A quiet amen for things that will surely come to pass…

Anthony McIntyre’s with his account of polling day in Ballymurphy… he sees a new definition of Paisleyites, which includes Sinn Fein…

  • Talk about being a sore loser.

  • Irish Republican in America

    I agree Sammy!

  • Zorba the Greek

    Why did Mr McIntyre bother walking to a polling station to cast a vote in an election organised to bolster the State? By partaking in the election, he is acknowledging the fact that Stormont – the shambles that it is – is a legitimate entity. I mean Gerry’s MPs, et al, do not – IN THEORY – recognise Westminster’s right to govern Ireland ….. yet. Cat calling the kettle black to me in calling the Sinners PSNI supporters.

  • Terry Doherty

    God love Mackers. If only more than 423 people in West Belfast were as intelligent as him Geraldine Taylor would have romped home and the evil Shinners would have got their comeuppence. Then again, maybe the voters in West Belfast are smart enough, and can do without Mackers rubbish.

  • URQUHART

    The instant rush to slag off McIntyre shouldn’t surprise but it still disappoints.

    It’s a good article from someone whose analysis has proved to be pretty accurate. His politics have no attraction for me, but he deserves to be recognised as one of the few voices to understand and describe what has happened in the provisional movement.

  • Mick Fealty

    Don’t any of you guys do irony?

  • heck

    what’s this crap about playing the ball not the man?

  • URQUHART

    Mick: “Don’t any of you guys do irony?”

    Not unless told to.

  • heck wrote “what’s this crap about playing the ball not the man? ”

    that Slugger rule applies only to Irish Thames reports and their journos.

    right Mick ?

  • Indeed heck. I had thought about titling this “Sinn Fein don’t do irony, but if they did…”, but I thought it might not have gone down too well…

    Given the first few responses, maybe I should have… Now anyone want to talk about what he actually said?

    annon,

    There are a few annonymous trolls who are more than prepared to use the freedom Slugger affords them as a license to attack others in this personal manner. If you see it, let me know!!

  • Joe

    An “Irish Republican in America”….the worst sort of political “long rifle”. Pass me the bucket

  • Greenflag

    The mention of Clement Freud brings back the former Liberal MP and gourmet dog food gastronom who admitted being somewhat peeved while on a political trip to the former USSR in the company of Winston Churchill’s grandson . The bould Clement took justifiable umbrage at the fact that the Reds were paying more attention to Churchill who was always getting the best rooms /service etc etc wherever they stayed . Putting on his most morose and mournfaul visage Clement asked one of the local commissars why Churchill was getting preferential treatment -after all wasn’t the Soviet Union a communist country ?

    The Commissar’s reply was that the special treatment was on account of Churchill’s grandfather . Clement quipped that this was the only time in his life that he had been ‘outgrandfathered ‘ 🙂

    McIntyre is obviously peeved at the voters — the bastards !

    What was he thinking ? Despite the media gloating over SF votes being whittled away by the ultras -SF voters displayed their discipline to such a degree that even FF stalwart tallymen confess admiration !

    Mackers should refer to George Orwell’s Animal Farm for political guidance at this time . Both sets of ‘pigs’ DUP and SF have got their snouts lined up at the trough . Political principles have been left behind as the Gaderenes rush to grab whatever they can before Mr Hain puts a lid on the only gravy train left in town/

    Ye see Mackers – beggars can’t be choosers.

    It’s politics for Chrissake – Beats gunfire any day of the week No ?

  • Garibaldy

    Mick,

    I see other irony in this story. We have MacIntyre, a former member of the Provos while it was carrying out nakedly sectarian killings on a regular basis, complaining about PSF buying into sectarianism. Then we have him voting for an organisation that he says he doesn’t support instead of a candidate he says he does because, apparently RSF are republican. And of course there is ample proof of their commitment to the unity of Protestant, Catholic and Dissenter, most blatantly of late during the riots in Dublin.
    The same edition of the Blanket has a story from Tommy Gorman complaining about the difference between the Provos and Tone.

    It would be ironic of it wasn’t tragic and if muddled and idiotic thinking like this among the people who now congregate in the Blanket’s circles hadn’t resulted in so many deaths and the people of Ireland being more divided than ever. It seems PSF aren’t the only ones who don’t do irony.

  • SuperSoupy

    Seems someone is using Republicanism as a comfort Blanket as he crawls into bed with the physical force dinosaurs of RSF and looks out his window to see the world has moved on without them.

    At least there wasn’t enough people who did what Mackers did for RSF to claim a mandate for their violence.

  • Spinster

    The policemen were not ALL born in Britain surely?

  • Yokel

    I hear Americans don’t do irony.

  • belfastwhite

    The blanket and Mr McIntyre has been very quiet recently regarding the recent brutal double murders in Ardoyne and Bog Meadows. The silence is deafening! Does anyone see the irony in that?

  • Mick Fealty

    The Blanket is a fortnightly magazine, the latest issue only came out on Wednesday. Are suggesting they should have had a detailed article on a murder that no one (officially) still has a clear lead on it (the PSNI are being noticeably coy).

    Aren’t you putting 2 and 2 together and getting something that isn’t 4?

  • Aaron McDaid

    There is an assumption by some on this thread, that those who use/advocate physical force are automatically more sectarian than those who don’t. This assumption is false. Now, of course, there are many sectarian people through NI in all walks of life and in all sorts of movements, but they can’t be as easily pigeonholed as you might think.

    Some seemingly nice and sensible people have prejudice and hatred when you scratch the surface, and many of those who took up arms didn’t have a sectarian bone in their body. The least controversial example of the latter might be the average British Army soldier.

    McIntyre’s article stands or falls on its own merits and cannot be dismissed just by referring to his criticisms of the Provisionals. Isn’t there something ironic about some unionists denouncing those who criticize PSF – surely it should be the other way around!?

    Anyway, back to the article itself. He mentions how SF will latch on the Celtic football club bandwagon. I agree with him that this is not what an anti-sectarian party should do. I went to a Celtic match once and will not go again – I was disgusted with the conversation from most of the crowd and felt the tricolour was being dishonoured by being flown in that environment. So McIntyre does have a point about sectarianism. I want a pro-policing anti-sectarian republican party.

  • belfastwhite

    “Aren’t you putting 2 and 2 together and getting something that isn’t 4?”

    That wouldn’t be something you would do Mick I seem to remember you claiming the IRA must have been behind the Northern Bank because it happened “on their turf” and not to mention your pre election rant regarding the SDLP canvass in Upper Andersonstown! Glass houses and Stones comes to mind.

  • Mick Fealty

    bw,

    I have never once said they actually did it. The closest I got was when I said they were suspects because they were closest the cookie jar. Is this the rant you’re talking about?

    I don’t mind being taken to task for anything I have written, but I take exception to being called on things I haven’t.

  • Belfastwhite

    Mick

    I have never once said they actually did it. The closest I got was when I said they were suspects because they were closest the cookie jar.

    Touche! If you read my post I pass no blame it is you who come up with putting two and two scenario.

    I don’t mind being taken to task for anything I have written, but I take exception to being called on things I haven’t

    You did pass a remark which I well remember saying that the IRA were suspects because the raid happened on their watch (Poleglass being a republican area). I pointed this out to you at the time.

    Is this the rant you’re talking about?

    Yes Mick IMHO the intro to that thread painted a very disparaging picture of what was actually happening on the ground. Off course the actual election results told the true story.

  • Roisin

    [i]Given the first few responses, maybe I should have… Now anyone want to talk about what he actually said? — Mick Fealty[/i]

    Sure. It’s moribund. McIntyre lectures on what I suspect most could figure out for themselves, long before he gave himself kudos for figuring out on their behalf.

    Provisional Irish Republicanism isn’t much different than any other version of Irish republicanism. It is first and foremost Irish nationalism, with republicanism being the form of government desired.

    The northern franchise cannot be the same as the rest, because, to state the bleeding obvious, it consists of two diametrically opposed populations.

    The question is whether to end British jurisdiction before bringing about Irish unity and a republican form of government; or to bring about Irish unity (in two forms, unity of the two parts of the northern population, and north-south) before ending British jurisdiction, or partially at least.

    McIntyre, and his coterie of true republicans, can heckle from the sidelines all they want. They have offered no alternative political strategy, and, moreover, they spat the dummy and threw the rattle out of the cot when they walked out. And now they’re pissed off that those they showed their backs to, pay them no mind when they indulge themselves with their political true-republican-elite rants reminiscent of two year olds throwing tantrums wondering why the grown-ups are ignoring them.

    Does that answer your question, Mick?

  • Middle Class Mark

    Roisin, I am very interested in this. It sounds just like what the Workers Party have always said about the Provisionals.

    “Provisional Irish Republicanism isn’t much different than any other version of Irish republicanism. It is first and foremost Irish nationalism, with republicanism being the form of government desired.
    The question is whether to end British jurisdiction before bringing about Irish unity and a republican form of government; or to bring about Irish unity (in two forms, unity of the two parts of the northern population, and north-south) before ending British jurisdiction, or partially at least.”

  • Nevin

    “Provisional Irish Republicanism isn’t much different than any other version of Irish republicanism.”

    Roisin, I thought all Irish nationalist organisations subscribed to a republican form of government. The SF parapoliticans subscribe to the notion that their Army Council is the legitimate government of Ireland and the organisation to which they belong indulges in exiling, barbaric justice and numerous other expressions of criminality. And they have the gall to demand that others respect their mandate ….

  • ahh nevin

    At the end of the day, any party is what their constituents want them to be. Given the dictionary definition of “republicanism”, how many republican parties around the world adhere to so-called “republican principles”? All politics are fluid. Most people realise that. My opinion, Mick and Nevin, McIntyre isn’t doing irony let alone offering an alternative “solution”, Roisin, he’s doing what he’s always done…WAH WAH WAH. He needs to deal with his past and then, maybe he’ll find his future.

  • kensei

    “And they have the gall to demand that others respect their mandate ….”

    Wait a second!? Are you saying that SF campaigned on the fact that the Army Council was the legitimate government of Ireland? Did they state that other parties were voted onto the Army Council? Did they demand that it was the “Army Council” mandate that had to be respected. Appreciate if you could link to the relevant bits of the manifesto, recent media interviews and the like.

  • Roisin

    Middle Class Mark,

    [i]Roisin, I am very interested in this. It sounds just like what the Workers Party have always said about the Provisionals.[/i]

    Dunno, I’m still trying to figure out if you’re being sarcastic or not. 🙂

  • Middle Class Mark

    It has a touch of deja vu to it Roisin. Just read back over the Workers Party criticism of the Provisionals and it is the same point you make.

  • Roisin

    MC Mark,

    Do you have a link to what you were reading?

  • Middle Class Mark

    Roisin, it must be years since I looked at anything by the Workers Party – some of it from before the internet came into being. It used to be their run of the mill criticism. That’s why I made the initial suggestion to you. It just sounded funny seeing the same type of point being made again.

  • Roisin

    Mark, thanks, I was wondering because I don’t think I’ve read anything by them. It doesn’t seem to me like there’s anything unique or profound in it, it’s something I imagine many people will have thought about over many years, including people who would have been provisionals.

    Someone can have the ‘right’ analysis, but it doesn’t amount to a hill of beans if the timing isn’t ‘right’, and the target audience isn’t there yet.

    Sorry not sure how to explain that any better.

  • Middle Class Mark

    Roisin, you made a good point in raising it earlier in the thread.

    ‘It doesn’t seem to me like there’s anything unique or profound in it, it’s something I imagine many people will have thought about over many years, including people who would have been provisionals’

    The Provisionals were the one group who actually disputed it. They hated being called nationalists if it was not emphasised enough that they were republican. The nationalist thing became much more prominent during the late 1980s. The Provisionals were also scathing of the Workers Party idea that the issues within the North need to be resolved before the country could be united. They rejected in its entirity the idea that unity within the North was essential before unity in the country could be achieved. They rubbished the Workers Party advocacy on this as the stages theory.

  • Roisin

    Probably because it’s not essential for unity within the north before reunification.

  • Middle Class Mark

    Roisin, in that context what would this meean?

    The question is whether to end British jurisdiction before bringing about Irish unity and a republican form of government; or to bring about Irish unity (in two forms, unity of the two parts of the northern population, and north-south) before ending British jurisdiction, or partially at least.

  • Roisin

    Mark,

    Sorry for the delay in replying, this had slipped way down the board.

    In that context (I’m assuming you’re talking of the context today, but if not let me know what the context you mean is) it’s not essential for a majority on both sides to see eye to eye before reunification. But irrespective of the numbers game, there’s certainly no harm, and quite a lot of good, in both sides working together, as this in itself should help resolve some differences and perceptions that each have of the other.