79 2 mins 9 yrs

For once I agree with the DUP although they are being hypocrites themselves;

The DUP has said Sinn Féin’s rerouting of a controversial parade is meaningless. Sinn Féin had announced that it would re-route the parade it is holding in Castlederg, County Tyrone in August. The march commemorates the death of two IRA men who died in 1973 when their own bomb exploded prematurely. After Unionists called for the parade to be banned, Sinn Féin said the parade would no longer pass the town’s cenotaph or Methodist church.

WHY would you want to “commemorate” the death of two terrorists? Admiration for fallen comrades in terror? The very fact that Sinn Fein think that the deaths of two killers who accidentally killed themselves is worth commemoration tells you all that you need to know about how little they have changed, if at all. DUP words of condemnation would mean more if they were not quite so keen to share power with those who wallow in the celebration of terror.

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

79 thoughts on “RE ROUTE BIGOTRY.

  1. Nice attempt at the “commemorate” the death of two ‘terrorists’ smokescreen but the issue at the centre of this is the absolute double standards adopted by the DUP and the wider unionist / loyalist community here. Not content with the voluntary rerouting of the parade the DUP / loyalist / unionist community want it banned completely.

    What happened to the ‘right to march?’

    If I was a cynic I would say that SF have played an absolute blinder here as the intransigence shown by unionism here is likely to have an effect on future Parades Commission decisions regarding contentious parades,

    Still, at least it’s positive that unionism now recognises the Parades Commission let’s see how long that lasts.

  2. There is an excellent piece by brian feeney in todays irish news about how the unionist community hasn’t yet woken up to the fact that society here has changed. To illustrate his point he points to the issue of flegs and marches.

    It’s time for unionists to wake up and respect other cultures on an equal footing.

  3. What is the particular need to march in support of the two individuals who apparently blew themselves up before they were able to blow up others?

  4. What is the particular need to march in support of the two individuals who apparently blew themselves up before they were able to blow up others?

    I don’t know Mahons. What is the particular need to march at all?

  5. Paul – Well people have parades for a variety of reasons such as celebrations. If folks could focus on the event here instead of the knee-jerk Republican response to any criticism then one might question the decency of celebrating two bombers, especially on the day when Omagh has its memorial gathering for those who were wickedly killed by the Real IRA bomb in 1998.

  6. If folks could focus on the event here instead of the knee-jerk Republican response to any criticism then one might question the decency of celebrating two bombers

    Yes they may but I don’t think it’s anything to do with ‘knee jerk’ reaction to criticism. You seem to be suggesting that the reason that people march be the main point to consider why people march. If that’s the case then unionism is being blatantly hypocritical in some cases supporting the ‘right to march.

    The DUP have no problem in supporting people like The Old Boyne Island Heroes LOL 633 , (known locally as the UVF lodge), bands like the Young Conway Volunteers, (know what the initials YCV represent?) playing a ‘Beach Boys song’ passing a Catholic place of worship. They are talking out of both sides of their mouth on this one.

    People have parades for a variety of reasons

    Indeed Mahons.

  7. Paul – Put aside the failures of the Unionists as the separate topic that it is (they also have wacky parades which quite often are not well intentioned, and their defenders turn their arguments on their heads here to protest the republicans).

    What matters is an analysis of this particular parade. By any measure it is counterproductive and sectarian at best and indecent and immoral at worst.

  8. So Mahons want you want to do is ring fence this parade and see it in stand alone isolation?

    Okay then, I’ll comment on the parade. I don’t know anything about the parade e.g. if it’s ‘traditional’, the reasons behind the parade or the intentions of those killed bar that they were assembling a bomb when it exploded premeturely but I will say that, on the face of it, I would have no problem if the parade was cancelled however my own opinion is that it should moved to a place like Pomeroy which is a 98% C/N/R town.

    Now, that I’ve commented on that issue perhaps you’d like to address the issue of unionist hypocricsy , like David above, regarding marching?

  9. Paul McMahon –

    Nice try, and you’ve said alot about unionist parades, but no.

    The post is about republican parades. In this case, it’s about republicans parading in memory of a pair of terrorists who were fortunately killed by their own hands. Say what you like the other lot, but you don’t get much dumber than the terrorists or those on the parade.

    I know you lot like to feel superior to unionist marchers and point out how out of touch they are with the times. Feel free to be even handed.

  10. The post is about republican parades

    And I’ve commented on it above.

    I know you lot like to feel superior to unionist marchers

    I think you’ll find that the superior ones are those arguing that the ‘right to march’ is the exclusive preserve of one section of the community Pete.

    You, in your attempt to stifle debate about this blatant double standard, are showing as much hypocritical double standards.

  11. Paul – I can’t say I find your merely having no problem cancelling a parade for two bombers to be a magnanimous response to such a travesty. I also think moving it into a parochial area is hardly the answer if one really is looking to break down the divisive past.

    I did address the issue of Unionist hypocrisy, but will do so again – those who defend the tone and nature of sectarian Unionist parades are hypocrites if they then turn around and lambaste the SF gang for this provocation.

  12. I can’t say I find your merely having no problem cancelling a parade for two bombers to be a magnanimous response to such a travesty

    I’ve explained that I have no knowlege of the parade in question Mahons. What would you wish me say?

  13. Paul – What prevents you from acquiring knowledge of the parade? There is certainly enough information here about it, and one can certainly obtain additional information with the delightful Google.

  14. There is certainly enough information here about it

    The march commemorates the death of two IRA men who died in 1973 when their own bomb exploded prematurely.

    That’s what I know about the parade. I’ll have a look at google and see what else I can dig up.

    In themeantime, What would you wish me say?

  15. The DUPs official position – and one which I believe is shared across the Unionist board is that the Parades Commission is an illegitimate and unacceptable interference in public life and freedoms, and they want it disbanded and refuse to acknowledge its remit. Whatever opinion they may have about this Republican march if they want to stay true to their view of the PC they should not be asking it to ban the march.

  16. Paul – I would think anyone who had those facts could reach the simple conclusion that the event was, as stated above, counterproductive at best and immoral at worst.

  17. These are the only facts I could find:

    James McGlynn (20) Catholic
    Status: Irish Republican Army (IRA), Killed by: Irish Republican Army (IRA)
    Killed in premature bomb explosion while travelling in car, Kilclean, near Castlederg, County Donegal.

    Seamus Harvey (23) Catholic
    Status: Irish Republican Army (IRA), Killed by: Irish Republican Army (IRA)
    Killed in premature bomb explosion while travelling in car, Kilclean, near Castlederg, County Donegal.

    http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/sutton/chron/1973.html

    As I stated above: I don’t know anything about the parade e.g. if it’s ‘traditional’, the reasons behind the parade or the intentions of those killed bar that they were transporting a bomb when it exploded premeturely

    Counterproductive at best and immoral at worst

    I’ll concede that it could be counterproductive in this proposed location however if you’re going to condemn this as immoral, (which I’m not sure it is), you’d better be prepared to condemn many many things.

  18. Paul – Well I think we can assume that they were not transporting the bomb to a remote location where they could safely diffuse it. I think we can assume that their intentions were not of the milk of human kindness variety.

    The location perhaps is worse, but are their places on Earth where a terrorist bomber is a suitable cause for parading? Even in the so-called community, do we wish to have children think that their actions were honorable and praise-worthy? I think not.

    I am prepared to condemn many things. Perhaps you should be prepared to condemn one thing.

  19. I am prepared to condemn many things. Perhaps you should be prepared to condemn one thing

    Then name it Mahons. Out with the one thing I should condemn?

  20. Paul

    I think Mahons is asking you to condemn the Provos violent campaign – at least the modern pro-1969 element of it.

  21. Having “Bigotry” in the title trivialises the issue. This is about commemorating terrorism/ists and should not be allowed anywhere.

  22. Mahons, on July 31st, 2013 at 4:21 PM Said:
    What is the particular need to march in support of the two individuals who apparently blew themselves up before they were able to blow up others?

    What is the particular need for americans to have an entire national holiday to celebrate the results of american terrorists?

  23. Paul – the parade in question

    I have no problems condemning the parade in this specific location Mahons.

    As for the wider parade context; if people wish to mark this event in an area where it is specifically accepted / wanted / welcomed who am I, or anyone else, to object?

  24. Emerald- I am unaware of such a holiday. As are you.

    Paul – You are a human being who therefore should be able to condemn a parade celebrating terrorist bombers at any location, even if it is at a location where people would like to have it.

  25. Mahons, let me be absolutely direct with you here, (as I hope you will be with me).

    I don’t like violence and I think that most people don’t like violence.

    The IRA did some (most?) horrifically inhumane atrocities which I have absolutely no problem in condemning but some of their actions were justifiable.

    In that context I can’t condemn this parade in theory as opposed to location as I don’t know what the intentions of the two who were killed were. Now, if we’re going to condemn this parade we should be also ready to condemn the ‘Armed Forces Day’ parades occasionally held in Belfast as the British Army murdered a considerable number of cvillians in that city and elsewhere and / or the ‘old IRA’, (which I have seen you venerating in the past),commemerations which are held in the Republic as they killed a fair amount of both civillan and military causualties also or is it going to be a case of ‘history is written by the victor’?

    There’s a much more complex debate on the issue over at Slugger:

    http://sluggerotoole.com/2013/07/31/republican-castlederg-parade-the-insensitivity-of-the-impotent/comment-page-1/#comments

    I know that in being brutally honest in my above comment I’m likely to draw a lot of flak yet don’t want to be drawn into a blow by blow account of the conflict on what was justifaiible and what was not but I am prepared to have a serious discussion regarding the issue.

    The DUP politician in the links above was a member of the notorious loyalist militia UDR for many years yet that organisation have the honour of freedom of the city of Lisburn.

    Two legs good four legs bad?

  26. Paul – If that is absolutely direct I would hate to think what you would be like if you were being vague.

    If we wish to swim in sophistry then lets say humanity can’t have parades because members of humanity have done bad things.

    If we wish to view the facts of this matter than we have two bombers being elevated to an honorable place. I don’t think pretending their intentions were a mystery gives one much credibility. Even if one supports the cause they tried to associate themselves with I find singling them as praiseworthy would be like anti-Communists having a parade for the Mai Li massacre.

    One of the continuing false myths of the IRA of that generation was to pretend they were merely freedom fighters, and if they were terrorists than all soldiers were terrorists. It doesn’t pass the laugh test.

  27. If we wish to swim in sophistry then lets say humanity can’t have parades because members of humanity have done bad things.

    No Mahons let’s not say that at all. Let’s view the ‘facts of the matter’ and comment on how an elected unionist politician who was a member of the British Army for years can advocate murder by ‘a newly forned Ulster Loyalist paramilitary grouping appearing out of nowhere and opening fire with machine guns, rocket launchers & grenades’.

    Are these the soldiers that you speak of?

    If that is absolutely direct I would hate to think what you would be like if you were being vague

    Perhaps you’ll demonstrate where I am being vague?

    One of the continuing false myths of the IRA of that generation was to pretend they were merely freedom fighters

    What’s your basis for this Mahons? The former IRA members I know became involved in the IRA for a number of reasons, some to defend the nationalist community from attempted pogroms, some as a knee jerk reaction to what was happening at the time and some for purely idealogical reasons.

  28. Paul – If you give me the name of the politician you refer to I will happy look him up and review what he’s said.

    Your demonstration of being vague is what appears to me to be the willful blindness as to what the two IRA members were up to when they blew themselves up.

    My basis for my claim is the historical record. I have no problem with a defense of the nationalist community from attempted and actual pogroms. However, even the ones you know can’t possibly claim to have spent even the majority of their time doing this. In fact they intimidated both communities (quite often their own).

  29. The politician’s name is Ruth Patterson and the controversy over what she said is in the two links I provide above. The first reported in the media and the second in its original form.

    (It’s nice to know that you’re following the basis for some of my points.)

    However, even the ones you know can’t possibly claim to have spent even the majority of their time doing this. In fact they intimidated both communities (quite often their own).

    The only things that the ones I know have done is what they were convicted of.

    Having said that, being born and living in West Belfast for forty years I can say that I was never intimidated by the IRA although that’s only my personal experience.

    Now, back to the main issue:

    Well I think we can assume that they were not transporting the bomb to a remote location where they could safely diffuse it. I think we can assume that their intentions were not of the milk of human kindness variety

    Interesting comment. Here’s a link I picked up from Slugger, what’s your assumption there?

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/british-uncover-operation-in-basra-agents-provocateurs/990

  30. Patterson’s comments were wrong and she deserves to be censured for them. She’s also apologized.

    Your link appears to be related to Iraq. What are you asking me about it?

  31. Two British soldiers ‘ dressed as Arabs, replete with wigs and armed to the teeth and in a car which according to one report, was packed with explosives’

    Terrorists, soldiers, ‘transporting the bomb to a remote location where they could safely diffuse it’?

  32. Here’s an interesting comment by John O’Neill in that slugger link I posted Mahons:

    I am getting more and more interested in the mindset behind this.

    Whatever semantics are used, unionist parades revolve around bands that either have overt symbols of loyalist violence (deceased members of UVF/UDA etc on Banners) or wear military uniforms linked to past episodes of violence like the UV or UVF (both of whom had an explicitly violent mission – indeed, Northern Ireland probably wouldn’t have acquired counties Tyrone and Fermanagh without their violence since neither had voted for partition or allegiance to the Belfast government, ironically their democratic rights were even more explicitly ignored – which is the actual context of Churchills dreary steeples reference). Every year we hear some scene shifting (eg that they arent the Orders just the bands they hire), but that is all part and parcel of parading and even unionists must be weary of trotting that sort of nonsense out and insulting everyone elses intelligence.

    The resonances identified about the republican parade above are explicit in most unionist marches whether unionists can face that point or not (I can repost the video of Belfast No 2 District and the Pride of Ardoyne Band, with UVF men named on their banner, singing The Famine Song at Woodvale on the Twelfth of anyone wants to contest this). The only difference here is that republicans aren’t likely to be marching through a town which is 60% Protestant (whether you have to conveniently swap wards in and out to get the figure or not). And I doubt any 60% Protestant town has had 20 Republican/AOH parades in a year (ever).

    And before more mopery is pushed back at me: given that the Special, RUC and UDR were all disbanded due to their histories and actions – if I am not mistaken, they are all disbanded – surely commemorating them is also as fraught with objection since, and unionists have to swallow hard here, they were all disbanded for a reason.

    Pretty much all (quasipolitical) parades here seem to commemorate violence (with exceptions like Pride), violence which, peculiarly is part of a weird shared history re-enacted in a bit of drum-trotting bravado. that everyone seems to not recognise in themselves. I am obviously biased on the subject, but I get embarrassed at how incapable unionists are at introspection and self-awareness.

    Personally, I blame the Stormont government that banned republican parades in 1926 (lasted until 1966). It meant (rightly or wrongly), unionist parading was used and perceived as flaunting all the grievances around the northern state. Maybe it would be less fraught now if it hadn’t been banned then.

    Thoughts?

  33. Paul – Interesting article, Allan must subscribe to that outlet. Two likely SAS soldiers who were operating undercover in 2005 Iraq which at that time made NI look like Switzerland. I am not sure of the extent of what they were doing. It would seem at least they were operating undercover in the vicinity. it is unclear what confirmed reports there are of their activity.

    Is someone giving them a parade?

    Your actual complaint against them is what? That they were British?

    There are examples of British or American soldiers who have committed atrocities, some punished, some not. I wouldn’t support a parade in the honor of any who committed such acts.

  34. My thoughts on Mr. O’Neill’s thoughts is he is excusing Republican misconduct by pointing to Loyalist misconduct.

    Some people are damned to ride a merry-go-round their entire lives.

  35. some to defend the nationalist community from attempted pogroms

    Yes. And these people were far more moral than those who did nothing.

  36. Some people are damned to ride a merry-go-round their entire lives.

    I know 1,800,000 people who have that issue.

    Many ( hopefully most )don’t want to, but there are very many who live for the same oul thing and fear peace and normalcy as they fear the fires of hell.

  37. Petr – If we want to pretend that everyone else did nothing, and that those who set themselves up as “defenders” didn’t engage in acts of terror against civilians then perhaps you are right. We can also pretend unicorns exist.

  38. Allan must subscribe to that outlet

    Would you like me to try to dig up something more credible?

    Your actual complaint against them is what? That they were British?

    Of course not I don’t have a ‘complaint’ against them I just was wondering wether you would proffer your ‘milk of human kindness’ assumption to them also and if they were part of the glorification of ‘armed forces day’ that occasionally parades through towns & cities seeing as they were dressed as Arabs and all complete with wigs?

    I wouldn’t support a parade in the honor of any who committed such acts.

    But that’s okay if you support a parade to the organisation as opposed to the individuals or individual atrocities comitted by members of that organisation as you seem to be ring fencing here?

    Some people are damned to ride a merry-go-round their entire lives

    Absolutely, some from the safety of their ivory towers.

  39. Paul – No need, there are accounts of the incident in other media reports. I’d suggest you read some of the more balanced accounts.

    I am not the one pretending I can’t divine the purpose of the individuals involved. Those two were British undercover operatives in a war zone, I am not sure (and neither are you) of what they were doing specifically. In other words, were they doing something immoral? If they were shooting innocent Iraqis (and that was their claim to fame) then I certainly wouldn’t think a parade in their particular honor is warranted.

    I have no problems with a parade supporting the British Army, overall they’ve been a force for good in the World. However, I would not support a parade in honor of those members who were involved in Bloody Sunday, for instance.

    My tower is ebony and ivory, as I live in perfect harmony.

    Bottom line – there should be a parade honoring two IRA guys who blew themselves en route to blow up other people. There are plenty of more honorable nationalists who would serve as better honorees.

  40. “Bottom line – there should be a parade honoring two IRA guys who blew themselves en route to blow up other people. There are plenty of more honorable nationalists who would serve as better honorees.?

    ?

  41. We can also pretend unicorns exist

    We can also pretend – or you can at any rate – that you have some understanding of the politics, history, and conflict in Ireland.

  42. I don’t think it is fair to pull rank on mahons on discussing Irish affairs. He never puts him out as a big expert ( as others do ). He has been to Ireland. He has family and friends there. He is interested in the subject, which he tries to learn about. I think that gives him the right to speak.

    And Dublin can be a lot further from Belfast than America can be, Petr. It sure seemed that way when I went there in the 1980s and 1990s.

    Do you see yourself as having a superior knowledge of the politics, history, and conflict of Ireland, esp. the recent century or so in the north?

    Are only six county or island of Ireland residents allowed to speak on these things?

    Save the scorn for the blowhards. He’s not one of them.

  43. Petr – I’ll be happy to directly address any Irish issues you care to address. The majority of Irish people share my view of the IRA campaigns of those times.

  44. When I was there, in some very bad times, the locals, north and south that I spoke to – a very unscientific sample to be sure – let there be no doubt that they were very strongly opposed to the bombings and other activity. They told me this, unprompted.

  45. There were often family things, with more tea than Guinness.

    Including sitting in the kitchen chatting when British soldiers with rifles suddenly appeared, walking through the front yard.

    Those were different days. The very normal next to the very abnormal.

  46. I thought perhaps you had prompted them with grog to encourage them to say unprompted things..

    I have heard that sentiment expressed quite often by some acquaintences of mine who are neither English Welsh or Scots and who will live in another part of the British Isles that will remain nameless.

  47. People, esp in those days, would often speak differently to those they trusted, as opposed to what was said out in public.

    There could be repercussions.

  48. Mahons, on August 1st, 2013 at 3:52 PM Said:
    Emerald- I am unaware of such a holiday. As are you.

    Really Mahons? As an american you have never heard of the 4th of July? I find that truly amazing!

  49. As one columnist said today in the press, ‘Sinn Fein has insisted that everyone has a right to honour their dead’, yet it did not accept this argument when it was used by unionists to justify RIR homecoming’

    And this is what it is all about, shared space. But as Alex Kane said on Nolan today, having your parade in your area while we have ours in our area, is not a shared space either. (I paraphrase Alex there )

    This is what I tried to say in siemi’s post. These things need to be discussed in a neutral way along with the issue of flags etc. Its about sharing space to do the traditions of your community with out giving offence to the other, and to be able to do your traditions in peace. Shared space must move from being a concept to a reality.

    The ‘morality’ of the parade shouldn’t be the issue. What may not be my tradition and even though I may even abhor some of the sentiments etc- in a shared democratic society that embraces the concept of shared space there needs to be room for all.

  50. Emerald – The 4th of July doesn’t celebrate terrorists.

    Katey0 – the morality of it is an issue. There shouldn’t be a standard that says it is ok to celebrate terrorist bombers in one neighborhood and not another. If the community thinks it is ok, then their morality needs improving.

  51. it isn’t about morality. Its about marching, and domination and changed demographics. There is to be another parade – this time a hunger strike commeration- that will be passing through Belfast city centre, that has just been given the go ahead by the PC. This too will be contentious. Remember there are at least 600 OO parades throughout the north during the marching season, do you agree with all of them, or would you like to examine their morality. There are unsavoury characters that follow both sides.

    As to morality one mans terrorist is another mans hero…

  52. Kateyo – Contentious in and of itself is ok, people don’t have to agree on everything. A Hunger Strike Parade would be different from celebrating two individuals whose fame arose merely out of blowing themselves up before they could blow up other people. The Hunger Strikers (while they may have been in jail for crimes) managed to arose international attention and support for a principled movement and non-violent to resist what they saw was an injustice and as such it is for that they would be remembered.

    I would be as critical of any parade that elevated Loyalist paramilitaries whose fame was based merely on killing or attempting to kill someone.

    We can be objective about good and evil. It isn’t subjective.

  53. Good and evil isn’t subjective?

    It never is?

    OK, let me throw a high hard one.

    Who, generally, were the ” good ” practitioners of armed struggle against the British in Ireland in the 20th Century? Or were they all ” evil “?

    Sometimes these things are black and white but often they are not. Not as I can see anyway. They’d be easier to solve if it was clear.

  54. Mahons, your morals are your own business, but if a community want to celebrate these two men its not for blowing themselves up, but for belonging to an organisation (which for them and many in their community was about ) that was defending the community from state murder and loyalist murder squads. think what you like, moralise all you like, say that people here did not agree with them, yet there is no protest from within the nationalist republican community that says these men are not worth honouring. for many, they died fighting for a cause, you may not agree with it, you may pretend that morality is not subjective and there may be those who agree with you, but then there are those who won’t.

    Bottom line is, these two were comrades in arms of people who are now in govt, do you think if there’d been no ‘war’ we would be where we are today? I doubt it very much. This place was owned by unionists, it’s not now, and part of that is realising that within the resistance to unionist rule many fought a fight and died because of it, including these two, and for that they can be honoured.

    As I said, one mans terrorist is another mans hero. that’s subjective but its also morality…

    Morality is one of those words that always needs qualifying…

  55. Good article.

    The Canadians have more to teach the Americans than vice versa.

    On very many issues, including income inequality, guns, health care, etc.

    They’re not hung up on labels, or what the holy founding fathers said. They just try to figure out what works.

  56. Mahons, on August 1st, 2013 at 9:34 PM Said:
    Emerald – The 4th of July doesn’t celebrate terrorists.

    Yes it does Mahons, it just celebrates terrorists that were very succesful as opposed to the IRA who’s success is yet to be detirmened

  57. Kateyo – Your morality is situational, which isn’t really morality. The two nitwits who blew themselves up (thank God before they hurt someone else) had no support from the majority of Irish people. The IRA chorus can pretend otherwise and proclaim themselves the guardians of nationalism, but they aren’t. The IRA lacked majority support across the entire population of Ireland, as most people were disgusted by their senseless violence.

    Emerald- Nonsense, you can’t be that dense. Or perhaps you can be.

  58. mahons my sweet young friend, perhaps you have money you could lend?

    What were minute men but un-uniformed combatants or TERRORISTS?

    If the british had won then ‘american patriots’ would be listed as bandits, rebels and highway men. or by modern terms a terrorist

  59. I am not the one pretending I can’t divine the purpose of the individuals involved.

    Isn’t it strange how you can be 100% sure the purpose of the individuals involve in that particular incident yet are strangley oblique when it comes to two soldiers out of uniform in a car allegedly full of explosives?

    Those two were British undercover operatives in a war zone, I am not sure (and neither are you) of what they were doing specifically. In other words, were they doing something immoral?

    The IRA lacked majority support across the entire population of Ireland

    Perhaps if the majority of the population of Ireland have lived in that different state across the border they would have felt differently. After all, those same people didn’t have a problem supporting violence in the second and third decades of the twentieth century?

    Mahons, the IRA were able to survive precisely because they did have support now, while the level of that support may be difficult to ascertain and while the IRA were involved in some horrific atrocities and that support ebbed and flowed it still existed.

    Ask yourself objectively why that was?

    it isn’t about morality. Its about marching, and domination and changed demographics.

    Kateyo nails it.

    Meanwhile, in other news;

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-23547697

  60. Paul,
    I said I wouldn’t comment in NI affairs and I won’t.
    Instead I will comment on commenters and evasive tactics.
    imv Mahons (with whom I rarely agree) put up a reasonable questioning of your position,

    He has more of a right to do that being an Irish American who cares about the best of his Irish roots.
    What you seem to have sought to do is justify (from exile in Spain) your passionate support of the Republican cause in Northern Ireland.

    Your last comment (12:15) is a fine example of “whataboutery”.
    As Mahons said in his black and white way, no decent person could want to celebrate the deaths of two guys who intended to blow people up, but managed to blow themselves up instead.

  61. Firstly Agi, no one is suggesting that Mahons has no right to comment about anything my ‘ivory tower’ comment alluded to those who are detached from the actual situation that they’re commenting and may see things from a different perspective. That doesn’t mean that they have no right to comment.

    He has more of a right to do that being an Irish American who cares about the best of his Irish roots.What you seem to have sought to do is justify (from exile in Spain) your passionate support of the Republican cause in Northern Ireland

    Once again you have referred to my geographical position regarding my politics. My support of Irish Republicanism has absolutely no bearing on where I live and, again please put that ‘in exile’ bollocks out of your mind. I really don’t know where you get these notions from.

    No decent person could want to celebrate the deaths of two guys who intended to blow people up

    No? then you’d better pull down that statue of Arthur ‘Bomber’ Harris, who was the arcitecht of more civillian deaths than the IRA ever were, on the Strand then.

    How’s that for ‘whataboutery’?

  62. ” No? then you’d better pull down that statue of Arthur ‘Bomber’ Harris, who was the arcitecht of more civillian deaths than the IRA ever were, on the Strand then.”

    Evasion tactics or skewed logic?

    At the time Britain as now had a government.
    America had a government.
    France, Germany, Japan
    even Ireland had/has a government.
    Why is this important?

    Because they all for good or ill, instructed their people their military to engage the enemy.
    Bomber Harris was ruthless in the sense that he knew what needed to be done in order to bring Nazi Germany to its knees. But he acted on behalf of the British government and in the best interests of his country.
    The Americans did the same when they dropped the A bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. They would have argued back and forth over the moral dilemma, but in the end they did what they thought was right.

    I cannot see how men dressed as civilians for the most part can justify the murder through bombing of innocent non combatants also dressed as civilians.
    I said it before that people who were fed up with the situation could have moved south to the RofI or overseas, as many did -even many going to live in mainland Britain.
    The alternative was to stay and protest or promote change peacefully, or just to stay.
    To stay and pretend to be an army, and to kill men in uniforms deceitfully or to intimidate people into “helping” or to make bombs that killed innocent people are not in my mind acts of honour or bravery, however much you try to justify it.

    I picked this response from a website..

    “hi lauren, while searching for another thread i came across your thread.. on the bf this subject is very touchy..most of us exciles are from all parts of n.ireland and have become friends on here.. we all imagrated for our own reasons, some for safety reasons, some for no work. i came in 74 and that was a bad time, i had a job but left it to come here.. that is all i’m saying..i have many friends on here now that i would not have met back home, maybe..but i’m glad i’ve met them here…”

    http://www.belfastforum.co.uk/index.php?topic=28411.0

    There as many good Irish people as there are English Scots Welsh and American. Good people. I have no beef with them and I am willing to put my hands up and accept the English did some bad stuff in Ireland, Scotland and Wales.
    But I still don’t see how those actions justify what the IRA did.

  63. Bomber Harris was ruthless in the sense that he knew what needed to be done in order to bring Nazi Germany to its knees

    The destruction of housing – or ‘dehousing’ as the British called it – achieved by using incendiary bombs, was, they reasoned, potentially as disruptive to industrial production as the levelling of factories.

    “Bomber” Harris minced no words about the true nature of the
    British strategic bombing, stating that,
    The aim of the Combined Bomber Offensive…should be
    unambiguously stated [as] the destruction of German cities,
    the killing of German workers, and the disruption of civilized
    life throughout Germany. It should be emphasized that the
    destruction of houses, public utilities, transport and lives, the
    creation of a refugee problem on an unprecedented scale, and
    the breakdown of morale both at home and at the battle
    fronts by fear of extended and intensified bombing, are
    accepted and intended aims of our bombing policy. They are
    not by-products of attempts to hit factories.

    http://castle.eiu.edu/historia/archives/2010/2010Joyner.pdf

    Yeah, who’d want to celebrate ‘ guys who intended to blow people up’?

    I said it before that people who were fed up with the situation could have moved south to the RofI or overseas, as many did -even many going to live in mainland Britain.

    Yeah they could have, or they could have stayed and fought against an oporessive, undemocratic state.

    BTW, your ‘if you don’t like it move’ comment sounds suspiciously like ‘enforced change in demographics’ I think it was also called ethnic cleansing in the Balkans wars in the early nineties.

Comments are closed.