refusing to attend November 11th and who bombed British Legion Halls (case study: B. McKenna) should now be found trying to stop a ceremony on spurious grounds such as those outlined by you.
Have you looked at Dunloy Accordian Band’s website - good grief they’re hardly some paramilitary outfit. No, Stephen this is the real face of Sinn Fein, they hate the Orange Order, they hate anything they deem British and if they were honest they hate the Protestant population of Northern Ireland.
Posted by on Jul 11, 2006 @ 09:25 AMLoyalist,
I have no doubt whatsoever that some of what you say is true. Many republicans do hate the maanifestations of the British state, and the OO perhaps even more. This is not the right thread for a discussion of why this is the case.
The issue of ‘remembrance’ is a tricky one, though. Like so much else in the British state, what could have been a simple act of personal remembrance has been elevated into a state occasion, with all of the pomp and ceremony that the British so love. It has been interwoven with imperial jingoism, loyalty to the monarchy, support for the British army, and so on. This incorporation of the personal act of remembering into an effective British national event is what turns Irish nationalists off. If you cannot ‘remember’ your loved ones without being squeezed into some kind of a flag-waving, loyal-to-the-queen-and-empire position, then most nationalists will stay away. Maybe they say a simple prayer in their heads, or lay a simple flower on a loved one’s grave, I don’t know.
De-politicise the event. Remove the implicit (and explicit) references to loyalty and submission to the monarchy. Remove the triumphalism. Make the day a simple and personal, non-state, occasion. Accept that people died for all sorts of reasons, and not only because they supported the British empire (as it was) and state. Too many of the war memorials claim aall the dead as having died ‘for King and Country’. Bullshit - many died for a hundred other reasons, but like the mormons, the jingoists claim the dead as their own.
The recent event in Dublin was a good example. Although the state was involved, it made certain that the event was non-political, and aimed only at those who died. By inviting representatives from all religions, and all sides of the recent conflicts, it avoided any sense of triumphalism.
Posted by on Jul 11, 2006 @ 09:55 AM</b>Aaargh,
Sorry about the over-bolding of my 10.55 post.
Could a moderator fix it, please?
Posted by on Jul 11, 2006 @ 09:56 AMThanks, anonymous one!
Posted by on Jul 11, 2006 @ 10:02 AMRE, you say “Sinn Féin are not objecting to any commemoration for war dead, but it is clear that this practice of Dunloy LOL commemorating war dead by standing in Dunloy’s Main Street and playing music (without consulting with residents) is NEW and is designed to gain ground in the parades dispute rather than commemorating the dead.”
Clear to who? If their war dead commemoration involves standing on the street outside the church playing a few hymns, that’s what it involves.
You decreeing what a unionist wreath laying ceremony should or should not involve is EXACTLY what I’m talking about. Again I ask, where does this fit in the ‘Ireland of Equals’?
Is there any evidence of PSF having sought community or residents’ views on the hungerstrikefests across the North earlier this year? For example, I had a black flag erected on the pole outside my house and wasn’t asked how I felt about it.
Posted by on Jul 11, 2006 @ 11:27 AM‘De-politicise the event. Remove the implicit (and explicit) references to loyalty and submission to the monarchy. Remove the triumphalism. Make the day a simple and personal, non-state, occasion.’
Stephen:
Could the same be done for IR commemorations too?
You seem to have plenty of advice for how other people are to conduct ceremonies that you would never be interested in attending, so how about applying the same to commemorations on your own side?
Posted by on Jul 11, 2006 @ 04:36 PMharpo,
That is our old friend ‘whataboutery’.
Bring it up again on a thread dealing with IR* commemorations, and we’ll discuss it.
[* IR = Irish Republican, I presume?]
Posted by on Jul 11, 2006 @ 05:39 PM
