NILTS, sectarianism and perpetual civic adolescence.

The extent of latent sectarianism that manages to surface each summer is depressing (and I am by no means suggesting that it is solely an issue for unionism). Mid-summer regularly reveals attitudes that hollow out the heavy lifting of the political processes as largely an exercise in displacing empty boxes.

Nowhere is this more obvious than that other major element of the silly season – the persistent civic adolescence that has been a permanent feature of the political scene. Chris has mapped some of the outlines of the attempted UVF assault on the Short Strand, an episode which has been dismissed, as ever, as some mere tit-for-tat sectariana. Indeed, one noted journalist spent a whole radio interview declaiming the end of the peace process, no less, since shots were fired from the nationalist side, which could only have been the Provisional IRA, in his opinion, and was, he claimed, the most significant event to date (I think he managed to avoid mentioning the UVF at all). While this failed to gain traction, the recurring contextualisation of overt unionist threats, like the massed UVF action, into some vague ongoing dispute tends to come as unstuck as the most recent episode, as Chris outlined.

The recurring failure of both mainstream unionism and the media to name and address anti-Catholic sectarianism when it occurs will, again, and as ever, include equally little comment on those same UVF men marching alongside unionist politicians over the next couple of weeks. Nor will any unionist politician refuse to participate if any of the same UVF members attempt to parade with them.

That this civic adolescence is endemic is wonderfully illustrated by the belief placed in the NILTS report. The value of opinion polls is generally calibrated against electoral results. Yet NILTS is held up as of great significance when it has failed that most basic test. Since it has erred onto what the mainstream take as the palatable side of results that same civic adolescence happily disregards that central flaw (how long would the method survive over-estimating nationalist sentiment?). That NILTS is regularly cited in policy reports isn’t considered. If the underlying method is not consistently extracting political opinion that mirrors actual opinion (which we can compare to the real thing as expressed at the ballot box), how can the other results be meaningfully evaluated in other spheres?

The main thing NILTS revealed was that, politically, many can still only deal with central political issues in NI by partitioning them off from reality.

  • Nunoftheabove

    Who’s the noted – and by whom and for what are they noted ? – journalist you’re referring to John ?

  • John Ó Néill

    Interview was with Alan Murray on Newstalk.

  • pippakin

    “I am by no means suggesting that it is solely an issue for unionism”.

    Shots were fired from the ‘republican’ side, the police have said they were fired by ‘republicans’ who may have been dissidents and there is an argument that there was provocation from ‘republicans’ in the days prior to the attack. It may be that there are questions to be asked of the ‘republican’ side.

    The problems within the UVF are clear but what is not clear, perhaps deliberately so, is what if any talks are taking place within and with the UVF leadership.

    The only way both sides will be satisfied is if both sides are treated equally and that includes in apportioning blame.

  • changeisneeded

    100 masked men did not attack ballybeen pippakin..
    the uvf started the violence according to the peelers
    your tit for tat excuses for violence are sickening

  • changeisneeded

    very good and refreshing blog john. can we just not call a spade a spade when we see it..

  • pippakin


    I’m not making excuses for anyone. I blame the UVF for Monday and Tuesday but if there is a reason behind it then I want to know what that is and make the people responsible for that pay for any crimes they committed.

    I’ve yet to read something about the violence on Monday and Tuesday night that is not heavily slanted in favour of whoever the writer supports, and that includes this post and that is the point I was making.

  • andnowwhat

    Hi Pip.

    What happened on Monday night was not the usual crazy season, tit for tat rioting.

    It started with a planned attack form at least 2 directions in to the short Strand. These guys were wearing surgical gloves for goodness sake. Rioters do not wear surgical gloves.

    Have to say, it’s rich that uvf guys are calling the shots from the republican side an end to the ceasefire. Bobby Moffet?

    I’m sure Turgon (where is he BTW?) could tell us how many times the uvf have broken the ceasefire. I think it’s about half a dozen.

    This is 2011 not 1969. Something loyalists do not realise is that we were able to follow live commentary via Twitter from politicians and a resident as this went on.

    For example, Conal Mc Devitt tweeted that pensioner’s roofs were on fire from the initial attack and people were trying to put them out.

  • Comrade Stalin

    Shots were fired from the ‘republican’ side, the police have said they were fired by ‘republicans’ who may have been dissidents and there is an argument that there was provocation from ‘republicans’ in the days prior to the attack..

    This is what I’m talking about. When loyalists talk about provocation they are taken seriously. If there was an attempt to explain dissident violence based on provocation it would be dismissed.

    Provocation is not acceptable as an excuse for this behaviour in any case. I wouldn’t accept “he made me do it” from my seven year old niece. Why would I accept it from grown adults ? We need political leaders who will face down this nonsense, and sadly unionism has yet to step up to the mark. We are constantly being told that nobody supports the UVF so why is it so hard to be unequivocal in condemning their actions in public ?

  • Drumlins Rock

    Why does it always have to be an “either or” situation, its seems pretty obvious that
    A. the usual tit for tat has been going on.
    B. the UVF in EB deliberately escalated the situation for various reasons.
    C. republicans / dissidents or whoever played along to a greater or lesser extent.
    D. everyone else plays their traditional tune, oppressed, provoked, neglected, blame someone else.

    So skip the blame game, call it 50% UVF, 20% dissident, 20% “social disadvantage, 5% police, 5% politicians, or argue about the percentages all night there remains 3 problems,
    1. the refusal of the two communities to live in peace, build walls, or sent them off to Butlins or somewhere, but its long term thing.
    2. weed out the dissident threat, like in any other area, they made things worse for everyone,
    3. deal with the UVF, round them up, pay them off, whatever, but they should no longer exist.

    It might be easy to say that far from the city, but when they start dragging the whole country down its our business too.

  • pippakin

    I have already said I blame the UVF for the riots on Monday and Tuesday night. I hope all those responsible are found and charged, but what does that have to do with finding out if there were any others involved or if there was any previous provocation? If there was then they too should be found and charged.

    Its as though some people think if loyalists did ‘this’ then republicans can’t have done ‘that’. Or the other way around depending upon which ‘side’ you are on.

    I’m not trying to be provocative I’m just asking the question.

  • between the bridges

    andwn.’For example, Conal Mc Devitt tweeted that pensioner’s roofs were on fire from the initial attack and people were trying to put them out…’
    would these be the same ‘pensioner’s roofs’ that the ‘defenders’ where throwing petrol bombs from? If so i wonder how the fire started in the first place…

  • Comrade Stalin


    I know you’re not trying to excuse the UVF but the danger is that as soon as someone opens the question of provocation (irrespective of who it is) they are then entering the territory of conferring some kind of crude legitimacy on the actions of whoever was supposedly provoked.

    The people who fired shots out of the Short Strand on Tuesday and Wednesday were no more or less provoked than the UVF were, and their actions are no more or less excusable. My own view is that those who fired the shots have the same objective as the UVF, namely the destabilization of the peace process and the terrorising of the people caught in the crossfire.


    I don’t actually accept the idea that the communities in Short Strand and the surrounding neighbourhoods do not wish to live together. A noisy and restless minority in either camp are (to use Martin McGuiness’ pithy term) “conflict junkies”. A significant proportion of the agitation in the area earlier this week involved people who did not live in the immediate vicinity – dissidents came in from Ardoyne and Twinbrook, and the UVF shipped people in from Ballybeen and beyond.

    A lot of work has been done to try to solve the problems that have occurred at the same flashpoint in previous years. A great deal of the problems that occur – people’s houses being bricked or missiles thrown – are not down to planned agitation by paramilitaries, but feckless spides aged anywhere between 8 and 18 doing it for the buzz, and getting away with it because they are treated by everyone concerned with kid gloves. I know of several neighbourhoods in Newtownabbey where houses get attacked even though there is no interface – all it takes is a bunch of bored kids. And without excusing the yoof involved (they need to be punished severely) they don’t understand exactly what it means to have your windows put in. Sure, sometimes the paramilitaries are in the background somewhere – but the important point is that they are not a prerequisite.

    Maurice Morrow pointed out the other day that the police were being made to look like a laughing stock, sitting tight in the landrovers while the wee bastards crawled all over them.

    So instead of shrugging and saying “to hell with it, this can’t be solved” maybe we just need to try a bit harder and come up with a solution that reflects the above realities.

  • changeisneeded

    what you are trying to do is justify what the uvf did by saying they where provoked. its sick. questions need answered sure but your being one sided in your questioning.

    so the uvf get paid off, but the dissidents get weeded out..? why?
    Intrested in your 1,2,3 solution idea. Is it in order of seriousness, why do the dissidents come before the aggitators in this situation? the uvf never decomissioned, imagine this had been the IRA that staged this attack. There would be some crying then….

    here burn the bridges
    clutching at straws there are we?
    get a grip and face up to the bigotry in your community.

  • andnowwhat

    Tried to retrieve the tweets BTB but the fires were very early on, right at the start

  • andnowwhat

    My own view is that those who fired the shots have the same objective as the UVF, namely the destabilization of the peace process and the terrorising of the people caught in the crossfire.

    Comrade Stalin

    Agreed and hence the stupid endless posting on here and other sites by loyalists that it was PIRA who fired guns that night.

    Funny enough, I’ve just listened to a debate on Any Answers about self defence in the case of someone being in one’s property. David Cameron is all for it. That’s 2 of his policies well illustrated then, the other being the “big society” given the lacklustre of the PSNI’s intitial response.

    Jim Wilso seemed shocked that the people of the Strand fought back as they did. It was rather like a bully being shocked when a nerd kicked him in the wee bits and left him lying on the ground.

  • keano10

    If Alan Murray is the journalist who gave that interview, then I’m afraid that his career might be ending a lot quicker than the process.

    Its absolutely staggering that this guy can be employed as a security correspondent coming out with nonsense. The police know that it was dissidents who fired the shots, as do most of the media, the local residents and probably even the dogs in the street.

    It has been a poor work for local journalism particularly UTV who completely missed the beat on Monday night failing to report on what they later described as the worst riot in ten years.

    This latest drivel from Alan Murray only serves to indicate still further that local news reporting could do with a major shake up.

  • Limerick

    “Jim Wilso seemed shocked that the people of the Strand fought back as they did. It was rather like a bully being shocked when a nerd kicked him in the wee bits and left him lying on the ground.”

    The history of this one is being written as we speak. A unionist pogrom against the defenceless peaceable folk of the Short Strand repelled by local volunteers who were forced to use the gun in order to defend the poor pensioners’ homes. No doubt the songs are being penned and the murals planned.

    However one or two things do not fit the script.

    For instance the republican violence appears to have largely kicked off after the police had arrived and were holding the loyalists at bay.

    Said violence was not an act of defence, but rather one of aggression as it involved a mirror attack on Protestant homes on the other side of the road.

    Republicans appear to have launched opportune shoots against both the police and the loyalists. In the first instance they managed to wound two Protestants and on the second night they managed to shoot a journalist. All the shooting took place after the arrival of the police and after any threat to the houses in the Short Strand had been dissipated by their presence.

    It also appears that a significant portion of the thugs on the republican side were not from the Short Strand, but were imports from Ardoyne. Specifically seeking to exploit the situation to their own ends.

    Conclusions: The UVF launched a sectarian attack on the Short Strand for reasons which are not 100% certain, but which appear to be centred around the activities of the HET.

    The Police arrived initially in small numbers and repelled said attack.

    Republicans ‘mobilised’ (in the words of Belfast’s Lord Mayor) and began counter rioting against the loyalists. They then embarked on a sectarian attack against Protestant homes on the other side of the road.

    Dissident republicans arrived on the scene and attempted to exploit the situation by opening fire at random targets. Loyalists did likewise.

    Result: Misery for locals and a bonanza for dissident republicanism.

  • Joe Bloggs

    This is how the trouble started:

  • kinnegoe

    Its not hard to work this all out if you put yourself in the Reebok runners of the morons that attacked short strand. What was going through their minds along with the Buckfast and god knows what else? – Its easy enough: Nothing more and nothing less than undiluted sectarianism – a collective super psychopath that cannot be rationalised, justified, defended. Each time we do give this madness validation we make it grow and spread – it has to be choked of all validation before it recedes.

  • andnowwhat

    Great post Kinnegoe.

    I’m sure Nolan’s interview with Wilson from Tuesday is still on the player.

    He genuinely sounded shocked at how the people of the Strand reacted.

    What the hell way did loyalists think the people woulf have reacted?

    Limerick, your post contradicts itself. How can chasing off a paramilitary attack be called sectarian? I’m sure we’re all interested.

    As for the guns. There’s no shortage of Irp’s just half a mile away in the Markets, never mind new brand dissidents

  • Limerick

    “Limerick, your post contradicts itself. How can chasing off a paramilitary attack be called sectarian? I’m sure we’re all interested.”


    The only people who chased off any paramilitary attacks were the PSNI, and they had to do so with both collections of scum.

  • Mick Fealty

    Could some of you trouble yourselves to read the Telegraph link? Not so you can find someone else toblame, just so we can start to unwind from the spin and bullshit of the last week.

    What I have been hearing is a lot political posturing, and little concern for the truth.

    Not everything comes down to politics, and not every problem has a political solution. Mooch I hope will have something to share on Monday that, I hope, will get people thinking again.

  • Mark McGregor


    As we read the link, maybe we should be made aware of who the source, ‘community worker’ is?

    Hardly a stellar reputation to be treating as a strong voice to add in previously unreferenced material?

  • Nunoftheabove


    Fair and timely point. Poster bias and point-scoring is inevitable, for me it’s the performance of the media over this in recent days which really ought to be exercising some keyboards though I’d have thought.

    What we’ve seen a lot of this week is an avoidance of objectivity in the local media. Maybe it’s the way these journalists are trained these days, maybe it’s more the policy of their employers. It’s not exclusively a NI problem of course but incidents such as these in east Belfast do rather highlight the problem. The search for balance in the story, what they call impartiality or even-handedness or fairness, means an avoidance of objectivity which of course is the search for truth at all costs and all hazards – even should it lead to unwelcome or unpopular conclusions. A consequence-oblivious account of the evidence of what occurred irrespective of who thinks what about it or of how (or from whom) the sparks may fly afterwards.

    It’s almost exactly a mile from both the BBC and UTV to the Short Strand, between them they must have dozens of available personnel in Belfast on decent salaries. What we get over the course of an event that played out over 2+ days, was “What appeared to happen was…” , “what I’m told by some is…” being, as they see it, balanced with and by “but what the RUC/other residents/other political representatives say is…”with fatuous summaries along the lines of “so we have conflicting accounts, one side says this, the other saying that, no-one really knowing the full story”.

    The trouble is that notwithstanding the corporation policies of the BBC, UTV etc, it seems to me that a good many of these journalists wouldn’t recognize the distinction between what they do for a living and journalistic objectivity or would avoid it over fear of allegations of bias.

  • Limerick


    Did you watch the Spotlight programme about McArdle which was on last week? It gave us an insight into how journalists who go off message are treated by the Sinners.

  • Mick Fealty

    Mark. It accords with what I was getting from a secondary source four days ago. What’s puzzled me all along is the reliance on the pogrom narrative. The ‘spontaneous eruption’ of anti Short Strand feeling.

    I don’t buy it. And I don’t buy the socio economic excuses either. This is the first this story has made it to the papers. It may or may not be true. But it at least suggests there are more searching questions to be asked about what started this.

    As I say not every problem is rooted in politics. But Ove never seen any quite as determined as the commenters here to bend reality to th needs of their own particular political ambition!

  • bumper14

    I passed through the lower end of the Newtownards road and saw the wrecked fronts of the Protestant homes. It takes a frenzy of hatred to inflict such damage. Nationalists have brought more shame upon themselves- absolutely shocking!
    Incidentally is there no Catholic out there who thinks it desecration to use the Chapel grounds to launch attacks on Protestants? Apparently not because St Mathews has been used as cover ,frequently in the past, to the extent of even murdering Protestants. Oh I forgot sure its no sin to kill a heretic!

  • kinnegoe

    Mick. Am i really being too naive into thinking this was not sectarian madness? The reasons for it happening may be something else but the target was blatant. The truth must be harsh and game changing?

  • Nunoftheabove


    Yes. Kinda makes my point for me.

  • Mick Fealty


    The truth is better than rthe half truth.

  • John Ó Néill

    There is a disparity here between the organised nature of the UVF action and the apparent difficulty in drilling down to the trigger. The post-hoc justification citing earlier sectarian attacks doesn’t stand up to serious scrutiny. Too many people were involved who don’t appear to have known this (they would have pointed it up immediately as legitimisation) that it wasn’t the motive behind their participation. Whatever justification people want to retro-fit to soften the story, an organised attack like the UVFs is still an attempted pogrom, whatever way it is spun. As it has played in the media, they will be encouraged to deploy this tactic again this summer.

  • Mick Fealty

    So just walk us through what you believe was the motivation John? A rogue UVF faction can certainly be a contributing factor to an unstable context.

    But how do we get from pressure from HET to attacking pensioners homes? If we can answer that we’ll move away from this journalism on stilts we’ve been witnessing over the last week.

  • John Ó Néill

    I think (I’m not claiming to know) that it was a show of strength, relying on the old school ‘defenders of the faith’ line to get some traction locally. Presumably there is some internal pissing contest in play in the UVF which dictated the timing.

    As such, the Short Strand peace line residents are only the pawns in this. Whether the real beef is with the HET or internal is hard to tell.

  • Mick Fealty

    That would explain a parade. What I’m hearing is that Clusn Place has been under nightly attack for weeks.

  • pippakin

    Mick Fealty

    Dare one ask: What do you think is the reason behind it?

  • Chris Donnelly

    What I’m hearing is that Clusn Place has been under nightly attack for weeks.

    And this alleged series of sectarian attacks never managed to make it to the media for what particular reason? It’s not like unionist politicians aren’t quick to contact the BBC and UTV when paint gets thrown onto an Orange Hall, so why keep mum about this?

    A dodgy narrative, alright Mick.

    Most Slugger commenters should be able to see through the bullshit….

  • Chris Donnelly

    Excellent post @ 9:08 btw

  • Chris that is exactly the same question the residents of Cluan place are asking. I spent an hour or so there yesterday and was shown a collection of missiles, golf balls, stones, ball bearings and bolts that have landed in there in the last 4 days. More or less every night there is at least one incident of something coming over the peace wall. This are being reported to the PSNI and therefore logged. An FOI should reveal the numbers.
    The CCTV has blind spots in the coverage which the PSNI have admitted to. Speaking with the residents they agreed that in all likelihood the feral kids responsible don’t really understand what they are up to. My guess is that despite lines of communication between the local community workers to help stave off trouble at this flashpoint, the election and the Short Strand having the youngest Lord Mayor, meant that the Shinners had their minds occupied elsewhere and took their eye off the ball as regards these attacks.
    I blogged about this nearly two years ago

  • Comrade Stalin


    Cluan Place and other streets nearby (on both sides of the interface) have been “under attack” for years. I put that in quotemarks, because it implies there is something organized going on when usually it is nothing much more than a group chucking bricks or stones over a wall because they have bugger all better to do.

    That is not to diminish the seriousness of it, I know from personal experience what it is like when it happens, it is very hard to tell yourself when a brick hits your house that it is random and not because you were deliberately singled out. Nonetheless, this is usually the case (although if you make the mistake of going out and yelling at the wee bastards doing it, you might find yourself subject to further special treatment). As I have said before we have a serious problem with anti-social behaviour in this country and when it gets mixed in with the tribalism and the peace walls you get a volatile combination.

    But I don’t buy the narrative that the UVF action was some sort of response. The UVF’s own spokespersons in the heat of the moment did not point to provocation, they pointed to disaffection and bad representation. Others, such as Barney Rowan, talked about how this has all been brewing for months. If Jim Wilson had been on saying “we’re fed up with our homes being bricked” I could maybe see it. But he didn’t.

    As for that Belfast Telegraph article, something doesn’t smell right. If this incident really kicked off on the previous Saturday why did the police move to blame the UVF, and why did the police not have a heavy presence on the ground ?

  • Mick Fealty

    Which is why, CS, I don’t believe this a mere political problem.

  • Kevin Barry


    I’ve enjoyed reading you try to justify these attacks by the UVF and then hysterically try to backtrack. Quite hilarious.


    A girl gets hit with a brick and the UVF decide to petrol bomb pensioners in an organized manner? You’re clutching at straws or playing devils advocate. I hope it’s the latter as the former makes you look somewhat foolish.

    I appreciate that people’s homes have been hit with bricks, I wager it’s a feature for residents on both sides, but you appear to me, rightly or wrongly, to be going through evidence that suits your narrative, daily anti social behavior broke the camels back and the UVF reacted.

  • Mick Fealty


    I agree with you that it is likely to be a problem for people on both sides. But heretofore we’ve had people telling us that the problem originated with the UVF invasion.

    I want to say a great deal more about this matter when I have more than an iPhone to respond with.

  • Kevin Barry


    I hear you re the iPhone, I’m having trouble myself.

    The point I am trying to make is that loyalists gave us reasons for the attack at the very outset; lack of representation and a feeling of being neglected etc.

    This gained no traction whatsoever amongst the great and the good so now they wheel out that some girl got hit with a brick and constant anti social behavior from the Short Strand. I’m sorry but I’m from Lurgan, if we were to have a riot every time there was anti social behavior or someone got hit with a brick the town would be razed to the ground (insert joke about how it looks like that anyway).

    Maybe it’s because I’m a nationalist and I lack the ability of rational thought but the excuses, not reasons, but excuses for this is pitiful.

    For what it’s worth, IMHO it was a show of strength by these guys before the 12th together with some rumblings about the HET as well the anti social behavior acting as a nice cover for the whole lot.

  • Mick Fealty

    Well. That story may now be getting reported, but I heard it late Tuesday. I didn’t use it because I was not in a position to check it’s veracity and was not keen to add to the spin and hysteria.

  • My guess is that despite lines of communication between the local community workers to help stave off trouble at this flashpoint, the election and the Short Strand having the youngest Lord Mayor, meant that the Shinners had their minds occupied elsewhere and took their eye off the ball as regards these attacks.

    One of the curious things for me from the whole episode is that SF’s media mauipulation has been a lot less slick than from what it (ironically) was in 2002 when it was Cluan Place under constant and sustained attack from Republicans over a period of days. Ironically (again) that ws the time when the loyalist paramilitaries stood back when the street was in flames in order to maximise the PR effect, so the propaganda job would have been much more difficult for SF but they still managed it.

  • Kevin Barry


    I’m not doubting the veracity of the story, what I am doubting is that it is the reason they decided to attack the Short Strand as their representatives offered different reasons from the very beginning.

  • Mick Fealty

    I get the impression that they were not watching the local game here. We don’t know exactly who the gun men were, but according to one unconfirmed account I have, the local Shinners were told in no uncertain terms not to interfere.

  • Mick Fealty

    Which ‘representatives’?

  • pippakin

    Kevin Barry

    I have not and am not supporting the rioters, not the UVF or any other abbreviation. For goodness sake what is wrong with asking for full investigations into all of the disturbances?

    Its not as if there are no questions even you have them. Tbh I’m sick and tired of sectarianism being used as a catchall excuse.

    I think its a bit more involved than that and I would like to know the real reason, not some armchair warriors explanation/brush off’. The last thing it needs is to be dismissed in various shades of green or orange.

  • Chris Donnelly

    C Stalin has it right, unfortunately, about life on the interfaces. There are ‘attacks’ and ‘assaults’ on a regular basis which are taken for granted due to the close proximity of the residents to the ‘other.’

    I don’t doubt claims that some objects were thrown by loyalists at nationalist homes and nationalists at unionist homes in recent days prior to the UVF attacks (excuse the shorthand with regard to politicising homes but you know what I mean.)

    But the fact that the unionist-loyalist narrative since has only now settled on a UVF as defenders account is deeply suspect, and those who would baulk at republicans for constructing a similar narrative to excuse a clearly highly organised and sustained set of sectarian attacks on a vulnerable protestant community in a sea of nationalists would do well to reflect before jumping with both feet to the defence of loyalists in an area where all evidence points to a considerable degree of planning culminating with these assaults.

  • ayeYerMa

    This blog post is nothing more than yet another Irish Nationalist propaganda piece on Slugger, if ever I heard one.

  • Nunoftheabove


    So just to clarify, any criticism of the actions of unionist rioters and/or loyalist paramilitaries by definition makes the critic an Irish nationalist propagandist, does it ?

  • 241934 john brennan

    Shure don’t ye know, that fur unemployable loyalist paramilitaries, organising a wee riot is a lot easier than completing a form, applying for wan of them wee paid community jobs. Start a riot wan night – as easy as throwing a brick through a winda. The next night put on a dayglo jacket and kid on to be stopping a riot – and Bob’s yer uncle – an instant wee community job at the tax-payers’ expense.

    What cud be simpler, apart from being a republican rioter. Then if yer face fits, SF will see to it that get a wee paid community job, with no questions asked.

    After all, Peter an’ Martin hev an £80m pound slush fund fur wee paid community jobs, especially for wans what toe the party line.

  • Nunoftheabove

    Forgive my ignorance of this but those people with the ‘Community Warden’ jackets on the other night in and around the scene, are they volunteers or are they paid ?

  • Tweedybird

    If you thought to much about this latest escapade it would depress you. Do we learn nothing from the past ? Its a absolute disgrace this is still going on. We, the people that live in small villages, live, work and play with our neighbours no-matter what religious persuasion, or political viewpoint. You would think certain places/people in Belfast want to hold on to old grievance’s. Moreover, when you see the news its as if whatever side is in a permanent state of victim hood.

  • HeinzGuderian

    Personally,I blame The Brits…………………;-)