McDaid killing: Shadow of Robert Hamill murder looms ever larger with explosive new claims

The Sunday World’s front page today carries allegations that a serving PSNI officer goaded loyalists about the presence of Irish Tricolours in the nationalist Heights area of Coleraine ahead of the violent loyalist attack which killed one catholic man, Kevin McDaid, and has left another fighting for his life.
The alleged text message read: THE TRICOLOURS ARE STILL UP IN THE TOWN- ARE YIS REAL MEN OR WHAT?
The paper further alleges that PSNI officers stood chatting with loyalists in the Scotts Bar area prior to the attack, with some PSNI officers goading the loyalists about the presence of tricolours.
Prior to these revelations, the PSNI were already in the dock for their handling of this killing. These new claims will not only serve to heap more pressure on the PSNI, it will also strengthen the dissident republican narrative that the PSNI remain a deeply partisan, sectarian force and immediately recall the actions of RUC officers during and in the aftermath of the murder of Robert Hamill in Portadown.
In this regard, the role of nationalist politicians in the coming period will be crucial. It will be extremely important for them to provide strong leadership in holding the PSNI to account at the highest level for the persistence of what appears to be a pervasive sectarian mentality within the police service at a local level within Coleraine.
I have already listed a number of questions which must be addressed by the Police Ombudsman in relation to this killing in a previous thread. Naturally, with these allegations there are a number of new questions which instantly arise regarding the name and rank of the PSNI officer concerned, but also his role in events on the day. Furthermore, the revelations also confirm suspicions raised about why the PSNI did not simply inform loyalists threatening violence on a predominantly nationalist community due to the presence of a couple of flags that they would not be permitted to invade the area and inflict such violence and could be arrested for making threats with such implications: clearly, a number of the PSNI officers shared the same objective as the murderous loyalists.

  • Driftwood

    Paul Kielty
    For almost a year, the UK was alone in the fight against Nazism. Churchill, despite your anti-British hatred, seen through the Nazi regime (supported by De Valera).
    I suggest you watch the episode from ‘The World at War’- Britain Alone. Then confront your own prejudices. If that’s possible.

  • Paul,

    Yes, you stated that we had a classic colonial situation. However, you’ve been very light on the detail of what that actually means. And any evidence that there are other ways of looking at the situation, or that there might be more than one version of colonialism or imperialism over the course of one thousand years is apparently mere pedantry.

    Well it seems that the leaders and movements that successfully fought against imperialism (and some that lost) in the C20th disagreed with you as they had several different definitions of what it was, most based on the work by Lenin I mentioned earlier. Hence there ability to defeat it, allied to the support provided by the anti-imperialist forces of the USSR and the socialist countries. But maybe where they went wrong was in not looking at how the Normans did things in Ireland, instead of looking at their own conditions.

    I’ll ask you again. What makes this a simple and straightforward colonial situation?

    How would you describe the southern state by the way since its inception?

    And you might find that some within the CPI have a vision closer to yours than you think.

  • Driftwood,

    How did Dev support the Nazis? Give details. I’ve already provided evidence of how he facilitated the allied war effort while not doing the same for the Nazis. So far you’ve come up with obeying diplomatic nicieties on the death of a head of state, and accusations that no historian and no reasonable person believes about submarines, and for which there is no evidence.

    As for this year alone. That would be – with the exception of the air war – the period known as the phony war right?

  • Driftwood

    obeying diplomatic nicieties on the death of a head of state

    How many other democracies followed suit here on the death of Hitler, who you admirably refer to as a head of state.As if it was the PM of Luxembourg. And what was the western response to the death of General Franco? Excluding the RoI.
    get a grip Garibaldy, De Valera knew that he and his ‘people’ preferred Hitler to that nasty man Churchill.
    So it goes….

  • So one visit versus lots of officers released back to join the allied war effort? What else have you got? Because judging on the evidence, it appears you are defying logic here.

    I think we can safely say that there were people who preferred the Germans to the British. There were also people who preferred the British. As the relative recruitment rates might hint. Equally, there is no question that people in the south liked the Americans almost universally.

    Was Hitler or was he not head of state? Perhaps we can ask the English football team instructed to give him the Nazi salute by the British government?

    As for Franco. How did the democratically-elected government get on when it approached the democracies Britain and France for help, or even to sell them weapons? Where was the high-mindedness when it mattered? And how did Pincohet get on with the British government while we are discussing Spanish-speaking fascists guilty of mass murder?

    And so it goes indeed. One person uses the weight of evidence, the other prejudice.

  • Brian MacAodh

    part of Dev’s reply to Churchill:

    “Allowances can be made for Mr. Churchill’s statement, however unworthy, in the first flush of victory. No such excuse could be found for me in this quieter atmosphere. There are, however, some things it is essential to say. I shall try to say them as dispassionately as I can. Mr. Churchill makes it clear that, in certain circumstances, he would have violated our neutrality and that he would justify his actions by Britain’s necessity. It seems strange to me that Mr. Churchill does not see that this, if accepted, would become a moral code and that when this necessity became sufficiently great, other people’s rights were not to count… that is precisely why we had this disastrous succession of wars — World War No.1 and World War No.2 — and shall it be World War No.3? Mr. Churchill is proud of Britain’s stand alone, after France had fallen and before America entered the war. Could he not find in his heart the generosity to acknowledge that there is a small nation that stood alone not for one year or two, but for several hundred years against aggression; that endured spoliations, famine, massacres, in endless succession; that was clubbed many times into insensibility, but each time on returning to consciousness took up the fight anew; a small nation that could never be got to accept defeat and has never surrendered her soul?”

  • Brian MacAodh

    driftwood

    Ireland was nuetral but cooperated with the Allies and passed on intelligence to the Allies. They took in refugees from the Blitz, allowed down allied airmen to go to NI, imprisoned downed Axis airmen, and interned IRA men. Many free staters, like my grandfather, volunteered and fought in British and American units.

    They did not refuel U-boats. Give it a rest man.

  • Brian MacAodh

    I am looking forward to reading Beevers book on Normandy as well. His book on Stalingrad was masterful

  • Harry Flashman

    Now that this thread has gone off on a completely different tangent can I ask Driftwood (seeing as he is supplying the WSC quotations) whether he ever came across the Churchill quote where he said following the Dunkirk evacuations that the only armed and equipped body of men in the entire United Kingdom was the Ulster Special Constabulary?

    It sounds like a delightful piece of windbaggery on the old man’s part (there were two divisions of well equipped Canadians) but I suspect it is an apocryphal story made up after the war.

  • Dave

    “Hmm, so according to you warped logic, this hotel is guilty of treason on a grand scale.” – Big Maggie

    Is the hotel engaged in a dispute with another nation over sovereign territory and making a political statement about which nation controls the state or is it touting for business? Can you spot the none-too-subtle difference ? 😉

    “Peculiar interpretation of the GFA. ‘british nationality has supremacy by default’? Since when?” – Paul Kielty

    Since sovereignty first resided with the Crown. Until the GFA, the Irish nation disputed the legitimacy of British sovereignty over Northern Ireland. That is no longer disputed. There is nothing peculiar about my interpretation of the GFA. It states that Northern Ireland is part of the United Kingdom. Unless I miss my guess, the Union Jack is the flag of the UK, not the Irish tricolour. Under the GFA (and the British-Irish Agreement), you are born British but have the right to apply for Irish citizenship. Therefore, your default nationality is British.

    The GFA tries to obfuscate that by using the term “birthright” as the right to apply for Irish citizenship in such a way that it reads like it is saying that you are born Irish and therefore do not need to apply. That’s just clever word play, as the Irish Nationality and Citizenship Act confirms. A birthright requires no action on your part because you are born with it. Since you must act to apply for Irish citizenship if you are born in Northern Ireland post-GFA, Irish citizenship cannot, by definition, be your birthright.

    Lurig, it’s a mistake to assume that constitutional documents are just meaningless pieces of paper or that oaths are just “empty formulas of words.” I think that mentality was put out there by those who wanted you to sign up to those documents despite your reservations about the content of them.

    Prior to the GFA, it was the case that nationalists insisted that no nation has the right of veto over another nation. That was the principle that self-determination should be inalienable and unfettered. You have now accepted that the British nation has a right of veto over you. You may have received some internal improvements as a result of accepting the legitimacy of that veto but you have dispensed with your Irish national rights by doing so.

    The way loyalist would look at it is that it is they have made the practical concessions in return for nationalists accepting the legitimacy of British sovereignty but that nationalists are acting contrary to the agreement by making bogus claims about the Irish nation controlling a state that they have formally declared is not rightfully theirs. You could argue that flying the Irish flag is an expression of culture (and for many it is) but that ignores the actual political context where it is a de jure claim to sovereignty over the state – a claim to sovereignty that was supposedly renounced in return for those internal concessions.

    Personally, I don’t see this supposed shared nation of Northern Irish emerging that must emerge if the dysfunctional dynamic of two nations competing with each other for control of one state is ever to be ameliorated. There were some attempts have a flag for this nation post-GFA. The British government had a working design for a flag and the Alliance Party also came up with a few designs.

    The two flags, the Union Jack and the Irish Tricolour, will remain as symbols of two nations. They will also, of course, remain as symbols of two states – and that’s the only practicable solution in my opinion. Because two nations cannot share one state, it was always maintained that the unionists were a tradition within the Irish nation rather than a separate nation. Post-GFA, no one really maintains that fiction anymore. It is now recognised that there are two nations, not two traditions, on the island of Ireland. So while there is that recognition there is also, paradoxically, a farcical denial of the old mantra that two nations cannot share one state. That will fizzle out in due course. What you will be left with is the option of repartition.

    Incidentally, the GFA is not about extending the right to Irish national self-determination into Northern Ireland but is about removing it from the rest of Ireland. It was devised by Whitehall to be a vehicle for dismantling the Irish nation-state and replacing it with a replica of Northern Ireland. And, as I said before, good luck with that. Article 1 (v) of the British Irish Agreement states:

  • Dave

    [b]Continued[/b]

    (v) [The two Governments] affirm that whatever choice is freely exercised by a majority of the people of Northern Ireland, the power of the sovereign government with jurisdiction there shall be exercised with rigorous impartiality on behalf of all the people in the diversity of their identities and traditions and shall be founded on the principles of full respect for, and equality of, civil, political, social and cultural rights, of freedom from discrimination for all citizens, and of parity of esteem and of just and equal treatment for the identity, ethos and aspirations of both communities;

    This rules out a nation-state of Ireland, declaring that the British nation should have a veto over the right to self-determination of the Irish nation. In this clause, the government is mandated to act with “rigorous impartiality” between British nationalism and Irish nationalism. A government that is partial to Irish nationalism and duly acts to promote the Irish national interest would fall foul of its requirement to act with “parity of esteem” for British nationalism. This would result in every second decision it tries to make ending up in the courts, and would also result in intense animosity for the British nation among the duly fettered Irish nation, resulting in an unavoidable civil war where a majority nation wipes out the minority nation. That is a totally unacceptable clause, and madness of the part of Bertie “I won sterling on the horse” Ahern and Martin Mansergh to agree to it. The only way around that clause is for Northern Ireland to become part of a federal republic but to have a devolved government where the national government can then act with “rigorous impartiality” between the two nations who will, of course, continue to struggle within the federal state for control of it.

    But I could be completely wrong. 😉

  • latcheeco

    Dave et al,
    You’re worrying over nothin’. On Spike TV the RA just beat the Taliban with Caddies .

  • The Impartial Spokesman

    Fuck the Irish Whingers on here

    They are a bunch of crying pussies who don’t have the intelligence or the balls to retake their island.

    yap yap yap yap, its quite nauseating tbh

    All they are is a bunch of keyboard commandos, who come on here and spout BS, glorifying a bunch of hungry cunts who could do the crime but didn’t have the balls to do the time.

    The brits will soon be here for a millenium, and won’t be going any time soon.

    “what we have in the north of Ireland is a colonial situation”

    So what if it is ??? what go gonna do ? bore us all to death with your inanely boring posts ? or are you gonna do something “big guy” ?

    Anyone got anymore jokes to cheer this thread up a bit, it really is getting flat?

  • Doctor Who

    CD

    “It is about the PSNI’s attitude to dealing with the incident, and what it reveals about the underlying sectarian prejudices which persist within the organisation, which contributed to a man’s death.”

    Surely Chris you would agree that your statement here is sensationalist and without foundation. We now see record numbers of applicants from a non unionist background, legislation to ensure a 50% recruitment of Catholics. If sectarian predjudices persisited within the PSNI, surely there would be discontent amongst these Catholic recruits. There is no such evidence to back this up.

    ” explosive new claims”

    No, rumour.

    “clearly, a number of the PSNI officers shared the same objective as the murderous loyalists.”

    Horrendous and without foundation, the officers that are reported to have stood by during the fatal assault of Kevin McDaid, would be far more likely to be in turmoil at this time. A man lost his life and they are being implicated as complicit in the event, by rumour mongers and opportunists.

    Chris far from asking questions of the office of the Police Ombudsman, you seem more intent on giving them the answers.

  • Big Maggie

    Dave,

    “Is the hotel engaged in a dispute with another nation over sovereign territory and making a political statement about which nation controls the state or is it touting for business?”

    Ahem. First, the flag is not “sectarian” as was claimed earlier; it’s the flag of a nation containing many sects and not a few atheists and agnostics.

    Second, it’s not a “foreign” flag as Driftwood suggested but the flag of a neighbouring nation, whose capital is just down the road and whose natives are friendly and won’t cook you in the pot along with the shpuds. Honest.

    Third, by signing up to the GFA the tricolour’s nation ended the territorial dispute you refer to.

    Fourth, those who feel they belong to that nation, no matter where they live, have every right to fly that flag—or would in any civilized country.

    Now let’s move on, shall we? And by “on” I don’t mean 60 years into the past as others would wish but into the future.

  • Jen Erik

    “I had heard of this bell ring in Coleraine being rang as a warming for all catholics to leave the town centre, did this really happen?”

    @highlander: My feeling is that it was to tell people who didn’t live in the town proper to leave – I’d vaguely assumed because they closed the gates at night. But I don’t remember ever being taught that – it’s just an impression I had. I’ll look it up for you.

  • Doctor Who

    Big Maggie

    Flags are not sectarian themselves, whatever colour they may be. It is when they are used by individuals or groups for the pupose of antagonising others they know may find that sort of behaviour offensive, then it becomes sectarian.

    Of course flags are essentially cloth and can be used when one runs out of toilet paper. Words and statements I find far more offensive such like the quote attributed to you on page 3 of this thread.

    “There’s enough of that among the Unionist terrorists in Coleraine.”

    Big Maggie it´s about time you took responsibility for the things you write and recognise that such a statement is not just a generalisation, but an offensive and sectarian one at that.

  • Big Maggie

    Doctor Who,

    As you know “There’s enough of that among the Unionist terrorists in Coleraine” refers to intolerance.

    The Unionist terrorists are those who beat Mr McDaid to death.

    I fail to see why you take offence to this. What would you call them, boy scouts?

  • Big Maggie

    Doctor Who,

    Nearly forgot. The flying of the tricolours in Coleraine and elsewhere is not a sectarian statement. It’s an expression of Nationalism.

  • Mayoman

    DW:”Flags are not sectarian themselves, whatever colour they may be. It is when they are used by individuals or groups for the pupose of antagonising others they know may find that sort of behaviour offensive, then it becomes sectarian.”

    F****g surreal coming from a unionist! Can you put that exact wording on a petition, get all your unionists mates to sign it, and send it the Parades Commission?

  • Doctor Who

    Big Maggie

    Is it useful to present a “paralax view”. I would be equally offended by an expression for example the nationalist terrorists in Craigavon.

    “What would you call them, boy scouts?”

    If it had´ve been a troop of boy scouts that murdered Mr. McDaid then that would be fair. It was however no more a troop of boy scouts responsible for the murder than it was the unionist people of Coleraine.

    It is your vague generalisations which I take offence to and your inability to seperate unionist from loyalist. I notice you have no such inability in seperating nationalist from republican.

  • Doctor Who

    Mayoman

    “F****g surreal coming from a unionist! Can you put that exact wording on a petition, get all your unionists mates to sign it, and send it the Parades Commission?”

    It does however apply to all flags of all colours and therefore you and others would have obvious problems in defining what was sectarian.

  • Mayoman

    Thanks for the completely un-enlightening reply! Is there text missing?

  • Big Maggie

    Doctor Who,

    We’ve been over this ground before but here goes one more time.

    “It was however no more a troop of boy scouts responsible for the murder than it was the unionist people of Coleraine.”

    I did not say that “the” Unionist people of Coleraine murdered Kevin. That would suggest he was murdered by the entire Unionist population.

    A Loyalist is a Unionist. Or is he a Nationalist? You’re being silly.

    “I notice you have no such inability in seperating nationalist from republican.”

    Then you notice more than I do. Why not pay more attention to the issue at hand? Find out why your fellow Unionists behaved in such a savage way towards innocent people.

  • Big Maggie

    Doctor Who,

    What in god’s name is a “paralax view”?

  • Doctor Who

    Big Maggie if I say I am offended by your vague generalisations, why do you think then im deluded.

    “Then you notice more than I do.”

    But Big Maggie in your reply to Dread C on a related thread you stated “I hope you don´t think I am a Republican, i´m a Nationalist.”

    “A Loyalist is a Unionist. Or is he a Nationalist? You’re being silly.”

    Loyalism is undoubtedly connected to Unionism. Nationalism is undoubtedly linked to Republicanism, there are also fundamnetal differences that are irreconciable. I and many other unionists have no affiliation with anything loyalist. So why make that generalisation?

    “I did not say that “the” Unionist people of Coleraine murdered Kevin. That would suggest he was murdered by the entire Unionist population.”

    In actual fact you do imply this Big Maggie and the obvious way to remedy this would be to be careful of what way you say things as it is likely to cause offence. I can assure you that the revulsion amongst unionists to the murder of Kevin McDaid is just as much as your own.

  • Big Maggie

    Doctor Who,

    “But Big Maggie in your reply to Dread C on a related thread you stated “I hope you don´t think I am a Republican, i´m a Nationalist.”

    My god, you DO notice these things! Amazing. I barely recall the conversation. But the parallel you wish to draw fails. A Republican is a Nationalist but a Nationalist is not necessarily a Republican.

    But… a Loyalist is a Unionist.

    < <“I did not say that “the” Unionist people of Coleraine murdered Kevin. That would suggest he was murdered by the entire Unionist population.” In actual fact you do imply this Big Maggie and the obvious way to remedy this would be to be careful of what way you say things as it is likely to cause offence.>>

    Wrong. You infer that. Sorry but I have no control over your inferences.

    Now, any chance you’ll discuss why the beating to death of Nationalists by mobs is a Unionist pursuit? What should be done to tackle this savagery?

  • Dr Bigun

    “Now, any chance you’ll discuss why the beating to death of Nationalists by mobs is a Unionist pursuit? What should be done to tackle this savagery? ”

    Fuck all if you ask me. Its like asking how do we stop humans killing each other all over the world.

    Its happened before and it will happen again…….cest la vie.

    PS Maggie Nationalist death squads also like to go on the rampage too you know leaving 2 soldiers and a policeman dead in their wake.

    Also you ignored……

    http://www.independent.ie/national-news/killer-gang-link-to-attack-on-candidate-1756659.html

    I notice THREE times you have not answered my questions……I don’t need an answer, your silence tells it all.

  • inspector clueso

    How can nationalists say the RUC were, and PSNI are sectarian, given the nationalist terrorist group the IRA killed more catholics that anyone else during the troubles ??

    This is a fact strangely ignored my many nationalists

  • Big Maggie

    Chris,

    Did you see the article in the Belfast Telegraph today?

    Police have said “no evidence” has been produced to support a allegations that a PSNI officer sent a text to loyalists shortly before Kevin McDaid was killed encouraging them to take action against Catholics who had put up tricolours.

    Was it all a hoax then?

  • Doctor Who

    Big Maggie

    You really let yourself down, after many attempts to point out that your language can cause offence, I now conclude you simply do it to offend.

    There is no point going on with the argument, you are simply being obnoxious.

  • Jen Erik

    “I had heard of this bell ring in Coleraine being rang as a warming for all catholics to leave the town centre, did this really happen?”

    @highlander: My feeling is that it was to tell people who didn’t live in the town proper to leave – I’d vaguely assumed because they closed the gates at night. But I don’t remember ever being taught that – it’s just an impression I had. I’ll look it up for you.

    @highlander – sorry, I can’t find anything more exact. There’s a 19thC piece looking back to the curfew bell, which says it was rung for a century and a half – the only date it gives is when it mentions the bell would have been rung in 1642, so if that’s correct, it must have ceased being used as an actual curfew by the 19thC. (If I find anything more exact, I’ll post.)

    My mum, who is old enough to remember the bell being rung, says no-one in the town thought anything of it – it was just a custom.

  • Big Maggie

    Doctor Who,

    “You really let yourself down, after many attempts to point out that your language can cause offence, I now conclude you simply do it to offend.”

    And this from the person who from the start subjected me to personal abuse!

    Extraordinary. Such double standards.

  • Big Maggie

    It would have been a fine gesture had the local MLA, Gregory Campbell, attended the funeral. The message would have been: as a Unionist I’m expressing solidarity with the family.

    Actions speak louder and all that….

  • Doctor Who

    Bi Maggie

    “And this from the person who from the start subjected me to personal abuse”

    Nonsense.

  • Maggie is right for once

    “It would have been a fine gesture had the local MLA, Gregory Campbell, attended the funeral. The message would have been: as a Unionist I’m expressing solidarity with the family.”

    A Bit like Gerry Adams fine gesture Carrying the coffin of the Shankill bomber………….

    Well actions certainly do speak louder……

    What do you think Gerry’s message to the innocent protestant familes was Maggie ?

  • Bill

    I didn’t really want to get involved in this conversation again however, Big Maggie, in the Northern Ireland context a loyalist is NOT NECESSARILY a Unionist. There are many people I know – including members of paramilitary organisations, ex-members of paramilitary organisations and ex-prisoners – who are definitely NOT unionist but are explicitly loyalist and define themselves as such.

    On another point, I find it reprehensible that no political representative from the Protestant, Unionist, Loyalist community made the time to attend the funeral today. More and more often I feel embarrassed by the individuals and parties that are meant to represent me.

  • Big Maggie

    “And this from the person who from the start subjected me to personal abuse”

    Nonsense.
    Posted by Doctor Who on Jun 01, 2009 @ 02:08 PM

    Big Maggie

    Oh! was it in joined up writing. I don´t think so.

    As you can´t tell the difference between someone who claims to be unioinist as opposed to loyalist, I doubt then that you can comprehend most things.

    Have you ever considered it is possible to be both a NI unionist and a British republican at the same time. Oh no I better not, to much for the big girl.
    Posted by Doctor Who on May 27, 2009 @ 05:18 PM

    Big Maggie

    Keep taking the Prozac. If your “mate” is unionist and a republican, it kind of excludes her from being a loyalist. Two different things. Now if you remember that tomorrow buy yourself a few pastie suppers.

    What you might think and what actually is are worlds apart Maggie, you offer nothing to this site and it´s about time you went back to interaction with the Teletubbies.

    Sure what´s the point explaining that to the likes of Big Maggie and Paul who have closed sectarian minds.
    Posted by Doctor Who on May 27, 2009 @ 07:38 PM

    You and Big Maggie should link up. A Jack Russell and a salivating Rotweiller, you could sit and repeatedly watch “Religulous” together, and giggle endlessly because laughing at your own ignorance makes you feel better.
    Posted by Doctor Who on May 27, 2009 @ 11:28 PM

    HAAAAAA!! yes Paul ok you did “bested” me, but don´t tell fat maggie as she might get jealous.
    Posted by Doctor Who on May 27, 2009 @ 11:51 PM

    ….

    And that’s merely a few samples from a SINGLE thread.

  • Big Maggie

    “What do you think Gerry’s message to the innocent protestant familes was Maggie ? ”

    No idea. Did it begin with “But what about…?”

  • Big Maggie

    Bill,

    “There are many people I know – including members of paramilitary organisations, ex-members of paramilitary organisations and ex-prisoners – who are definitely NOT unionist but are explicitly loyalist and define themselves as such.”

    Are there any Jesuits among them?

  • bill

    [i] Are there any Jesuits among them? [/i]

    Perhaps I am more ignorant than I thought that I was, but I have no idea what you are talking about. Could you explain?

  • Doctor Who

    Bill

    Yeah the Jesuit thing got me as well. She tends to spontaneously bullshit when she has no idea.

    Big Maggie

    As ive continuously pointed out that you have and continue to offend unionists and the people of Coleraine, pointing out a few tongue in cheek posts of mine will not change your ignorance.

    Only you can open your mind.

  • Big Maggie

    Bill,

    Apologies. I was a little obscure there. The Jesuits are notorious for the long-winded and never-ending arguments over trivialities:

    You might not know the story behind this rivalry between the Jesuits & Dominicans. But, since it’s one of the great stories in Church history, I thought I’d give a brief summary.

    In the sixteenth century, when the teachings of Calvin and Luther came to be more widely disseminated, it brought up some questions among Catholic theologians about the relationship between grace and free will. A particularly bitter battle in this vein broke out between the Dominicans and the Jesuits, the Dominicans holding the to what had been the more widely held Thomistic opinion, and the Jesuits proposing a somewhat altered view in hope of better answering the challenges of the Protestant reformers. The first phase of this argument, which began in Belgium, lasted from 1584-1588. In 1588, the matter was referred to Rome and Pope Sixtus V told them to stop arguing about it.

    Evidently, the silence didn’t last too long and the controversy broke out anew in Spain, also in 1588. The Jesuit view was condemned by the Dominicans as being Semi-Pelagian. The Dominican view was condemned by the Jesuits as being too Calvinist. In 1594, the new Pope Clement VIII ordered the argument stopped again and began to investigate the matter, seeking opinions from several of the major universities. He even established a commission in 1598 to look into the matter. The superior generals of both orders were commanded to appear with their theologians before the commission the next year. A year or so of such sessions were held, with no resolution. Another series of debates began in the presence of the Pope from 1602-1605, sixty-eight of them in all. Clement died in 1605, followed by the brief papacy of Leo IX, and then Paul V became Pope. Paul V presided over seventeen debates.

    Finally, in 1607, the Pope issued a decree which allowed each order to defend its own doctrine, demanded that they not condemn each other, and asked them to await a decision from the Holy See. The decision never came.

    (I’m not a historian so the facts may not be exact–my sources might not be right–but I think you get the picture!)

    My understanding is that this also ended in an agreement that upon the death of the general superior of either order, the living general of the other order would preside at the funeral mass. I think this may still be the custom today (but I couldn’t find an authoritative source on that).

    So, when people talk about rivalry between Dominicans and Jesuits, it’s rooted in this little argument about grace which lasted 23 years and was never resolved!!

  • Bill

    If the discussion regarding your use of the terms Loyalist and Unionist is trivial as you suggest, why do you continue to use the terms incorrectly?

  • Big Maggie

    Am I the only one here disappointed in Gregory Campbell’s poor showing?

    Stop me if I’m wrong. You’re an MP and MLA for Coleraine. One of your constituents is beaten to death in a savage mob attack that also leaves another innocent man on life support. A pregnant woman is also attacked by the mob.

    The murder makes the headlines at home and abroad and leads to serious questions being asked of the police force.

    Is it not odd then that Gregory chose not to attend the victim’s funeral as a mark of respect to his murdered constituent and the family? Did he have more important business to attend to?

    In any civilized country such dereliction of duty would be viewed as disgraceful.

  • Big Maggie

    Bill,

    “If the discussion regarding your use of the terms Loyalist and Unionist is trivial as you suggest, why do you continue to use the terms incorrectly? ”

    Er, it’s others who keep arguing about it. I’m quite prepared to leave it at “Unionist” and move on.

    What do you think of Gregory Campbell’s dereliction of duty?

  • Bill

    Perhaps it is others who keep arguing about it but it is you who appears somewhat unwilling to recognise that your use of the term is firstly, incorrect, and secondly, quite offensive to some people.

    In relation to Gregory Campbell, I wrote in my first post today, [i] I find it reprehensible that no political representative from the Protestant, Unionist, Loyalist community made the time to attend the funeral today. More and more often I feel embarrassed by the individuals and parties that are meant to represent me. [/i] I stand by this.

    I think it is disgraceful that no political representative from the Protestant, Unionist, Loyalist community was there to offer condolences to the family. I have no time for the Church as an institution but I applaud the Protestant clergy for being there, especially when politicians weren’t.

  • OC

    On another point, I find it reprehensible that no political representative from the Protestant, Unionist, Loyalist community made the time to attend the funeral today. More and more often I feel embarrassed by the individuals and parties that are meant to represent me.

    Posted by Bill on Jun 01, 2009 @ 02:44 PM

    Bill, I find your posts to be amoungst the most reasonable.

    No point in arguing. A fellow British citisen was murdered by a rabid mob, and now folks that identify with him are fearful, and can you blame them?

    Right now, they are expressing themselves, as is their right.

    If a family member is killed, his relatives are going to howl with grief. They may even say things that they know are not true, but one doesn’t try to reason with them during their all-too-human God-given irrationality.

    Mom used to say, “Actions speak louder than words.”

    It’s time for you, and others from the unionist community, to be the bigger man here.

    And not just with this horrible murder.

    When anyone aspires to be top dog, they are still a dog.

    Submit word = fact

  • pól

    Maggie, you are a total embarrassment. Why do you continue on with the “Unionist mob” stuff? Wouldn’t offend you if people said that a Nationalist mob killed those soldiers and Masserene? Apart from that, you are letting people who are using horrible, diversionary tactics to avoid discussing the matter completely off the hook. In every thread about the murder of Mr McDaid, you’ve started this futile and ignorant argument. Act your age.

  • please join the world

    Majority of NI Protestants hate Catholics. End of .. there are a few who weren’t brought up with the idea that Catholics hate them and want to subject them to the same treatment meted out by prods against taigs. Maybe … but look at the facts, and the past, it’s clear to the whole world. Just the prods still think it’s “us or them, they would do the same to us”. Reminiscent of the Confederates. How long must we sing this song?

    How long will you nurse this hatred of us indigenous people?

    Cue whataboutery .. remember, we never landed on yous, yous landed on us!

  • Paul

    PL

    UMMM because it wasn’t a mob that killed the soldiers just a couple of psychotic fellow travelers

  • The Raven

    Doctor Who,

    What in god’s name is a “paralax view”?

    Posted by Big Maggie on Jun 01, 2009 @ 10:45 AM

    It’s from series 4, episode 12.

  • MONTAFUK

    “And no similar sectarian flags like Celtic or the tricolour either.”

    Oh please, are Protestants barred from becoming head of state of the ROI? No they are not.

    Are Catholice barred from becoming head of stae of the UK? Yes they are …

    Where does the sectarianism lie?

  • lest we forget

    the tone of these messgages is very worrying. never mind the elections. seems to me – from what you lot been saying – this ain’t over yet.

    take a moment to remember what we all did to each other

    ..

    now take another moment

    is that what we want?

    by this blog, I recon that’s what’s coming

  • Doctor Who

    The Raven, lol good one, although do you mean series 4 episode 12 of the classic series or the Russel T Davies re-working.

    Big Maggie, the following is a good definition of a “parallax view”, although after that outburst on the previous page I suspect you´ve been red carded and hence will miss the explanation.

    A parallax view is a viewpoint from which you can observe and study something or somebody from a new angle, thus gaining insights unavailable before.

  • nevermind that wanker the dubliner, he’s just a fine gael wind up merchant who hates northern nationalists with a passion! every one of his posts has the ring of kevin my-arse about it.

  • pól

    [i]

    How about you act your mental age pl and F**K O*F

    you c**k s***r [/i]

    Touch a nerve?

  • Big Maggie

    Chris,

    Those who can’t answer my arguments are trying to impersonate me again—as if a well-brought up woman like my would use foul language when I have reason at my disposal.

    Please delete and/or block the wretch’s IP.

    Thank you.

  • pól

    Maggie, could you answer the points I raised?

  • Big Maggie

    I believe certain people are confusing “parallax” with “parallel”.

    It’s a common misconception.

  • Big Maggie

    pl,

    Remind me, what points did you raise?

  • pól

    “Maggie, you are a total embarrassment. Why do you continue on with the “Unionist mob” stuff? Wouldn’t offend you if people said that a Nationalist mob killed those soldiers and Masserene? Apart from that, you are letting people who are using horrible, diversionary tactics to avoid discussing the matter completely off the hook. In every thread about the murder of Mr McDaid, you’ve started this futile and ignorant argument. Act your age. “

  • Big Maggie

    pl,

    Ah, those points. I didn’t think you wanted an answer.

    How do you expect me to answer: “Maggie, you are a total embarrassment.”?

    The others:

    “Why do you continue on with the “Unionist mob” stuff?”

    It’s the Unionist mobs who continue on with their murderous stuff. Robert Hamill, David McIlwaine and Andrew Robb, and now Kevin McDaid, to name but a few.

    When are they going to stop?

    “Wouldn’t offend you if people said that a Nationalist mob killed those soldiers and Masserene?”

    No. They’re weren’t killed by a mob, Nationalist or otherwise. If they’d been set upon by fifty or more youths on the Falls Road I’d consider them to have been killed by a Nationalist mob.

    “Apart from that, you are letting people who are using horrible, diversionary tactics to avoid discussing the matter completely off the hook.”

    I don’t understand this. Are you referring to the whataboutery? It would be there with or without me. It’s the Ulster way.

    “In every thread about the murder of Mr McDaid, you’ve started this futile and ignorant argument.”

    I started no such argument. Those who felt offended started the argument. I was merely stating facts.

    “Act your age.”

    Is that a question? If so, what does it mean?

  • dub

    Big Maggie,

    You have already clarified for us that you yourself are a unionist as you are very happy with the union and the advantages it brings your family. You have stated that you support the union. So you are a unionist.

    Perhaps that explains your obsession with the phrase unionist mob. You are projecting your own self loathing onto others.

  • Big Maggie

    dub,

    “You have stated that you support the union.”

    You infer too much for your own good. I stated no such thing. I said the Union supports me, not vice versa.

    “Perhaps that explains your obsession with the phrase unionist mob.”

    I’m not obsessed with it at all. It happens to be relevant to recent events.

    “You are projecting your own self loathing onto others.”

    … said the chief projectionist :^)

  • Doctor Who

    Big Maggie

    ” believe certain people are confusing “parallax” with “parallel”.”

    No, I think you are the only one with a problem concerning definitions.

    The term parallax view is also taken from the film directed by Alan Pakula that starred Warren Beaty.

  • Big Maggie

    “The term parallax view is also taken from the film directed by Alan Pakula that starred Warren Beaty”

    Well I suppose if i removed my head from my rectal passage once in a while, I would have know that.

    Sorry, my mistake.

  • Big Maggie

    Doctor Who,

    “The term parallax view is also taken from the film directed by Alan Pakula that starred Warren Beaty.”

    You mean it’s as meaningful as Quantum of Solace?

    Chris,

    Can you please block those pathetic Unionists who feel so cornered they resort to idiotic impersonation? Rather pathetic but par for the course.

    Perhaps a simple cross referencing of IPs will reveal some interesting facts. Thanks.

  • Dave

    “nevermind that wanker the dubliner, he’s just a fine gael wind up merchant who hates northern nationalists with a passion! every one of his posts has the ring of kevin my-arse about it.” – dave(not the dubliner)

    While I appreciate your deserving genuflection to the capital Dave by rendering your own name in lower case, please modify your impudent outbursts in future to so that they omit reference to myself as a member of a party of political ne’er-do-wells like Fine Gael. I was a member of FF, but I lost faith in that party when it embraced European nationalism and soft-socialism. I don’t support any Irish political party (but have huge respect for the Tories) and will make a point of voting for the most capable independent candidate in the local election and for Libertas in the European election.

    By the way, it turns out that Fine Gael, according to the GFA, were right about the legitimacy of partition all along. All of the mainstream political parties on the island of Ireland have now signed up for it via the GFA, with none of them now disputing the legitimacy of British sovereignty over Northern Ireland. Since partition is now legitimate, the real issue is a fair repartition.

    “Maggie… Act your age. ” – pl

    That would be senile. 😉

  • Big Maggie

    Dave,

    “That would be senile. ;)”

    My my, I’ve really put a few noses out of joint, eh?

    Have you anything other than personal insults to contribute to this discussion?

  • teh doctor

    Maggie did you have sex (if ever) ?

    you come across as attention seeking and frustrated.

    personally i bet you are a right dog

    I wouln’t touch you with chris’s dick

    and btw im a nationalist (as im sure you are dying to know). do u not notice how few people like you here ??

  • tom

    In relation to Chris’s point that it is crucial that senior nationalist Politicians hold the PSNI to account. The nationalist political leadership have virtually ignored the murder of Mr. Mc Daid. They have also to their lasting shame ignored the conduct of the PSNI on the day. Parallels with Robert Hamil’s murder sit uncomfortably with those like Martin Mc Guinness Alex Maskey and Gerry Adams who have embraced a newly repackaged Unionist Police Force. The command structure of which is accountable to no one.

    It took Martin Mc Guinness four days working in hand in glove with Sir Hugh Orde his PSNI police chief to concoct a statement which would not offend the sensibilities of Sir Hugh or his Officers in the Special Branch nor question the integrity of his force or their unwillingness or inability to defend Catholics, which was very decent of him and no doubt will be greatly appreciated by Sir Hugh when he heaves a huge sigh of relief and heads back to a nice cushy job with his bit on the side in England.

    It would seem that Martin Mc Guinness, like Mark Durkan, Gerry Adams, Alban Maginness and Barbara de Brun decided to leave the explosive issue of the PSNI‘s dismal failure to protect Catholics from sectarian attack well alone and decided concentrate on getting themselves on that big European gravy train instead, without stepping on any toes or being to controversial and offending the sensibilities of Sir Hugh. Maybe he’ll recommend them for a knighthood for being so considerate and compliant.

    Incidentally nothing from Cardinal Brady regarding the PSNI’s failure to protect vulnerable individuals and communities from sectarian attack. Don’t expect anything soon either.

  • Big Maggie

    tom,

    Good comments. I believe you’ve successfully summed up the “integrity” of Mssrs McGuinness, Durkan and the other top Nationalist politians. They’ve tasted power and wealth at last and aren’t about to jeopardize it for the sake of a nobody from Coleraine.

    Quite distasteful.

    As regards Brady, well, he has enough on his (collection) plate without the added burden of preaching morality to his flock.

  • PaulB

    “As regards Brady, well, he has enough on his (collection) plate without the added burden of preaching morality to his flock. ”

    I think these comments are most unfair, he actually has more pressing matters at hand, so less of the smart comments please, and try to show a some christian values.

    Its so easy to sit on the sidelines and make sneering comments on blogs like this, isn’t it?

    http://www.examiner.ie/ireland/cardinal-brady-profoundly-sorry-and-deeply-ashamed–92234.html

    “They’ve tasted power and wealth at last and aren’t about to jeopardize it for the sake of a nobody from Coleraine.”

    What you want them to do ? wear sackcloth ?

  • Big Maggie

    PaulB,

    “I think these comments are most unfair, he actually has more pressing matters at hand, so less of the smart comments please, and try to show a some christian values.”

    What Christian values would those be? The ones the Church lost sight of in Ireland for over 60 years while children were being institutionally tortured and raped?

    Cardinal Brady lives not an hour’s drive from Coleraine. Please don’t tell me he’s too busy with damage control to his Church not to have given a robust response to the depravity of that mob murder. Or is he cautious of Protestant backlash?

    The Presbyterians to their credit showed more solidarity. But of course they don’t labour under the same feudal hierarchy as the Catholic Church, do they? The latter still haven’t seen this for the problem it is and was.

    “What you want them to do ? wear sackcloth ?”

    How about concentrate on their own constituencies and less on Europe? Europe is well able to take care of itself and it won’t matter one whit who’s elected this week; it’s the unelected Commissioners who call the shots, not the MEPs.

    Let our politicians call an extraordinary meeting with the police and try to work out a strategy that will put an end once and for all to outrages like the McDaid murder. We’re now head and ears into the marching season, 12 July looms. Who knows what we can expect from certain murderous factions within Unionism in the weeks to come or the months following?

    It’s time for our elected reps to call a spade a spade and do some serious talking, and to put constructive proposals on the table.

  • PaulB

    “What Christian values would those be? The ones the Church lost sight of in Ireland for over 60 years while children were being institutionally tortured and raped?”

    that is a totally childish response………

    “Let our politicians call an extraordinary meeting with the police and try to work out a strategy that will put an end once and for all to outrages like the McDaid murder.”

    Absolutely IMPOSSIBLE !!!!! an “extraordinary meeting” cannot solve societys ills, Such nonsense you talk.

    “It’s time for our elected reps to call a spade a spade and do some serious talking, and to put constructive proposals on the table.”

    How about the return of shoot to kill policies….would that be good for starters ? is that what you want ?

    I am a nationalist, and obviously totally condem this senless killing, but we must keep calm and not have knee jerk reactions that punish unionists as a whole, as in my opinion this murder was simply carried out by thugs who could have come from any society. We must look at the bigger picture here otherwise we will plunge back into the abyss.

  • Big Maggie

    PaulB,

    “that is a totally childish response………”

    Again: Brady lives less than an hour from Coleraine. Where was he when needed? Engaging in damage control. What did you say about “Christian values”?

    “an “extraordinary meeting” cannot solve societys ills, Such nonsense you talk.”

    Silly me, I thought extraordinary meetings lay at the basis of our society. We call them parliamentary sittings. Why shouldn’t one such involve the police?

    “How about the return of shoot to kill policies….would that be good for starters ? is that what you want ?”

    What gave you that idea? I’m advocating talking not shooting!

    “we must keep calm and not have knee jerk reactions that punish unionists as a whole”

    No one’s asking that Unionists as a whole be punished. Or if that’s the case I missed it.

    “in my opinion this murder was simply carried out by thugs who could have come from any society.”

    The first part is true. Yet I’m wondering why this sort of thing is coming increasingly from our society. That’s why I believe it’s time for our political representatives to discuss the question, “Why?”

  • tom

    With regard to the point made earlier, advocating compassion towards the Cathoic Heirarchy and Cardinal Brady. The Catholic Church including Cardinal Brady are in a mess of their own making. The fact is the Catholic Hierarchy was aware of such evil and satanic abuse going on for over 40 years. I am not remotely interested in the sensitive feelings of the Catholic Hierarchy to a bad press. They should have displayed Christian values of compassion to the victims of the evil satanic abuse of children carried out by fallen and evil priests within the Church. The fact is they not only ignored the misery of the children but actively sought to cover it up which in itself is evil. The Priests involved should have been defrocked excommunicated and jailed for carrying out these evil acts. Did this happen? No it did not.

    The hierarchy of the Catholic Church were more interested in damage limitation and how much they would have to empty from the Churches coffers to pay in compensation to those whose lives were destroyed by this evil abuse. They were dragged kicking and screaming by the press and their own flock and forced to face up to this issue.

    Apart from anything else the despicable behaviour of these Priests and the Catholic Hierarchy who tried to cover it up, is in stark contrast to the dedication shown by thousands of priests who remained faithful to their very difficult vocation and who work tirelessly across Ireland and across the world under difficult circumstances and often under threat of death, to bring comfort and hope to those who have none. The Catholic Hierarchy have let them down as well. They will not be not get a by ball from their flock on this issue and rightly so. They have a lot to answer for.

    My main point was straightforward. Why did none of the nationalist political establishment comment on the conduct of the PSNI before and during the murder of Mr Mc Daid and the savage attack on Mr Fleming? Mark Durkan, Gerry Adams, Martin Mc Guinness, our prospective euro candidates Barbara De Brun and Alban Mc Guinness skulked away and refused to address the concerns expressed by both the family of Mr Mc Daid and a considerable amount of the nationalist population, about the conduct of the PSNI during the murder of Mr Mc Daid and the attack on Mr Fleming why?

    As far as Cardinal Brady and the Catholic Hierarchy commenting on murder of Mr Mc Daid and the conduct of the PSNI both before and during the heinous murder is concerned . The thundering pulpits of the Catholic Hierarchy were strangely silent. Could this be because like their politically correct friends in the SDLP and Sinn Fein they endorsed the PSNI which is controlled by the Special Branch and MI5 who are saddled with the legacy of political and sectarian murder which was often inspired and organised by this arm of the PSNI. .

    They have done this in the past and are capable of doing it again,as they are not accountable to the electorate, our politicians, or any of the District Policing Partnerships (DPPs) endorsed by the leadership of the SDLP and Sinn Fein ( converts to the DPP’s Alex Maskey and Martina Anderson please note). This inconvenient and uncomfortable truth is something that Cardinal Brady and the Catholic Hierarchy may not like to face up to and it would be interesting to hear the views of our politically correct politicians and the Catholic Hierarchy to these concerns although I am not expecting a rush to reply any time soon.

  • Big Maggie

    tom,

    Good comment as always. I noted that you twice described the conduct of clergmen as “satanic abuse”.

    The irony is that Christians were clamouring some years ago to investigate so-called Satanism in Britain and elsewhere, when in fact there was no such thing. “Satanists” are no more than bands of swingers who like to hold the occasional orgy. AFAIK those orgies do not and have never involved child abuse.

    I linked to this interesting site recently:

    >>For over forty years, delusional and lying Christians have accused Satanists of committing all manner of atrocities toward children without any evidence. This is ironic considering the pervasive occurrence of prolonged systematic child abuse among the various Christian churches and denominations, and among others abusing positions of trust in the Jewish and Islamic Synagogues and Mosques.

    >>Enough hypocrisy. We all know who the sick, deranged child abusers really are: the sanctimonious frauds of the Judeo-Christian-Islamic traditions.

    >>In fact, you could go so far as to say that child abuse IS a Judeo-Christian-Islamic tradition!<< I spoke to various Catholic friends in the wake of the Ryan report. Not one reported a mention by their parish priests that Sunday. It led me to think that the Catholic Church is still refusing to take this as seriously as it should. It seems that only when it impacts their institution financially do they become exercised. "As far as Cardinal Brady and the Catholic Hierarchy commenting on murder of Mr Mc Daid and the conduct of the PSNI both before and during the heinous murder is concerned . The thundering pulpits of the Catholic Hierarchy were strangely silent." Yes, again the pulpits were silent. I sometimes wonder if Brady and the rest are living in the same place as I am. Time, I think, to tear the house down and start over. What would Jesus say? They had at least a decade to repair their house but they only called in the brickies when it looked as if it was falling down about their ears.

  • dub

    dave,

    y the way, it turns out that Fine Gael, according to the GFA, were right about the legitimacy of partition all along.

    er, fine gael disputed the legitimacy of partition for many many years as did all political parties south of the border.

    once again you are talking pure shit.

    just for the once, please explain in what way ni was, is or ever has been a state, as you keep telling us it is.

    also please clarify the prccedures someone born in ni has to go thru to claim irish citizenship as i am unaware of any.

    lastly please study article 2 of the bunreacht na heireann ( in tandem with articles 9.2.1 and 9.2.2.) and get back to us when you have.. you are aware that consitutional law overrides all other domestic law in ireland are you not?

  • Fr Pat MaBum

    tom

    “The Priests involved should have been defrocked ”

    I thought this was part of the problem ?

  • Big Maggie

    “Fr Pat MaBum”,

    You may think your remark is hilarious. It is not.

    Countless innocent children were sexually abused by priests and other religious. I don’t know if you have kids of your own but I do. The thought of them experiencing the horrors recounted in the Ryan report chills my soul.

    Please don’t make light of this. Your wit must surely be of use elsewhere. Surf the net. There are innumerable places where it will undoubtedly be appreciated.

    Politeness forbids me to say any more.

  • The Raven

    Tom wrote: My main point was straightforward. Why did none of the nationalist political establishment comment on the conduct of the PSNI before and during the murder of Mr Mc Daid and the savage attack on Mr Fleming? Mark Durkan, Gerry Adams, Martin Mc Guinness, our prospective euro candidates Barbara De Brun and Alban Mc Guinness skulked away and refused to address the concerns expressed by both the family of Mr Mc Daid and a considerable amount of the nationalist population, about the conduct of the PSNI during the murder of Mr Mc Daid and the attack on Mr Fleming why?

    I earlier wrote about about how the political establishment, both local and regional, had much blame to shoulder for the events leading up to this attack. And yet I was accused of sectarian hand-wringing. I note this the Deputy First Minister today that he has also remarked on the failure of local political leadership, though admittedly he aims the verbal at the MP for East Londonderry.

    I truly hope that the wider inquiry into this notes some of the antics of local politicians from both sides in this area, and that some political maturity will grow out of this.

    Maggie, you earlier noted the approach of the 12th. I for one will be interested to see if there is any toning-down of “celebrations” in the area. I live at the fringes of this area, and – yes, believe it or not – both sides of the community are calling for calm. And yet there is nothing coming from Councillors…nothing.

    As I said sometime ago, another distraction will happen upon us, and Mr McDaid’s murder will consigned to a footnote of whataboutery on this board and elsewhere. Some of us are genuinely worried however, once the spotlight moves on, what the outcome will be here locally.