Saturday, August 18, 2007
Crossing the divide to learn about ‘themmums’ marches…
THE past few days have seen members of one ‘side’ getting up close and personal with the other ‘side’s’ parading culture. Loyalist victims’ campaigner Willie Frazer attended last weekend’s republican hunger strike commemoration (which he was less than impressed with), while UDA leaders Jackie McDonald and Colin Halliday observed a parade by the Ancient Order of Hibernians in Kilkeel (see pic). Also crossing the divide, a number of ex-IRA prisoners paid a visit to the Apprentice Boys’ museum in Londonderry. The DUP’s Gregory Campbell, perhaps unfairly, hedges his bets on the value of the visit until he sees any outcome. Campbell doesn’t see the point of risk-taking, as it could (in his eyes) backfire. However, the risks taken by the Boys have also reaped dividends in recent years.
Belfast Gonzo @ 11:30 AM
observer… do grow up old chap
Turgon I dug this out for you :-)
And the afternoon, the evening, sleeps so peacefully!
Smoothed by long fingers,
Asleep ... tired ... or it malingers,
Stretched on the floor, here beside you and me.
Should I, after tea and cakes and ices,
Have the strength to force the moment to its crisis?But though I have wept and fasted, wept and prayed,
Though I have seen my head (grown slightly bald) brought in upon a platter,
I am no prophet - and here’s no great matter;
I have seen the moment of my greatness flicker,
And I have seen the eternal Footman hold my coat, and snicker,
And in short, I was afraid.Love song of J.Alfred Prufrock
Posted by on Aug 18, 2007 @ 10:47 PMParcifal,
Thankyou.
I do not like the slightly bald bit as it is happening to me along with a bit of greying. Time for new 18 year old wife, sports car (will have to be foreign as no British ones left) and similar.
Okay I have not enough money for sports car, no 18 year old would have me and I still adore Elenwe, though she is a bit grumpy tonight. The only option is bed. Goodnight.
Sorry to waste bandwidth Mick though I still do not really understand what it is.
Posted by on Aug 18, 2007 @ 11:02 PMThis thread makes me sad. This is a good chance for an understanding about the “other side” instead the usual suspects and a few new names come in with the usual crap. Live cannot be converted into points scoring and those of you who are trying should be ashamed of yourselves.
While it could be said that the Nationalist community voted in terrorists the Unionist side aren’t much better. Paisley never took up the gun himself but he was more than happy to associate with those who did. To manipulate them when it suited them then abandon them so he could claim his conscience was clean. And on the other hand if Adams and McGuinness are so proud of what the PIRA fought for why do they so strongly deny ever being members? For all their apparent difference Unionist and Nationalist are more alike then they want to think about.
Posted by on Aug 19, 2007 @ 12:24 AM2). Yes Stormont involved significant sectarianism and was at fault. Was it their fault that the IRA began killing people; I suspect not. Was sectarian behaviour by the state acceptable; No. How widespread was it, I do not know we can argue about it but yes it seems to have been quite widespread. Was I personally responsible for it. Well let me see I was a toddler when Stormont was suspended.
Typical big house prod “not mu fault” lies and obfuscation
In terms of the reliance on arms, yes there are issues about 1912 but I was a bit younger than a toddler then as I suspect most people here were. Will I condemn the UVF of 1912, well no if that makes me an evil bigot then so be it. Will you condemn the 1916 Easter rising?
See above replyh
Now can you answer me, will you accept that the IRA waged a sectarian campaign against protestants? And in this perfect united Ireland of yours must I accept being irish, if I do not / cannot? And by the way just in chat are you from the island of Ireland
No the IRA waged a political campain the fact that it is almost universally against protestants is infact proof that the protestants were sectarian bigots
I know we seem to be getting along Turgon and I respect your right to hold your own strong beliefs but I have to call Bollocks where bollock exists as per my own strong beliefs
Posted by on Aug 19, 2007 @ 12:54 AMTurgon:
An intersting list of questions but I suggest that you do your own research and tell us why Sutton’s analyses are wrong in specific instances and also tell us exactly how much these “errors” affect the overall analysis. in the meantime, I suggest that your questions are no more than desperate attempts to deny the bloody record of the security forces and the paramilitaries whom those same security forces treated as allies in the Troubles.
Sutton has determined the status of each victim included in his analysis. If you have a problem with that in individual cases, let’s hear them and find out just how many victims to whose classification you object. Rhetorical questions without bases in fact are really nothing more than propaganda.
Secondly, I suggest your claim that the PIRA was widely supported by the Irish/Catholic/nationalist community does not have much basis in fact. Sinn Fein received little electoral support as long as it continued its campaign and the SDLP - which strongly criticized and condemned the violence of both sides - had widespread support in that same community. On the other hand, the unionist parties condemned republican violence but ignored the illegal violence of the security forces and the unionist paramilitaries.
But, until and unless you can demonstrate just how the errors you allege Sutton made affects the overall damning picture that emerges from his study, all your questions are, it seems to me, merely dodges to avoid addressing the real issue—the murderous terrorist campaign waged by the security forces and the unionist paramilitaries.
Posted by on Aug 19, 2007 @ 03:39 AMHate to see all the informal gestures of goodwill go to diatrabe. Now see reconciliation at its hardest. It’s not hard enough to speak the words, but to show your face? At least some on both sides are trying. And don’t doubt they have taken risks to do it.
Posted by on Aug 19, 2007 @ 04:53 AMRory - that was a wonderful tail - I can just see the scene of Mr Carr beaming as he was carted off to jail. “Tail-light” Murphy indeed !
Pounder - McGuiness had admitted IRA membership - I, also, don’t understand why Adams does not.Posted by on Aug 19, 2007 @ 10:38 AMMixing me tail’s up - first should have read tale
Posted by on Aug 19, 2007 @ 11:00 AMBob McGowan,
So professor for once you have stuck around.
“I suggest your claim that the PIRA was widely supported by the Irish/Catholic/nationalist community does not have much basis in fact. “
On which post did I make the above claim?
Turning to the rest of your post, I am well aware of the Sutton analysis. If you look on the CAIN web site you will not find the term “murder”. Sutton merely provides lists of deaths and the status of those killed he makes no comment on whether or not they were murdered. It is only in your mind that you make those distinctions.
You can pervert the statistics all you want but I put the following to you regarding your pseudo analysis.
Any present member of the security forces killed by the IRA was not murdered in your analysis.
Any member of the security forces killed off duty was not murdered in your analysis.
Any person retired from the security forces who was killed was not murdered in your analysis
Any person who was a contractor to the security forces or who provided them with any service whatsoever who was killed was not murdered in your analysis.
Any unionist politicians killed were not murdered in your analysis
Members of the British army killed in mainland GB and Europe were not murdered in your analysis
Members of the judiciary killed were not murdered in your analysis
Members of the mainland police force killed were not murdered in your analysis
Members of the IRA killed by the IRA were not murdered in your analysis
Members of the nationalist community killed as informers etc. were not murdered in your analysis
Relatives of members of the security forces killed whilst attacking the security force member may well not have been murdered in your analysis.
Were members of the IRA killed attacking security force personal murdered?
As to my views on loyalist paramilitaries (unionist paramilitaries as you like to call them) I would suggest that most posters here know them and will, if asked tell you, the same goes for episodes of collusion.
My real problem with you is this pseudo intellectual analysis totally lacking in morals or indeed any real understanding of what happened here. Furthermore your only contribution to debate is this endless accusation without any explanation of your methodology. You might know that any scientific analysis requires explanation of the methodology; so since you are making the claims re murders you show me the methodology of your pseudo science. I doubt you will give me the answers to any of the above but one more question. Have you ever been to Northern Ireland professor?
Posted by on Aug 19, 2007 @ 12:28 PMTo Bob McGowan
You say there is little or no evidence to suggest the catholic/nationalist community supported PIRA.
I think you are very wrong.
In one constituency over 29,000 catholc/Nationalsts voted for the officer commanding PIRA-------namely MR B Sands.
Is that not Support?
To me it was one of the most defining moments of the past 30 years and I lost all respect for SDLP for not standing in that electionPosted by on Aug 19, 2007 @ 01:13 PMConfused - they voted for a Hunger Striker from their own tribe. In that context not as an IRA gunman. Agree that a defining moment (actually in the road to peace) - Personally don’t think the SDLP could have stood (doing the British bidding would have destroyed them).
Posted by on Aug 19, 2007 @ 01:23 PMThe SdlP were cowards.
Their supporters gave their vote to PIRA and then hid behind the argument that it was only because of the hunger strike when they actually used the strike to show their real support for the Provo’s.Posted by on Aug 19, 2007 @ 01:36 PMConfused - do you really believe the SDLP really supported the Provos ? Like this great pan-nationalist front thing ? Just ain’t true - Mallon’s bitterness as to how Sinn Fein benefited from the peace process is well documented (well I’ve heard him go on about it on the tele!)
Posted by on Aug 19, 2007 @ 01:43 PMDewi
I don’t believe SDLP as a Party had very much in common with the provos and I greatly admire Hume and Mallon with their stand on human rights but I could never understand the 29,000 votes for the leader of PIRA.
They could have stayed at home to abstain.Posted by on Aug 19, 2007 @ 01:53 PMTrying to save lives I think confused. Hunger Strike such a potent iconic image in Irish history.
Posted by on Aug 19, 2007 @ 01:55 PMNot the leader of the PIRA confused - just the OC in the prison.
Posted by on Aug 19, 2007 @ 02:03 PMDewi
OC was used in point 10 and leader of PIRA in point 14.
Both phrases can be synonymous and if a difference exists it does not detract from the main point.Posted by on Aug 19, 2007 @ 02:16 PMConfused - certainly does not detract from your point agreed. But OC refers to IRA prisoners in a prison - leader of PIRA implies leading the Army.
Posted by on Aug 19, 2007 @ 02:26 PMCould it be that committed SDLP supporters were equally committed Irish republicans, as are 80% of the Irish people of course, and that though we disagreed with the Provvies on tactics we were in no doubt that the ultimate responsibility for misrule in NI lay on the British government?
Way back at the time of Bloody Sunday Hume said publically that his constituents would be satisfied with nothing less than a UI. That´s more true today than it was then.
The only valid argument against physical force republicanism is that it reduced irish republicans to the moral level of their oppressors. Unfortunately it became inevitable which made the ethical situation even more complex. Did I and other SDLP supporters actually prolong the conflict by giving the Brits a figleaf?
Posted by on Aug 19, 2007 @ 05:13 PMI remember Hume making that statement about a UI or nothing.
He certainly settled for a lot less and surprisingly SF agreed to the great compromise.Posted by on Aug 19, 2007 @ 05:29 PMconfused,
Irish republicans are in government North and South and we are already working out the shape of a UI solution, with devolved government in the North if that can be made to work.
Plan B was that it would be done without unionist input. That´s why, in Paisley´s phrase, ´there was no alternative´ but for unionists to endorse powersharing.
Posted by on Aug 19, 2007 @ 05:44 PMlib2016
For years most unionists had no problems with power sharing.
On a technical point Republicans do not exercise sovereign government in the North.
Along with unionists they administer local government within the limits granted to them by Westminster and this will remain even when more powers are transferred such as police and justice.
If republicans had their own destiny in their hands why do they tolerate the presence of mi5/mi6 at Holywood?Posted by on Aug 19, 2007 @ 07:55 PM“For years most unionists had no problems with power sharing”
Well perhaps you could have let the world know - because it certaintly did not not seem that way.
Posted by on Aug 19, 2007 @ 08:06 PMWhilst i cannot speak for SDLP voters/supporters, I would think that it is obvious that most people, being of limited political nouse will vote by tribe. They will vote for what they think is right and then they will vote for “not the other side”
This may be simplistic and wrong, but so are most people in ireland and across the world.
It is only when the strongest tribe representative e.g DUP or SF try to step outside the box that some of their tribe is taken with them. So, whilst i consider the reverand paisley to be a sectarian throwback, there could not have been peace without him. In the same breath, big gerry and co, may have sold out everything they tied to their masts in the eighties, but they must have realised that the goals they seek would not have been realised by one more working class lad being being sent back to england in a box.
I can only hope that the present era of slow, but definable dialogue will go some way towards a just and lasting settlement to the differences that divide us.
A united ireland made up of the different races and ideologies that are celebrated on blogs such as this!
Posted by on Aug 19, 2007 @ 08:31 PMTo Dewi
The world did know of the unionist’s position.
You were not paying attentionPosted by on Aug 19, 2007 @ 09:12 PM
