TRANSCRIPT: Radio Free Éireann interview with Richard O'Rawe, author of Blanketmen
Radio Free Éireann
WBAI 99.5 Pacifica Radio
New York City
Saturday 17 August 2013



Via telephone from Belfast: Sandy Boyer (SB) interviews Richard O'Rawe (RO), author of Blanketmen: An Untold Story of the H-block Hunger Strike, about the Democratic Unionist Party's unilateral decision to cancel the proposed Peace and Reconciliation Centre at the Long Kesh prison site. Thanks as always to our transcriber who rises to the occasion every time.

(begins 1:13 EST)

Sandy Boyer (SB): We are going over to Belfast to speak to Richard O'Rawe. Richard, thanks very much for being with us.

Richard O'Rawe (RO): It's a pleasure, Sandy. Thank you so much for having me.

SB: Richard, you were on the blanket. You were the PRO, Public Relations Officer, for the hunger strikers. You knew men who died on hunger strike.

RO: Yes.

SB: How does it make you feel that there can't even be a Peace and Reconciliation Centre where they died?

RO: Well it makes me feel very, very angry to be quite frank, Sandy, because it is indicative of the myopic, tunnel vision view that Unionists have of what happened during the struggle.

I mean the reality of the matter is that ten very selfless men, ten heroes gave their lives in Long Kesh for us, their fellow blanketmen, who were on protest against criminalisation.

And they gave their lives and ended up with a horrific death and we're not even allowed to visit (the site).

They're actually talking about rasing the hospital wing in which Bobby Sands and the other nine hunger strikers died. They're talking about rasing it to the ground – an attempt to wipe out all memories of the hunger strikers.

And I think it's absolutely diabolical.

SB: Richard, you would think that no one could be against peace and reconciliation. Here we have a saying that it's “like Mom and apple pie”.

But suddenly, the Democratic Unionist Party from out of nowhere – and despite the fact they agreed to it already  –  says you can't do it. You can't have any monument to the hunger strikers.

RO: Well, it's not even that Sandy because they're now talking about dismantling the monuments to Republican IRA Volunteers, Republican freedom fighters, throughout the North.

What's actually happening is that the Unionist/RUC-type section of this population are of the opinion that they were the only people who suffered here –  that they were the only people who had legitimate dead – that everyone else who died here were gangsters or terrorists or whatever you want to call them.

They're actually now coming to a position where they're trying to deny Republicans any outlet at all – they're denying them the right even to show respect for their own dead.

SB: But this is just adding insult to injury.

There's been a sustained Unionist offensive, I would say, against Nationalism, right back –  you had the flag protests –  where they insisted the Union Jack has to fly over the Unionist Belfast City Council even more times than it flies over Buckingham Palace!

They're saying: we're more loyal than the Queen herself.

But then you got  –  last week  –  Máirtín Ó Muilleoir, the Sinn Féin Lord Mayor of Belfast, tried to dedicate a park –  he got attacked by a mob, a Protestant mob frankly...that's all you can call it.

His Unionist colleagues on the Council stood by...did nothing.

And of course last week you had the attempt to commemorate internment without charge or trial and a Loyalist mob just blocked it from getting anywhere near the city centre. So this is not just an isolated incident.

RO: No, it's not. But at the heart of all of those incidents is a supremacist attitude.

And it's an attitude that is vibrant within the Unionist population. And that has never changed from the formation of the state of Northern Ireland which, we must remember, was a gerrymander in that the Six Counties was deliberately (and) geographically picked because it would ensure that there would always be a Unionist majority within.

And from that came this supremacist attitude. And that supremacist attitude hasn't gone away simply because there's a peace process. It is still there and they are of the view – and that's why they wouldn't let anyone march down – weren't allowed on the main street in Belfast –  because in their view that's their street.

They can walk up and down it every twelfth of July and any time the notion takes them. But Nationalists are not allowed to walk down it. And if they try to there will be riots...as there was.

And it's the same with the Union Jack flying over Belfast City Hall. The Union Jack is their flag. Someone suggested: now why not put up the Tricoulor, the Irish flag, up beside it  –  they went absolutely nuts. Then someone else suggested well why not put all the flags of the European Union up  –  and again they went nuts.

The only flag that they wanted is the Union Jack because the Union Jack is a supremacist flag. And it's a flag that tells Nationalists that they're second-class citizens. And that is really the crux of the matter.

They have a supremacist attitude. It hasn't gone away and it's not going to go away. They have no interest in sharing power. They're doing so because they have to.

But they are absolutely convinced that Nationalists are second class citizens and should be treated as such.

SB: And are being treated as such.

RO: And are being...absolutely!

SB: But Richard, what happened to parity of esteem and power sharing?

Look, you've got Sinn Féin, the largest Nationalist/Catholic party, is in government with the Democratic Unionist Party, Ian Paisely's party, the ones who just canceled this Peace and Reconciliation Centre. I can't get over it. I can't help thinking no one could be against peace and reconciliation. But  –  How come?

You're supposed to have parity of esteem. That's what they tell you!

RO: There is no parity of esteem.

You made a point earlier I'm going to come back to: This was going to be a peace centre. This wasn't going to be a monument to the hunger strikers.

Sure the hunger strikers died in Long Kesh but there was also prison officers who died during the struggle, who were shot dead during the struggle by the IRA, who were going to be remembered as well. There was all sorts of different outlets. So in fairness, it probably would have been a legitimate peace centre. However, they scuttled it.

The fact of the matter is that they scuttled it because they can.

In actual fact what they did (was) they checkmated Sinn Féin. They just came out and they put it up to Sinn Féin...we're closing this...this is never going to happen...see, this business...it's put back until Richard Haass, the American diplomat, comes over.

It will never, ever be opened in my view.

The fact of the matter is they pulled the plug on it because they could. Because it was a step too far for them and they would not have ever been comfortable with it.

They don't want the IRA remembered in any shape or form. And Sinn Féin now have an awful, awful dilemma: they either swallow this, in other words they say: well there's nothing we can do about it and they march on and accept this second-class sort of citizenship.

Or, the alternative to that, is to pull down the institutions at Stormont. And I don't think they're going to do that.

So the reality is they're going to have to just accept it and they will. I've no doubt about that.

SB: But, Richard, Sinn Féin has been, I don't know...for months and months if not years...telling everybody there was going to be a Peace and Reconciliation Centre there. It will be in effect, if not in name, a monument to the hunger strikers. That's what they've...I haven't researched it...I don't know how many months they've been saying it...but a good long time.

RO: Yes, they have. The DUP, even prior to this being scuttled, the DUP was saying the exact opposite. The both of them can't be right.

The DUP was saying there would be no mention of hunger strikes. Jeffrey Donaldson actually said it on television. There would be no mention of hunger strikes in this Peace and Reconciliation Centre.

They were actually diluting the whole hunger strike event. Had it not been stopped they were of the view that they were going to dilute it to the point where it would not be a monument to the hunger strikers.

So no matter what Sinn Féin said the DUP would have had the upper hand in this one. They did have the upper hand. And now they've pulled the plug on it.

SB: This sounds like a microcosm for the peace process.

RO: It is.

SB: You tell Loyalists what they want to hear, Protestants what they want to hear. You tell Nationalists, Catholics what they want to hear and then eventually, reality intervenes.

RO: You're absolutely right. The peace process itself is ambiguous because nobody really know what it means.

We could have had power sharing, as we know, back in 1974 and we had it at Sunningdale and it was pulled down. But setting that aside, we now have power sharing again but it's a power sharing that is forced.

And there's no doubt that Unionism at its core does not believe in power sharing.

They believe that as they are the majority of the people in this gerrymandered state they are entitled, as they have always been, to be at the center of government – to be in control of the government.

And that power sharing, to an extent, has been forced on them. But they still have the upper hand.

You can talk about the peace process – yeah – there's nobody's being killed –  this dissident campaign, which in my view, is nonsense and should be stopped immediately –  but this dissident campaign is not having a major impact politically.

But nonetheless, Sinn Féin –  they're like drinking ducks, they have no choice but to keep on swallowing their pride, swallowing their pride because to do something against it –  the only radical thing that they could do would be to walk out of government –  and they're never going to do that. In my view they're never going to do that.

They didn't do it over internment, when Marian Price was interned, or that young man Coney is interned.. or Corey, I beg your pardon, Martin Corey...he's interned. And there's other people in...

SB: Martin Corey's interned for years and there's no prospect of his getting out.

RO: And they're doing absolutely nothing for him.

The radical Sinn Féin of twenty years ago or twenty-five years ago would have been mobilising on the streets, would have been absolutely making a nuisance of themselves – these guys don't want to do nothing. They don't want to rock the boat. They're getting good wages. They're getting a good living.

Those who are with them are getting the handy jobs, etc – well paid jobs –  and they don't want to rock that boat. And they don't want to confront the sectarianism of Unionism. It's there. They don't want to confront it.

So what they're going to do now is they're going to swallow it and say that's tough.

SB: Well you know, Richard, if you read The Belfast Telegraph –  the mainstream Northern (Ireland) newspapers  –  the “respectable” press, they're all saying – Oh my God! there's a crises in the peace process. Sinn Féin has been insulted.

The DUP didn't even give them a call and say: just want you to know, boys, we're going to cancel this. They put out the press release and said: that's it!

They asked Martin McGuinness, who's the Deputy First Minister, if he was going to talk to the Unionist First Minister of Northern Ireland. He (McGuinness) said: well, first of all  –   he's in Florida so I can't really reach him and even when he's in Belfast I can't really reach him.

So what future can there be if they can do this to Sinn Féin and Sinn Féin says well we can't even get in touch with these people  –   what does that say about this coalition government?

RO: Well, it shows you how useless, not useless –  useless may not be the right word, how inept Sinn Féin is and how inadequate their involvement with this process is. Stormont itself is a talking shop. Westminster does most of it –  they give them the money and all they do is hand it out.

But the point of the matter is, Sandy, and it keeps coming back to the same point and Robinson demonstrated it very vividly when, as you say, he didn't even take the bother or he didn't even have the manners to tell Martin McGuinness that he was going to pull the plug on this – McGuinness heard it when all the rest of us heard it on the news.

So you have to say to yourself: What respect has Robinson for his co-counsel? For his fellow leader? There's absolutely none.

Again, it's done because he still has this supremacist attitude that Nationalists, per say, are people who are not worthy of respect and they're certainly not worthy of having equal status to the Unionists in this statelet.

SB: Richard, but what does it say about the future of this coalition?

Because it seems to me, if Sinn Féin can't get a...now it's symbolic but...a little, tiny – and I would think  –  uncontroversial thing like a Peace and Reconciliation Centre –  I keep thinking that  –  a Peace and Reconciliation Centre – nobody could be against that –  but they can't even get that. So what are they able to get?

RO: They're not going to be able to get anything.

Ultimately Peter Robinson knows that –  and he has this well thought out –  he knows that Sinn Féin aren't going to walk away from this because if they walk away they've nowhere to go and he knows they're going to have to come back –  probably come back to the same situation. So he knows that there's nothing they can do about it.

The only way that the situation would change would be for Sinn Féin to walk out  –  that would be the drastic measure that may be needed to maybe interject some reality or shake up Unionist thinking. But they're not going to do that.

Sinn Féin will go on and they will go on taking the slaps in the face. They will go on taking the insults. They will come off with jargon that tries to allay the justifiable concerns of their constituents but they will stay in power, Sandy, because don't want to give it up under any circumstances.

And Peter Robinson knows that.

And he knows that these guys –  at their core –  haven't got a great sense of moral fibre – that they'll do whatever they have to do to stay in power –  and if that involves swallowing pride again and again and letting things absolutely spiral out of control in terms of state security things like internment, etc they will just take it. And Robinson knows that. And that's why he can be so flippant and so bad mannered.

Sinn Féin knows there's no choice but to take it.

SB: Richard, it seems to me that having gotten away with this, having gotten away with the attack on the internment march, having gotten away with repeated attacks on Nationalist areas like Ardoyne and, as you say, with interment, it would seem to me that there's going to be more attacks on the Nationalist community. It's going to get even worse!

RO: The violent streak in Unionism in my view –  and I'm almost loathe to say this  –   it seems to me that paramilitary Unionism isn't that far away from actually lifting up guns again and starting to kill people.

Because alot of these riots are being led by the paramilitaries, the paramilitaries that led the UVF etc, they're very much into (this)...and it wouldn't be beyond the imagination of some of these guys to say: come on, we'll go and shoot a Catholic.

There's the potential there, Sandy, for things to get worse.

I don't see it getting any better. I don't see how the issues that are so salient now are going to be removed.

For example, the Unionists want to parade and walk wherever the hell they want irrespective of whether it upsets other people or not. They don't want the Peace and Reconciliation Centre. They don't want Catholics walking in the city centre of Belfast. They actually don't want IRA monuments now throughout the country. They don't want the IRA to even honour their dead.

This is the reality. It's humiliating.

It's humiliating to be a Nationalist here because we all thought that (with) the Good Friday Agreement we had moved into a new era and the mindset of the people was changing.

And we now know that that was an illusion.

The mindset of Unionism has not changed one iota –  that it's still “croppy lie down” – that's the way they think and that's the way they're actually acting. And that's what we're seeing...that's what we've seen right throughout the Summer and what we've seen for years.

And the problem is that Sinn Féin is lying down. Sinn Féin has no teeth. And they know that.

SB: Before I let you go –  I was talking to Eamonn McCann, the journalist whom you know very well...

RO: Yeah, I know Eamonn well.

SB: And he was saying: You know, I was going to write that if this keeps up the next step will be assassinations. He said then I didn't do it because I thought I might be putting the idea in somebody's head.

Is that what we're coming to?

RO: I was of the same view as Eamonn and that's why I said that I'm reluctant to say this. I mean, I said it there two minutes ago but I think that is not that far away. I think that some of these eejits would think nothing of lifting a gun and shooting some Catholic and come up with some blind reason for it.

I hope, I pray with all my heart that it doesn't. But I'm saying that it's not beyond the realms of possibility. Like Eamonn, I hope I'm wrong...this is one where I really do hope I'm wrong...I mean, the situation is very fraught, very, very fraught at the minute and it's very, very dangerous.

Everyone's pinning their hopes on Richard Haass. I tell you  –  he would need to be a magician because only a magician could pull this off.

SB: Well, Richard, we'll get back to that and thank you very much. We really appreciate you coming on.

RO: You're welcome, Sandy. Thank you so much for having me. It was lovely to talk to you again.

(ends 1:35 EST)

No Choice But to Take It: RFE interview with Richard O'Rawe

TRANSCRIPT: Radio Free Éireann interview with Richard O'Rawe, author of Blanketmen
Radio Free Éireann
WBAI 99.5 Pacifica Radio
New York City
Saturday 17 August 2013



Via telephone from Belfast: Sandy Boyer (SB) interviews Richard O'Rawe (RO), author of Blanketmen: An Untold Story of the H-block Hunger Strike, about the Democratic Unionist Party's unilateral decision to cancel the proposed Peace and Reconciliation Centre at the Long Kesh prison site. Thanks as always to our transcriber who rises to the occasion every time.

(begins 1:13 EST)

Sandy Boyer (SB): We are going over to Belfast to speak to Richard O'Rawe. Richard, thanks very much for being with us.

Richard O'Rawe (RO): It's a pleasure, Sandy. Thank you so much for having me.

SB: Richard, you were on the blanket. You were the PRO, Public Relations Officer, for the hunger strikers. You knew men who died on hunger strike.

RO: Yes.

SB: How does it make you feel that there can't even be a Peace and Reconciliation Centre where they died?

RO: Well it makes me feel very, very angry to be quite frank, Sandy, because it is indicative of the myopic, tunnel vision view that Unionists have of what happened during the struggle.

I mean the reality of the matter is that ten very selfless men, ten heroes gave their lives in Long Kesh for us, their fellow blanketmen, who were on protest against criminalisation.

And they gave their lives and ended up with a horrific death and we're not even allowed to visit (the site).

They're actually talking about rasing the hospital wing in which Bobby Sands and the other nine hunger strikers died. They're talking about rasing it to the ground – an attempt to wipe out all memories of the hunger strikers.

And I think it's absolutely diabolical.

SB: Richard, you would think that no one could be against peace and reconciliation. Here we have a saying that it's “like Mom and apple pie”.

But suddenly, the Democratic Unionist Party from out of nowhere – and despite the fact they agreed to it already  –  says you can't do it. You can't have any monument to the hunger strikers.

RO: Well, it's not even that Sandy because they're now talking about dismantling the monuments to Republican IRA Volunteers, Republican freedom fighters, throughout the North.

What's actually happening is that the Unionist/RUC-type section of this population are of the opinion that they were the only people who suffered here –  that they were the only people who had legitimate dead – that everyone else who died here were gangsters or terrorists or whatever you want to call them.

They're actually now coming to a position where they're trying to deny Republicans any outlet at all – they're denying them the right even to show respect for their own dead.

SB: But this is just adding insult to injury.

There's been a sustained Unionist offensive, I would say, against Nationalism, right back –  you had the flag protests –  where they insisted the Union Jack has to fly over the Unionist Belfast City Council even more times than it flies over Buckingham Palace!

They're saying: we're more loyal than the Queen herself.

But then you got  –  last week  –  Máirtín Ó Muilleoir, the Sinn Féin Lord Mayor of Belfast, tried to dedicate a park –  he got attacked by a mob, a Protestant mob frankly...that's all you can call it.

His Unionist colleagues on the Council stood by...did nothing.

And of course last week you had the attempt to commemorate internment without charge or trial and a Loyalist mob just blocked it from getting anywhere near the city centre. So this is not just an isolated incident.

RO: No, it's not. But at the heart of all of those incidents is a supremacist attitude.

And it's an attitude that is vibrant within the Unionist population. And that has never changed from the formation of the state of Northern Ireland which, we must remember, was a gerrymander in that the Six Counties was deliberately (and) geographically picked because it would ensure that there would always be a Unionist majority within.

And from that came this supremacist attitude. And that supremacist attitude hasn't gone away simply because there's a peace process. It is still there and they are of the view – and that's why they wouldn't let anyone march down – weren't allowed on the main street in Belfast –  because in their view that's their street.

They can walk up and down it every twelfth of July and any time the notion takes them. But Nationalists are not allowed to walk down it. And if they try to there will be riots...as there was.

And it's the same with the Union Jack flying over Belfast City Hall. The Union Jack is their flag. Someone suggested: now why not put up the Tricoulor, the Irish flag, up beside it  –  they went absolutely nuts. Then someone else suggested well why not put all the flags of the European Union up  –  and again they went nuts.

The only flag that they wanted is the Union Jack because the Union Jack is a supremacist flag. And it's a flag that tells Nationalists that they're second-class citizens. And that is really the crux of the matter.

They have a supremacist attitude. It hasn't gone away and it's not going to go away. They have no interest in sharing power. They're doing so because they have to.

But they are absolutely convinced that Nationalists are second class citizens and should be treated as such.

SB: And are being treated as such.

RO: And are being...absolutely!

SB: But Richard, what happened to parity of esteem and power sharing?

Look, you've got Sinn Féin, the largest Nationalist/Catholic party, is in government with the Democratic Unionist Party, Ian Paisely's party, the ones who just canceled this Peace and Reconciliation Centre. I can't get over it. I can't help thinking no one could be against peace and reconciliation. But  –  How come?

You're supposed to have parity of esteem. That's what they tell you!

RO: There is no parity of esteem.

You made a point earlier I'm going to come back to: This was going to be a peace centre. This wasn't going to be a monument to the hunger strikers.

Sure the hunger strikers died in Long Kesh but there was also prison officers who died during the struggle, who were shot dead during the struggle by the IRA, who were going to be remembered as well. There was all sorts of different outlets. So in fairness, it probably would have been a legitimate peace centre. However, they scuttled it.

The fact of the matter is that they scuttled it because they can.

In actual fact what they did (was) they checkmated Sinn Féin. They just came out and they put it up to Sinn Féin...we're closing this...this is never going to happen...see, this business...it's put back until Richard Haass, the American diplomat, comes over.

It will never, ever be opened in my view.

The fact of the matter is they pulled the plug on it because they could. Because it was a step too far for them and they would not have ever been comfortable with it.

They don't want the IRA remembered in any shape or form. And Sinn Féin now have an awful, awful dilemma: they either swallow this, in other words they say: well there's nothing we can do about it and they march on and accept this second-class sort of citizenship.

Or, the alternative to that, is to pull down the institutions at Stormont. And I don't think they're going to do that.

So the reality is they're going to have to just accept it and they will. I've no doubt about that.

SB: But, Richard, Sinn Féin has been, I don't know...for months and months if not years...telling everybody there was going to be a Peace and Reconciliation Centre there. It will be in effect, if not in name, a monument to the hunger strikers. That's what they've...I haven't researched it...I don't know how many months they've been saying it...but a good long time.

RO: Yes, they have. The DUP, even prior to this being scuttled, the DUP was saying the exact opposite. The both of them can't be right.

The DUP was saying there would be no mention of hunger strikes. Jeffrey Donaldson actually said it on television. There would be no mention of hunger strikes in this Peace and Reconciliation Centre.

They were actually diluting the whole hunger strike event. Had it not been stopped they were of the view that they were going to dilute it to the point where it would not be a monument to the hunger strikers.

So no matter what Sinn Féin said the DUP would have had the upper hand in this one. They did have the upper hand. And now they've pulled the plug on it.

SB: This sounds like a microcosm for the peace process.

RO: It is.

SB: You tell Loyalists what they want to hear, Protestants what they want to hear. You tell Nationalists, Catholics what they want to hear and then eventually, reality intervenes.

RO: You're absolutely right. The peace process itself is ambiguous because nobody really know what it means.

We could have had power sharing, as we know, back in 1974 and we had it at Sunningdale and it was pulled down. But setting that aside, we now have power sharing again but it's a power sharing that is forced.

And there's no doubt that Unionism at its core does not believe in power sharing.

They believe that as they are the majority of the people in this gerrymandered state they are entitled, as they have always been, to be at the center of government – to be in control of the government.

And that power sharing, to an extent, has been forced on them. But they still have the upper hand.

You can talk about the peace process – yeah – there's nobody's being killed –  this dissident campaign, which in my view, is nonsense and should be stopped immediately –  but this dissident campaign is not having a major impact politically.

But nonetheless, Sinn Féin –  they're like drinking ducks, they have no choice but to keep on swallowing their pride, swallowing their pride because to do something against it –  the only radical thing that they could do would be to walk out of government –  and they're never going to do that. In my view they're never going to do that.

They didn't do it over internment, when Marian Price was interned, or that young man Coney is interned.. or Corey, I beg your pardon, Martin Corey...he's interned. And there's other people in...

SB: Martin Corey's interned for years and there's no prospect of his getting out.

RO: And they're doing absolutely nothing for him.

The radical Sinn Féin of twenty years ago or twenty-five years ago would have been mobilising on the streets, would have been absolutely making a nuisance of themselves – these guys don't want to do nothing. They don't want to rock the boat. They're getting good wages. They're getting a good living.

Those who are with them are getting the handy jobs, etc – well paid jobs –  and they don't want to rock that boat. And they don't want to confront the sectarianism of Unionism. It's there. They don't want to confront it.

So what they're going to do now is they're going to swallow it and say that's tough.

SB: Well you know, Richard, if you read The Belfast Telegraph –  the mainstream Northern (Ireland) newspapers  –  the “respectable” press, they're all saying – Oh my God! there's a crises in the peace process. Sinn Féin has been insulted.

The DUP didn't even give them a call and say: just want you to know, boys, we're going to cancel this. They put out the press release and said: that's it!

They asked Martin McGuinness, who's the Deputy First Minister, if he was going to talk to the Unionist First Minister of Northern Ireland. He (McGuinness) said: well, first of all  –   he's in Florida so I can't really reach him and even when he's in Belfast I can't really reach him.

So what future can there be if they can do this to Sinn Féin and Sinn Féin says well we can't even get in touch with these people  –   what does that say about this coalition government?

RO: Well, it shows you how useless, not useless –  useless may not be the right word, how inept Sinn Féin is and how inadequate their involvement with this process is. Stormont itself is a talking shop. Westminster does most of it –  they give them the money and all they do is hand it out.

But the point of the matter is, Sandy, and it keeps coming back to the same point and Robinson demonstrated it very vividly when, as you say, he didn't even take the bother or he didn't even have the manners to tell Martin McGuinness that he was going to pull the plug on this – McGuinness heard it when all the rest of us heard it on the news.

So you have to say to yourself: What respect has Robinson for his co-counsel? For his fellow leader? There's absolutely none.

Again, it's done because he still has this supremacist attitude that Nationalists, per say, are people who are not worthy of respect and they're certainly not worthy of having equal status to the Unionists in this statelet.

SB: Richard, but what does it say about the future of this coalition?

Because it seems to me, if Sinn Féin can't get a...now it's symbolic but...a little, tiny – and I would think  –  uncontroversial thing like a Peace and Reconciliation Centre –  I keep thinking that  –  a Peace and Reconciliation Centre – nobody could be against that –  but they can't even get that. So what are they able to get?

RO: They're not going to be able to get anything.

Ultimately Peter Robinson knows that –  and he has this well thought out –  he knows that Sinn Féin aren't going to walk away from this because if they walk away they've nowhere to go and he knows they're going to have to come back –  probably come back to the same situation. So he knows that there's nothing they can do about it.

The only way that the situation would change would be for Sinn Féin to walk out  –  that would be the drastic measure that may be needed to maybe interject some reality or shake up Unionist thinking. But they're not going to do that.

Sinn Féin will go on and they will go on taking the slaps in the face. They will go on taking the insults. They will come off with jargon that tries to allay the justifiable concerns of their constituents but they will stay in power, Sandy, because don't want to give it up under any circumstances.

And Peter Robinson knows that.

And he knows that these guys –  at their core –  haven't got a great sense of moral fibre – that they'll do whatever they have to do to stay in power –  and if that involves swallowing pride again and again and letting things absolutely spiral out of control in terms of state security things like internment, etc they will just take it. And Robinson knows that. And that's why he can be so flippant and so bad mannered.

Sinn Féin knows there's no choice but to take it.

SB: Richard, it seems to me that having gotten away with this, having gotten away with the attack on the internment march, having gotten away with repeated attacks on Nationalist areas like Ardoyne and, as you say, with interment, it would seem to me that there's going to be more attacks on the Nationalist community. It's going to get even worse!

RO: The violent streak in Unionism in my view –  and I'm almost loathe to say this  –   it seems to me that paramilitary Unionism isn't that far away from actually lifting up guns again and starting to kill people.

Because alot of these riots are being led by the paramilitaries, the paramilitaries that led the UVF etc, they're very much into (this)...and it wouldn't be beyond the imagination of some of these guys to say: come on, we'll go and shoot a Catholic.

There's the potential there, Sandy, for things to get worse.

I don't see it getting any better. I don't see how the issues that are so salient now are going to be removed.

For example, the Unionists want to parade and walk wherever the hell they want irrespective of whether it upsets other people or not. They don't want the Peace and Reconciliation Centre. They don't want Catholics walking in the city centre of Belfast. They actually don't want IRA monuments now throughout the country. They don't want the IRA to even honour their dead.

This is the reality. It's humiliating.

It's humiliating to be a Nationalist here because we all thought that (with) the Good Friday Agreement we had moved into a new era and the mindset of the people was changing.

And we now know that that was an illusion.

The mindset of Unionism has not changed one iota –  that it's still “croppy lie down” – that's the way they think and that's the way they're actually acting. And that's what we're seeing...that's what we've seen right throughout the Summer and what we've seen for years.

And the problem is that Sinn Féin is lying down. Sinn Féin has no teeth. And they know that.

SB: Before I let you go –  I was talking to Eamonn McCann, the journalist whom you know very well...

RO: Yeah, I know Eamonn well.

SB: And he was saying: You know, I was going to write that if this keeps up the next step will be assassinations. He said then I didn't do it because I thought I might be putting the idea in somebody's head.

Is that what we're coming to?

RO: I was of the same view as Eamonn and that's why I said that I'm reluctant to say this. I mean, I said it there two minutes ago but I think that is not that far away. I think that some of these eejits would think nothing of lifting a gun and shooting some Catholic and come up with some blind reason for it.

I hope, I pray with all my heart that it doesn't. But I'm saying that it's not beyond the realms of possibility. Like Eamonn, I hope I'm wrong...this is one where I really do hope I'm wrong...I mean, the situation is very fraught, very, very fraught at the minute and it's very, very dangerous.

Everyone's pinning their hopes on Richard Haass. I tell you  –  he would need to be a magician because only a magician could pull this off.

SB: Well, Richard, we'll get back to that and thank you very much. We really appreciate you coming on.

RO: You're welcome, Sandy. Thank you so much for having me. It was lovely to talk to you again.

(ends 1:35 EST)

66 comments:

  1. I have to disagree with mo chara mór Ricky, I couldn't stomach seeing a peace and reconciliation center near what remains of the H-Blocks and hospital wing.

    That would be handing the Shinners the legacy of the Hunger Strikers on a platter to do with as they wish. And as we know that would be spinning their deaths into the lie that is the peace process.

    What is needed is the mobilisation of Republicanism to take to the streets and let them know they can't bulldoze our history.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Stephen Nolan ‏@StephenNolan 12h

    Very interesting story about Stormont , breaking on Nolan Ulster at 9am tomorrow morning.

    Have the shinners grown a set I wonder?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Dixie-

    " breaking on Nolan Ulster at 9am tomorrow morning "

    Any chance that you could give us a taste about this-ffs you cant just say something like that and leave the rest for our imagination to work out-

    ReplyDelete
  4. Nolan didn't tell me Micky Henry he just tweeted.

    How if I could hazard a guess I'd say the Brits are taking Carson down and are going to install him as First and Deputy First Ministers.

    Come to think of it the money saved on not paying a solid lump of granite two sets of wages for doing the same job as Peter and Marty could build another three peace bridges in Derry and we'd be even more content with nothing.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Dixie

    The civil-serpents run the country. Do you honestly think John O'Dowd was fit for two government positions? FFS he's not fit for one, none of them are.

    They just mouth off and get a salary to keep the peasants happy while those who really run the place into the ground get on with it behind the scenes.

    That's why you don't need a degree in economics or social planning to get elected and fuck things up, the civil-serpents have all got degrees in social devastation.

    ReplyDelete
  6. That was quite a lengthy intreview and after reading, it would be hard not to comment or at the very minimal have an opinion.

    Richard stating the reality that SF just keep taking this from so called partners in government, is seemingly given in a tone which would suggest this man is tired of stating the obvious.

    Nobody in nationalism/repulicanism nor unuionists/loyalism, or any person should accept being treated with anything other than equality.

    When Richard says everyone is waiting for Haas to come, he is right but Haas will offer nothing other than diluted equality. As has been proved time and again by unionism/loyalism. No matter what agreement is brokered,it will be seen as an assult on thier culture if there is the whiff of eqaulity about it. The cherry picking of the GFA is proof enough of this. The Brittish government has led by example in all of this, Irish language act, Patten, arrests of republicans which goes against what was supposedly agreed at St Andrews.

    I agree with Richard when he says SF will keep taking the slaps. That is a matter for them but if I voted for them which I dont and never would, I would be long ago fed up with the slaps and insults from the brits/loyalists and unionist politicians. SF does have a choice, they can continue to accept things as they are. on behalf of those that vote for them, or they can adopt a grasp of reality.

    If SF continue further down the road they are on of sustaining unionist domination over thier nationalist neighbors,they are doomed just like the SDLP. The current position of remaining in government just legitimises a unionist narative at the expence of thier own.

    SF would like to have the internationally recognised GFA implimented in full, unionists want to renegotiate it. They have tailored thier interpretation of the GFA to the point that it is no longer the GFA but rather the parts that are acceptable to
    unionism.

    Unionists have failed time and again to grasp the olive branch. Will this change, the truth is no,never.

    What can be done?. Something radical maybe. What about democracy as it is in most other countries. The largest party wins or they go into coalition. Unionists have proven thier collective innobility to deliver any semblance of equality. Nationalist are heading into the majority posiion within the six counties. The republican/nationalists support and adopted the tenets and flavour of the proclamation. So why dont they go for it and impliment an equality process when they get propper power and not this current reflection of what the h blocks had in its final years.

    As regards the peace and reconciliation centre. Why dont those big republican leaders within the nationalist communities buy the site themselves, to do with what they want. Lets see, has all the nothern bank money been used yet?, what about the business empire set up by republicans, hotels,bars,nightclubs,car parks,property, the list goes on. Why not direct the profits to this worthy cause. I doubt retaining the hospital really means that much to these people. given the antics of riding the big gravy chu chu.

    Time to stop taking the insults and slaps. It is time for a new approach. Unionists and the brits cannot and should not be trusted. Thier failure to fully impliment the GFA sealed its fate.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I enjoyed the interview. Some great points there.

    Larry,
    Well said. I agree. One day the money will start to decline from the US and the UK governments, and these front figuremen politicians in stormount will have to make some decisions of their own, then we will see how far the peace process has come and well equipped these charlatans actually are.

    Haas will deliver and facilitate nothing, only photo shoots, and the promise of maybe more funding for more community building initiatives, groups, paid holidays for the representatives, all achieving little. Christ knows, how long this will last.

    The civil servants working for stormount have basically prescribed the leading parties a schedule of packages to implement, all I am sure with catchy titles and spin without any real chance of maintaining or improving the quality of life for ordinary folk whatsoever, and the wheel turns round again, more of the same, more of the same, status quo, status quo. Just how they like it.

    Media coverage on the economy include: Begging/ granting of pharmaceutical and IT contracts from North America and the Asia PLC.

    Daily Media Headlines in the form of: 100 job created here in IT industry in Derry, 70 jobs lost here in retail in Belfast, 30 new apprenticeships here in construction tyrone, the construction economic downturn lasting another decade across Northern Ireland.

    House prices rise here according to Royal Institute of Surveyors on Monday, followed by a media report from the Northern Ireland Research Statistics Agency in line with research from Jordanstown that the market is remained stagnated with 0.01 % rise since 2007.

    Sort of get the impression you are being lied too via the media, hell bent on manufacturing consumption in these sectors. Estate Agent sales- style I certainly do.

    Its all stage management, bluffing, deception and make believe. Sure great craic.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Dixie-

    " Nolan didn't tell me "

    It was about the £250,000 Assembly spend in 2012 on the canteen subsidy which we all should have a problem with- except that greedy git Nolan-

    Feel Te Love-

    " Why don't those big republican leaders within the Nationalist communities buy the site themselves "

    Be a bit hard to buy listed buildings I would have thought-

    ReplyDelete
  9. As for the 'maze' site, they should build a whorehouse on it, SF can reside within it.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Richard,

    great interview and a strong articulation of what many are thinking.

    It is absolutlely humiliating for SF to behave as they do. Compare this 'on our knees and proud of it' mindset to the refusal of the hunger strikers to lie down. Men incapable of getting out of bed due to physical weakness still refused to lie down because of their moral fibre.

    We never wish these things to become a self fulfilling prophecy but there are people now fearful that the sectarian assasinations might start again. And if the possibility is hidden then the act might creep up on our blind side and there will be claims of how it took us by surprise.

    State it clearly - this type of thing is what nationalists face if the drift continues. The DUP very cleverly exploited SF's hunger for office, got them in, stripped them of power and are rubbing their noses in it. And this much is guaranteed, we will not hear one hint from McGuinness that Peter Robinson and the DUP are 'traitors' to the Good Friday Agreement. He is so coopted into the British administrative system that he can only see republicans carrying out the type of activities he for so long ordered, as traitors.

    It is a shambolic disgrace. Danny Morrison said SF should never go into government with Paisley's party as it would be the laughing stock of the world. We can hear the laughter alright and it is not what Bobby Sands referred to when he spoke of the laughter of our children.



    ReplyDelete
  11. Not to mention when you roll over to make a sop to unionism and describe IRA operations as mere murder and by implication the hunger strikers as participants in a murder campaign, why would the unionists want you marching up and down the streets commemorating people you regard as murderers?

    SF is hoist on its own petard

    ReplyDelete
  12. Dixie,

    I think Richard is right in that it is an important historical site which the unionists would like to have the republican cultural memory of obliterated. Had it gone ahead there was more chance of Thatcher being honoured there than the hunger strikers. But that was only because of the lack of fibre within SF. We should not balk at it being associated with peace. The ten men embarked on a most selfless peaceful protest and still the Brits done them in (albeit not without considerable input from the Criminal Committee). The destruction of the hospital would be a vindictive act of 'culturocide' and the bigoted minds behind it should be faced down.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Great Interview Richard.

    As I have stated many times, Peter the punt and his Unionists muckers have been Playing a game of Chess with SF, They can't wait to Say , "Check Mate", and its going to happen. How SF can walk about and hold there heads high baffles me , They must feel like a lump of Shite covered with flies, They don't have a clue were to turn to , They have to make a massive move, They have to decide, That's it, lets walk out of stormont, lets bring the whole shebang down with us, alas , They have been in the British clutches for far to long , They have got used to the BIG MONEY , and don't want to give it up.

    I will state here and now, That if the so called peace centre is allowed to continue without the Hospital and other historical parts , SF will not have a leg to stand on, I can just visualize it now, Union Jacks all around the historical site, and not one mention of the Hunger Strikers , But Plenty of mentioning of The screws etc.

    MH:

    "Be a bit hard to buy listed buildings I would have thought"

    Which part of it is Listed? , Because the DUP are adamant to have all off it brought to the ground.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Itsjustmacker

    Correct! You can't bulldoze listed buildings but you most certainly CAN buy them.

    Just another example of SF 'know-how' from MH.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Richard,

    In a review of Joshua Levines' 'Beauty and Atrocity' carried by Pensive Quill, August 2010, you provided the rationale for Unionism's opposition to the Maze for the siting of a 'Peace and Reconciliation Centre' and all other matters relating to the IRA in the acknowledgement that,'..the unionist community suffered greatly during the recent IRA campaign.'
    If there is sectarianism or a supremacist attitude it is entirely secondary to what is such an elementary factor.












    ReplyDelete
  16. Robert:

    ".the unionist community suffered greatly during the recent IRA campaign"

    "And The Nationalists Didn't?

    You must be having a joke on this one , and , I am being honest on this one,You are well taking the piss . Being one who suffered my house being burnt down (Torched) by UVF/B.Specials in cranbrook Gardens, Ardoyne, Having two of my Relatives Murdered by the Shankil Butchers , one cut to pieces , the Other mowed down in a bar, 12 Bullets in Him, PROVIES Didn't do it!, UDA/UVF did. One of my brothers still walks about with a Bullet in his Spine which cant be removed, He got it standing outside Grahmes Bookies on the Crumlin Rd, WAITING FOR HIS BUS TO GET TO WORK UDA/UVF done that, Yet the British knew the UDA was committing these atrocities , Yet, they let them get away with them. That is just my family, I'm sure you have been on the CAIN site? , if you haven't I advise you to do so.
    So , please, don't try and insult our memories of those sadistic events. I will admit that P.I.R.A. committed atrocities as well , In retaliation of course, and , I agreed with it, but , I did not agree with The Inniskillin bombing , nor , the Omagh Bombing which was not carried out by P.I.R.A, Nor the warington Bombing, My message to you is, Get your facts right before hitting the keyboard, Now, I have been Honest, Lets see how unbiased and honest you can be with your reply, That is, if its forthcoming.

    ReplyDelete
  17. From Alec

    The DUP's volte face is a major slap down to Sinn Fein. The retention of the hospital wing in particular was a much needed concession in the face of so many broken promises. Now the party is left having to explain how they
    are helpless to challenge this act of bad faith on the part of their unionist partners. For republicans the prospect of the site being demolished is an extremely painful one. Whilst some will share Dixie's view
    on the matter, most will not wish to see the site where our ten comrades died being erased from history. Watching the bulldozers pulling down those walls, if this is what is to happen, will cause deep distress and anger.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Robert

    Collusion and bigotry fuelled sectarian murder by the huns. How it must be to see yourself as the perpetual victim and sinned against but never the sinner...

    Only thing wrong with the IRA campaign was it didn't fight fire with fore and go after the hun and British establishment's families in kind.

    There might have been a different result then.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Itsjustmacker,

    'My message to you is, Get your facts right before hitting the keyboard,..'

    The quote, I believe, was clearly attributed to Richard. I cited it verbatim. If you have an issue with his acknowledgement, which you evidently have, you need to address that to Richard.

    In his RFE interview Richard puts forward sectarianism and a supremacist attitude as explanations for Unionist opposition to the citing of the proposed 'Peace and Reconciliation Centre' at the Maze. I believe he excludes the patently more obvious motivation, and in his own words,'..that the Unionist community suffered greatly during the recent IRA campaign'.

    In addition to oddly attributing Richard's observation to me, you draw great inference from what I didn't say. The suffering of Nationalists was not being discussed but I have no issue with stating another obvious - that the Nationalist community suffered greatly during the Loyalist campaign.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Larry,

    'Only thing wrong with the IRA campaign was it didn't fight fire with fore and go after the hun and British establishment's families in kind.'

    I don't intend following you into the latrine. I am going to remain here at the door, holding my nose due to the rancid stink, observing you as you bob up and down with the faecal matter.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Robert

    You are no different from Coulter or that DUP 'hippo' charged recently. Attempts to come across as educated and above it all don't wash.

    The big mistake the Irish always made was offering an olive branch to planters who refuse to accept they are on the island of Ireland. Tricolour? Stuff that sop. It's a joke of a flag.

    Your lot Robert have had their day but rather than accept it you'd rather separate the 6 counties from the rest of the island and tow it out to sea and sink it. That's Unionist 'educated logic'.

    No war was ever won by the nice guys. Loyalism is ugly by nature and needed faced down. The refusal to do so is the cause of the perpetuation of the bull-shit here. There weren't too many Catholics murdered by the UDR/UVF in S. Armagh after the Kingsmill's
    treatment was meted out.

    When the loyalists were shooting-up bookies and bars Adams, McGuinness and Co. were happy to permit the slaughter and let it go unanswered whilst they were busy setting up pathetic little personal careers, as we all now know.

    Nagh Robert, you fool no one.

    Unionists/loyalists got off way too lightly.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Out of curiosity, are any unionist politicians or community leaders on record at any time during the troubles stating that the targeting of republicans relatives was wrong? Was it ever suggested it should cease?

    Just wondering where all the educated, 'above it all' huns stood on the issue.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Robert:

    You jumped at Richards point About Loyalists.
    ".the unionist community suffered greatly during the recent IRA campaign""

    That's my point, to me you are no different from the rest of the hun scum, What I regret during the days of the conflict when the hun murdering scum were roaming the streets looking for "INDIVIDUAL CATHOLICS" to cut up and torture. I was one of many who wanted immediate action against the loyalists, my opinion was, Lets hit them back twice as hard, and , I still think like that to this very day. I do Not have a doubt there are those in the background hoping that the loyalist take to the gun again , against Nationalists.

    That's when the thoughts of old come into play, with very extreme and fatal results.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Larry,

    '..after the Kingsmill's
    treatment was meted out.'


    'His mouth had been used as a latrine by some small creature of the night, and then as its mausoleum.'
    Kingsley Amis

    ReplyDelete
  25. Itsjustmacker,

    '..to me you are no different from the rest of the hun scum'.

    Flattery ill placed?

    ReplyDelete
  26. I don't see how we can view Whitecross as anything other than a war crime: a Bloody Sunday equivalent that we visited on an unarmed civilian population. Once we go down the road of trying to defend it we lose any moral authority to speak out against what the Paras did in Derry.

    We all might have felt the urge and on occasion acted it out while in the IRA or INLA but this far on with so much time to reflect, the moral inhibitors against such a course would have been well raised.

    If what was achieved by the IRA campaign was not worth the loss of one life, the logic of that must compel us to balk at actions which take the lives of people who were not even combatants.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Anthony,

    Your coherence and moral reproof has spoilt the spat!

    ReplyDelete
  28. Robert,

    never one to rain on a good row, I found points raised that I felt merited comment. We always need to be able to revisit and reflect or we remain as were were. And that won't take us too far from where we started.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Anthony,

    Seems that others have some way to travel. One wonders what might be the catalyst for reflection?

    ReplyDelete
  30. Itsjustmacker

    I agree with your view on this. Drug fuelled low-life Loyalists armed, assisted and directed by elements of RUC/UDR British establishment had and have no qualms about atrocities against the Irish people.

    DUP/UU political and prod religious mouthpieces talking about law and order falls on stony ground here. Plank and eye registers not with them.

    SF and Mackers may have taken different routes to pacifism, however loyalism will destroy all around them before becoming democratic. The challenge has been left AGAIN to a future generation. Republicanism is not the answer. Begin of Israeli fame and Brit/loyalist tactics being reciprocated may yet prove to be the only thing they eventually take heed of.

    Mackers

    there are no war crimes on the winning side. SF are permitting hun scum to present themselves as victims. Whitecross was necessary at the time. A few dozen-dozen more would have done no harm!

    ReplyDelete
  31. Mackers

    why Drogheda? Ballygomartin was closer for you, next door to Robert. lol

    ReplyDelete
  32. Larry,

    it is closer to the Boyne here.

    If you managed to read the piece on the Omagh bomb you will see I don't agree with pacifism. I think it is an invitation to the bully who always behaves better as a result of a busted nose rather than a genuflection. And fir that reason I have never described the Narrowwater attack as a war crime.

    There has hardly been a war crime in the history of humanity that has not been justified on the grounds of military necessity.

    Civilians have rights against soldiers and the latter never have the right to line up a group of non-combatants and mow them down.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Mackers

    I generally agree. However when loyalists and state forces in collusion consider it both a tactic and objective to murder and butcher Irish people, then there has to come a time to wake the fuck-up.

    Or remain contentedly good British croppies like SF/SDLP.

    I'm not advocating genocide against prods. During loyalist massacres the IRA had sufficient info on where to direct effective reprisal attacks.

    If the RC community were accepted as complicit in IRA activities then by the same token a truck bomb with a 45 minute warning in Rathcoole after an atrocity would render the UVF units 'support base' homeless.

    Perhaps Downing street could then re-plant/house them ...

    IN LUTON!

    ReplyDelete
  34. Larry,

    which is sort of a different argument from the original one. More nuanced for sure. Ultimately, I feel that process justifies outcome rather than ends justifying means.

    ReplyDelete
  35. mackers

    it is all academic and in English grammatical terms the 'third conditional'.

    Unionism have secured the 6 counties but seem intent on destroying the victory.

    Republicanism is out-dated and irrelevant. Perhaps rather than giving unionism political ammo with commemorations for IRA dead, commemorations highlighting state/loyalist murders would be more logical.

    That would expose the reality of life for nordy RC's and prevent the likes of Robert engaging in self delusion. Coz he aint fooling anyone else.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Robert:

    "Flattery ill placed?"

    From you , The word "Flattery" says it all".
    I'm surprised at someone like your self Pertaining to be Intelligent slipping "Flattery" into a reply. "ill placed" is more appropriate!.

    Anthony:

    The mini-bus in which they were travelling was ambushed by up to a dozen attackers. It is believed the massacre was in revenge for the ,"murders of five Catholics in Lurgan and Whitecross last night.". I agree 100% with whitecross , It has always been my stance on loyalist murders, Hit them back harder, let them know they are no longer going to domineer Nationalists.

    Lest someone forgets!.

    Killed in retaliation

    ReplyDelete
  37. Larry:

    "Perhaps Downing street could then re-plant/house them ...

    IN LUTON!"


    I doubt if they would go to Downing St , It would not be a very safe place , I doubt Whitehall would be a safe place either, because they have given up on them , In the dark corridors of whitehall , the so called British elite "MI5 controllers" are saying, FFS , these people better get a grip, they don't have a clue who they are really up against, they have to be told, "This is not 1969/70" , our agents are on the ground within your drug baron areas , we pull the drug baron agents out, "YOU ARE ON YOUR OWN" , you will not survive.

    As for Robert, Less said the better , Maybe he could be one of them!.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Itsjustmacker,

    unionists with the same sense of grievance could claim that Bloody Sunday was 'in retaliation' for IRA activity. That would hardly make it right. How can retaliation be taken out against people not responsible for what is being retaliated against?

    Robert,

    I guess the catalyst differs from person to person. I know that when someone from the unionist persuasion hears such arguments, they feel that republicanism is not about the rights of the people killed but merely of which body should have the right to kill non combatants. Which means the Derry dead as civilians had no right per se not be be mown down but merely a right not to be mown down by the Paras: the right to line up civilians and slaughter them, belonging only to republicans.

    I don't see how that could ever work or pass muster in a world shaped by justice.

    Even in instrumentalist terms it is an own goal in the republican critique of events like Bloody Sunday which suddenly become not wrong, merely that the wrong people did it.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Mackers

    you continue to endlessly turn the other cheek if you enjoy it so much. Try not to stain your undies!

    That sanctimonious horse-shit permitted the Loyalists/brits to continue a one sided sectarian slaughter unopposed and free from fear of any meaningful response. The odd accident was simply not enough.

    THAT is why republicanism as a political philosophy for any future organisation is a disaster from the get-go.

    State and loyalists colluding to murder people requires a more determined reply than good manners and indignation.

    I fear if the loyalists continue to insist they are not English, Welsh, Scottish or Irish and continue to act in a Nazi fashion in and around Belfast poisoning the entire body politic of the island, next time out they will get what they have been crying out for since 1609.

    PLEASE GOD BRING IT TO FUCK ON!!

    ReplyDelete
  40. Larry,

    if flippancy is ever to get us off the hook we need to at least be good at it.

    And each of needs to listen to what is being said otherwise risk facing the ridicule of Bertrand Russell:

    A stupid man's report of what a clever man says can never be accurate, because he unconsciously translates what he hears into something he can understand.

    Turning the other cheek is not a position I have seen advocated here. What is being advocated is a simple defence of the people of Kingsmill having the same right as the people of Derry not to be gunned down in the street.

    I would hope that is a position that all but the Paras could defend. I have for a while observed a form of racism in the view that some people in this world are not to be afforded the same human rights as the rest of us on the basis that they were born a this rather than a that. Which really amounts to seeing them as less than human: the dreaded tag of Untermensch.

    I don't think the type of Republic we want should have that sort of regime on offer.

    If that is sanctimonious bullshit so be it but somehow I doubt if you will find much support for your critique.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Mackers

    In the context of 'war' to promote a peaceful and dignified stance is a losers position. Hence the absence of the republic you lament will be perpetual.

    The Paras carried out government orders and the successive governments have defended those actions repeatedly.

    Being morally correct does not win the war, merely vindicates the defeated for their failure.

    A myself and Itsjustmacker have made clear, our comments are in the context of the 'war'. Not today.

    Should it come to pass that republicans want a re-run of what went before, I'll be avoiding them like the plague!

    Don't think a Ghandi strategy will work with the huns. Might as well attempt to romance a rapist.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Larry,

    context is always alibi for the purpose of either pretending that a crime was not committed or distancing ourselves from them when they are. Context is never a given but is always a construct. Citing context amounts to nothing unless the person you cite it to agrees that the context described is correct.

    In war there is a category that exists for breaches of war protocol. It is called war crimes.

    Legitimate grievances do not in unmediated fashion convey legitimacy onto all actions to redress those grievances. Otherwise anything would go.

    There were no rapists killed at Whitecross. If somebody rapes us we don't rape his children or his friends. We deal with the rapist because he, not those of the same religion as him, is guilty of rape.

    ReplyDelete
  43. mackers

    Dresden, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, the Belgrano, Bloody Sundays (plural and global) the list is endless and the perpetrators see it as an historical and successful tactic. My point is the same. The fear in the USA and GB today is that some marginalised group may perpetrate a fraction upon them of what they have exported globally.

    Good guys get their ass kicked. I would not want to be under your command in any conflict. Good job you are very old and I'm a nifty-fifty.

    Unionism in my opinion will resort to violence again sooner rather than later and perhaps well in advance of any utopian SF border poll. Should nationalists resort to the 'good fight' you promote AGAIN then the result will be the same AGAIN.

    Or perhaps MH and SF will talk democracy into them.

    I'm merely stating in response to Robert's assertion that the huns suffered terribly that if they don't suffer a hell of a lot more in any future conflict which THEY will certainly incite, then the result will be the same.

    All those trying to resurrect republicanism should take up trainspotting instead. It would ultimately prove more rewarding.

    If the loyalists designate the entire RC community legitimate targets in any future conflict then they should be forced to defend their families behind their own backs in kind. Merely my opinion.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Larry,

    nor would I want you under my command in any conflict because with corporate responsibility I would be tried for your acts.

    That perps try to justify their actions would hardly amount to those actions being right. The perps that tried justifying Vietnam, Cambodia, Bloody Sunday, Dresden have all tried rowing back. Bomber Harris had the blame for the WW2 carpet bombing of Germany shifted onto him and was subsequently something of a pariah in the post war British society. It became useful to distance him and make him a scape goat to whom all the sins could be passed.

    Kissinger can't enter some countries for fear of arrest over his war crimes.

    So, we either stand for war crimes or against them. Your logic of a collective punishment for the acts of individuals or smaller groups was applied against civilians by the Nazis during WW2. Can we say it was right just because it made sense to the German military?



    ReplyDelete
  45. As coincidence may have it, the following piece just came through on the Alternet list. Something

    Maybe they are spying on us and are trying to shape the debate! Haven't read it, just looked at the title but it might be of use to somebody

    ReplyDelete
  46. Mackers

    Yet those nations that won those conflicts continue to dominate the globe today. Just saying that whilst of course you are correct, the image in the H-Blocks of the grim reaper tramping over catholic dead and a script saying 'kill them all let God take care of them' isn't something to be tolerated out of moral superiority. Our dead wont thank us for the morality of our cowardice in the face of prod fascism.

    No easy answer. And of course you are right to fear judicial consequences, as a certain loser that would be your fate.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Larry,

    Might is right merely invites us to join the strong against the weak.

    But we were the ‘fascists’ in lining up a civilian population for the purpose of killing them. How do we address the question of our own ‘fascism’ if it is fascism you are opposed to, rather than just ‘prod fascism.’ I imagine fascism is wrong because it is fascism and not ok if Franco approves it.

    The real cowardice is to be found in abiding by fascism rather than in confronting it.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Mackers

    I read that article. Painful reading.

    I just believe that in the face of fascism and indiscriminate targeting of RCs the huns got off way too light. Simple as that. Effectively given the go-ahead. And they promote themselves as the sole law abiding victims!

    The weak are the targets, why encourage the bully as you said yourself?

    'civilization has developed means of destruction that can only be used against those too weak to retaliate in kind, a large part of the appalling history of the post-World War II years'.

    If you want peace arm to the teeth. AND BE PREPARED TO FIGHT FIRE WITH GREATER FIRE for as long as necessary. When the huns get ugly again (and they will)the RCs need to show them as Itsjustmacker has stated, 'it's not 1969 any more!

    ReplyDelete
  49. Larry,

    but it still does not answer the question of our indiscriminate targeting of Protestants through fascistic actions for no reason other than their religion. Are you saying it is wrong but we should do it anyway on the grounds of necessity? If so, do ends justify means? And after that is there no such thing as rights? And if there are no rights what is the republican struggle supposed to be about? How can republicans claim they oppose rights abuses if they have no respect for rights themselves? It only leads us into a situation where abuse of rights is not the problem but who the abuser is. When it is a Protestant abusing rights it is wrong but for Catholics it is right. That gap might well be one reason that republican ideas have not caught on.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Mackers

    I'm long since 'over' republicanism. It is a dead political vehicle here. All I am saying is that in the event that the loyalists predictably reject democracy in the future and resort to indiscriminate violence against RCs and relatives of nationalist activists, that to refuse to address the issue would be a huge mistake AGAIN.

    When an estate in Donacloney and a housing estate in Tyrone were bombed by the IRA in revenge for the RUC/UDR destroying hundreds of Catholic houses in search of the Lybian weapons it brought it home to the huns they could not expect to return home and put their feet up in front of the fire after a happy days wrecking in Newry and Twinbrook. Falsely 'looking for weapons' that their high grade intelligence undoubtedly knew were not there! The result of the bombings were no further whole-scale wanton destruction in RC areas.

    Whitecross whilst involving lethal force had the same effect. Bobby Story once said Whitecross merely moved the hun killing elsewhere. Point proven? To an area too weak or too unwilling to confront it effectively?

    It was common knowledge in N Armagh that when Billy Wright was contemplating standing for election in Portadown, over 8,000 people in his housing estate had signed a petition for him to leave the area!!

    Sometimes needs must.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Itsjustmacker,

    'From you , The word "Flattery" says it all".
    I'm surprised at someone like your self Pertaining to be Intelligent slipping "Flattery" into a reply.'


    Lacking any coherence or relevance from the outset, your contribution has now simply dissolved into guff. A Sunday afternoon best spent not attempting to converse unconventionally with 'Madame Malaprop'.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Larry,

    'I'm merely stating in response to Robert's assertion that the huns suffered terribly..'

    It was Richard's assertion - I merely quoted him.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Robert

    Everyone suffered terribly.

    It is my view that the IRA inaction against loyalist indiscriminate attacks betrayed their stated position as defenders of the Catholic population.

    The only people who can toss away the victory for unionism now are the Orangemen and UVF who quite incredibly seem intent on doing exactly that.

    Maybe they have nothing to get out of bed for in the mornings these days, except for their signing on days. The old 'security' industry being no more perhaps leaves them out of pocket and out of options.

    Long may it continue, but if not, then hopefully they will pay a very high price for starting things up again.

    ReplyDelete
  54. If you kill civilians just because of their religion that's called sectarianism.

    Kingsmill was a disgrace. An eye for an eye leaves everyone blind. I wouldn't refer to all killings as murder but killing someone just because of their religion is just that.

    Uninvolved non-combatants, guilty of nothing but their religion. All the PIRA's purposely sectarian killings were by definition murder.

    The loyalists with their sectarian hatred are a lesson in what not to become. I am reading Henry Patterson's "Ireland's Violent Frontier" at the minute and his analysis of ethnic cleansing along the border doesn't stand up to scrutiny. But reading these comments above, I find myself discovering a world of sectarianism my Republican friends wouldn't countenance. Perhaps the revisionists are too convincing in their arguments and leading people to believe it was all about religion?

    ReplyDelete
  55. Agh republicans, those moral elite who would stand resolute whilst watching the slaughter of their relatives and neighbours. What political fortitude they represent.

    All subjective 'tazering' of poor Robert aside, if I ever embark upon a political career I'll avoid a republican party for sure. I'd never measure up.

    As we know it takes quite some character to be elected with a landslide in places like county Louth. Should I ever reach such dizzy heights of moral fibre I'll take the advice of another iconic example of republican credibility, Bertie Ahern, and 'top myself'.

    Robert

    As you can no doubt deduce from the comments here, it's 'grouse season' for the loyalists any time they feel ready. You have indeed proved to be personally 'above it' Robert and I salute you for that (Benny Hill style).

    ReplyDelete
  56. Larry,

    all these arguments you manage to turn in on yourself. The elitist attitude is to be found in the stance that there are some people who can't stand on the pantheon with the truly elite and are therefore unworthy of the same rights. In all of this you have yet to put a case for gunning down unarmed non combatants either ethically or strategically.

    It also puts you in a position whereby the logic of your argument can be used to butress events like Bloody Sunday. Even the Brits don't go down that road any longer.

    One reason it might be important to get the loyalist history out is that it might shed some light on how many actually joined the UDA/UVF and went on to kill non combatants themselves as a result of Whitecross.

    Does anyone really want to subscribe to a republicanism that wants to slaughter civilian populations?

    While I tend not to feel you are being totally serious in what you say, more just throwing the argument out there and shocking people into responses, there are readers who are not going to see that and think there is no moral difference between some republicans and the Paras.

    Simon,

    I guess many of us go through our lives with the Orwell sentiment in mind - we want to be good but not too good and not all the time - but there are some things so far off the moral radar that we don't consider them: genocide, infanticide, rape. I think that is what keeps us ordinary and it is an ordinariness that we call upon for fortitude when the Nazi 'extraordinary' elite types come along and concoct some scheme and rationale for gassing the Jews.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Mackers

    'It also puts you in a position whereby the logic of your argument can be used to butress events like Bloody Sunday. Even the Brits don't go down that road any longer'.

    Mackers you need to get out of your bedroom more often ffs, what planet are you currently living on?? Jesus wept and you are an academic!

    Think I wrote an article for this blog a while back on a massacre by a Scots regiment in Malaya in the 'Emergency' there in 1948?

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/may/06/britain-batang-kali-massacre-malaysia


    Then there was Bloody Sunday in Derry and more recently the Danny Boy incident in Iraq where twenty plus men and boys were rounded up in a truck and taken away and murdered by British troops.

    http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2008/feb/23/military.iraq

    Think you will find the Brits most certainly do continue the practice and not just via drug fuelled, armed, supplied and military intelligence directed murder gangs, but with regular troops as official policy.

    YES my throwing the argument out there is more designed to force debate and a rational addressing of what is a military tactic, (first tactic) in most conflicts by the Brits.

    To live in denial of the fact is the ostrich option. (Goulding + Johnston 1968) Until an effective way to combat this preferred Brit/loyalist tactic in any future conflict is addressed, failure is guaranteed.

    The same security forces that Catholics were telephoning after their families were murdered had in many cases directed the killers to their target in the first place.

    I am not any longer republican as it happens. That political notion was a failure from its conception and is a failure now before it is even resurrected today by all those lost political souls left in the wake of the piss-process. I have better things to do with my time than to perpetually work myself up to another lamentable failure.

    In reverse of your Whitecross assertion regarding hun recruitment, ill say this to any young nationalists.

    When the prods don't like what's going on here down the road (and they wont) and they start killing people again (and they will) stay the hell away from republican groups because they will offer absolutely nothing in response while your relatives are being murdered by official and unofficial state forces.

    Republicanism is a dead duck.


    ReplyDelete
  58. Larry,

    you know what they say when you dig a hole!

    I am under no illusion about what the Brits do. The point being made, which you seem not to grasp, is that even they cannot defend the actions you are defending - taking out a civilian population for slaughter. They have to cover it up, explain it away as something else. You make no attempt to do that and merely advocate murder of non combatants. So, no point in getting irritated when that position is challenged.

    What people did the non combatants of Whitecross kill and what did any of them do that would justify their slaughter? When you give me something concrete on that I will concede you have a point.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Mackers

    Whitecross prevented any further 'effusion of Catholic blood' in S Armagh. (to quote Cromwell)The Brits have been at it for some time huh?

    My point is that the holier than thou, head in the sand, position has never worked. I don't know the answer to their tactic, perhaps there is none. But like Goulding and Johnson before and SF today, wishful thinking will not prevent the tactic being redeployed later on, IMHO.

    Republicans should consider that before embarking on another (Christ help us) campaign of agitation and confrontation.

    Their strategy will lead, via the scenic route of death and mayhem, to them holding hands with the Chie of Colonial police at Stormont. Best just go 'route one'. Mc Guinness has led the way.

    ReplyDelete
  60. BTW Mackers

    check out the 1641 depositions, pure black propaganda for the Cromwell invasion and genocide in Ireland

    more recently the dodgy dossier Iraq, blatant lies for the facilitation of war in Iraq.

    and here is your typical investigation into more recent inquiries in Iraq and the Danny Boy massacre and murders in captivity there.

    "Their investigation lasted 10 months, involved the interviewing of over 150 British personnel and 50 Iraqi nationals, and found no evidence to support these allegations".

    I really don't think the Brits are hiding from anything. They investigate themselves and find nothing.

    Again, my advice to all young men, stay the hell away from republican groups, they don't have the answer.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Larry,

    I really don't think the Brits are hiding from anything. They investigate
    themselves and find nothing.


    And your point is?

    You merely reinforce the critique of your own position which is one of defending the mass slaughter of a civilian population. That is why the Brits find in their own favour, find that they don’t slaughter civilians when they do – and here we have you advocating what even they won’t defend and which they have to call by some other name.

    Again, my advice to all young men, stay the hell away from republican groups, they don't have the answer.

    Whatever the merits it adds nothing to your defence of war crimes.

    ReplyDelete
  62. mackers

    we can talk around in circles forever. I've debated this 'myself' in circles here 'til I can make out the shape of an Australian customs official in the distance below me. I am no closer to an answer.

    There is no justification for massacres. Possibly why the Brits don't attempt to do so. But the Brits do see them as a useful and effective necessity. I do just wonder will it take some of their own never-ending medicine to 'shock' the Brits out of the habit.

    As I say, no one has the answer. A point I think proven here by the lack of debate offered. But the Brits will continue to value and deploy the tactic as long as it is effective and people are foolish enough to believe that their fictitious enquiries and fake shock and surprise are remotely genuine.

    Republicanism has no answer to a population that detests everything Irish. So it should reflect upon that reality.

    Why is it ok for them, the Brits, but not others? Simple question. No doubt we are back to morals.?

    ReplyDelete
  63. Larry,

    I think there has to be a moral differential between methods we oppose and the methods we use to express our opposition. Otherwise we just become the same as that we claim to oppose.

    The main point you make is that massacres are never justified. That leads onto the strategic question of what to do.

    Kingsmill might have made a difference in a local setting but we can't really know that because we do not know how many Protestants it drove into the ranks of the UVF in Portadown and elsewhere. If Bloody Sunday had that effect on young nationalists why wouldn't its counterpart in Whitecross have the same effect on young unionists? Moreover, the Belfast IRA killed considerably more Protestants than South Armagh during the 74-76 period and produced what?

    The Goulding analogy does not work. It failed because Goulding offered no defence and believed the unionists combatants would listen to their working class brethren on the nationalist side.

    The argument being made against your case is not premised on Goulding's misunderstanding of unionism or its failure to provide defence. It is based on a very simple position - non combatants are not to be targeted.

    On on ehand you seem to accept that but on the other you fear that in accepting it the loyalists gain the upper hand. It is a tension only you can solve in your own mind.

    ReplyDelete
  64. Mackers

    Correct. It is a mental struggle that I intend not ever to have to face.

    'The Goulding analogy does not work. It failed because Goulding offered no defence and believed the unionists combatants would listen to their working class brethren on the nationalist side'.

    And yet having learned nothing SF are 'leading' everyone to a border poll un-defended and I assume in the confidence that the Brits/RUC will be honourable in implementing its outcome should it be favourable to them. Dear oh dear! Like they did the Patton report..?

    I do feel in the event that the Prods will react as anticipated and like the Brits after their latest global atrocity, Irish republicans will react with equally fake shock, insisting that they never saw it coming.

    Bit of a 'banker' mind-set all round lol.

    If and when it does come to pass, I will be far, far, away, thank heavens.

    It was a tangent begun by Robert's highlighting the assertion that the unionists suffered terribly, and it got way out of hand. Unionists suffered minutely in proportion to their financial gain in Northern society. It is something I suspect they long to have back again. Crocodile tears to my mind.

    ReplyDelete
  65. Larry,

    As you can no doubt deduce from the comments here, it's 'grouse season' for the loyalists any time they feel ready. You have indeed proved to be personally 'above it' Robert and I salute you for that (Benny Hill style).

    A funny thought, but the exchange, which I enjoyed, has left me equating you more with 'Wee Jackie' Benny's diminutive sidekick!


    ReplyDelete
  66. Robert

    Very good. I hope to laughing at it all from afar soon enough.

    ReplyDelete