I have long wondered about Unionisms relationship with militarism, definition of terrorists and identification with physical force as a means of achieving political aims.
Ruth Patterson has again laid bare or as I have previously on numerous occasions said, let “the mask slip” regarding this matter. Unionist marches are invariably militaristic in nature. They involve people dressing up in mock military uniforms and banging drums and playing flutes. Ahem. I’ll not make the obvious Freudian analogy. They are accompanied by members of the various Loyal Orders marching in faux military formation. Many of them are actually ex- military Men, and they are mostly Men.
These Unionists celebrate and commemorate, to my knowledge, the following events: The battle of the Boyne, The Siege of Derry, the battle of Aughrim the Somme and various other scenes of slaughter in WW1. They celebrate their sacrifices for the benefit of Britain. A Britain that they distrust and that they also say has continuously abandoned them.
They object to the commemoration of those who sought, through those same means of arms, the aim of Irish self determination including many of the protestant faith.
Not a single Orangeman fought at the Boyne. Actually all they did was import German arms into Larne and Bangor just before the first world war and threaten armed insurrection against the state if they didn’t get their way and they didn’t care what anyone thought.
Just like Ruth.
"We in coming days may be" 
Well BD never let the facts get in the way of a post…
Where to start…
Are you seriously suggesting that unionism identifies more closely with violence than republicanism (clue – one includes the use of violence as an essential element in its definition the other does not unless we want to use CNR / PUL interchangeably)?
Unionist marches are militaristic – perhaps you should compare the unionist marches with bands and banners to republican marches with children dressed as terrorists and come back to me on that. if bans uniforms are military please find armies which wear uniforms comparable to any band except the handful which have recently adopted WW1 uniforms and Omagh Protestant Boys with their pith helmets which are I assume an attempt to look like the Royal marines Band rather than actual commandos. Locally there is a band referred to as the milkmen due to their blue uniforms with white hats and if the loyal orders are militaristic due to their banners does that extend to the trade union movement? The battles you refer to are the seminal moments in the Glorious Revolution – if you want to see a culture which remembers military events go to County cork, my whole week on holiday I don’t think there was a stretch of road where I didn’t pass a memorial to an incident from 1920s. Frankly the Boys Brigade was more militaristic than the Orange Order in my experience.
Many of the protestant faith – not round County Cork from what I could see or read, just the usual handful of token prods vastly outnumbered by those from that single county kidnapped and buried in unmarked graves simply because of their religion (Dame Nuala O’Loan seems to have overlooked them somehow).
As for comparing the set piece battles of the Williamite Wars and World War 1 (Irish Divisions included) with the actions of republicans and so called loyalists in our own Troubles is not laughable it is just offensive.
And if they did threaten armed insurrection at least they only threatened it. Ruth’s comments were as the DUP themselves put it today obnoxious and she should resign but at its height it was support for hypothetical violence against a parade glorifying those who engaged in actual violence – her main crime has been to deflect attention from this by sinking nearly to their level (nearly – but not quite)
LikeLike
Thanks for the reply Peter,
I appreciate your recognition of the obnoxionable nature of the remarks. I also note the “but”.
Yes, I am suggesting that unionism has a close affinity with the threat of violence, The six county state was founded upon that threat.
Your point regarding the dressing up I would point you in the direction of the recent UVF parades in East Belfast, not to mention the flags of that organisation still flying along Sydenham.
If comparing the williamite wars with WW1 is offensive, and in my opinion there is no link or comparison whatsoever, why is it done?
Most of your last paragraph I agree except they didn’t just threaten, as I say in my post they imported arms. They acted on the threat and relied upon that threat for 80 subsequent years. It’s called the Orange Card.
As for the actual use of violent military force upon the people of Ireland, both legal and paramilitary(illegal) I can happily direct you to respected and detailed sites. I would, of course argue that the occupation of Ireland is a matter of illegality from a long way back.
LikeLike
She was glorifying a hypothetical terrorist attack on those celebrating an actual terrorist attack – are you saying that that is a) inaccurate and / or b) that if it is accurate that real and hypothetical terrorism and therefore glorifying each of them are on the same level of culpability?
The recent UVF parade in Belfast was a one off – you use the phrase invariably which means in every case – big difference
The offensive comparison is between Williamite Wars & WW1 with recent terrorism not the two components of the first half
The 1912 UVF did not act on its threat of violence – if you believe it did perhaps you can refer me to the specific examples
And perhaps if the occupation of Ireland was and Northern Ireland is illegal perhaps you could indulge my legal side and refer me to the relevant international law (whereas the Belfast Agreement endorsed by all the people of the island may appear to reinforced my position that it was and is entirely legal).
LikeLike
They were hardly going to fight using conventional warfare Peter. The Untied Irishmen took to the battlefield yet without proper armaments they were slaughtered.
You condemn the tactics of the IRA yet refuse to acknowledge the British have been guilty of much worse in this country. All sorts of terrorism, from famine to slavery, evictions and land grabs to the penal laws. They partitioned Ireland with threats of terrible war rather than accept the will of the people. In comparison the IRA campaign pales into insignificance.
LikeLike
If they do not fight within the rules of war then there is no comparison with those who did – different game different rules.
All those British tactics are at least 100-150 years old not a decade in the past and I don’t parade to commemorate those tactics and neither does anyone else. The silence on the parade itself remains deafening….
LikeLike
The rules of war meant to the British what ever they could get away with at any particular time in history. They denied the people of Ireland the right to express their will at the ballot box and eventually when they had the opportunity to do so the definition of democracy suddenly had a different meaning.
Basically what you’re saying is that the victim must accept the will of the aggressor.
LikeLike
Hmmm that seems to have totally avoided every single one of my points – usual complete republican rebuttal, just like Barry has been doing all week answer the question you wanted to be asked not the one you actually were asked and can’t answer. Republican = victim (hence patriot dead), Britain = aggressor without exception? As for failing to express the will of the people at the ballot box surely that is the very definition of republicanism and what distinguishes it from nationalism?
LikeLike
Your point is British rule ok anyone who resists not ok, I get it. You choose to ignore how British rule was achieved and maintained in the first place, the reason why the IRA came to exist, then you use the rules of war in an attempt to distinguish one form of terror from another.
LikeLike
Still misses the point and avoids the questions I put – but lets follow you off topic. How was British rule achieved and maintained, why did the IRA come into existence and what rules of war did they follow?
LikeLike
I’ve just written something similar .
Yesterday to be precise. Great minds think alike!
Hope you enjoy it and some other posts I’ve put up
LikeLike
The planned IRA terrorists parade in Castlederg is a grubby dirty disgrace. Ruth Pattersons twitter remarks were idiotic and offensive, I just wish the Northern Ireland middle ground would agitate and marginalise both these groupings.
LikeLike
Alphiedale,
Now do you know how nationalists feel about UVF banners and offensive songs?
LikeLike
Nice whataboutery Bangordub. When have I ever said otherwise about any paramilitary displays?
“Now do you know” ridiculous comment against me, as I know people of Catholic background who live in working class areas, I know exactly how they feel towards Loyalist paramilitaries – I feel similar, and have known how they feel for many years, I didn’t discover it yesterday. I also know how they feel towards the IRA who terrorised their estates and eg, abducted and beat with hurley bats the teenagers involved in petty crime in their area. Now do you know how victims of IRA violence on all sides feels, and to have it glorified by butter wouldn’t melt Sinn Fein?
Your post on this subject is propagandist (again). You didn’t mention Castlederg once therefore offer no opinion on it, but are happy to comment on the DUP twitter shambles. Even though this is a republican blog such lack of balance undermines the credibility of this blog.
LikeLike
The British army have engaged in their fair share of terrorism. The OO use UVF men to marshal parades and many are members. Have you ever questioned their right to parade?
I’m not really surprised by Ruth Patterson’s comments. She’s only expressing a view thats probably widespread within UnionismIn and especially the DUP. In Peter Taylors Loyalists a senior Unionist politician claimed many Protestants, who wouldn’t admit it publicly, had a “sneaky regard” for Loyalism. Willie McCrea and Billy Wright come to mind.
LikeLike
What is the British Army’s fair share? Surely that is an oxymoron, there is no such thing as a fair share of terrorism unless you a re a republican.
Many UVF men are members of the Orange Order is a sweeping generalisation which may be partly true on certain parts of Belfast but is not everywhere else and if they are parading it is not to commemorate “their patriot dead” (sic).
I suspect that many unionists did have a sneaky regard for loyalists on the rare occasions when they actually took on republicans but that was so infrequently that they never had any significant support from with their own community who were usually their main target – whereas the CNR community had an undeniable affection for republican terrorists despite the fact that they killed more members of that community than the security forces – contrast the hunger strikers funerals with those of loyalists.
Perhaps time to pause and take the log out of your own eye before trying to take the undeniable splinter out of the eye of unionism?
LikeLike
At least we got to see see the HS funerals unlike those of Loyalists. I wonder why they were so camera shy. Wouldn’t have anything to do with hypocrisy and certain politicians in attendance?
LikeLike
Why are the SDLP and so called nationalists happy to appear on camera and carry the coffins of republican terrorists? The reason the cameras were there was for publicity to allow all the plastic paddies in (occupying?) America who were funding the campaign in America to see what the Brits had done to ten men who committed suicide and keep them filling those tins Danny Baker got in trouble fro reminding Bostonians about. Most unionists wanted and want nothing to do with so called loyalists the election results speak for themselves. – kettle pot black?.
LikeLike
If you’re going to claim “the CNR community had an undeniable affection for republican terrorists” because they attended the funerals of Republicans would it not be fair to say the same of members of the OO and Unionists politicians who attended the funerals of Loyalists?
Did Willie McCrea or Ian Paisley and other DUP/UUP/OO members attend the funeral of Billy Wright? Would you vote for them if you knew they did?
LikeLike
Yes – but contrast the numbers at the respective funerals, both of politicians and ordinary members of the public. Proportionate to the electoral support of their respective political wings – but you are preaching to the converted as I resigned from the UUP over the decision to admit Ervine to the Assembly group. As I have said above I have no time for the UVF.
LikeLike
What, you mean like the massive send-offs that the likes of Billy Wright and Lenny Murphy got!?
LikeLike
Compare the funerals of Murphy and Wright to any Hunger Striker or republican killed on active service and bear in mind the weighting of the smaller community from which funeral goers would be drawn and then tell me the numbers are comparable. This is not a terribly scientific process but I think the results (like election results) tell their own story….
LikeLike
Both got massive send offs with unionist political reps present. Why both denying it!?
LikeLike
Perhaps you could reproduce my denial for me – I can’t seem to find it?
LikeLike
I believe whataboutery was the particular form of pseudo-sophistry you used this time, Peter. With a few fairy tales thrown in. Anything to avoid the inconvenient truth basically.
LikeLike
So when you say we both denied it you mean we didn’t both deny it we were using whataboutery? It makes it kind of had to answer your questions when they aren’t actually the questions you mean to ask FF… – specify the fairy tales too.
I merely pointed out that the funerals were on completely different scales and perhaps you could confirm that the UUP or DUP leader actually carried the coffin(s)
http://www.spiegel.de/fotostrecke/gerry-adams-missbrauch-schuld-und-schweigen-fotostrecke-50168-2.html
LikeLike
I’m losing track of you Boys! 🙂
LikeLike
Don’t worry BD – it’s not your fault, FF has lost the run if himself.
it’s like having a conversation with the wife (who fortunately does not get involved in these types of discussions) – I am supposed not to answer the question I am asked but to work out and then answer a question I haven’t been asked!
LikeLike
😉
LikeLike
Peter Brown is avoiding facing up to the fact that loyalist murderers were given massive public send-offs by alluding to the size of the funerals given to the hunger-strikers. More disingenuous sleight of hand from our Ahoghill correspondent!
LikeLike
I am merely pointing out that c10,000 people attended the funerals of Murphy & Wright (in a number of cases of the attending of Wrights funeral was more to do with the manner of his death than the manner of his life) which equates to c 1% of the PUL community. For Hunger Strikers, Sands in particular it was 100,000+ which is c20% of CNR community – what is your point about funerals in the light of this FF?
LikeLike
I would say that encouraging Maggie Thatcher and co to maintain hard-line on republican prisoners was extremely counter-productive and then some. Apparently the slow-learners have still has not learned this lesson.
LikeLike
“in a number of cases of the attending of Wrights funeral was more to do with the manner of his death than the manner of his life”
Are you speaking for yourself or people you know?
It is believed he deliberately murdered dozens of innocent men woman and children for no other reason than they were Catholic so why would the manner of his death be of any concern to you or the need to offer an explanation to those who turned up at his funeral. You claim to be above this sort of thing.
If you’re going to judge people for attending Republican funerals then please don’t be a hypocrite and excuse OO/DUP/UUP members for doing likewise.
As for comparison in size of funerals what does it matter. Its no secret a large section of the CNR had sympathy for the IRA.
LikeLike
According to BIlly Wright’s biographer an estimated 30,000 people attended Wright’s funeral.
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=eTLqbve1i3UC&pg=PT23&lpg=PT23&dq=billy+wright+funeral&source=blots=d0jAKqJ648sig=dsTBCDTKuZSdkz0nNv8AIvcLnxg&hl=en&sa=X&ei=XuQDUvOpBtHP0AXo_oDwBw&ved=0CHIQ6AEwDQ#v=onepage&q=billy%20wright%20funeral&f=false
As was widely reported in the media at the time the town of Portadown came to a complete standstill, with the shops closing.
LikeLike
FF
If you think the British government took a tough line on prisoners ask the families of the Disappeared.
AND
I was not at Billy Wrights funeral nor was anyone I know (at least not anyone who has told me) and I would have thought that the manner of his death would be a concern to any right thinking person. I have no difficulty with the death of Brian Robinson or anyone even unarmed who dies on so called active service but to be assassinated inside supposedly Europe’s most secure prison by a fellow prisoner should concern anyone. By the way as someone so keen on proof when it comes to Republicans how many murders was he convicted of?
FF
My 10,000 came from the BBC – I wasn’t there so I can’t comment but whichever account you believe it is still tiny compared top Republican funerals – are you suggesting Portadown closed down out of respect?
Your arguments are getting weaker and weaker…..
LikeLike
The circumstances of his death look shady as fcuk, and I wish his family the best in finding out the truth, but it’s hardly a reason to turn up at his funeral.
By using the words “in a number of cases” you’re implying you know people who did attend otherwise why would you use those words.
His funeral was huge compared to most and the only reason for this was due to his paramilitary reputation and going by the allegations made against him this included the mass murder of innocent Catholics.
LikeLike
are you suggesting Portadown closed down out of respect?
Dunno, Peter. Perhaps we could ask the MP for South Antrim.
LikeLike
In the most recent Troubles a handful of republicans received bigger funerals than Billy Wright – and most of these died during the 1981 hunger strike.
Happy for you to try and show I’m wrong.
LikeLike
AND
Let me reiterate – I know no-one personally that was at the funeral as far as I am aware but there was a perception that it was bigger for that reason – if nothing else many who were opposed to him in life whether because they were feuding or did not support his position went because of how he died. I was a UUP member at the time and am not aware of anyone even from the local party attended (contrast Colum Eastwood for example) but I could be wrong.
FF
I am suggesting (I believe it was reported at the time that they were “asked” to close and to imply that this was a show of voluntary sympathy was disingenuous to say the least (or par for the course from you)
In terms of funeral size AND has already conceded my point that in his words its no secret a large section of the CNR had sympathy for the IRA and you continue to flog the dead horse with no evidence that PUL community was a mirror image. If Billy Wright’s funeral was your ace I’ll trump it with the hunger strikers, Gibraltar 3, Marley all off the of of my head but you keep on playing your only card over and over again hoping I’ll not notice….this tangent should end at that point I think!
LikeLike
You seem to have a great insight into the mind of people who attended Billy Wright’s funeral despite not personally knowing anyone who went. Strange that!
BTW your attack on Colm Eastwood is extremely snide but then again you are that sort of person. And you’re dead wrong about Larry Marley’s funeral, part of which I witnessed through a classroom window. There were nearly as many RUC men at it as mourners.
LikeLike
FF
That was the perception as to why it was so much larger than any other similar funerals (Robinson, Bratty, Elder, Bingham) – it was hue, almost 1/10 the size of a republican funeral!
I’m not sure how you can say my attack on Colum Eastwood is snide – it was merely a response to your attempt to blacken the names of mainstream unionist politicians by doing exactly the same thing? Are you snide ort just a hypocrite? And engaging in hypocritical ad hominem attacks does not mean that you can get away without addressing the substance of my points….I’m not sure about the numbers at the Marley funeral but there were hundreds of RUC men and presumably even according to you therefore even more mourners…..
It was also widely reported at the time I believe that shops were visited and asked to shut for right’s funeral and to imply it was a show of respect is at best disingenuous “but then again you are that sort of person”.
LikeLike
Peter, I’d just like you to square the circle whereby you don’t personally know anyone who attended the funeral of Billy Wright yet you understand the wholly innocent motivation which caused these people to go to there in the first place.
You’re also undoubtedly aware that Willie McCrea offered political support to Wright at a time when the well-known psychopath was engaged in a campaign of murder against people like Michael McGoldrick – not that it did him any harm at the ballot-box.
LikeLike
I have dealt with that issue at some length FF and WMcC lost Mid Ulster and only initially won S Antrim at a by election after that support – not like you to get your facts wrong (oh wait yes it is as typical as your inability to address any of my points ;-p)
LikeLike
I’m still waiting for you to explain how you know people had sincere motivations for going to a mass-killer’s funeral despite your claiming not to know anyone who actually went. Wishful thinking, Peter, or are you telling porkies?
LikeLike
Middle ground = status quo = unionism.
Mu parents were ivolved in the Peace With Justice stuff back in the day and that was one of the points they rightly made. Even the most casual knowledge of Irish history means that there is only one legitimate end to this, a united Ireland.
Make no mistake, by every definition, the UVF were no British patriots but traitors and their supposed great sacrifice in WWI was born out of self-interests, as witnessed by the pish poor enlistment of NI unionists in WWII and their poor performance (the worst) in the war effort.
The mentality is like that of zionist who purport to be like us in the west but the truth is that they see themselves as more important than us, the chosen ones.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IX9Tk2TMA6Q . Just as AIPAC demanded money be taken off the beleagured and desperate Americans and given to israel, in the recent sequester, so too do unionists demand that the every desperate man, woman and child in GB send us the much needed £10 billion to the statelet.
What we have now is what white South Africans, most notably, the Afrikaans, found when the state was no longer a thing of their creation, the right to be as poor as the “natives”.
We didn’t start this but we sure as hell have to make sure we finish it and with the right result, it’s the ONLY justice.
LikeLike
I broadly agree with Peter’s comments. Two points to address:
“Not a single Orangeman fought at the Boyne.” Big clue, he was riding a white horse. There were no British, or Germans, who fought at the Boyne because those countries didn’t exist at that time. Also, no Christians followed Jesus when He lived.
Militaristic uniforms and formations; this has been touched on by Peter with regards to Trades Union parades, which my band used to take part in. There was little difference between the May Day parade and the Twelfth, bar you got more scruffy dressers and the speeches were, unbelievably, worse at the former. The plus point was that, by that afternoon, I’d invariably watched the Glens win the Irish Cup again.
On to Ruth Patterson, her thoughts are incompatible with the pledge of the public servant and she should be made to apologise not just to the general population but also to her party colleagues. I actually was wondering over the last couple of days would you do a post about the Castlederg parade but now, with her comments, the heat has been deflected from a sticky wicket for SF onto an outburst of idiocy.
LikeLike
LOL Carricakally,
noting your comment regarding the Rovers, I’m delighted for them. A team that went belly up and started again from scratch. Now with a shiny new stadium, owing nobody anything, learning lessons and paying their way again. Proud of all concerned and I think the Glens could do worse than follow their example. (Billionaire’s me arse)
OK, King Billy may have had a white horse and been of the house of Orange but the OO was named after him, not the other way round.
I have to admit the uniforms are mostly hilarious, not to mention ill fitting and sit poorly with the , mostly, well groomed, Orangemen in their Sunday best, but come on, it’s like the Boy Scouts trying to be soldiers.
The bold Ruth has single handledly fecked up the entire Castlederg plan for the DUP. Of course the real narrative is why a 65% Nationalist town which has 20 unionist parades a year cannot tolerate a single nationalist parade.
LikeLike
Ruth Patterson has been charged with sending a grossly offensive communication. PSNI have sent out an interesting signal because people will have to make sure what they say on Facebook or Twitter or other chat forums isn’t as bad as or worse than Patterson’s, from now on. People will report each other more, etc. I always hated vile comments like those Patterson agreed with, and we know they come from both sides. I just wonder how effective the police will be. I think a lot of new legislation will be needed to make sure that facebook, twitter, you tube, and those who run other comment zones, don’t allow these type of comments to be posted anonymously.
LikeLike
Its not a nationalist parade its an IRA parade. I’d say a lot of nationalists want no truck with it or the IRA . Needless to say the Fleadh parade was held in Castlederg no probs
LikeLike
They’d also want no truck with the many many many Loyalist parades. Do you listen to that side of the argument?
LikeLike
Brilliant point as in, why the fek didn’t think of that one.
LikeLike
As much as Sinn Fein have – classic whataboutery there!
LikeLike
My view on the Castlederg parade would be to allow those who live along the route the final say. Just like if you want to change the name of a street you need the consent of residents.
The organisers must also bear responsibility for the behaviour and actions of those who participate and costs of any clean up or damage to property.
LikeLike
The Irish (Unionists and Nationalists) are given to bouts of (para)military insurrection depending on how they warmly they feel towards the prevailing constitutional conditions and political architecture.
Unionism, having been threatened with greater (papish) southern Irish involvment by the British are now expected – to accept the de-facto legitimicay of the republican insurgency post GFA with SF in governement – and are still clealry struggling with this new dispensation.
Ruth, who likes to tell it as she sees it has simply expressed what many Unionists think i.e. that SF and or the IRA should have taken out and shot for their murderous crimes against Ulster.
The DUP will need to be cautious about throwing her out of the party when she could boost the anti-agreement rivals of the party – and especially with contentious marches on both sides in the offing and the Bobby Sands Memorial shrine in the pipeline. Better having Ruth inside the tent pissing out (Union Jack skirt permitting) than the opposite.
Ruth, is simply the latest in a long line of Irish personages who periodically and (metaphorically) reach for the rifle when the percieve conditions to be taking an unfavourable turn – and her latest offering will probably boost her popularity.
LikeLike
Actually what Ruth was doing was endorsing the suggestion is that “Sinn Féin / IRA” and anyone who happens to be in their vicinity should be attacked with guns, bombs and rockets in the PRESENT on account of grieviances about events that occurred in the PAST. She was in fact advocating the resumption of WAR.
LikeLike
It is good that she made a clear apology.
LikeLike
It’s good that we saw what she really thinks.
LikeLike
There’s nothing more revealing than a politicians unguarded moments
“They haven’t gone away you know”
“…did Drumcree happen by accident? …no…(t)hree years work went into creating that situation!”
“Every word of Irish spoken is like another bullet being fired in the struggle for Irish freedom”
(c) Sinn Fein
LikeLike
Let’s face it you’d never have heard of the last one if it hadn’t been said in the medium of English (speak English or die).
Do you think the DUP should now expel Ruth Patterson?
LikeLike
I think that she should resign her seta and that the DUP should expel or at least suspend her as she had reduced the clear blue water between them and Sinn Fein – it will be interesting to see whether they put more store by their traditional loyalist support or their new middle ground support….of course Gerry Kelly should resign from the Policing Board as well ;-p
LikeLike
Well the DUP position for some time to share power with Sinn Féin. Ruth’s expressed desire to murder Sinn Féin reps flies in the face of that.
But who in the DUP leadership has the cojones to kick her out?
LikeLike
Its hreat the every former UDR person we see in public, Elliot,b Lord Fekwit, Donaldson and Patterson show what a bunch of bigots we all knew the UDR to be
LikeLike
Its great you are so predictable. Saves me reading your posts ::-)
LikeLike
As I was scrolling down the comments, I was very interested in the thumbs up and thumbs down. It would seem that what I would call “moderate” comments had more thumbs down. Then I got to the end of the thread and saw who had been posting and it all became clear.
For example, how could anyone disagree with the following:
“The planned IRA terrorists parade in Castlederg is a grubby dirty disgrace. Ruth Pattersons twitter remarks were idiotic and offensive, I just wish the Northern Ireland middle ground would agitate and marginalise both these groupings.”
Unless they were a bigoted apologist for murder?
LikeLike
Had to give you a thumbs up for that Carrickally as the token moderate….
LikeLike
“The planned IRA terrorists parade in Castlederg is a grubby dirty disgrace.”
Ally,
Good job you don’t have to be present then. Have you ever paraded with terrorists yourself? Rhetorical question of course.
LikeLike
carrickally,
re. “The planned IRA terrorists parade in Castlederg is a grubby dirty disgrace”
the unpalatable truth for Unionists is that neither successive British governments nor the majority of Nats view the IRA campaign or ‘IRA-SF’ in the same way as Unionists do – the British having ‘gerrymandered’ a system (GFA) to get ‘IRA-SF’ into power and Nats continuing to vote for them to keep them there.
If Unionists are genuienely puzzled or outraged about why Nats can justify an armed insurgency – surely they can look to their own past at the turn of the last century when dissatisfaction with the proposed constitutional arrangments for Northern Ireland led to the taking up of arms.
Nats have as much right to celebrate the efforts of the now ‘old’ IRA at the end of the last century as Unionists have to celebrate the efforts of the ‘old’ UVF at the beginnning of the last century.
Whether it is wise or sensitive to celebrate theses efforts in this day and age, given the volatility of Northern Ireland, is another matter.
LikeLike
Sammy,
“the unpalatable truth for Unionists is that neither successive British governments nor the majority of Nats view the IRA campaign or ‘IRA-SF’ in the same way as Unionists do”
Much as it pains me to admit it you may have hit a nail squarely on the head with that one.
LikeLike
Except that despite numerous requests on this and other threads no-one has as yet provided the example of where unionists having armed themselves actually used those arms – the point is not without merit but is not a bullseye. And if it is true does the same maxim not apply to loyalists terrorism – I for one opposed both but you can’t have one without the other?
LikeLike
Peter,
re.
“Except that despite numerous requests on this and other threads no-one has as yet provided the example of where unionists having armed themselves actually used those arms – the point is not without merit but is not a bullseye. And if it is true does the same maxim not apply to loyalists terrorism – I for one opposed both but you can’t have one without the other?”
Evaluation of the ‘legitmacy’ of an armed insurgency is obvioulsy a tricky and often subjective business. One way of so doing is looking at how the community they ‘represent’ react to the actions taken on ‘their’ behalf – in that respect the PIRA campaign and the old ‘UVF’ have strong parallells – whilst the new UVF (or the ‘new’ IRA do not ) having been largely rejected by the Unionist community.
I think it is a fair point to raise – but it only carries limited weight, to suggest that because the old UVF largely got their way and did not have to engage in armed rebellion (although the old UVF of the 1920s carried out attacks) that this means that their actions has more ‘legitimacy’ than the PIRA.
As mentioned above, each side has and will resort to violence when the consitutional wind blows agianst them and given the history of Northern Ireland – on balance we are unlikley to have seen the end of that.
I personally dont see Ruth’s remarks as a desire to return to ‘war’ as suggested by FF but more a reflection of (Unionist) frustration at how the last round of the ‘war’ turned out and particlalrly at the (de-facto) legitimacy bestowed on PIRA-SF by ‘their’ government in forcing Unionists to accept PIRA-SF in Stormo and sundry other ‘concessions’ for those who Unionists consider to be terrorists.
LikeLike
Loyalists terrorists in state uniform? Lets not pretend it doesnt exist. The unionists had the british state available to arm them. And lets not pretend the present day orange marches etc dont ‘honour’ people killed in the troubles and celebrate nationalist deaths’ either. Ormeau road bookmakers gloating?
Ruth should resign to ensure the pretence that ‘moderates’ like to push ie everybody here is good and its only republicans[to which there are plenty] and a handful of loyalists that are bad.
LikeLike
And lets not pretend the present day orange marches etc dont ‘honour’ people killed in the troubles and celebrate nationalist deaths’ either. Ormeau road bookmakers gloating?
A one off which was part of the Twelfth parade not a specific parade to gloat (unlike Castlederg) where those responsible were subsequently expelled – let’s compare apples and apples WT….
LikeLike
So you object to republicans commemorating republican dead – on the unlikely basis that this constitutes ‘gloating’.
Do you apply the same standard to Remembrance Day ceremonies? Do you regard wearing a poppy as an act of gloating? And how come unionist politicians don’t object to loyalist paramilitary remembrance day parades- is it a case of same old double standards?
LikeLike
Not double standards – there is a distinction between remembering soldiers who voluntarily or by conscription participated in a legitimate war with national and international support and involved set piece confrontation with an identifiable enemy in circumstances where international laws applied and were in the main complied with and those who were involved in a illegitimate terrorist campaign with no national or international legitimacy or support and who constantly flouted the international law applicable to such scenarios whilst expecting their opponents to comply with their legal obligations and whose main tactic was not to engage their enemy face to face to but booby trap their homes, cars, place of business or even worship or attack them when off duty and preferably unarmed. That is where the double standard is – trying to equate the 1912 UVF in its 36th Ulster division guise with its modern counterparts in the UVF or PIRA. That’s goes for you below as well WT – brave or misguided?
LikeLike
Peter, give it another week and you’ll be upholding the rights of the UDA and UVF bands to march through Rasharkin, as you do every year.
LikeLike
Once again no attempt to answer the points just another deflection which I presume I can assume is a de facto concession. If there is a thread on the Ballymaconnolly Parade then I’ll deal with the whataboutery there….
LikeLike
Peter, your point amounts to: we demand the freedom to march but we’ll be damned if we give it to fenians.
(EDITED BD) as will be further demonstrated when the UDA / UVF mount their annual provocation in Rasharkin.
LikeLike
Erm, there’s a simple reason why it was a one off…it got banned from the area.
Oddly, we have the other end where unionist/loyalist violence ensured, as Chris Donnelly pointed out, that they did continue to march http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgWw0SkpM2w&list=PL40FEF4341512A043&index=2
BTW, do you think we forget the YEARS of loyalist violence, including murders, that was (at best) obsfucated (but supported, in reality) by unonists during the Drumcree debacle?
LikeLike
‘A one off’?? I stood and watched orange/loyalist/apprentice marchers beating with their drums with gusto and howler as they passed a taxi rank office where 2 schoolkids were shot dead by undercover UDR men ie ‘loyalist paramilitaries’ in the early ’90’s in armagh city. I am sure there are lots of ‘one offs’ like that around the country??? By the way these heroic UDR men were scouted in by their uniformed colleagues.
Life’s too short to call a shovel a spade so i’ll get to the point- i believe it is proper to remember any person who displayed great bravery in taking on the enormous resources of the british state. Untrained, badly armed, few resources and hopelessly out numbered, it called for a certain type of bravery.
The odds were stacked against them as their enemy were well armed, financed, and had endless man power[thanks to money] and resources.
Their enemy were told if they joined the british war machine it would lead to ‘great career prospects’ and you could get to ‘see the world’,’ meet new friends’ etc etc whereas if you were a republican your prospects were simply 2 things- there was a good chance you would be killed or sent to jail for a long time. And if you were really
unlucky then both. Now thats bravery that cannot be measured by money or medals.
Any ‘moderate’ person can, at least begrudgingly, acknowledge that?
LikeLike
Well said Wolfe Tone,
If I may add in response to some of the comments above, post partition there existed a heavily armed Unionist population many of whom joined various militias that existed with the blessing of the British state. This situation continued for many years right up to recent times. The B-Specials being notorious but also the UDR and RUC for example. All organisations with indisputable links to Loyalist paramilitaries. When was it that the UDA was actually proscribed as an organisation?
Thus the UVF members who had threatened the violence had ready made organisations which were actually “legal” that they joined. Nationalists and Republicans on the other hand had a choice of abandoning their struggle or being labelled “Terrorists” and imprisoned as such. Meanwhile, South of the border, their former comrades became, after a bitter civil War, pillars of the establishment.
If partition had not come about I wonder how Unionism would have developed? I imagine rather stronger, better thought out and confident in itself.
LikeLike
The were fighting a state that castrated Mau Maus, wiped out Malay villages did who know what n Aden and the greater Middle East (still do).
For the most part, the IRA claimed their actions, thousands of the did bird but the same cannot be sad for the British, here or abroad.
The moral highground? It’s a myth in war but interesting that while the British government (and unionists) were supporting Apartheid, the IRA were giving technical advice in their campaign against it.
Don’t start me about unionist hypocrisy in the illegal occupation of Palestine and its support of illegal settlers on Palestinian land,
LikeLike
They had the choice to accept the democratic will of the undisputed majority rather than take up arms and they chose to take up arms – it was not a catch 22 no matter how much you would like to portray it as such. Contrast the unionists who remained within the Republic and who did integrated and continue to do so, those that were still alive after the Civil War that is( no-one has got back to me yet about Dunmanway)…
LikeLike
Peter,
“They had the choice to accept the democratic will of the undisputed majority ”
Did you actually write that with a straight face?
The actual democratic will of the Irish people was expressed in the 1918 election and denied them. The results were:
Sinn Fein 73
Unionists 22
Irish Parliamentary Party 6
Labour 3
Independent Unionist 1.
Could you please expand on your theory?
LikeLike
That was a part of what was then the United Kingdom – why can the same principle of self determination not apply to part of the island of Ireland (I could produce the 1918 figures if you want)? Care to expand on your double standard?
LikeLike
I think I’ll set up a sectarian murder squad and then, in forty years’ time, you or your kids can talk about how brave I was.
You can convince yourselves all you want that the UDR, RUC and the British Army were handing target files over to scumbag paramilitaries every day of the week, that the IRA were an organisation made up of the holiest of men who had no shoes they were so pious and no money from fundraising, and who were unable to purchase state of the art weaponry.
Or you can look at the conviction rates for loyalist terrorists, the moneys and weaponry pumped in by Norad and Libya (and certain pillars of RoI) and the lack of support that former terrorists get from the Unionist electorate.
WT, I’ll give you a begrudging “well done” for being brave boys but quite simply, I’ve been a brave boy in my life too but I didn’t set out to murder any person for my beliefs, or theirs. Will you give me a begrudging acceptance that murder or attempted murder is wrong?
LikeLike
Carrickally,
I, for one, will not hesitate to utterly condemn anyone who uses sectarianism as an excuse to attack or murder anyone. It is the most un-republican of activities.
The UDR, RUC and the British Army WERE handing over files. That is a matter of documented fact at this stage, not a fantasy. The evidence is overwhelming as I am sure you are aware.
LikeLike
Not disputing that there was handing over of files BD but you studiously avoid confirming that it was not widespread or endemic or that the IRA was often as sectarian and indiscriminate in its violence – there are some republicans I cannot hep but have a grudging military respect for but many were simply yabba a dabba do any hun will do mirror images of their loyalist counterparts and none of them are worth commemorating.
In terms of bravery WT in the vast majority of cases the terrorists on both sides opened up first from concealed positions and then ran away before anyone capable of returning fire had the opportunity to do so. If they were opened on first then they cried foul and shoot to kill – there was a statement from INLA at one stage which denounced such double standards and it was about the only thing which they did which was admirable – not expect their opponents to fight with one hand tied behind their back.
LikeLike
Peter,
Make no mistake, I believe it was endemic and widespread. In fact I have no doubt about it. The evidence is emerging all the time and the Pat Finucane Centre is doing great work in that regard but it is emerging slowly and has to be extracted forensically. Nothing is being given away easily by the British Government.
Regarding your notes on Guerilla tactics, the tactics of the likes of Tom Barry were studied and the lessons learned by similar organisations across the world regarding an occupying fully equipped and resourced Army and how to counter them.
I might add that I in no way condone any sectarian attacks against innocent civilians whatsoever.
LikeLike
BD
There much was too be admired from a military point of view in the tactics of the IRA in the War of Independence although again there was a double standard of shooting the wounded and prisoners and then complaining when the government did the same. The Provisionals however with some notable exceptions studiously avoided repeating those feats such as Kilmichael (having passed the memorial and spent my holiday in an house boasting a photo of the 1938 reunion I have read up on it over the last few weeks) and instead preferred to attack off duty and often unarmed members of the security forces in a campaign which was therefore in my less than objective opinion much grubbier and dirtier than their predecessors.
Then to rub salt in this wound of not abiding by the laws of war or even insurrections they cried foul every time they got a taste of their own medicine – they tried to have their cake and eat it expecting their opponents to play by rules they themselves were ignoring and now only expect enquiries into the actions of the security forces whilst avoiding the spotlight themselves. It would be interesting to contrast the figures for security force (especially RUC & UDR) deaths and injuries on and off duty with the figures for the 1920s and then with equivalent figures for terrorists/combatants which I think would tell their own tale…
LikeLike
Care to tell me how long the UDA were killing people before they were proscrbed?
Also, unionists have had former loyalists run for them and even get elected, the son of one just got done their for a racist pipebomb attack. Funny enough, Robo was at his side when he sad he was attacked with a simlar device, when the photo makes one question the story, a bit Mc Gurk’s ballistics stylie
LikeLike
Who determines the ‘rules’ on what is murder? All violent death is wrong. To me the IRA were justified in their campaign but i hasten to add they carried out some actions that are unjustifiable. No republican has any truck with sectarianism. I personally would be disgusted if an IRA man decided to ‘execute’ 2 schoolboys for no reason than that they were protestant. And i have no doubt my community would be horrified as well and would publically show it.
International law tends to be ignored by nations like the US and Uk when it suits[rogue nations?]. The ‘illegal’ war in Iraq for example. Who committed ‘murder’ in that war? I would say the british troops in that country committed murder as they were not justified in even being there.
As for the ‘conviction rates of loyalists’, dont make me laugh. Due to the british attempts to appear like a mediator in the eyes of the world, they had to seen to be impartial ie they had to jail loyalists too. I wouldnt measure the conviction rate but i would actually measure the severity of the sentences handed out to see whose side the state favoured.
I recall the british coming under severe criticism in the mid 1980’s by the international community for seemingly’ taking out’ republican ‘terrorists’ regularly while they were on active service and yet somehow loyalist militia were acting with impunity on a daily basis. The allegation was that the british were in collusion with this 3rd force. So what happened next? The brits executed/murdered a loyalist[brian robinson] on his way back from shooting a catholic shopkeeper. That gave the brits the perfect retort to any international observer accusing them of collusion…..job done. The illusion of impartiality has been maintained. It may have fooled the ‘moderates’ but it didnt fool republicans. Alas, there are none so blind as those that DONT want to see.
LikeLike
Except that despite numerous requests on this and other threads no-one has as yet provided the example of where unionists having armed themselves actually used those arms
Peter Brown.
Yep, as the Briitsh and the new Irsh government gave them what they wanted, the reason they didn’t take to arms en masse is hardly out of fairplay. But then, lets look at the Poop O Day and how they murdered Catholic men, women and children, founders of the constantly celebrated Orange Order.
Of course, the Peeps were angry for the same reason political unionism and loyalsm s up n arms about today, that greater fairness was afforded to Catholics.
LikeLike
Poop O Day@ Man, was that a Freudan slp 🙂
LikeLike
carrickally,
re. “I think I’ll set up a sectarian murder squad and then, in forty years’ time, you or your kids can talk about how brave I was.”
To ussuns the UVF (old version) were a right wing militia set up to subvert the state and engaged in sectarian killings simply because they didn’t like the desired will of the British and the Irish people.
The Orange Order celebrate their activities and their blood promise to plunge Ulster into chaos and mayhem which as we all know would have led to extensive Nat loss of life as was the .custom when Unionists took to the gun – only avoided because the British changed tack..
The awkward question for Unionism is how can they denounce celebrating the actions of the PIRA when they support the actions of the old UVF simply because their ‘sectarian murder squad’ are 60 years older than the Provos.
The Provos are just as legitimate as the (old) UVF as a focus of celebration – both taking to arms to alter the actual or proposed constitutional status.
You cant have it both ways – if themmuns get to march in celebration of a right wing putch – ussuns get to march in celebration of a Nat insurgency.
LikeLike
LikeLike
Great post.
As said during the SPAD debate, most nationalists know former “combatants” (hate that term) and most of them are sound, normal people who would be vastly outdone by DUP politcians in the thuggery stakes.
What’s more, when one looks at the actions of the state, internment, non prosection n cases like Patrick Rooney or Bloody Sunday, RFU lies such as Mc Gurk’s, what the hell else were people to do? Did t all go mad? When does t never?
LikeLike
Of couse they are it was the Brits that forced them to commit Enniskillen, la Mon, the Abercorn, etc etc and if it wasn’t the Brits it was the hun planters refusing to go back to Scotland where they belong and therefore were only getting what they deserved in Coleraine, Bloody Friday, Teebane etc. Sound normal people just like the Shankill butchers…
LikeLike
You can see here from the comments of our resident Orangemen that the Orange Order, even the self-declared moderates, are just as opposed to the notion of equality as they ever were. By staging a commemoration in Castlederg, Sinn Féin may be acting against the spirit of their (bogus) ‘unionist outreach’ rhetoric – but assuming we live in a democratic society, they have every right to do so. The march has been restricted by the Parades Commission. Unlike certain other organisation it’s unlikely that the Shinners will attempt to mount a violent siege or to block roads and go on the rampage across the north. Orangemen, look and learn please!
LikeLike
Of course not FF the people of the Garvaghy Road, Ardoyne etc etc all graciously accepted the right to march when it was applied? Rewrite history much?
LikeLike
It seems to me, Peter, that you’re against the right to march while claiming to be in favour of it. Is that a fair summary of your position?
LikeLike
Yes same as you FF ;-p
LikeLike
OK, there we have it. All the hot air and bluster about the quasi-sacred right to march is in fact a lot of unprincipled sectarian bollocks. As indeed is opposition to the Parades Commission!
LikeLike
Clearly your sarcasm shields are down tonight FF perhaps you can get them repaired by the time I’m in a position to post tomorrow?
LikeLike
Peter, you may think you’re being smart but really you’re not.
LikeLike
I am merely pointing out that we both seem to agree against the right to march while being in favour of it – we just use different criteria. Do you dispute that?
LikeLike
I think the OO’s reaction to the Quinn brothers deaths show how right they are to object.
How about the OO wating outsde Musgrave St. police station to welcome the emotional (can dish it, can’t take it) Ruthy Babe?
Christian mehole
LikeLike
Perhaps you could provide a link to this reaction an incident which it is now accepted at least in this part of the world probably had little to do with Drumcree and as for waiting outside Musgrave Street by 2 men in collarettes is enough to condemn the other 30,000+ then I think I can find enough bad apples in republicanism to make the same sweeping generalisations for them too….
LikeLike
Ain’t funny that when an Orange man breaks society’s rules (decency) they’re acting as individuals but when the break the OO rules (such as attending a dead Catholic policeman’s funeral) the get hauled up before the grand poobahs?
I’m interested to know where people don’t thnk the Quinn’s deaths weren’t connected to Drumcree?
LikeLike
the get hauled up before the grand poobahs…
and acquitted (just thought that was an important detail there)
I’m still interested to see the much touted reaction to their deaths (no link yet) – here is the Wikipedia link for the murders and the explanation at the trial speaks for itself. I cannot and will not dispute links to the murder of Michael McGoldrick among other crimes but the Quinn case was not as straightforward as that….
LikeLike
Remind us, Peter. why were the Quinn children incinerated on 11th July 98 at the height of yet another Drumcree stand-off? And the hundreds of other people who were attacked or intimidated from there homes at the time – what was that about?
LikeLike
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quinn_brothers'_killings
Read it for yourself FF – not all to do with Drumcree if at all…UVF drug feud as told to the court by the defendant himself. Perhaps you could link me to the stories of the hundreds of others…
LikeLike
Oh, you know, Peter. All those spontaneous hijackings, arson attacks and cases of intimidation that, like the murders of the Quinn children, had nothing whatsoever to do with the Orange Order and their wee standoff at Drumcree.
LikeLike
From the Wiki:
The judge described Gilmour as an “accomplished liar”
Shame you skipped that part, Bro. Brown. Shame – on you!
LikeLike
FF
I haver read the judgment in a professional capacity – I think it predates the online court service and I can tell you that he did not call him a liar about the motive for the attack hence the order press release referred to on Wiki.
The court of appeal judgement is available online
http://www.courtsni.gov.uk/en-gb/judicial%20decisions/publishedbyyear/documents/2000/2000%20car%203185/j_j_carc3185.htm
The attack was cowardly and despicable and frankly typical of the UVF (from during my time in politics I received my only specific threat so I am not terribly objective) but it was at worst peripherally related to the Drumcree dispute. Many other incidents were directly related to Drumcree but in this case Drumcree was used as a cover to exact a personal revenge by members of the UVF. That is no comfort to the Quinn family whose loss remains unimaginable even to me as a father of 4.
LikeLike
You defended this scumbag then?
LikeLike
What part of accomplished liar don’t you understand?
LikeLike
No but I know those who did (I was barely qualified at the time) and if you read the judgment you will see what the lies were about “The learned trial judge expressed some scepticism whether the appellant had told the whole truth about his involvement in the incident” – the extent of his involvement not the alleged motive. It remains a tragic and disgraceful episode but not entirely sectarian or related to Drumcree – sorry if that deprives the movement of propaganda but by the time this came to light the media weren’t interested any more and the true motive which was and is well know in the area didn’t get the coverage it merited.
LikeLike
Indeed, Peter. It reeks of a sinister conspiracy against the Orange Order. Were those who defended this essentially honest – but accomplished – liar Orangemen too?
LikeLike
No actually – they were Catholic (if that is relevant). They also represented Torrens Knight as it happens. The evidence about motive did not just come form the defendant either – it came from members of the Quinn family (see the Wiki entry). I’m not justifying the attack or attacking the understandable initial assumption about motive or even saying that it was not related to Drumcree at all. At its height my case is that the UVF possibly using Drumcree as a smokescreen attacked a house of a relative of a person with whom they had a drugs related dispute. There were other more obvious targets than the home of 3 contributors to the building of the local bonfire whose homes were passed on the way to attack this one. If Drumcree wasn’t happening who knows if this attack would / could have gone ahead but it did and irrespective of the motive 3 boys similar in age to my own children died at the hands of members of an organisation who I have no time for whatsoever and to that extent the motive is irrelevant – but it should not have become the political football that it did and that it remains despite the information which came to light at this trial. Most concerning of all is the fact that the actual perpetrators were never convicted of anything despite their identities now being well know (presumably because Gilmour accounts were so contradictory that in the absence of other evidence nothing could be done but the Quinns are not unique in not having had full justice.
LikeLike
Peter,
We all need to condemn the actions of our dissident factions. I do. Do the OO?
LikeLike
It has expelled dissidents and criminals in the past and I suspect that wearing regalia on this occasion is probably an offence under its rules but the individuals would need to be identified before a complaint could be made…
LikeLike
Who is your dissident faction, BD? Who is the loyalist dissident faction? If you mean rioters and people who set out to injure or kill, then that condemnation should be a given. If you mean politically dissident like, for example, NI21, then I’ll happily condemn them too.
LikeLike
Carrickally,
“Who is your dissident faction, BD?”
For me the dissidents are those who reject the democratic wishes of the Irish People (all of them) and express that by force of arms.
That puts the British Government in the frame for example
LikeLike
See this from above…
bangordub said:
August 4, 2013 at 10:09 pm
.
5
0
Rate This
Quantcast
Peter,
“They had the choice to accept the democratic will of the undisputed majority ”
Did you actually write that with a straight face?
The actual democratic will of the Irish people was expressed in the 1918 election and denied them. The results were:
Sinn Fein 73
Unionists 22
Irish Parliamentary Party 6
Labour 3
Independent Unionist 1.
Could you please expand on your theory?
Reply
Peter Brown said:
August 5, 2013 at 12:01 am
.
0
0
Rate This
Quantcast
That was a part of what was then the United Kingdom – why can the same principle of self determination not apply to part of the island of Ireland (I could produce the 1918 figures if you want)? Care to expand on your double standard?
LikeLike
Peter,
What double standard?
Going on what I think you are saying, on that basis, NI would be reduced to 1 1/2 counties. What are you trying to say?
LikeLike
Is the right to self determination that of the British Isles, the island of Ireland or portions of the island of Ireland – according to republicans only the middle one not the other tow because they didn’t like those results, if so why only the middle one?
LikeLike
Peter,
Have you never read any History at all? Your question is in the realms of fantasy land. I’ll answer you at length if you wish but I cannot believe that question is serious.
LikeLike
Semi serious question – where do Republicans draw the line on self determination? island as a whole only and if so why given that the island is not homogenous? (I have read some history by the way)
LikeLike
Peter,
I, as a Republican, regard self determination as being a matter for all the people of Ireland. Meaning everyone who lives here regardless of class, colour or creed. Fair enough?
LikeLike
As a whole presumably – which presumably then rests with the Agreement and the right to self determination for Northern Ireland endorsed by the whole island?
LikeLike
When you say Ireland was a part of the United Kingdom you conveniently leave out the fact that the overwhelming majority of the population, Irish Catholics had no say in the matter. There was no referendum on the act of union.
From an Irish Republican/Nationalist point of view the right to self determination means the majority of the Irish nation being able to determine its own future collectively and free from duress.
It does not entitle a small minority within having the right to carve out a separate state for religious or ethnic purposes anymore than the same right be extended to those in Britain who would wish to live under Sharia law.
Thats the problem with your interpretation, where does it begin and where does it end, its a recipe for disaster.
LikeLike
There is no Irish nation – so Ireland was a small minority with the UK which carved out a separate state, you simply draw the line for viability higher than unionists in Northern Ireland and I draw it below it (but above the sharia state of Blackburn assuming it would vote for such a thing)
LikeLike
Does it not matter to you the Irish people never gave their consent for Ireland to be a part of the United Kingdom?
Who or what in your mind decides the rules which country or territory is or is not a nation?
The dictionary says that a nation is, a large aggregate of people united by common descent, history, culture, or language, inhabiting a particular country or territory.
Is that not the case with Ireland?
Do you disagree with the dictionary and would you also claim there is no Scottish /English/French nation?
LikeLike
To reiterate the Republic of Ireland has a right to self determination and nationhood (no reintegration of the 26 counties) but so too does Northern Ireland (I thought this was accepted by the whole island in the Agreement?) -Yugoslavia no longer exists because each of its component parts merited and ultimately required self determination and nationhood and so does Northern Ireland. Ireland as an island is not a nation, there is insufficient unity.
LikeLike
carrickally,
With reference to my post above – and this snippit – I would be interested in your views.
“The Provos are just as legitimate as the (old) UVF as a focus of celebration – both taking to arms to alter the actual or proposed constitutional status.”
One paramlitary bunch trying to ensure partition and the other paramlitary bunch trying to end it – both with genuine cause for taking up arms and both in defiance of the democaratic staus quo – which neither accepted. There is considerable support within their respective communities for their actions as evidenced by the electoral support for SF-PIRA and the centrality of the old UVF in Orange/Unionist culture.
Any quibbles with that?
LikeLike
Sounds like a fair enough analysis, sammy. Perhaps it shows that while unionists can commemorate the past, like the people of the Irish Republic will do over the next decade too, there is a substantial portion of the republican electorate who live in the past?
LikeLike
Now Carrickally,
Are you seriously saying that Unionists “Commemorate” the past while Republicans “Live” in it?
LikeLike
… and meant to add in realtion to the paramilitiary leaders – Craig and Carson the -Mc Guinness and Adams of their day.
Post conflict both Craig and McGuinness held the highest post in Stormo and both Carson and Adams preferred to ply their trade in the British and Irish parliaments(resepctively).
Uncanny similarities.
LikeLike
Craig was also an officer in the British Army, McGuinness was the same in the IRA. Carson was never in the UVF, likewise Adams was never a provo. You’re right about the similarities!
LikeLike
carrickally,
Excellent point.
… and after entering government there were also some similar problems with former colleagues for McGuiness and Craig – although the boy Craig was able to offer those still keen on a bit of action similar employment with the state.
LikeLike
I didn’t think they had SpAds in those days – do you mean as part of his chauffeur pool? ;-p
LikeLike
re. SpAds
Now that is a difference.
..Marty would have dearly loved to have followed Jimbo’s example in getting his old paramilitary pals inside the tent.
LikeLike
What was the unionist reaction to the attempt to set a policewoman on fire as part of an anti democratic vote?
Were there scolding remarks akin to MMG’s to dissidents? Robinson wouldn’t even stand shoulder to shoulder with MMG, as happened when dissidents attacked PSNI officers.
The actions of unionists only satisfy the letsgetalongerists (copyright of some oul lad, apparently), aging unionist bigots and loyalists.
LikeLike
Where, when and why were the OO founded?
There ya go…a bunch of murder celebrants.
LikeLike
Enlighten me Kalista…
LikeLike
Is Google excluding loyalists, as well as Facebook?
LikeLike
No I looked it up on Wiki and the story of its origins was not as damning as you have been….
LikeLike
The peaceful DUP http://www.u.tv/news/Ex-DUP-man-jailed-over-pipe-bomb-attack/ce7064b6-98d5-4af8-8632-1b3c1cf6e438
LikeLike
Now if you want to get into tit for tat with the DUP v SF I could be here all night…with the MLAs alone!
LikeLike
Pingback: Back With A Bang, Not A Whimper | An Sionnach Fionn
The myth of British and Unionist constitutional politics in Ireland (“myth” in this case denoting a fairy tale and with much the same level of credibility).
LikeLike
BD
“Now Carrickally,
Are you seriously saying that Unionists “Commemorate” the past while Republicans “Live” in it?”
“We” have parades whereas “you” vote for those who took us through dark, dark days. I’d say that’s a pretty clear indication of current thinking from unionists and republicans in Northern Ireland, considering the idea of a United Ireland has no future.
Time to buckle down, let go of the hatred that poisons community relations in this time of equality and build the shared future. First stop, parades; next step, education.
LikeLike
Sammy:
“Excellent point.
… and after entering government there were also some similar problems with former colleagues for McGuiness and Craig – although the boy Craig was able to offer those still keen on a bit of action similar employment with the state.”
Northern Bank and this list of murders to 2005:
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/list-of-shame-the-39-killed-by-the-provos-since-the-ceasefire-26205787.html
There’s quite a bit of employment still out there for the old comrades, either at Stormont or in the fields.
LikeLike
In the nomenclature of the Peace Process – ‘it was never going to be easy’.
As mentioned above Jmbo(Craig) was took his former paramilitary colleagues into the tent with him.
The substantive point remains – both communities seek to commemorate old paramilitary deeds – for themmuns its the old UVF and for ussuns its the old-new/IRA/Provos*.
*For suggestions on IRA nomenclature (what a spiffing word) see below.
http://fitzjameshorselooksattheworld.wordpress.com/2012/08/26/the-ira-by-numbers-guest-post-by-sammy-mcnally/
LikeLike
Hmmm, interesting Sammy. A bit like version 1, 2 and 3 UVF (1913-14, 1920-22, 1966-now). Of course, there are also two UDA versions; the one in the beginning, with a huge number of members and the ones who developed in the early eighties onwards.
LikeLike
That’s some serious revisionism right there regarding the UDA.
LikeLike
carrickally,
Would it be fair to say that although you accept the parallells between the legitimacy of celbrating the deeds of the old (Versions 1 and 2 ) UVF and the actions of the old-new IRA Provos (version 2.1s) you dont think that sufficent time has elapsed after the actions of the Provos for it to be acceptable for them to march?
LikeLike
I don’t celebrate the deeds of UVF1, I commemorate what they did as 36th Ulster Division in France and Flanders. I doubt very many people know about UVF2 either – perhaps their “finest” hour was engaging the IRA in Londonderry in 1920.
To judge issues on time is a tough one. I don’t have a problem with parades, that would make me a hypocrite on the SF scale. There are people on the republican side who have made such an issue out of parading that it is only natural that there is a response generated to what is planned in Castlederg, by SF. That anger is also there for Friday night but because it is a dissident outing, it won’t attract the level of publicity because I hope we can all agree that IRAv4 or whatever they are, are scum.
I do believe that there needs to be a complete honesty about the past; it might be dressed up in flowery language but Pat Sheehan’s speech on the “Republican Perspective” blog by BD certainly suggests that he is comfortable enough addressing those elements to a degree and he recognises that the Pat of today may have thought differently to the young Pat.
LikeLike
carrickally,
re. “I don’t have a problem with parades, that would make me a hypocrite on the SF scale. ”
Unionists do not accept equivalence between the Old-New IRA and the Old UVF in terms of the legitmacy of the right to celebrate/commerorate their deeds – although you hinted at some acceptance of this above you earlier remarked that ”
“I think I’ll set up a sectarian murder squad and then, in forty years’ time, you or your kids can talk about how brave I was.”
There is no chance of dealing with the parades issue or the past until either Unionists accept the legitmacy of the IRA campaign or Nats deny it.Neither of which seems likley. History being written by the victors and when we have a score draw as per the GFA – we still find ourselves waiting for Page 1.
Unfortunately for Unionists SF can manage the parades issue to their advantage – as we can now see – and it is unlikley the the boy Haas will be coming up with anything radically different to the Parades Commission approach – except that SF will propably have a direct say in where the OO marches.
In what the DUP called the battle a day with SF – luckily (for ussuns) the Orange Order dont have the sense to stop damaging their own and Unionism’s cause.
LikeLike
Would it be fair to say that there appears to be no Unionist sense of strategy or direction other than “what we have we hold” and this explains the complete lack of ability to win?
LikeLike
Fair points sammy. BD, I await a new approach to parading and protesting and have a funny feeling that there will be some sense talked in the long run – I would expect by early December.
LikeLike
Pingback: Ruth Patterson – Lady Uniban | An Sionnach Fionn
Alright Enough Lads I think we all have the point?
LikeLike
Dub, if you won’t challenge his insidious Orange propaganda I will
LikeLike
As is your right. I actually think the less said the better sometimes. Tonight being a case in point
LikeLike
I’ll leave it at that in deference to the chair – except to say that when you can’t even get the questions right never mind answer the responses it’s not really all that challenging.. on to a new thread
LikeLike