David Ervine gives a lengthy interview to the Press Association, in which he outlines the feelings of those loyalist paramilitaries who have by and large keep to the ceasefire and remained onside with the Belfast Agreement. He raises a particularly interesting question:
The police press office will tell you if there is an incident such as the attacks on District Policing Partnership members in Strabane it is an action by dissident republicans. Why do they not define dissident loyalists? Why is there a distinction between a republican who, we hope, is trying to offer hope for the future and one who is not? And why is that same luxury not afforded to loyalists?
When they define a scumbag loyalist, they need to be more definitive. Is a loyalist just a paramilitary or are the people around my office in my constituency who have never done anybody any harm in their lives loyalists? Why the broad brush stroke approach to what a loyalist may do?
Mick is founding editor of Slugger. He has written papers on the impacts of the Internet on politics and the wider media and is a regular guest and speaking events across Ireland, the UK and Europe. Twitter: @MickFealty
Discover more from Slugger O'Toole
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
