Tuesday, October 30, 2007
“to search for appropriate wording..”
It’s not clear from either this report or this one who has actually appointed them, presumably the Council, but a trio of supernaturalists, led by former Presbyterian moderator the Rev John Dunlop, are to “search for appropriate wording on a shrine to the victims of the Real IRA attack [in Omagh] in 1998.” Omagh Council has been wrangling over the proposed wording on the memorial stone for some time - as the minutes from November 2006 indicate. [Not so with other memorials - Ed] But perhaps the Council could explain what problem they have with the wording mentioned in this November 2006 BBC report
The words proposed [by relatives of the victims] for the monument were to read: “To honour and remember 31 people murdered and hundreds injured from three nations by a dissident republican terrorist car bomb.”
It’s also worth noting that the November 2006 report also quotes Sinn Féin Cllr Sean Clarke, “Omagh council has unanimously agreed to unveil a memorial stone in 2008, to mark the 10th anniversary of the tragedy and the council has also unanimously agreed the wording of the inscription.”
Has anyone seen that “unanimously agreed” wording?
Pete Baker @ 02:04 PM
Pete,
Are you using supernaturalists because you consider it more expositional of the absurdity of belief than say theist? Have noticed it a few times now, and was just wondering.
Posted by on Oct 30, 2007 @ 04:03 PMThere was disagreement last month between the Omagh Memorial Working Group and the realatives’ Omagh Support and Self Help Group over the best way to go forwards with the wording:
http://breaking.tcm.ie/archives/?c=IRELAND&jp=mhcwidmheykf&d=2007-09-18
Perhaps the three churchmen are a compromise. I do not know. I find the term “supernaturalist” a distraction from the main issue. If you are seeking impartiality, perhaps referring them as Coommunity Leaders to whom grieving survivors rightly or wrongly turn to when those they love best are unexpectedly incinerated or maimed for life would suffice.
Posted by on Oct 30, 2007 @ 04:32 PM“Cosmo Baker was rescued by the supernaturalists, a small team of three that hunt paranormal creatures ...”
Get over yourself, Pete, and keep your eye on the ball!
John Dunlop, Brian Lennon and Olive Hobson are the ‘gang of three’.
“the Head of Arts and Tourism advised that Omagh Support and Self Help Group (OSSHG) had taken a decision to withdraw from the process ...
The Head of Arts and Tourism advised that it was essential engagement took place with the bereaved, the injured and traumatised and the wider community in regard to this issue and that Omagh Memorial Working Group had recommended that this be taken forward by an independent facilitator.” ODC minutes 12 September 2007
Posted by on Oct 30, 2007 @ 04:39 PMUmmm…I know I’m the newbie here…and I know I risk the flames of Hell for this next bit, but ummm…930 people lost their jobs yesterday.
And we’re posting in about what, exactly…?
Sorry - I obviously need some perspective re-alignment here…my bad…
Posted by on Oct 30, 2007 @ 05:26 PMIt would be a distraction to focus on my use of supernaturalists - which shouldn’t be a surprising use by the way, usually I also link back to this post.
To the ball, then.
OSSHG have been very clear about why they have withdrawn from the process - also linked in the original post.
And it’s also worth noting that no-one has appeared from any quarter, except the OSSHG, to explain what their problem with any proposed wording actually is.
Posted by on Oct 30, 2007 @ 05:26 PMI think the relative’s choice of wording is fine,they could probably save a few quid on the engraving by omitting the word “dissident” given the obvious desire of sinn fein councillors in omagh to have it changed
Posted by on Oct 30, 2007 @ 05:34 PMUmmm…I know I’m the newbie here…and I know I risk the flames of Hell for this next bit, but ummm…930 people lost their jobs yesterday.
And we’re posting in about what, exactly…?
Sorry - I obviously need some perspective re-alignment here…my bad…
Posted by The Raven on Oct 30, 2007 @ 07:26 PMAh but where’s the cheap laughs in that Raven?
About time Slugger had an economics correspondent.
Posted by on Oct 30, 2007 @ 05:39 PMSorry, an economics blogger.
Posted by on Oct 30, 2007 @ 05:40 PMSurely it is perfectly reasonable to have a thread on this as it was featured on utv news
Posted by on Oct 30, 2007 @ 05:44 PMveritas
Of course it’s perfectly reasonable to have a thread on this. The thing is, what’s a bigger story in the scheme of things?
The inscription on a memorial, or 930 people losing their jobs in our already under-populated private sector?
Especially given that it happened in one of the less prosperous areas of the province.
Posted by on Oct 30, 2007 @ 05:48 PM“With regard to the wording outlined last week, the Chief Executive advised that the specific wording used had never been submitted to the Council or the Memorial Working Group and added that it had been inscribed on a stone in the Memorial Garden without the Council’s approval being sought…
Councillors Shields and Rainey spoke of occasions when other victims of the Omagh Bomb had advised them that the OSSHG did not represent their views therefore members felt it important that consensus on the memorial needed to be more wide ranging that just meeting the wishes of the support group. Councillor Donnelly expressed the view that the Council had played a leadership role and had given a commitment to follow an open transparent process which he felt should continue with the Council speaking with a corporate voice on the issue.” ODC November minutes
Posted by on Oct 30, 2007 @ 05:51 PMThere is no reason why a jobs thread shouldn’t be opened ,but I guess that is up to the admin people on the site.point is omagh council are looking like dicks on this.
Posted by on Oct 30, 2007 @ 06:05 PMJobs? I said economics. Not exactly the same thing you know…
Posted by on Oct 30, 2007 @ 06:06 PMWhy are we concerned about what the Council think of the wording?
Surely the relatives of those killed and injured can decide what they want on the memorial.
The Council should not have the last say!Posted by on Oct 30, 2007 @ 06:17 PMSorry - I really didn’t mean to start any dispute on this - truth be told, I was pretty disappointed to come in yesterday and note that there was not even a mention of the Seagate issue on the site.
No disrespect to those to whom this memorial is important, or to the serious nature of the issue from which it stems.
Posted by on Oct 30, 2007 @ 06:22 PMNevin
A few quick points.
The quoted minutes are from November 2006.
“spoke of occasions” - i.e. not necessarily on this particular occasion.
“with the Council speaking with a corporate voice on the issue.” - i.e. the Chief Executive playing a straight bat, not the councillors answering specific questions about their position on the wording.
Posted by on Oct 30, 2007 @ 06:28 PMThe Ravem is totally right about the need for a Seagate debate, particularly after the programme for government job targets. But he’s also right this isn’t the place for it. Nor perhaps for my first post, on reflection. Pete any chance you could respond to the demands of the audience as you seem to be around?
Posted by on Oct 30, 2007 @ 06:37 PMVictims’ families believe the Sinn Fein-dominated Omagh District Council objects to the words “dissident republican car bomb” on a memorial plaque, but Mr Rush said he was opposed to any sort of shrine.
“I don’t want to be confronted with the death of my wife, I don’t see there is anything to be gained from that,” he said.
“There are other things that the money could be spent on, a bursary or a scholarship that would be of benefit to the children of the future rather than a monument.
“I have my monument, my monument is my three children and grandchildren and in the cemetery. If we put one in Omagh it could be vandalised.” Belfast Telegraph 30/10/2007
Posted by on Oct 30, 2007 @ 07:40 PMNevin
That’s not evidence of opposition to the wording.
It’s opposition to any memorial in Omagh.
and I see Omagh Council’s Chief Executive, who’s also chair of the Omagh Memorial Working Group, has been put into bat again..
Posted by on Oct 30, 2007 @ 08:01 PMFirst of all I don’t see why the council should have any role in this other than rubber-stamping the relatives wishes.
Omagh was the worst atrocity of the ‘conflict’ and should be commemerated in whatever way the bereaved see fit.The wording is in any case not remotely contentious unless you happen to be associated with a terrorist group beheld of the notion that blowing up town centres was somehow going to free Ireland. Fortunately the majority of republicans have belatedly realised the futility of the ‘armed struggle’ and should therefore have no problem acknowleding the expressed wishes of some of their victims.
As for Pete’s ‘supernaturalist’ comment, I couldn’t agree more Pete, but it does slightly detract from the subject matter.
And yes Raven, Seagate does deserve a thread, but job losses cannot in any way be compared with the senseless loss of life in Omagh. The relatives have been shabbily treated from day one, not least in the dismal failure of the powers that be to secure any meaningful convictions and the sickeningly immoral attitude of the republican movement as a whole on the issue.
The very least these people can expect is a memorial on their own terms.Posted by on Oct 30, 2007 @ 09:34 PMI refer the Honorable Member for Cuba to the answer I gave some moments ago.
“No disrespect to those to whom this memorial is important, or to the serious nature of the issue from which it stems.”
Posted by on Oct 30, 2007 @ 10:05 PM*they could probably save a few quid on the engraving by omitting the word “dissident”*
My thoughts exactly.
Posted by on Oct 30, 2007 @ 10:25 PMPete, reading your posts makes me want to burn my eyes out with a white hot poker.
Not only is the subject of your posts boring, they are also just badly written. Boring.
Posted by on Oct 31, 2007 @ 12:44 AMWent to the doctors the other day, told him “Everytime I poke my finger into my eye it hurts”, he told me “Well dont do it anymore”... Why didnt I think of that?
Posted by on Oct 31, 2007 @ 01:23 AM“also just badly written”
Posted by on Oct 31, 2007 @ 01:40 AM
