No danger of the 'Ra taking power.

Status
Not open for further replies.
WolfeTone said:
To be clear, any support I may give to SF now is wholly conditional on their participation in constitutional democratic politics.
Click to expand...

Including standing on the street behind the coffin of a IRA leader who was responsible for death, misery and criminality? That's what we consider partaking in constitutional democratic politics in the year 2020 is it? Good to see we have left the past behind us then. He might have been a hero to people in West Belfast and a couple of dimwits South of the border but if Mary Lou had been Taoiseach, we could have had the leader of my country paying respects to a child killer like she represented all of us. No thanks. SF still have no desire to represent all people in this Country. They are still a bunch of bigoted terrorist supporting idiots. I actually feel sorry for some very capable SF politicians who probably do want to move on from the past but keep getting dragged by back by their IRA puppet leadership. I am surprised at Doherty though. Thought he knew better.
 
WolfeTone said:
I'm don't peddle the "Catholic oppressed" line, SF does.
Click to expand...
TheBigShort said:
...brave volunteers who stood against internment, collusion, shoot-to-kill, censorship, while their communities came under attack and were abandoned by the authorities.
Click to expand...
Sounds like oppression to me.
It seems to me that black folk in the US are far more discriminated against than RCs in NI ever were. I know that's not a great benchmark.
There is a big difference though. The US majority population are not under existential threat from the 13% Black minority. In West Belfast every Easter was a sea of flags of a foreign state and still is, a state whose constitution was dedicated to the removal of NI from the map and whose leading politicians fostered the Provos (cf Arms Trial).
 
I see Arlene has asked Michelle to step aside.
I really don't understand why the DUP want devolved government in NI. SF make it unworkable. London rule OK.
 
Purple said:
And do you believe that the Party, the organisation at a top level, is fully committed to constitutional democratic politics?
Click to expand...

Yes I do, insofar as the framework for that constitutional politics, namely GFA, is substantively adhered to.
Of course, I could be shown to be wrong and if that occurs I will accept the errors of my way. But I would hope that should the British government diverge substantively from that framework that are called to account on it - otherwise it just feeds into the narrative that violent force is the only way.

There are many things that shape all of our views. One such thing was an interview I read by Peter Taylor with then SF chairperson Mitchell McLaughlin circa 1995 - before formal political negotiations had even been agreed, before IRA arms decommissioning.
In this interview McLaughlin was quite explicit, that SF were pursuing a peaceful political path and it was their objective to see an end to the IRA.
I thought this highly significant. Events unfolded since then, that within the republican movement, this view has won the day.
SF leadership know, that the people that vote for them now carry far more weight and strength than any political violence does - assuming that the framework for such political mandate is recognised and respected, unlike the Home Rule Act, 1914.
 
The greatest threat to the GFA is perfidy by either of the joint sponsors, the British and Irish governments respectively. Ostensibly the DUP leverage in the last UK parliament seemed to endanger that joint role of honest brokers but the UK never did play the Orange card as a result of that leverage.
It will be a whole different ball game with Mary Lou as Taoiseach. The idea of Falls Road HQ being honest brokers is cloud cuckoo land.
Of course brandishing the GFA goes down well with a Southern electorate wallowing in Brexit Brit bashing. But clearly the 25% who supported SF would be not in the least concerned for the integrity of the GFA should Mary Lou get the top job. Indeed the threat to the GFA of SF participation in a Southern government was on nobody's agenda in the GE. Because the anti Brexit commitment to the GFA was mere opportunism.
 
Last edited:
Duke of Marmalade said:
If you are telling me now that you personally reject that litany of "oppression" as being simply SF mythology, then I withdraw my comments.
Click to expand...

I don't subscribe to every whim or tale SF put out there, no more than the tales of any other party.
But excluding the press offices of political parties, there was the small matter of the Civil Rights Movement, led in no small part by such esteemed folk as Hume and Currie, when the SF as we know it was nothing more than a twinkle in Adams eye.
What was that Civil Rights movement all about then?

Duke of Marmalade said:
Sounds like oppression to me.
Click to expand...

Indeed.

Duke of Marmalade said:
In West Belfast every Easter was a sea of flags
Click to expand...

Probably an (over) reaction to the time when the police could bust into your to home and forcibly remove the display of such flags on the whim a preachers calling.
Perhaps the lesson is, don't ban the display of recognised national countries in the first place?

Duke of Marmalade said:
a state whose constitution was dedicated to the removal of NI from the map and whose leading politicians fostered the Provos (cf Arms Trial).
Click to expand...

Indeed, it wasn't just the Shinners. There was a whole crew of them involved across the political spectrum. They perpetuated the territorial claim, they armed and sponsor the IRA (some of them had their own IRA) they provided refuge for on-the-runs.
And today they preach as if their parties had no hand, act or part, in fostering and cementing the cycle of violence that poisoned this country for a generation.
 
Last edited:
We agree on something I do think FF are being hypocritical though I think MM is the most honourable of the whole bunch.
Wolfie said:
Probably an (over) reaction to the time when the police could bust into your to home and forcibly remove the display of such flags on the whim a preachers calling.
Click to expand...
Actually it was the election headquarters of The Republican Party, the political wing of the IRA. Strange how you exaggerate the "oppression" inherent in a symbolic act against a sectarian organisation dedicated to destroy the State by whatever means it deems fit. Dev himself knew how to deal with sedition and it wasn't to merely take down the Starry Plough.

That was 1963 and the said preacher was regarded as a looney by both sides. To be fair the IRA had little support either (aside query, did the oppression of the Catholic comminity only occur after 1963?). Within time the preacher became a hero to a section of his community and the promoters of republican violence commanded the support of a substantial section of their community. A complex rabbit hole as to who was responsible for this descent into barbarity.
 
Last edited:
Sunny said:
we could have had the leader of my country paying respects to a child killer
Click to expand...

I think he was convicted for possession of a firearm without a permit. 18yrs apparently, quite a savage sentence I would have thought. Still, a long way from being accused as a 'child killer'.

Sunny said:
I am surprised at Doherty though
Click to expand...

With all respect , why would anyone be surprised at Doherty?

The people leading SF today are members of SF because they honour the volunteers of the IRA, not in spite of them.
 
WolfeTone said:
I think he was convicted for possession of a firearm without a permit. 18yrs apparently, quite a savage sentence I would have thought. Still, a long way from being accused as a 'child killer'.
Click to expand...
He was a key member of a terrorist organisation which murdered children.


WolfeTone said:
With all respect , why would anyone be surprised at Doherty?

The people leading SF today are members of SF because they honour the volunteers of the IRA, not in spite of them.
Click to expand...
Good point; they are all supporters of, and apologists for, child killers.
 
Duke of Marmalade said:
Actually it was the election headquarters of The Republican Party, the political wing of the IRA.
Click to expand...

That's true, my err. I'm sure you understand the point anyway?

Duke of Marmalade said:
Strange how you exaggerate the "oppression" inherent in a symbolic act
Click to expand...

I'm not exaggerating anything. It was your good self that identified the good people of West Belfast that go all-in on the flag-waving at Easter Time.
They are not alone though, flags and emblems profound symbols of identity, right across the divide.

For my part I don't display flags, wear Easter Lilly or partake in the national anthem, save some small indulgences during sporting events.
But when it comes to the political arena, I consider these things as likely to provoke ill as much as provoking the narrow vision of national pride.
But I'm also not naive to think that they are not important, and that importance is not universally evident.
 
WolfeTone said:
I think he was convicted for possession of a firearm without a permit. 18yrs apparently, quite a savage sentence I would have thought.
Click to expand...
Imagine 18 years for possession without a permit. What us poor catholics had to put up with.
 
Purple said:
He was a key member of a terrorist organisation which murdered children.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's true. Is there any difference between that, and being a member of a 'lawful' organisation that murders children?

I don't want to go down the rabbit-hole of 'whatabboutery' suffice to say that I don't consider one organisation that murdered children having any greater authority than any other organisation that murdered children.
If we are to label one organisation as 'terrorist' then let's label them all as terrorist.

But I'm also the realist, a conflict has ended. There is greater hope of a shared future, I'm all for everyone paying final respects to the dead - all sides.

As a side, I'm somewhat curious as to the reaction in AAM (maybe I shouldn't be at this stage). While there is some commentary on the life and times of Bobby Storey in mainstream media, the overall general thrust of controversy is nothing to do with MLM and Doherty being present at an IRA funeral, but rather the apparent breakdown of social distancing!
Doherty himself remarked that mourners were all wearing masks in the church.
There was a time when mask-wearing Republicans would invoke the ire of the great and good, but nowadays its just a health and safety issue.
 
Duke of Marmalade said:
Imagine 18 years for possession without a permit. What us poor catholics had to put up with.
Click to expand...

Still, it falls someway short of being labelled a child killer.
It's funny now, the part about being "...but he was too young for internment."
Was probably not funny for those actually interned, regardless of age. I'm sure you would agree?
 
WolfeTone said:
Doherty himself remarked that mourners were all wearing masks in the church.
There was a time when mask-wearing Republicans would invoke the ire of the great and good, but nowadays its just a health and safety issue.
Click to expand...

Yes I too am amazed that the outrage in the North is about breaching COVID regs and not about celebrating a terrorist. It seems to me that it is the DUP who have had to make the greater nose holding exercise in going for this power sharing mullarkey.
 
WolfeTone said:
Still, it falls someway short of being labelled a child killer.
Click to expand...
Agreed, although I am with Purple's sentiments 100%.
It's funny now, the part about being "...but he was too young for internment."
Was probably not funny for those actually interned, regardless of age. I'm sure you would agree?
Click to expand...
I visited friends in Long Kesh. Auschwitz it was not (apologies for Godwin's law). They were allowed to socialise and wear own clothing. It was to keep them from doing harm, it was not punitive. Dev used it.

That's why they were so upset when, later, Maggie scrapped special category status for convicted criminals (not internees).
 
Duke of Marmalade said:
Agreed, although I am with Purple's sentiments 100%.
Click to expand...

I would too, except, my sentiment does not distinguish between the child killers of one organisation and any other organisation.
So ideally, if I had my way, justice would be served without fear or favour across the board.
But I don't have my way. I have to listen to others. Namely, the Irish people and accept their will. They have voted to accept the two-state solution or to change it if they wish. They have voted to allow the British government govern in Ireland, in spite of their child killing terrorists. And they have voted for SF to participate in government in Stormont and to participate in increasing numbers in the Dáil.
Over the next decade we are probably likely to see more such type funerals, across the divide.
The conflict is over, not forgotten. The future is jaw-jaw, not war-war.

Duke of Marmalade said:
Auschwitz it was not
Click to expand...

Who said it was?

Duke of Marmalade said:
They were allowed to socialise and wear own clothing.
Click to expand...

Eh, they were allowed to socialise and wear own clothing outside internment camps too!
At home, at work, pubs, much more desirable hangouts like that.

I detect a sense from you that because someone was interned, that therefore they must have been guilty of something?
I'm not 100% sure but as I do recall some statistic that showed the vast, vast majority of those interned in the 70's had no involvement in political or paramilitary activities before they were interned...

Duke of Marmalade said:
It was to keep them from doing harm,
Click to expand...

.... but may subsequently had a different inclinations after being released.
I think the overwhelming view is that internment was a bad idea.
 
Please Google and find that source. I don't really like playing the "I was there" card but I was there. Certainly the friend (not friends) that I visited in Long Kesh was in the IRA and proud of it (he tried to recruit me).
I recall my "interrogation" by the Brits, mentioned earlier. The uncomfortable bit was when they mentioned names to me and asked were they in the IRA. Of course they were and proud to be, everyone in our neighbourhood would know. At one stage they openly policed my area which was definitely No Go. I even recall being ticked off by the IRA for speeding in the neighbourhood.
However, I didn't want the Brits recording that I agreed that the names were in the IRA so I just answered "well you have interned them so I suppose they must be".
I never heard any complaints that the wrong people were being interned. The complaint was mainly that it was being applied very one sidedly, which is of course true, but even that can be justified; loyalists were not a threat to the state. And the Brits were subsequently found guilty by a European court of inhuman treatment though not torture, I don't think my friend suffered any of that.
I think the overwhelming view is that internment was a bad idea.
Click to expand...
Yes, it was a bad idea and one that totally backfired, ultimately leading to Bloody Sunday and the dismissal of the Unionist regime at Stormont. It was very bad judgement by the security authorities who completely underestimated the fact that the escape valve to the safe haven of the Republic would make it impossible to isolate the IRA. The propaganda boost to recruitment meant that it was very easy to replace any internees. It needed an all Ireland security approach, a Dev in other words.
 
Last edited:
WolfeTone said:
As a side, I'm somewhat curious as to the reaction in AAM (maybe I shouldn't be at this stage).
Click to expand...

I would say many on AAM would be somewhat curious to your reaction as well........ (Although maybe they shouldn't be at this stage)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Menu
Log in
Register