Navigation

Tit for Tat attacks in Maghera

on 8 June 2006 , 1:43 pm 22 | 36 views

Two Orange Halls and two PIRA/INLA memorials have been attacked in Maghera in recent weeks. Last night, the PSNI seized a cahe of petrol and paint bombs.

  • Yokel

    They are a real wee bitter bunch around Maghera..they obviously all think they are still fighting at the frontline of some war…

  • aquifer

    Since all this is drearily predictable, how come the PSNI don’t have the targets wired up to CCTV to catch a few offenders.

    We need some convictions and deterrent custodial sentences. Otherwise we are fated to endure this self-indulgent sectarian crap for ever.

    Same goes for race hate attacks.

  • Yokel

    Because CCTV will be ruled as being an anti-loyalist or anti-republican plot even if an even number of CCTV systems are used, the positioning will be considered more provocative.

    Remarkably enough a lot of people, even on this very forum would believe and support that type of complaining bollocks as well.

    Northern Ireland, lovely place, pity about the people…

  • fair_deal

    CCTV is probably better suited to urban rather than rural contexts. Also the PSNI may find itself on dodgy ground providing CCTV protection for signage of questionable legality.

  • reality check

    maghera has always been a bitter town.remember the hostile welcome which was prepared for the civil rights march in 1969?

  • Yokel

    Realty Check,of course your comment wasn’t influenced by your own core bitterness…

  • Steve

    Which if the attacks happined first, which side was provoked into attacking the other??

  • fair_deal

    “Which if the attacks happined first, which side was provoked into attacking the other??”

    It doesn’t matter.

  • Yokel

    Well done Steve, you’ll fit in nicely….

  • Steve, very relevant point and one that I was wondering myself.

    fair_deal on Jun 08, 2006 @ 12:59 PM wrote “It doesn’t matter.” And earlier wrote “… providing CCTV protection for signage of questionable legality.” Then there was …” Well done Steve, you’ll fit in nicely…. “ from Yokel.

    …from this I surmise that the memorials were attacked first and subsequently the Orange halls.

  • fair_deal

    Steve you have found a friend in anonymous

  • fair_deal on Jun 08, 2006 @ 03:02 PM wrote “Steve you have found a friend in anonymous”

    not necessarily; I was just guess based on the blatent dodging that you and Yokel (representing unionist/lotalists) did on the question about the chronology of the attacks. So while I have you online…can you please let me know which came first (chicken or the egg).

    You’ll note that I don’t offer opinion of the attacks but a guess at the timings based on the non-answers.

  • reality check

    no yokel, what happened in maghera in 1969 wasn’t influenced by loyalist’s own core bitterness was it?

  • Rory

    The question of “Who struck the first blow” matters very much indeed. Anyone- teacher, parent or acting in loco parentis is aware of this and experience soon shows that the one who did will usually lie and go on to continue to strike blows and earn a reputation as the school bully. He also usually surrounds himself with other cowardly boys of weak character and invariably drifts into low criminality.

    It is a common pattern for pro-unionist supporters (indeed especially those of outward liberal sensibilities) to constantly look for “tit-for-tattism” to excuse loyalist excess. This behaviour is understandable for the embarrassment factor but it is not helpful. Unionism must come to grips with its present day demons for any progress to be made. This requires courage (and some of that good ol’ “moral fibre” again) but, there you go, sometimes life is hard.

  • DK

    Steve asked “Which if the attacks happined first, which side was provoked into attacking the other??”

    Well Steve, to answer your question I believe we have to go back to 1169 and the Norman invasion…..although I think that we should really state that this was provoked by events in 1152 when Dervorgilla, the wife of Tighernan O’Ruarc king of Breffni and East Meath, ran off with Diarmuid Mac Murchada the king of Leinster…

  • darth rumsfeld

    oh no DK,you must go back to the Celts displacing the Cruthin :0)

  • fair_deal

    Anonymous

    “blatent dodging”

    Eyes roll. Simply not knowing is not dodging. I am in possession in the same information as you from the above BBC piece.

  • DK

    Darth,

    Well, who did the Cruthin displace – and I’m sure they provoked the Celts in some way. Maybe they put flags up outside their huts or something (did they have to invent the flag first?). In any case, it was probably the Brits fault. Cuchulainn was a securocrat.

  • less of the “Eyes roll”. If you didn’t know then say you don’t but will look into it…or both sides are stupid eejits regardless. Don’t write “It doesn’t matter.” and precede this with “… providing CCTV protection for signage of questionable legality” which implies responsibility for the trouble on the nationalist / republican side.

    Don’t we all know that perceptions and level playing fields are very important in NI ?!?

    “Simply not knowing is not dodging.” agreed. But simply adding your favoured opinion or avoiding an unfavourable conclusion is dodging.

    You’d make a good Shinner with your swerves and manipulation of the mejjia !?!?

  • fair_deal

    Another one looking for hidden messages. You link two quotes that were replies to two two different and un-related posts.

    “both sides are stupid eejits regardless. Don’t write “It doesn’t matter.”

    1. I personally think “it doesn’t matter” what was hit first is a perfect response to someone wanting to play a blame game. It is a pointless road as DK exemplified.
    2. I have no intention of spending time applying semiotics to individual or combined posts.
    3. I can write what I damn well please.

    “If you didn’t know then say you don’t but will look into it”

    1. Sorry to disappoint but I am not at your beck and call.
    2. If it is such a matter of importance to you, you might be interested enough to go and find out yourself.

    “which implies responsibility for the trouble on the nationalist / republican side.”

    1. A poster thought CCTV was a possible solution to tackle these attacks. I pointed out two practical problems. Nothing more or less. Responsibility for attacks was neither applied explicitly or implicitly to anyone.
    2. The report outlines what has been attacked. The Orange Order is not a proscribed organisation and its two properties, legal structures (planning permission etc). The IRA/INLA are proscribed organisations. The memorials may be in breach of planning laws (depending on their structure) and possible breaches of the new glorification of terrorism laws. Hence “questionable legality”.

    “your swerves and manipulation of the mejjia”

    The introductory line is a clear statement of fact based on the BBC piece. The fact that property identified with both communities have been attacked makes tit for tat a legitimate description. No swerve or manipulation involved.

  • Another one justifying a hierarchy in attacks.

    “It is a pointless road as DK exemplified. “ not in my opinion nor that of Rory @ 03:15 PM. Sorry if varied opinions on this site get up your nose but, hey, that’s life. While ‘he hit me first’ is childish and play-ground-ish it would be informative to know what initiated the present hostilities written by the Beeb. There has been many articles written over the last few months about sectarian attacks not being a case of one side is as bad as the other. Many nationalist journos has written that the killings (espec the child killings of Lisa Dorrian, Mickey-bo and the one in NBelfast) over the last few years seem one-sided as indeed are the cases of Holy Cross, Harryville and the Carmoney Graves (few opposing incidences).

    “ I have no intention of spending time applying semiotics to individual or combined posts. ‘ indeed I’ve always noticed that your postings are purely one side and don’t make the slightest attempt to include a modicum of level playing field which might be expected on such a noted blog. This is the basis of my GUESS that the attacks were initiated by the loyalist side as I always get the impression that you rush to defend orange rather than see the underlying / true cause of tensions and problems.

    “I can write what I damn well please.” You can and do. “ … I am not at your beck and call” I never thought you were although I alluded to the possibly that you might, as a Slug Core Team Blogger initiate some semblance of fairness to your postings.

    “ …go and find out yourself.” Agreed, I should and if I get the chance I will (assuming the boss doesn’t expect me to be productive at my desk)

    “…I pointed out two practical problems. Nothing more or less.” No, not at all. You pointed out one practical reason and voiced your opinion on the legality of a republic memorial. One of the basis’ for my posting. Again, you are more than welcome to voice your opinion (I think that’s the joys of posting at Slug) but please don’t camouflage your loyalist opinion as a ‘practical issue’. I also wanted to highlight that as a Slug Core Team you were merging opinion with the facts of the issue.

    “Responsibility for attacks was neither applied explicitly or implicitly to anyone.” I think you did imply that one side was more deserving of attack (or should that read, less deserving of condemnation) than the other by implying that one attack was against something less than judicially approved. Hence my neat swerve compliment.

    “The Orange Order is not a proscribed organisation …. Hence “questionable legality”.
    I think these are moot points when one should be looking to defuse a situation rather than the opposite. Quid pro quo, anyone should be able to stroll up the Shankill and trash a UVF mural (assumig no plan permission)? Not a good idea. Therefore if the same were to be applied to the present subject…? In NI society attacking a sub-legal memorial isn’t the best way of going about things. I think you might be less obvious in speaking of a sub-legal memorial. Just my opinion, ya know like.

    “your swerves and manipulation of the mejjia” referred to my claim of your ‘less deserving of condemnation’ implications

  • fair_deal

    1. Slugger core bloggers work too.
    2. If you could base your view on what I actually say it would be fair enough but as it is what you think I think it disappears into conspiracy and stereotyping.