Topics

As NI's children's commissioner Koulla Yiasouma said recently, the behaviour of those adults who encouraged young children to join in the recent street violence in Northern Ireland amounts to child abuse:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-56708430

And she is entirely correct, there is absolutely no excuse for such outrageous abuse, such that the adults should be put in jail and if parents themselves, their children taken away from them for being entirely unfit.

But these recent episodes brought back to mind something which I had previously wondered about, namely the grooming of children towards violence and extremism on earlier occasions in NI. Indeed, at its worst, this exploitation has been positively glorified:



Which leads on, of course, to the whole issue eg of Na Fianna Éireann and their involvement with the Provisionals etc, or their "Loyalist" counterparts, such as the Tartan Gangs.

Or is child abuse only wrong when it is eg for sexual gratification or financial gain, but not when it's serving a particular "cause"?



https://www.irishnews.com/news/2016/11/14/news/headline-781683/

Reading through some of the other threads on here (SF gone away, Voting in Border Poll, SDLP, Leo V etc), I am reminded of the witty aphorism usually attributed to Brendan Behan, that whenever Nationalists meet, the first item on the Agenda is always "The Split" 

But for all the amusement to be derived from seeing 40 Shades of Green cutting stripes out of each other, what is more pertinent is that not one of you seem to get the point, which is this.

Frankly, it doesn't matter one jot how many times eg SF demand a Border Poll; or some Southern politician announces a 'road map' to Unification; or how detached Westminster is from NI; or how much pressure comes from Washington or Brussels (or anywhere else, for that matter).

For since the GFA, the Constitutional future of NI is solely in the hands of the people of NI and no-one else. Further, it is only a majority who will ever decide, whether to stay within the UK, or join a UI. All else is bluster and flannel.

And for the people to be entitled to a Referendum, then it will require the SoS for NI to be of the opinion that there may exist a majority for Unity amongst the electorate.

Which means he/she has to look first to how that electorate might vote. Basically speaking, there are two pointers.

The first is to look at voting patterns in recent elections. And as eminent psephologist Prof. Brendan O'Leary pointed out at a SF Fund Raising event in NYC no less(!) a while back, ever since the turn of the century, the "Nationalist" vote in NI, as measured by SF, SDLP and various minor parties, has plateaued at around 42-43%. Moreover, O'Leary opined that he couldn't see that changing in the foreseeable future.

Now it is fair to say that the "Unionist" vote (DUP, UUP, TUV etc) is not any higher. But if Nationalism is to get over the line, it has to muster the bulk of the "Others" (Alliance, Greens, Independents etc) to their cause. Yet if you look at their votes, they are overwhelmingly drawn from Unionist-leaning areas (East Belfast, North Down etc). Therefore in the event of a Referendum, one might expect those of them who did bother to vote, to be Unionist.

Of course, that whole  vote-counting exercise is arguably a misleading one, for a number of reasons. First, people vote in elections (esp local) for individual candidates for a variety of reasons - the candidate may have a personal following; there may be a local issue which skews the vote; custom and habit; or tactical considerations ("keep Themmuns out"). Consequently a vote for a given party may not exactly reflect an individual's preference in a border poll.

And that's only those who actually bother to vote! Many, of course, never go near the voting booth, either because they're disaffected by the political process; or feel they have better things to do; or because they realise that in a heavy Unionist or Nationalist area, their individual vote won't make the slightest bit of difference.

However, as eg Brexit or the last Scottish Referendum showed, in a binary poll like we're talking about, individual votes do make a difference, meaning that many "non-voters" may be tempted to turn out this time.

So if we should be very suspicious of past elections as a guide to which way a Border Poll might go, where do we look? The answer has to be Opinion Polls. Now I know that how the question is asked can often determine the answer which is received etc, and that not all such opinion polls are entirely consistent. Nonetheless, the clear consensus basically since the GFA is that a clear majority (i.e. well over 50% +1) would vote to remain.

Why should this be? Basically because Referenda are at least as much about Identity as they are about the usual political and socio-economic factors which determine elections. And the whole point is Brexit notwithstanding, many in the Nationalist community are broadly satisfied that their Irish identity is now tolerably well recognised and protected, meaning that they are more likely to be concerned about Pensions, NHS, government jobs, DLA etc in such a vote, meaning that many will abstain, or even vote to remain - who needs the disruption, uncertainty, even chaos which might ensue from a UI vote?

Whereas Unionists look at this very differently. Namely, the only way they can preserve their own Identity is by voting to remain in the UK. For at its simplest, if there is no Union, there can be no Unionists, and if they're no longer in the UK, they can no longer be British.

And no amount of assurances of a post-UI state being a "warm house for Unionists" will persuade them to take a chance on it, why should they? It is still remembered that in 1921, the Unionist/Protestant population of the Free State was just over 10%, half a century later it was what demographers deem "statistically insignificant" i.e. under 2 1/2 per cent. (At the same time, the Nationalist/Catholic population in NI was going the other way).

Therefore even if Nationalism can maximise its own traditional vote (highly unlikely imo), it still has no hope of achieving a 50%+ majority, so long as the broader Unionist vote holds up and turns out (highly likely imo).

Which is where the paradox comes in. For every time Nationalism (esp SF) stokes up the temperature* on this issue in order to maximise their own vote, it only causes the Unionist vote to stiffen round the flag.

Which ultimately means that if Nationalism is to woo the persuadeable Unionist voters whom they need, it won't be by castigating them or telling them where they're wrong, mere honeyed words won't be enough. They will also need to demonstrate good faith behind their words, by contributing to good government at Stormont etc, at least while NI is in the UK.

Yet if they do contribute sincerely  and consistently to making NI work to demonstrate their bona fides, that will only make Nationalist waverers less likely to vote for change, while Unionists will conclude that with NI now working better, why should they vote against it?

Above all, the more successful SF is in the Republic, the more determined Unionists will be to vote to remain in the UK, since there is no way on earth that they (including me!) will ever trust our future to a UI political system which could ultimately be dominated by Shinners like the Gerrys Adams and Kelly, none whatever.





* - You know, Barry McElduff and Kingsmills, the Bobby Storey funeral, or Martina Anderson's latest "Brits Out!" outburst etc.

"An Ulster Unionist MLA has called for equality of funding to sports bodies after official figures revealed Ulster GAA received almost five times more from Stormont in the past three years compared to the Irish Football Association.

Rosemary Barton said Department for Communities figures show that Ulster GAA received over £3m from the department and Sport NI, with the IFA receiving £648,888 and Ulster Rugby £701,289.

"This means that Ulster GAA received almost 2.5 times more than the other two sporting bodies together and almost five times more than that of either Ulster Rugby or the Irish Football Association," she said."
https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/ulster-unionist-mla-rosemary-barton-queries-gaas-larger-slice-of-sport-funding-pie-39445089.html

Discuss.

This time it's the 40th Anniversary of the Claudy Massacre.

Relatives speak to Claudy bomb suspect

Relatives of those killed in the Claudy bombing of 1972 have spoken to one of the key suspects.

The man spent most of his life in the US and is now living in the Irish Republic. He was identified through intelligence reports as being involved.

Families of the victims say they cannot understand why more is not being done to bring the killers to justice.

(Read more at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-19059183 )

For those too young to remember, the Provos murdered 9 entirely innocent people - men, women and children, Protestant, Catholic and Neither - in Claudy in 1972, in a particularly callous and wreckless manner:







http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claudy_bombing

Still, no doubt the "Usual Suspects" will be queueing up to give us their considered thoughts on this matter, as they did in such numbers on the "Bloody Sunday Friday" thread...

Or did I just dream it all?

"No Republican was prepared to appear on this programme"

For the 40th Anniversary of Bloody Friday, BBC NI has produced a 1 hour documentary on the atrocity. Unfortunately I believe BBC iPlayer is not available outside the UK, since I feel this should be compulsory viewing for every Irish person, tough going though it is.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01kxsxn/Bloody_Friday/

4 June 2012 Last updated at 15:27

Mother's anger over GAA club's 'IRA medals' for under-12s


The medal carries a photograph of IRA man Martin McCaughey

The mother of an 11-year-old boy is angry that children at a Gaelic Athletic Club football blitz at the weekend were given medals bearing the picture of a dead IRA man.

The medals given to the Under-12 boys at Galbally Pearses Club in Tyrone featured Martin McCaughey.

He and IRA man Dessie Grew were shot dead by the SAS in October 1990.

"It was outrageous. My son was asking what the hero did," said the mother who did not want to be named.

"We had no warning that the medals would be dedicated to a dead IRA man.

""I think we should have at least been told what the medals would have on them and given a chance to decide whether we wanted our children to take part or not."

A press officer for Tyrone Gaelic Athletic Association said: "If the mother has a comment, she should make it to Tyrone County offices, they would obviously look at it."

A spokesman for the GAA's Ulster Council said: "The Ulster Council has no comment to make until we receive official notification from the individual involved."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-18322046

["We are sick, sore and tired hearing about demands for inquiries for atrocities like Bloody Sunday, Rosemary Nelson and Pat Finucane, yet no effort from our government to find resolution to the scores of people murdered in attacks carried out by the IRA."]

Meanwhile, the anniversary of another foul and barbaric massacre comes and goes, without the victims' relatives being heard, never mind heeded... 

http://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/local/twenty_years_on_teebane_families_voice_frustration_1_3423798
Published on Monday 16 January 2012 08:35

Twenty years on, Teebane families voice frustration



The families of eight Protestant men killed in an IRA massacre at Teebane have voiced their frustration and anger that 20 years after the murder of their loved ones, not one person has been brought to justice.

Twenty years ago tomorrow seven construction workers died instantly as an IRA bomb exploded at Teebane crossroads on the road between Omagh and Cookstown as they returned from work at Lisanelly army barracks.

The driver of the blue Mercedes minibus died four days later in hospital from his injuries.

Additionally, six other men also travelling in the minibus were left with serious injuries.

No one has ever been convicted of the murders, which were one of a group of Ulster's most horrific atrocities along with Kingsmills, Claudy and Darkley carried out by the IRA where the perpetrators have never been brought to justice.

Linda Clarke was 26 when her younger brother Nigel McKee was killed in the bomb at Teebane.

The 22-year-old had started working for Karl Construction just a few months before the deadly bomb.

Linda says he was typical of most young Ulster men. He loved cars, helping out on his uncle's farm and along with his girlfriend was looking forward to the rest of his life.

But as the Troubles raged on, Linda said Nigel didn't think about dangers, just his day-to-day life like most people his age.

"To him it was just a job," she told the News Letter.

"He would have been 43 in March. He had just got his HGV licence so that he'd be able to drive lorries. He'd always worked in construction. He'd been going out with a girl.

"My father had died when I was two, so after Nigel died, it was just my mother and I.

"My mother is now 71 and won't talk about it, she gets too annoyed.

"This year the 20th anniversary means a lot to us. However it is gut-wrenching to think that 20 years after my little brother was murdered we are still no closer to justice.

"Ten years ago we went to William McCrea and started asking questions. That was when we found out the police investigation had been closed."

The Historical Enquiries Team has re-investigated the atrocity but Linda says the families have been left disappointed.

"The main feeling among the families is frustration," she said.

"After all this time, still no one has been caught and now they say too much time has passed."

Linda's husband, DUP MLA Trevor Clarke, has challenged republicans to respond to what they did at Teebane 20 years ago.

"People have lost their lives. I condemn all murders both of Protestants and of Catholics," he said.

"So I would like to hear what republicans now, who have condemned more recent atrocities, say now about Teebane.

"I accept that I am an MLA and sit in Stormont with republicans, which does upset my wife and I.

"I believe if republicans are genuine about wanting to move forward, if they have consciences, then they should give any information they have which could help bring the perpetrators to justice.

"We are sick, sore and tired hearing about demands for inquiries for atrocities like Bloody Sunday, Rosemary Nelson and Pat Finucane, yet no effort from our government to find resolution to the scores of people murdered in attacks carried out by the IRA."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/2223042.stm

More Lies and Propaganda from the IFA Spin Machine...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trMJBYh4FSo

Published on Wednesday 10 August 2011 08:29

CANCER charity Marie Curie has distanced itself from an event being held memory of a dead IRA man and which purports to donate its proceeds to the charity.

A resident from Pomeroy contacted the News Letter to express serious concerns after flyers appeared in Tyrone advertising the "Seamus Woods Tug-of-War Annual Tournament" to be held in Pomeroy on Saturday, August 13 at 1pm.

What appears to be the logo of the Marie Curie charity also appears on the poster, with the words, "Proceeds Towards".

"Flyers promoting this event have gone up all over Pomeroy and Dungannon in memory of Seamus Woods," said the resident.

"But Seamus Woods was an IRA member who was killed when the bomb he was transporting to Pomeroy police station exploded prematurely in 1988.

"These flyers are in many of the shop windows in Pomeroy, saying all proceeds will be given to Marie Curie.

"But I had 13 friends from the Pomeroy area killed by the IRA and I know many people would not be keen to see this charity associated with such an event."

Marie Curie distanced itself from the event.

"We were not aware of this event, have no involvement and were unaware that our logo was being used to promote the event," a spokeswoman said.

"Members of the public often create their own events to benefit Marie Curie or decide to donate proceeds from an existing event without advising us."

TUV leader Jim Allister said Marie Curie was being "abused" by the organisers of the event.

"Woods was an IRA terrorist killed when mortars he was preparing for an attack on Pomeroy RUC station prematurely exploded," he said.

"Marie Curie is a very worthy charity which does a great deal of good work. It should not be abused in an attempt to bring a veneer of respectability to a celebration of terror."

However, Cookstown Sinn Fein councillor Cahal Mallaghan defended the tug-of-war tournament.

"It will come as no surprise that republicans commemorate their dead all over Ireland," he said.

"Seamus was a member of the Pomeroy community and it is important for his friends and family to remember him every year."

Mr Mallaghan said the event was organised by the Seamus Woods Commemoration Committee. He had helped run the event at Pomeroy Plunketts GAC for a number of years as a steward. Although not able to attend the event this year, he said his party, fully supported it. Mr Mallaghan said he could not comment on the use of the Marie Curie logo on posters.

Ulster Unionist MLA for Mid-Ulster, Sandra Overend, branded the flyers "disgusting and insensitive".

She added: "If republicans wish to commemorate the evil deeds of Seamus Woods then I for one do not believe that the good name of Marie Curie Cancer Care should be sullied by being used to publicise the event," she said.

"Furthermore, if the GAA is trying to de-politicise itself and make meaningful efforts to engage with other communities, then it would need to ensure that terrorist commemorations are not permitted in GAA premises."

The secretary of the Tyrone GAA county board, Dominic McCaughey, said he was not aware of the event and directed questions to the secretary of Pomeroy Plunketts GAC. When contacted by the News Letter, the club secretary declined to comment.
http://www.newsletter.co.uk/news/local/charity_has_no_involvement_in_ira_event_1_2948174

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_bm5i_51uY

Is this for real, or have the Hole in the Wall Gang finally come up with something funny? 

(I had meant to open this thread after the West Belfast bye-election on 09 June, but got sidetracked: better late than never, I hope)

Anyhow, at the bye-election, the Alliance candidate received a pathetic 122 votes  ( = 0.5%) out of nearly 23k votes cast, thereby coming rock-bottom of the poll:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belfast_West_by-election,_2011

This was a further reflection of the Alliance performance in the NI-wide elections in May, when Alliance received 12.5% of the first preference vote in Unionist-majority constituencies, but only 1.5% in Nationalist-majority ones:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/special/election2011/constituency/html/northern_ireland.stm

Further, if you look at Alliance's most notable successes (recently, at least), e.g. Anna Lo in South Belfast, or Naomi Long in East Belfast, these, too, have been in Unionist-majority constituencies.

Anyone any idea why this should be?

Unless this has been posted elsewhere, I cannot believe that this has gone unremarked:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-13080947
14 April 2011

Bertie Ahern advises Nigeria on business

The former Irish prime minister, Bertie Ahern, has been advising Nigeria on business and economic development.

The advice is published in a report by consultancy firm Oxford Business Group.

Mr Ahern said: "Consistent and transparent policies could boost its efforts to attract foreign investment".

The former taoiseach said sound policies provided the building blocks for Ireland's economic transformation. In November Ireland accepted a £85bn EU/IMF bailout.




I wonder how Bertie got the gig. Maybe he sent out millions of e-mails to Nigeria, along the following lines, and one of them got lucky:

"Dear Respected Citizen of the most Wonderful Nigeria,

I am currently a former Very Senior Official  in the governemt of the Republic of Ireland, who has fallen upon hard times, due to the unreasonable and demeaning ingratitude of a couple of million Irish voters. However, during my many years of selfless service to my country, I managed, by ceaseless and diligent application, to secure for myself a pension, as small recogmpense for my unceasing service to the Nation.
Now, however, I find that I am unable to access that Pension, due to the small matter of not having a Bank Account. However, if you should be so kind as to send me a small fund, to an unnamed and numbered Bank Account in Switzerland which my live-in Partner is operating on my behalf, then this would enable me to persuade the relevant officials in the Irish Government to unfreeze my assets and receive my due.
I will, of course, return your contribution, which you may term a "Consultancy Fee", at a tenfold rate, at the earliest opportunity. For this purpose, I will need access to your Bank details.
Trusting that this shall be received in the spirit in which it was sent, I sign myelf:
Yours sincerely,
Bertie.

P.S. Goodluck, Jonathan

You know, people with surnames like Johnson, Armstrong, Elliott, Hume, Adams...

http://www.u.tv/utvplayer/video/134863

The Author/Presenter, Senator James Webb, is not your average "Irish-American" politician:
http://www.jameswebb.com/about/about.htm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ch5u8YbOyIE&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yh0l1jA95Mk&feature=related

Is it:

A. Three seconds of Videotape?

B. Thirty Years of failed "armed struggle"?

C. £111,183 p.a. from the British Exchequer?

Answers on a postcard, please, to the family of Frank Hegarty, Derry, Ireland...

I know I've been away from the board for a while and so may have missed it on another thread etc, but how come there has been no mention of the following incident, as reported? I mean to say, when some RTE programme about the 200th Anniversary of the Bramley apple can cause Fearon, at least, to open an Armagh-related thread, surely this item cannot have escaped completely his and everyone elses attention?

http://www.irishnews.com/articles/540/5860/2009/10/12/629820_396673231401GAA8216.html

GAA 'fight night' spills onto street
By Andrea McKernon
12/10/09

RIOTING which led to the injury of 10 police officers in Armagh happened after a "fight night" event in the city organised by the Armagh county board of the GAA.

The officers were injured in clashes with a 150-strong crowd early yesterday at Friary Street close to Armagh City Hotel.

Police said one of their patrols was attacked outside the hotel at 2am.

"Police support was brought in from across the district. During the trouble litter bins were used to smash the windows of police vehicles and officers were kicked and punched.

"Four police vehicles had their windows, mirrors, lights and bodywork damaged," police said in a statement.

The officers sustained cuts and bruising to their faces, upper bodies, backs and legs.

None of the injuries were serious.

Revellers were also coming out of the hotel's Bunker night club as the violence erupted.

A 34-year-old man was last night charged with public order offences, criminal damage, four counts of assault on police and resisting arrest.

He has been ordered to appear at Armagh Magistrates Court on November 3.

A 21-year-old who was also arrested has since been released pending a report to the PPS.

An Armagh county board spokesman said he was aware that an incident had occurred at closing time at the hotel.

"The (function) room was booked for Armagh GAA. That is where trouble started," a hotel spokesman said.

The "Vegas fight night" was advertised on the Armagh country board website with an entrance fee of £30.

It matched local GAA players to box each other in a bid to raise money for the county team.

Sinn Fein yesterday blamed hotel security and police "heavy handedness" for stoking up tensions that ignited the trouble and said they had been inundated with complaints from people who were at the charity bash.

"We have requested to meet with the management of the hotel security and the PSNI as some reports were that security and the PSNI were heavy-handed in some cases," MLA Cathal Boylan said.

"There was trouble in the hotel but we want to know how it came to so many people spilling onto the street and the police action," he said.

Ulster Unionist MLA Danny Kennedy said: "There was an onus on the organisers of a fundraising event which had been taking place in an entertainment venue close to the incident to cooperate fully with the PSNI in order that the individuals involved in the trouble could be easily identified and brought to account for their unacceptable actions."

Irish Republicans object to having to swear an Oath to the Queen, whether this be to take a seat in Parliament or become a Barrister etc. They also object to the UK's Constitutional requirement that the Monarch be Protestant etc, eg citing that as a reason why Queen Elizabeth II should not be invited to the Republic, for instance (though I note they never seem to voice any such objections to the Protestant-only Danish Royal Family!)

Anyhow, whether I personally agree or not, all this seems fine enough to me as a matter of principle.

Except that in an Irish Times commentary on Dermot Ahern's imminent new Blasphemy Law (I can't believe that hasn't got its own thread on this Board, btw), noted Irish Atheist Michael Nugent makes the following observations:

"The preamble to our Constitution states that all authority of the State comes from a specific god called the Most Holy Trinity. It also humbly acknowledges all of the obligations of the people of the State to a specific god called Our Lord Jesus Christ.

Up to a quarter of a million Irish atheists cannot become President or a judge unless they take a religious oath. These religious declarations are contrary to Ireland's obligations under the UN International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights"
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2009/0710/1224250387007.html

I find it astonishing that Irish Republicans can be so concerned about Civil and Religious Freedoms etc in the UK (and NI especially), whilst remaining completely silent about the clearly discriminatory practices enshrined in the very Constitution of the state which they would have subsume Northern Ireland.

P.S. If anyone wants to comment on the new anti-Blasphemy Law specifically, I'd appreciate if they were to open a separate thread.

[Seán Russell]

New memorial unveiled to Seán Russell
A new memorial in honour of Irish republican Seán Russell was unveiled in Dublin's Fairview Park on Sunday, 28 June [2009].
Born in Fairview in 1893 Seán Russell was a veteran of the 1916 Rising, the Tan war and Civil War and was Chief of Staff during the IRA's bombing campaign in England, launched in 1939.The original memorial was badly vandalised in an attack in December 2004.
Last weekend's unveiling ceremony was conducted by the National Graves Association which commissioned the new statue by sculptor Willie Malone. The statue was unveiled by Paddy Ryan and Sean Dougan.
A wreath was laid on behalf of Sinn Féin by the party's Dublin City Council group leader Larry O'Toole.
http://www.anphoblacht.com/news/detail/38452



As this article by Henry McDonald* points out, Russell has some more entries on his CV, which his sympathisers curiously omit to mention:

Who do we think we are kidding ... of course the Brits killed Sean Russell

Henry McDonald
Sunday 16 January 2005 - The Observer

Watching Where Eagles Dare for the umpteenth time it suddenly dawned on me why that well-known anti-fascist, progressive, Jew-loving, Irish republican socialist Sean Russell ended up dying on a Nazi submarine in World War Two - the Brits did it. The evidence for this is contained in Alistair MacLean's intricately plotted wartime novel and later film starring Clint Eastwood and Richard Burton. Eastwood and Burton dress up as German officers in order to con the thicko Krauts with the aim of ultimately unmasking the Germans' top agent inside MI6 back in Blighty. Having seen the movie once more I'm convinced that there is nothing the Brits wouldn't do in terms of trickery and chicanery to get their way. Which brings us to the current bout of Nazi-denial in Ireland.
Just before Christmas, persons unknown severed the head of the Sean Russell statue in Fairview Park, North Dublin. The monument was erected by the National Graves Association and honours the IRA's commanding officer during the Second World War. The facts about Russell's tenure as IRA O/C as well as his death are crystal clear. As British cities were relentlessly bombed during the Luftwaffe Blitz Russell dispatched bombers of his own to England. Explosions killed civilians in cities such as Coventry while industries and military installations in Northern Ireland were targeted, all at a time when the Free World was fighting a war of survival against Hitler's armies. Moreover, Russell was feted in Berlin and travelled there voluntarily. In order to aid the IRA campaign to disrupt the British war effort Russell was transported back from Berlin in 1944 on a U-boat. During the voyage home Russell became extremely ill and died before he could be landed back on Irish soil.

Despite these facts there has been an orchestrated campaign of Nazi-like denial ever since Russell's statue was vandalised. Those behind the beheading issued a statement claiming they did so in memory of the millions the Nazis murdered. Regardless of their motivation the act itself was a piece of tokenistic protest posturing. Because if they had really wanted to shine a light into this very dark corner of Irish republican history then the vandals would have been better protesting in Fairview Park, holding seminars to discuss the IRA/Nazi links in the 1940s and publicly challenging anyone, including the Sinn Fein MEP for Dublin Mary Lou McDonald, who rushes to honour Russell as to why they feel it's alright to rally round a statue of one of Adolf Hitler's allies in World War Two. The attack on the monument merely turns Russell into a martyr once more.

Disapproval of the vandalism, however, should not deflect anyone from the truth about what the IRA's O/C and his comrades were up to in the Forties. In his very candid memoir, the late Paddy Devlin admitted that during the war there was a great degree of sympathy for the Nazis inside the IRA in Belfast. Devlin recalled that while in Crumlin Road jail he and his comrades enthusiastically plotted the advance of the Germans into the Soviet Union on a map in their prison cell. Each time news came through the radio about Nazi victories he and the other IRA inmates would cheer to the rafters.

Even in the face of historical fact the Nazi-like denial campaign has been building up steam lately, both in Dublin and Belfast. The NGA, which has vowed to reconstruct the statue, brands anyone linking Russell with the Third Reich as 'ignorant'. The NGA reminds the Irish public that Russell was not alone on the U-boat; the ex-IRA Spanish Civil War veteran Frank Ryan accompanied him on that fated voyage. Usually intelligent republican writers and critics such as Liam O'Ruaric in Belfast have also gone down the Nazi-like denial line pointing to Ryan's presence on the submarine and the fact that so many IRA veterans like him fought on the Republican side in Spain. The latter point is true of course. Irishmen and women like the late Paddy McAllister from the Lower Falls travelled to Spain to defend the Republic. Yet to use their defence of democracy to defend Sean Russell's strategic decision to ally the IRA with Hitler in the war is to insult their memory. And as for Frank Ryan, unlike Russell who was a free agent, the founder of Republican Congress was a virtual prisoner of the Nazis, having been rescued from a Francoist firing squad by German intelligence agents. Of course the invite to Berlin, the S-Plan, the IRA/Nazi alliance, the U-boat and the burial of Russell at sea complete with swastika flag and military honours may have been the work of British intelligence. Yes, of course that's it. The whole thing was an invention by latter-day securocrats aimed at blackening the name of the IRA by associating it with the Nazis. Just like Richard Burton and Clint Eastwood, those German submariners were, in fact, Brit agents and that U-boat came from a deepwater port somewhere in Scotland. Maybe Oliver Stone could make a film about it.


Of course, Sean Russell was only one of a number of Nazi collaboratos amongst Irish Republicans (albeit a leader), as the following demonstrates:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRA_Abwehr_World_War_II

And at the same time as leading Republicans such as Gerry Adams's father and Uncle Dominic etc were up to their eyes in the above, young men from the Unionist community such as Capt.Terence O'Neill (Irish Guards Officer), James Chichester-Clarke (wounded at Anzio), or James Molyneaux (6 years in the RAF, present at the liberation of Belsen) were volunteering  to join the fight against Hitler. (All three went on to be leaders of the Ulster Unionist Party, btw)

Yet Sinn Fein claims that they are the Socialists, whiles Unionists are Nazis.  I'm tempted to say that "you couldn't make it up" - only those hypocritical fcukers already have...




* - The usual "shoot the messenger" jibes are understood,  so there's neither use nor value in reproducing them, in an attempt to deflect attention away from the message...

In a "Sunday Life Exclusive"(!), they report that on a radio interview he gave in Dublin yesterday, Gerry Adams mentioned the inspiration he took from Monty Python's "Try to Look on the Bright side of Life" to get him through the hard times when he was in prison*.

According to the Sinn Fein President, he and his fellow Republican comrades enjoyed dark humour and belted out the ditty despite savage beatings etc.
Specifically he said: "Away down at the bottom of the wing we heard 'Always look on the bright side of life' and before you knew it you had 100 men singing this at the top of their voices"

Gerry Adams was in prison from 1973 to 1977.

Monty Python recorded "Always Look on the Bright Side of Life" in 1979...


P.S. Is there any chance Adams wrote the song for Monty Python when he was in prison?


* - For NOT being in the IRA, btw

I appreciate the danger of "Fearonisation"(!) i.e. splitting single topics into multiple threads, but rather than just comment aimlessly on Antrim and Craigavon and any other incidents which may arise etc, I am interested to know how people think the PSNI and Security Forces should react generally to the latest upsurge in Dissident activity?

For when Orde announced that the SRR would be deployed last week (yep, it was as recent as that  ), there were complaints from predictable sources that this was an overreaction/counterproductive etc. Do those people still think the same, in the light of subsequent events?

For it seems to me that out of the multiplicity of responses open to the PSNI etc, none is entirely satisfactory:

1. Do nothing different i.e. regular policing as before, with appeals for information etc.
This has the advantage of denying the Dissidents the reaction they seek, plus reassuring the rest of us that this place is still "normal" (relatively speaking). However, not only does this bring us no closer to arresting those who committed the recent murders, but it leaves the police (and bystanders) open to further attacks;

2. Reduce/Withdraw regular policing/patrolling etc from the most dangerous areas until the security situation improves.
This might lead to fewer murders etc of police officers. However, it will also lead to the re-establishment of "no go areas", which the Dissidents would be delighted to fill, with their own brand of "community policing". Further, it would likely provoke so-called Loyalist paramilitaries to step into the breech and resume murdering innocent Catholics etc;

3. "Emergency Policing"
New/additional powers re. questioning/detention etc for the PSNI and Courts etc, on the basis that whilst the perpetrators are likely known, under the present Rule of Law/Human Rights etc, all which can be done is lift them, question them, face a "blank wall", then release them without charge. A more "robust" approach, maybe even with some form of "selective internment" (along with the Gardai in ROI?), would conceivably get these people off the streets and off our backs? Yet I for one do not want to see that, both because it is wrong in principle, and likely counterproductive in the long run;

4. Enhanced Intelligence activity, combined with higher profile policing.
Clearly the first of these is now already in place, with the deployment of the SRR. I imagine that in the absence of hard evidence (witness, confession or forensic) to secure convictions, Orde has decided that greatly enhanced surveillance of suspects is the best way forward i.e. effectively follow them (physically and/or electronically) for 24 hours a day until either they make a mistake and/or lose all room for manoeuvre.
In addition, the police presence in dangerous areas needs to be enhanced, both to send out the message that the PSNI will not abdicate responsibility for policing, and also to disrupt the Dissidents by road checks, weapons searches etc. And with the present increased threat to their personal safety, this will mean the police must revert to Land Rovers and Rifles etc, possibly even accompanied by soldiers and helicopters etc for protection.

Of the four possibilities, it seems to me that the fourth must be the way forward, on the basis that it is the least unacceptable to everyone (bar the Dissidents).

Clearly the biggest consequences will be for people living in Nationalist areas where the Dissidents live. For in the end, if ordinary people cannot or will not supply the evidence which the PSNI needs to arrest, convict and imprison the perpetrators in their midst, then I cannot see any other alternative but to accept that the police must then come into these areas and root it out for themselves.

Which in turn puts pressure on the various political representatives to behave responsibly and make this work. Most notably, the DUP must not overreact and demand results at any price (i.e. kicking down doors, beating confessions out of suspects, suspension of the Rule of Law etc). and on the other side, SF must accept the principle that the PSNI must be allowed to deploy whatever methods they see fit (e.g. SRR. army support etc) to counter the Dissidents, with their (SF) role being to ensure those methods are "acceptable" i.e. reasonable and proportionate to the level of threat faced.

What do others think?