Friday, March 07, 2008
Mairead Farrell a Trojan Horse?
Given how ridiculous the idea of celebrating Mairead Farrell at Stormont was, which even the most devoted Sinn Fein supporter had trouble getting their heads around as a great idea, was the whole thing a trojan horse to arrive at this destination instead, which has already had a test-run in Limavady?
SF may seek to ban unionist symbols at Stormont and SF anger over IRA commemoration ban
Or is that just a face-saving exercise after a spectacularly daft suggestion?
What do you think of the tactic of pursuing “neutral space” - is it worth the bother, does it have any true meaning, is it a whitewash, rather than a co-writing of, of a shared history, is it a petulant idea, or a responsible one? Is there a difference between a shared space and a neutral one? Does this have any relevance to ordinary people’s lives? Is it a chimera for real progress, much like the arguments over symbols on the PSNI’s caps or flags in City Hall closets were? Or is it the sort of groundwork that reflects progress?
Rusty Nail @ 08:57 AM
Dec
so that’s a “no” then?
Posted by on Mar 07, 2008 @ 11:05 AMfor ‘could you be more disingenuous?’
read ‘you got me there’
Unionists seem all for equality now (finally), just so long as it means no republican parties or recognition and no decrease in unionist hegemony.
Cake and eat it !
Posted by on Mar 07, 2008 @ 11:19 AMI think we should look at what the article in the Irish Independent actually says:
Sinn Fein has hinted that it may seek a ban on symbols at Stormont.
Hardly very definitive now is it?
What that’s about is attempting to reduce the outcry from the republican grass-roots over the fact that those nasty unionists have blocked the terror jamboree that was planned. In order to keep the hard men on board they then tell them its all part of some grand plan to wipe stormont clean of unionism. Its the attempt by SF (which unionists all too often believe) to tell everyone that they’re the grand strategists who can think 5 moves ahead.
It just doesn’t wash - and the attempts to do remove symbpls in Limavady and Banbridge wouldn’t have worked if Councillors hadn’t been so keen to follow the (rubbish) advice all too often handed out by Council Officers.
Posted by on Mar 07, 2008 @ 11:23 AMBL
Since you appear to be confusing disingenuousness with being factually correct, the answer is indeed ‘no’. NOw can you discuss this issue without reference to any of the 3 Reichs?
Posted by on Mar 07, 2008 @ 11:24 AMRepublicanstones,
Why don’t you let the Shinners have their little “memorial” party round at your gaff - I’m sure you would put on a nice spread for them - armalite-shaped cake, multi-coloured balaclavas, etc, etc. - just think of the fun you could have -and this nip any Stormont problems right in the bud.Posted by on Mar 07, 2008 @ 11:29 AMAny removal of historic artefacts from Parliament Buildings would be an act of cultural vandalism.
People need to realise that NI is part of the United Kingdom and, as such, it is not unreasonable for symbols of the UK or related artefacts to be present in public buildings. If and when there is a “united Ireland”, then Union Flags, etc., will go. But it’s premature to do so now.
That said, I would personally have no objection in principle to the addition of some “nationalist symbols”, but I would like to know what these “nationalist symbols” might be. If they are merely an excuse to glorify terrorists then clearly that would be unacceptable. If, however, by “nationalist” what is really meant is Irish – then I’ve no problem with shamrocks, harps, etc. – but please no shelelegh sticks or other such tat.
I wouldn’t object either to portraits, or even statues or busts of historic nationalist politicians who graced the chambers of Parliament Buildings. Joe Devlin I guess would be the obvious choice and others, too. Other opposition figures, including Labour figures, should be represented as well. But I suspect the Provos might not like to be reminded that nationalists in NI historically tended to support constitutional nationalism and to oppose “physical force republicanism”.
Posted by on Mar 07, 2008 @ 11:32 AMgeorge, its really just the shinners being silly again and wasting everyones time having to respond to their nonsense. unionists and the other parties actually want to improve the economy and make things better in NI. pretty much just the same as politicans anywhere else.
the shinners dont seem to realise that these limavady type antics just make them look stupid. people have to respond to them in the same way you would deal with a small child thats taking a temper tantrum. you know when a kid wants to do something thats obviously silly and you have to explain why its silly and why they cant do it…Posted by on Mar 07, 2008 @ 11:32 AMEquality Commission for Northern Ireland P53 C79 O7 T139 PC[40.2%] CC[59.8%] - 2004 Monitoring Report
Equality Commission for Northern Ireland P50 C73 O6 T129 PC[40.7%] CC[59.3%] - 2005 Monitoring Report
Equality Commission for Northern Ireland P49 C80 O11 T140 PC[38.0%] CC[62.0%] - 2006 Monitoring Report
So much for equality!!
Has anyone got the male/female statistics?
Posted by on Mar 07, 2008 @ 11:33 AMThanks Demented. But i doubt my house would be big enough. I wonder if the SAS do will be as cheerful, or will the ‘noble’ sas recieve a more subdued reception?
Posted by on Mar 07, 2008 @ 11:33 AMNevin, where did those figures come from - are they online? It would be nice to have a source for future reference.
Posted by on Mar 07, 2008 @ 11:37 AMWllowfield you’re taking a very presciptive approach to what you would not object to in relation to statues and busts or portraits.
You must realise that republicans would have little or any time at all for people like Joe Devlin but would support people who were actually involved if not supportive of physical force and military active republicanism.
Just as a lot of Unionists would hold dear to Edward Carsonb who formed the UVF which was an illegal paramilitary army at the time of its inception.
Its all part of all our past and it needs sorted.
Posted by on Mar 07, 2008 @ 11:41 AMWllowfield you’re taking a very presciptive approach to what you would not object to in relation to statues and busts or portraits.
In fairness, I’m asking what “nationalist objects” might be put forward for display. I’m happy for reasonable such objects to be displayed, but obviously reasonable people would object to objects that glorify terrorists.
You must realise that republicans would have little or any time at all for people like Joe Devlin but would support people who were actually involved if not supportive of physical force and military active republicanism.
There lies their problem - because the vast majority of people in NI have the opposite view and the majority of nationalists chose to support people like Joe Devlin.
It is cynical and disingenuous for “republicans” to seek to censor from history the people whom Northern nationalists actually supported during NI’s history. Such attempts at rewriting history should be resisted.
Just as a lot of Unionists would hold dear to Edward Carsonb who formed the UVF which was an illegal paramilitary army at the time of its inception.
It’s not the same at all, given that (a) the UVF was not illegal, as you claim and (b) Carson - in contrast to the Provos - enjoyed huge support among people in NI.
Its all part of all our past and it needs sorted.
“Republican” violence is not something to be celebrated and in an historic context it received little popular support, no manifestation at Stormont and hence is undeserving of recognition at Stormont.
Posted by on Mar 07, 2008 @ 11:51 AMThe Shadow: - “By victims do you mean “IRA volunteers” who where fighting a “War against the British”? In a war soldiers kill each other you can’t cry that the other side isn’t playing fair.”
yes that is who i mean - i.e the kind of people Jennifer McCann and SF rely on for votes.
Posted by on Mar 07, 2008 @ 11:58 AMDemocratic - “Republicanstones, Why don’t you let the Shinners have their little ‘memorial’ party round at your gaff”
Because he is too busy making high quality intellectual videos for Sinn Fein PIRA:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9o0EO2qryGg“Up the Shankill ... on foot!”? Pictures of a turd in a toilet and slogans about the Shankill like “its still a shithole”, “it’s full of pubs and florists”.
Republican[throwing]Stones is about the level you can expect from him.
This whole neutrality argument from the Sinn Fein PIRA terrorist supporters on here is laughable. They put up memorials to SF PIRA murderers in areas where Protestants are in the minority. They have no problem naming stadiums and tournaments after Republican murderers and then claiming the facilities are for everyone - funded by the Government.
We need to celebrate our Ulster-British culture more in Northern Ireland. Sinn Fein PIRA tried to use murder to push their political agenda. As that failed, they are now trying to play games with culture. Poots and the DUP need to get their act together and start pushing issues like the flying of the Union and Northern Ireland flags. There should be no restrictions on when they are flown. Gordon Brown last year relaxed the rules for the mainland instead of just having designated days. It’s time that was extended to Northern Ireland.
Are you listening Mr Poots? Or too busy trying to work out what’s happening at the Irish Language conference?
Posted by on Mar 07, 2008 @ 12:06 PMSF vociferously oppose (rightly so in my opinion) the attempts/desires of certain loyal orders to march where they are not wanted.
Given that, it is passing strange that they attempted to hold this commemoration in a place where they had to know the majority of the population would object to.Posted by on Mar 07, 2008 @ 12:10 PMWillowfield, sensible suggestions. Might I suggest that the other problem facing the Shinners is that a good lot of the people they’d probably like to commemorate with mouments doubtless wouldn’t be too chuffed to think that their efforts had earned them a statue or bust up at Stormont.
Posted by on Mar 07, 2008 @ 12:14 PM“Thanks Demented. But i doubt my house would be big enough. I wonder if the SAS do will be as cheerful, or will the ‘noble’ sas recieve a more subdued reception?”
I’m sure your humble obode would be more than large enough Republicanstones - from what I hear depending on circumstances you can fit up to 200 Republicans into one toilet at the same time! - just ask the owner of Magennis’s in Belfast.
Posted by on Mar 07, 2008 @ 12:40 PMWhy not host a JOINT celebration in the Long Galley for Mairead Farrell AND (say) Billy Wright
Both lots can attend an “celebrate” the achievements(or lack of them) of these sterling children of Ireland
Posted by on Mar 07, 2008 @ 12:52 PMP&J;thanks for increasing my hits, free advertising is always welcome.
Democratic, i hate to say it but that crack about Magennis’s was good.
Posted by on Mar 07, 2008 @ 01:03 PMbeano,
Posted by on Mar 07, 2008 @ 01:57 PMWhy not host a JOINT celebration in the Long Galley for Mairead Farrell AND (say) Billy Wright
Both lots can attend an “celebrate” the achievements(or lack of them) of these sterling children of Ireland
Posted by barnshee on Mar 07, 2008 @ 12:52 PM
And what about those of us who would find both “celebrations” offensive? People time and time again forget or ignore that there are more than Republicans and Unionists in this wonderful country. Why is it that you have to be a biggoted backwards knuckledragger just to get any damn consideration when it comes to politics in this country.
Posted by on Mar 07, 2008 @ 01:57 PMWillowfield I did not suggest censoring any one if you read my post you will recognise that.
I did state that Republicans would have little or no time for people like Joe Devlin while I realiise that others would see him as a Nationalist icon.
I would challenge your claim that the UV’s were not considered illegal and some of its first actions such as the Clyde Valley and the Larne gun running were in fact carried out in secrecy for fear of those involved being arrested says alot to me about the legality of the UVF.
That aside I relaise and recognise that people within the Unionist community would seeb Edward Carson as an iconic figure andf would therefore welcome his statue in Stormont.
I would welcome a Statue of James Connolly or Winifred Carney two Republican Socialists in the grounds of Stormont.
I would also recognise that a sizeable amount of working class Loyalists would probably welcome a statue or portrait of David Ervine in Stormont Just as Iwould welcome a similar object relating to Bobby Sands or Kieran Nugent.
You claim that Republican violence is not something to be celebrated is a play with words as you seem to have made your mind up as to peoples intentions.
I could argue that by having a statue to Edward Carson that is showing support to the UVF of 1912 and also to the UVF of the present day, but I realise that would be a futile argument as he is part and parcel of our political history.
Just as the republicans which I have mentioned are also an important part of our history.
Posted by on Mar 07, 2008 @ 02:09 PMThere lies their problem - because the vast majority of people in NI have the opposite view and the majority of nationalists chose to support people like Joe Devlin.
In the Northern Ireland election of 1921 SF won 6 seats with 20% of the vote, compared to Devlin’s party which won 6 seats on 11%. Dev pulled in a seat for FF in 1933, but Nationalism wasn’t given many more serious options. Even then, there were a number of independent Republicans voted into Stormont. A lot of votes did go to Labour parties, and that needs recognised.
Two other points: historically, a lot of Nationalism has been absentionist and secondly, SF have now been a serious political force - if not the majority - here for getting on 25 years.
There is not some huge clear cut picture that people are attempting to hide. And in one sense the past is not relevant: it is about making us feel comfortable now. You don’t get to pick for us.
Posted by on Mar 07, 2008 @ 02:18 PMCut the bull
Willowfield I did not suggest censoring any one if you read my post you will recognise that.
But you did allude to the view that “republicans” would not wish to see Joe Devlin commemorated – even though he represented mainstream nationalist opinion during the early history of NI – and would instead prefer to see represented the advocates of political violence who were rejected by the electorate. I pointed out that that was cynical and disingenuous, and would be an attempt to censor from history the people whom Northern nationalists actually supported during NI’s history.
I would challenge your claim that the UV’s were not considered illegal and some of its first actions such as the Clyde Valley and the Larne gun running were in fact carried out in secrecy for fear of those involved being arrested says alot to me about the legality of the UVF.
What evidence to you have of the UVF’s illegality? When was it proscribed? By what means? That fact that some of its actions may have been illegal does not mean that the organisation itself was illegal – that is a logical fallacy.
I would welcome a Statue of James Connolly or Winifred Carney two Republican Socialists in the grounds of Stormont.
Both would be wholly inappropriate. Connolly never enjoyed the support of people in NI: indeed, he rejected their views and sought to overturn them by force. During Connolly’s time, people in NI chose to support unionism, moderate labour politics and constitutional nationalism, and rejected Marxism and violent “republicanism”.
Winifred Carney is inappropriate due to obscurity: no-one’s ever heard of her.
Neither was ever elected in Ulster or Northern Ireland and are of little political relevance to Stormont.
I would also recognise that a sizeable amount of working class Loyalists would probably welcome a statue or portrait of David Ervine in Stormont Just as Iwould welcome a similar object relating to Bobby Sands or Kieran Nugent.
The honouring of those who inflicted so much death and misery on the people of NI would clearly be unacceptable to reasonable people.
You claim that Republican violence is not something to be celebrated is a play with words as you seem to have made your mind up as to peoples intentions.
It’s not a play on words: I meant it literally.
I could argue that by having a statue to Edward Carson that is showing support to the UVF of 1912 [sic] and also to the UVF of the present day, but I realise that would be a futile argument as he is part and parcel of our political history.
It would indeed be futile: the UVF of the present day is completely distinct from that of 1913.
Just as the republicans which I have mentioned are also an important part of our history.
Except they’re not very important at all to the history of NI. That’s the whole point!
Posted by on Mar 07, 2008 @ 02:22 PMAnd in one sense the past is not relevant: it is about making us feel comfortable now. You don’t get to pick for us.
Yes, last time this issue was discussed on this site (in relation to Nationalist symbols at Belfast City Hall- or, to be precise, the distinct lack of), one of the Unionist bloggers here decided a bust of Gerry Fitt would be anappropriate concession to the city’s other community.
Posted by on Mar 07, 2008 @ 02:25 PM
