Sunday, November 11, 2007
“They kept faith with the republican past..”
Sinn Féin leader Gerry Adams speaking at his party’s commemoration of five men who died when a bomb they had been preparing exploded prematurely at a farm house at Edentubber in 1957 during the IRA’s Border campaign.
“They kept faith with the republican past and they ensured the future of our struggle.”
Ah, but did they have popular support and a “strategy to achieve a united Ireland”? And, btw, weren’t you always “of the view that no military solution was possible”? Just checking.. Or rather, checking..
Pete Baker @ 11:07 PM
Popular support? Yes Pete I think they did have popular support. 50 years ago. There was a military solution. Times and technology change: a United Ireland ruled democratically as a Republic Independent with all people’s religious beliefs and cultures protected. Once that is denied. then I dono what other avenue is open to retrieve it.
Posted by on Nov 11, 2007 @ 11:38 PM“all people’s religious beliefs and cultures protected.”
The Provisional Republican Movement can hardly be accused of offering that, not least when you think of Enniskillen et al 20 years ago.
Posted by on Nov 12, 2007 @ 12:00 AMhold on,
adams is yet again talking out his arse at edentubber. he shows up to the honor dead ira men killed an ira bomb. these guys have entered the patheon of republican heroes.
but clearly they had no popular support--- their campaign lasted a year or two.
they had no significant electoral support
they had no strategy for a united ireland--- blowing up customs houses etc
how did any of the actions of the IRA Operation Harvest bring a united ireland closer.
if the edentubber martyrs had not killed themselves, then they would have done murder on the RUC.
yet Chuckle McG leveled the exact same standards off the guys who shot that cop in derry the other day.
the edebtubber martyr had nothing to offer the people of ireland, by gerry’s logic.
Posted by on Nov 12, 2007 @ 12:02 AMReality check folks. Republicans are not going to stop commemorating their dead. I might well feel that their deaths were pointless, self-inflicted, and came in the pursuit of a cause that was both futile in practical terms and immoral in its methods. Republicans are still going to commemorate their dead.
Get over it.
Frankly, I’m a lot more annoyed by Ogra SFers running around Belfast City Centre with replica firearms than any verbal gymnastics Gerry Adams gets up to at a Republican commemoration.
Posted by on Nov 12, 2007 @ 12:10 AMMartyrs? they blew themselves up with their own bomb -instead of some other people.A taste of their own medicine.Those who live by the sword....
Posted by on Nov 12, 2007 @ 12:11 AM“If any question why we died,
Tell them, because our fathers (leaders?) lied.”Rudyard Kipling (the insert is mine)
Posted by on Nov 12, 2007 @ 12:11 AMNevin
the IRA did not go out to kill innocent people at Enniskillen they targeted British military occupation forces. Innocent people died. tragic blunder. Those lads in Edentubber were preparing a bomb to kill illegal immoral occupation forces and their allies. They were liberation fighters. Simple fact Ireland the Irish are right the foreigners (British) are wrong.
Why are you scared of the truth?Posted by on Nov 12, 2007 @ 12:13 AMIs Gerry talking about a ‘micro group’ in 1957 keeping faith with the republican past?
Posted by on Nov 12, 2007 @ 12:13 AMplus..
all that sf can offer their grass roots supporters is a constant diet of commemorations for this that and other.
it gives the people on the ground something to do. turn up at a commemoration, here some bulshit provie speech about never giving up, keeping the faith etc.
i have been at plenty to see what exactly happens. the leaders, well they are too fucking important to walk the mile or so of the march.
you never see gerry and conor murphy walking along wih the 5/8s. no the appear at graveside make a speech to keep the people happy and then fuck off to whatever drinks reception they have in hillsbororgh that evening.
the people go home with a little more faith in how really psf are keeping the cause alive.
then of course the 5/8 doesnt have to wory about
the general crapness of Catroina over classroom assistants (socialism indeed)
conor “watertap” murphy cleverly getting water charges in.
or the laughable attendance of 4 sf councillors at ennniskillen poppy day/bomb anniversary memorial
Posted by on Nov 12, 2007 @ 12:13 AMKisdo and if I remember right sinn fein said it was the british army who set it off deliberately-aye right.
Posted by on Nov 12, 2007 @ 12:16 AMSammy
See the update to the original post for one reason why it might be important to pay attention to those verbal gymnastics.
Posted by on Nov 12, 2007 @ 12:17 AMthe psf leaders have led the cause of a 32 socialist republic in a cul de sac.
no wonder ian paisley is laughing everyday.
he cannot believe this luck
psf are now the SDLP.
Posted by on Nov 12, 2007 @ 12:18 AMKisdo, I should imagine the same people/groups had been probably standing in much the same spot as they’d stood in previous years. Ditto for those in Pettigo where the attack failed.
How are the ‘micro groups’ of today different from the ‘micro groups’ of 1957?
Posted by on Nov 12, 2007 @ 12:20 AMkisdo
Which, as you well know, doesn’t go any way towards explaining the other bomb in Fermanagh that day which failed to go off, where only local Boys Brigade and Girl Guides were due to be present.
Or the fact that, after claiming for 6 months it was British dirty tricks. Then admitting responsibility when they had no other option but said the timing was wrong. The IRA couldn’t explain why they gave no warning when they realised only civilians were there at Eniskillen.
You, me and everybody knows it was designed to kill Prods.
If you are so proud of the brave volunteers then stand over their actions!
Posted by on Nov 12, 2007 @ 12:27 AMNevin
thats why the IRA didnt set the bomb off. MI5 did. just as they allowed Omagh to happen. veritas you are right the British did allow it to happen. We need to control our own destinies we need independence. And Ireland is under British control at the minute.Posted by on Nov 12, 2007 @ 12:29 AMjustthoughtidask
tell the MI5 commander to stand over Her actions. “Prods” were never targets of the IRA. If the IRA wanted to kill prods or english people they would have killed thousands. Commercial targets were always pre warned.Posted by on Nov 12, 2007 @ 12:34 AMSee the update to the original post for one reason why it might be important to pay attention to those verbal gymnastics.
Sorry, but I don’t agree Pete.
Are you trying to say that Sinn FĂ©in have performed ideological somersaults over the past couple of years? That this becomes particularly apparent when they commemorate the past as they now condemn what was once core political principle? That all this makes the squandering of hundreds of, mostly very young, Irish lives seem particularly wasteful and pointless? This is all true, but it’s hardly news Pete.
I wouldn’t subscribe to much of what Gerry Adams said today, but nor would I subscribe to the sub-imperialist nonsense I had to sit through at church this morning (no, British soldiers in Iraq are not fighting for my freedom and loyalty to one’s country is not a Christian virtue), and I for a moment silently wished for a machine gun when I encountered the bare-faced cheek of the Tiger’s Bay UDA Remembrance Day parade this morning (remember how much you charged Dean Clarke for that load of ketamine?).
Commemorating the dead, especially when those deaths were futile, brings out a lot of silliness in people. I still think the best policy is to shut up and let people get on with it. Collective grieving is something that people are best left to handle for themselves even if one might think they are going about it in a particularly silly way.
Posted by on Nov 12, 2007 @ 12:38 AMIt may be “hardly news” to you, Sammy. But it’s important to note nonetheless.
Not least when it comes on the back of the deputy First Minister’s contrasting view of current events - nevermind Gerry Adams’ statement about his own view of the chances of a military success.
The importance lies in, as the link I added states, “the first step [towards a benign union of minds and hearts] is to act with good authority by telling the truth to your own tribe”
Posted by on Nov 12, 2007 @ 12:49 AMThe honour given by Republicans to their dead requires neither explaination nor vindication nor would it be meet to attempt some twisted ahistorical analysis of the motivation or strategy of the fallen of former days at the time of such commemoration.
Sammy Morse has expressed the grace and broader humanity of one who recognises that. It is a sad shame that there are some who apparently are deficient in such grace.
Posted by on Nov 12, 2007 @ 01:05 AMKisdo
Is your head up your ass? The IRA had a popular mandate in the 1950s? You must be joking. Read the propaganda of modern SF, - their forefathers were ‘incompetent, ultra catholic and out of touch’. If you want proof don’t go further than the writings of the SF leader!Posted by on Nov 12, 2007 @ 01:06 AMYeah, Rory, nevermind about hypocrisy from public representatives.. no doubt Trotsky wouldn’t care either..
Posted by on Nov 12, 2007 @ 01:27 AM“The importance lies in, as the link I added states, “the first step [towards a benign union of minds and hearts] is to act with good authority by telling the truth to your own tribe””
What did Adams say that is untrue, in the strictest sense? Those men certainly acted consistently with the Republican past; the border campaign does feed into Republican mythology: evidenced by the fact it’s being commemorated now. You differ on whether it was a good thing or not; but what’s new?
Moreover, if you actually read the quote you make with regards to “no military solution possible”, Adams prefaces it with “By the mid to late seventies....” and goes onto to say that he thought “armed struggle” was a defensible position. If you really wanted to make a point, there are comments on dissident Republicans on the very same page you link to.
I am sure there a number of lessons Adams could elucidate on the efficacy of violence or otherwise. I don’t think a Republican commemoration is the time or the place for it; nor would the audience by particularly receptive to hearing it.
Personally, the strength of the condemnation of the Paul Quinn murder was what caught my eye most of all on that. Then again, I’m sure you could pull out about 50 red links showing how the inconsistency of this. And it’d be equally futile.
Posted by on Nov 12, 2007 @ 01:37 AM“I am sure there a number of lessons Adams could elucidate on the efficacy of violence or otherwise. I don’t think a Republican commemoration is the time or the place for it; nor would the audience by particularly receptive to hearing it.”
No shit, Sherlock.
Kinda the point though.
Posted by on Nov 12, 2007 @ 01:43 AM“No shit, Sherlock.
Kinda the point though. “
No, it’s you missing it. We have got where we are because Adams and co didn’t pick a Republican rallies to go “You know what lads, this is all fucking horseshit”, because if they had, they wouldn’t have held their position very long, and even if they had held on, one would have listened. I know you have the whole righteous voice of truth schtick going on there, but really, I don’t think we’d be here, flawed as it is, if they have adopted it.
I doubt we’ll ever hear Adams come out with the type of rhetoric you’d like. But I think the SF leadership is still continuing a slow drift away from the violent past, and continuing to try and take people with them: the apology to Colin Parry, however inadequate you feel it, is evidence of that.
Posted by on Nov 12, 2007 @ 01:53 AM“We have got where we are because Adams and co didn’t pick a Republican rallies to go “You know what lads, this is all fucking horseshit”, because if they had, they wouldn’t have held their position very long, and even if they had held on, one would have listened.”
So, Adams was sort of like a trainer who tamed a pack of bloodthirty animals intent of killing all and sundry? How does that fit in with the mythology of Provisionals being learned scholars amd nobel martyrs?
Adams can’t tell the truth to the nationalists of the Provos were really all about because that would put the nationalists who voted for them as well as his party cohorts into a very embarrassing position, wouldn’t it? Instead, Adams keep his mushrooms in the dark and feeds them bullshit - they all like it that way.
Posted by on Nov 12, 2007 @ 02:07 AM
