BBC Radio Foyle
Breakfast
Monday 19 August 2013

Programme Host Enda McClafferty (EM) interviews former IRA Volunteer Thomas “Dixie” Elliott (DE) of Doire about the controversial Peace and Reconciliation Centre that was proposed for the former Long Kesh prison site.

(begins 1:49)

Enda McClafferty (EM): The controversy over The Maze and The Peace Centre there rumbles on this morning when a former cellmate of Bobby Sands has accused Sinn Féin of using the hunger strikers to promote their own political agenda.

Dixie Elliott from Doire says the controversy over the Maze peace centre is part of a political game and not about remembering those who died.

Well he told me why he's opposed to the Peace and Reconciliation Centre at the former prison site.


Thomas “Dixie” Elliott (DE): My opinion is that Sinn Féin needs the Peace and Reconciliation Centre located at the site of the former H-Blocks because they need to continue with the claim that what is happening today in regards to the peace process is the legacy of the struggle.

And that ten men gave their lives for what is happening today - which is absurd! Like, no one would have died for peace.

In actual fact these men were imprisoned at Long Kesh because they were captured during what we seen as a war to remove the British from The North.

EM: But Sinn Féin would say of course that this was a crucial moment in history for Northern Ireland and it should be remembered and it should be there to be reflected upon by people who come to Northern Ireland and who visit that particular site.

DE: By all means remember but don't abuse it for their peace process.

By all means remember the sacrifices of the hunger strikers and other people who gave their lives but don't be abusing it for the so-called peace process - which I believe's a farce.

EM: So do you think then there should be a centre there? That there should be some sort of place that people can go and hear about what happened?

DE: See when you're talking about “go and hear what happened”...you see when I hear of “peace and reconciliation” I think of funding and jobs for the boys.

And this is what this is going to be...just another place so they can employ their own members.

EM: You're clearly opposed to Sinn Féin's project if you like, the policy that they're embarked on at the moment. Does that mean then that you're in the dissident camp?

DE: No. I'm in no camp. I'm an independent Republican who has my own opinions.

I don't believe that armed struggle will take us anywhere now. I don't believe it all. But would I condemn dissidents? No. I wouldn't be a hypocrite by condemning them.

But I would try and persuade them that the way forward is through peaceful means.

EM: You were a former cellmate of Bobby Sands as you were there whenever the hunger strikes happened. What do you think those people would have made of what's happening now...the people who died on hunger strike?

DE: See I can't speak for the dead because as I said, they're dead.

But what I can say is no one would have died for a peace process.

You don't die for peace. You die during a war. You die in order to bring about change. You don't die for peace.

But I'm sure if they had've known, which the British seem to know in 1981, that members of the Republican Movement were intent on steering the movement away from the struggle, the campaign, that they wouldn't have died.

I wouldn't have thrown stones for it if I had've known.

EM: So what's your message then to Sinn Féin who feel that this project is worth pursuing, worth pushing ahead with, because they feel it's crucial that the story of the hunger strikers has to be told on that site?

DE: I would say to Sinn Féin that the hunger strikers didn't die for a peace process.

And if they believe in a peace process well...well be it. But they shouldn't try and re-write history.

Bobby Sands and the nine other men who died died because they wanted to undo what Thatcher was doing and that was criminalising the struggle. And the struggle was all about waging war against the British.

And they can't re-write history to suit their own narrative.

EM: And what would you say to those Unionists out there who would see it as a step too far that there would be anything retained on the site of the prison site because it will become a shrine to terrorism?

DE: Well I think in terms of the Unionist politicians that everything's a step too far unless it's a step in their direction.

EM: That was Dixie Elliott there.

Well we have been in touch with Sinn Féin about what Mr. Elliott had to say but as yet we haven't heard back from the party.

(ends 1:54)



Peace Processing the Memory of Conflict: Radio Foyle interview with Dixie Elliott



BBC Radio Foyle
Breakfast
Monday 19 August 2013

Programme Host Enda McClafferty (EM) interviews former IRA Volunteer Thomas “Dixie” Elliott (DE) of Doire about the controversial Peace and Reconciliation Centre that was proposed for the former Long Kesh prison site.

(begins 1:49)

Enda McClafferty (EM): The controversy over The Maze and The Peace Centre there rumbles on this morning when a former cellmate of Bobby Sands has accused Sinn Féin of using the hunger strikers to promote their own political agenda.

Dixie Elliott from Doire says the controversy over the Maze peace centre is part of a political game and not about remembering those who died.

Well he told me why he's opposed to the Peace and Reconciliation Centre at the former prison site.


Thomas “Dixie” Elliott (DE): My opinion is that Sinn Féin needs the Peace and Reconciliation Centre located at the site of the former H-Blocks because they need to continue with the claim that what is happening today in regards to the peace process is the legacy of the struggle.

And that ten men gave their lives for what is happening today - which is absurd! Like, no one would have died for peace.

In actual fact these men were imprisoned at Long Kesh because they were captured during what we seen as a war to remove the British from The North.

EM: But Sinn Féin would say of course that this was a crucial moment in history for Northern Ireland and it should be remembered and it should be there to be reflected upon by people who come to Northern Ireland and who visit that particular site.

DE: By all means remember but don't abuse it for their peace process.

By all means remember the sacrifices of the hunger strikers and other people who gave their lives but don't be abusing it for the so-called peace process - which I believe's a farce.

EM: So do you think then there should be a centre there? That there should be some sort of place that people can go and hear about what happened?

DE: See when you're talking about “go and hear what happened”...you see when I hear of “peace and reconciliation” I think of funding and jobs for the boys.

And this is what this is going to be...just another place so they can employ their own members.

EM: You're clearly opposed to Sinn Féin's project if you like, the policy that they're embarked on at the moment. Does that mean then that you're in the dissident camp?

DE: No. I'm in no camp. I'm an independent Republican who has my own opinions.

I don't believe that armed struggle will take us anywhere now. I don't believe it all. But would I condemn dissidents? No. I wouldn't be a hypocrite by condemning them.

But I would try and persuade them that the way forward is through peaceful means.

EM: You were a former cellmate of Bobby Sands as you were there whenever the hunger strikes happened. What do you think those people would have made of what's happening now...the people who died on hunger strike?

DE: See I can't speak for the dead because as I said, they're dead.

But what I can say is no one would have died for a peace process.

You don't die for peace. You die during a war. You die in order to bring about change. You don't die for peace.

But I'm sure if they had've known, which the British seem to know in 1981, that members of the Republican Movement were intent on steering the movement away from the struggle, the campaign, that they wouldn't have died.

I wouldn't have thrown stones for it if I had've known.

EM: So what's your message then to Sinn Féin who feel that this project is worth pursuing, worth pushing ahead with, because they feel it's crucial that the story of the hunger strikers has to be told on that site?

DE: I would say to Sinn Féin that the hunger strikers didn't die for a peace process.

And if they believe in a peace process well...well be it. But they shouldn't try and re-write history.

Bobby Sands and the nine other men who died died because they wanted to undo what Thatcher was doing and that was criminalising the struggle. And the struggle was all about waging war against the British.

And they can't re-write history to suit their own narrative.

EM: And what would you say to those Unionists out there who would see it as a step too far that there would be anything retained on the site of the prison site because it will become a shrine to terrorism?

DE: Well I think in terms of the Unionist politicians that everything's a step too far unless it's a step in their direction.

EM: That was Dixie Elliott there.

Well we have been in touch with Sinn Féin about what Mr. Elliott had to say but as yet we haven't heard back from the party.

(ends 1:54)



23 comments:

  1. Always one to speak your mind Dixie..fair play..great interview!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I had the phone ready to respond but they never came...Those damn shinners!!

    ReplyDelete
  3. I am fervently in favour of protecting the historical site of the remains of Long Kesh. I realise this is a different but corollary argument from that of building a Peace and Reconciliation Centre.

    On the question of the Long Kesh prison site itself there are many valid reasons why it should be preserved and protected. It has such an intrinsic historical value; a lot happened within those walls and I will not remind you of it here but needless to say it is of immense significance, important on a worldwide level.

    I realise that some of this history is being revisited on current prisoners but if we lose the buidings at Long Kesh they will be lost forever. It encapsulates decades of Irish history and if we preserve them we will perhaps be reminded of this history for perhaps a hundred years.

    Politics aside the buildings should be kept because of the innate historical worth of the site. A museum would only work if it was balanced. Maybe in the same way as the Troubles exhibit at the Ulster Museum. It does a decent attempt at a balanced chronology of main subjects and events of which everyone will have something to disagree with but it isn't a rewriting of history so off-kilter as to be offensive. I think jobs for the boys by any group on any level would be offensive and perhaps macabre.

    Keeping the site would be a great historical asset, for posterity. History is sometimes better taught with physical evidence and I realise the danger of revisionism but there is only one thing that can rewrite the buildings themselves with any certainty and finality and that is 'the bulldozer'.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Interesting interview there. Dixie, you talk of the peace process as being SF's peace process "their process" - what would you envision as a workable all-inclusive process?

    I'm keeping an eye on my home from afar, but after the annual nonsense of summer parades there seems to be little evidence of a shared peace rather a shared antagonism.

    Thanks for your insights.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Dixie,

    they might visit you just as they visited Micky Donnelly and try to beat some peace into you..

    ReplyDelete
  6. Good Interview and to your point of view Dixie. For sure many of your points have validity, though they are another small part of a much bigger controlled agenda being carried through by the Brits.

    The GFA has been in free fall since the tories came to power, although they are not alone in responsibility for this. The Irish government needs to take a hit for allowing an international agreement unravel before them. SF from a republican standpoint have taken a hit for there ineffective way of dealing with an unrellenting assault on the GFA.

    Has there been a review of progress on the GFA by those who brokered the deal?. There urgently needs to be. We are on the eve of the political institutions once again colapsing. More uncertainty, more crises, back to the trenches attitude of unionists.

    SF have been put on the backfoot since they put thier (limited) credibility in support of the GFA.
    They would have us believe they had a strategy towards a united Ireland. Not so, they cant even bring about a border poll. The strategy they may or may not have started out with, is one which has morphed into a strategy of self serving preservation.

    To me at the start the GFA had the potential to bring about what it said it would and was the soft sell approach to a new beginning with unionist. This approach has failed. Unionist have used this agreement and its structures as a means to further entrench/lock themselves into a mindset that has not evolved.

    The attacts on the peelers and internment marchers in the town is indicitive of thier collective mind set. I want the right to be able to march on a human rights issue as a republican through the city where I reside. Even after state permission to do so, my so called unionist neighbors prevent me from doing so because they regaurd it as there preserve, as born out all year round when they can walk through not just the city centres but natioalist areas.

    At what point are SF going to come to the realisation that the GFA although a vehicle for change on paper. It has proven to be in its selective implimentation an obstacle to the progression of the republican narrative of equality. The picture that was painted at inception is at odds with the undeniable reality, nothing will change in this false state. The soft sell has failed, time for the hard reality to hit the unionist community, you will have to change how you live with the nationist community. You are no longer in the majority and are no longer the domminant force over your nationalist neighbors you once were. I am sick to the back teeth of the balking, recoiling nature of unionist reaction to what would in any other societies be regarded as positive change to the betterment of all of our society. In 1969 I did not have the same rights as unionists, though I should have, today 2013 I still dont. What's down on paper or in any agreement does not in actuality deliver my rights. Is it going to take another hundred years?, maybe two,three to make progress on an equality agenda.

    SF in my opinion are perpetuating the problems unionist have with accepting and dealing with reality in there current approach. By facilitating unionist reservations and outright hostility, SF have become complicate in holding back change and of facilitating the prevention of equality.

    ReplyDelete
  7. AM said...

    "Dixie,
    they might visit you just as they visited Micky Donnelly and try to beat some peace into you..."

    Mackers In the recent past they needed the guns to do that - without the guns, here in Derry they now use their friends in the PSNI. I gave an example of someone who wandered into one - of what they see as - their bars and got into a row with them. I'll repost it here...

    This guy goes into a bar with his son for a quiet drink. Couple of drunks (SFers) keep banging into him deliberately as they sit at bar...He goes to someone more senior (SFer) at other side of bar asks him to tell thugs to lay off he just wants a quiet drink...Senior boyo tells him 'you shouldn't be in here anyway'

    Later on thugs attack him again...cutting long story short - two thugs plus senior boyo plus another gobshite (late arriving SFer) get the shit kicked out off them....They phone PSNI -the Guy and his son are charged with assault.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Simon the problem with interviews is they edit them because of, as it was pointed out to me, time constraints.
    Or something is said which they don't want to air.

    You'll notice that bits seem to be missing.

    Take this part...(I'll put the edited out part in between brackets)

    EM: So do you think then there should be a centre there? That there should be some sort of place that people can go and hear about what happened?

    (DE: I believe that the Hospital wing and H-Block etc should be kept as a site of significant historical importance.)

    DE: See when you're talking about “go and hear what happened”...you see when I hear of “peace and reconciliation” I think of funding and jobs for the boys.

    The same with this question. (Edited out bit in brackets)

    EM: And what would you say to those Unionists out there who would see it as a step too far that there would be anything retained on the site of the prison site because it will become a shrine to terrorism?

    (DE: Who defines what is a terrorist? The British Army and RUC ran loyalist killer gangs which murdered innocents catholics )

    DE: Well I think in terms of the Unionist politicians that everything's a step too far unless it's a step in their direction.

    Also not included was what I also said in regards to the Peace Process...

    ( that it had been in place almost 20 years and the only people who had benefited were certain members of SF who had grown rich.)

    So you see how an interview can be changed by editing.

    ReplyDelete
  9. And on reflection I doubt I will be giving interviews again unless I can hear the full interview replayed as it would go on air.

    Leaving out the bit where I said the H-Blocks should be retained meant it came across that I wanted them demolished so as SF couldn't use them as part of their narrative of what the struggle was really about.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Dixie,

    you worry too much.

    Years ago when there was no internet once you did those type of recorded interviews they could be distorted or merely parts prioritised differently from what you would choose. And you had no way of putting the record straight. But now no matter what is said about you or what you are supposed to have said, you can reply and have a record out there which you can always point to. That is why so many of the powerful hate the net - it gives a voice to those they were once able to silence.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Dixie, I suspected there was something missing which is why I mentioned that arguments for the historical site and the Peace Centre weren't necessarily inseparable.

    It was unfair that it was edited without your expression of support for the site as the listener was left uninformed either way. The more unfortunate thing was that the interview in it's entirety was a cracker albeit I wouldn't have any personal knowledge of the "grown rich" description so couldn't comment.

    The statement about definition of terrorist seems to be central to many arguments post-conflict. The victims argument, the historical narrative argument, moral and ethical arguments, the mandate argument, the remembrance and the justice arguments too, amongst others.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Dixie,

    Morrison told me years ago that the only safe way to do interviews is not to do pre records and stick to live. Because that way they don't get to edit and leave out much of what you say. I think that is right but this happens all the time. The countless times I have been interviewed and heaps have been left out. But the reader/listener doesn't know this and doesn't see what has been left out. The final product is never as bad as you tend to think it is.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Dixie,

    I have just read this again and it seems to me that you have put nothing in the back of your own net and quite a few into the net of your opposition. You have got out there the points you needed to make. And you have a written record of it just in case detractors try to say you said something you didn't. Do mor of them, as many as you can.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Well said Dixie, I am for the Historical site and peace center, only if , SF have nothing to do with the running of it, nor , any other political party. But the DUP have well DUPed SF on this one, and , On everything else as well.

    I,m sure the redacted part of your Interview had nothing to do with Enda , Producer wanted it to be a bit more spicy , trying to make you out as a something which you are not, I'm glad you corrected and inserted the parts which were left out, It makes better and honest reading , and shows your true stance on the matter.

    Well done Dixie.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I have never fully understood Sinn Féin's desire to see a H-block and the hospital wing at the Kesh/Maze preserved. It seems like a perverse desire to preserve their defeat and condemn themselves to generations of lying on how from the jaws of defeat they also snatched ignominy

    Generally the preservation of defunct prison facilities seems to fall under a few categories:

    1. Statisfying a ghoulish desire for titilation as occurs during tours of the Crumlin Road and Alcatraz. The theatrics of the condemned man's cell at the Crumlin Road was an experience I found sickening. Swing back the cupboard and share the horror of seeing the noose just like the condemned. Almost as sickening as seeing Tom William's former resting place marked out like an unfinished car-parking space among the unclaimed remains of unworthies left with a spray painted line to mark their passing - deserved or not.

    2. A memorial exposing the immoraliality of the vanquished gaoler - concentration/extermination camps, Robben Island and Kilmainham

    3. Further ghoulishness best explified in the Arcotel Velvet hotel - B&B with that Stasi feel.

    I find the idea of fighting to preserve the hospital block at the Kesh as ghoulish in the extreme and given the 'execution' of the Crumlin goal experience something that'll eventually become more about visitor numbers needing the heebie-jeebies to gear them up for the gift shop than an analysis of conflict, imprisonment and increasing revelations of the lives wasted within and without through deceit.

    It certainly won't be a place where an oppressor's transgressions are exposed through it's penal system. The oppressor won. It's narrative will be main aspect of the £5 audio-guide available in 8 languages. The narrative will be of imprisonment breaking resistance and not great escape stories a la Kelly, McFarlane and Storey - £10 entry, carvery and rebel sing-a-long included.

    Attempts to attach a peace and reconciliation aspect making a joke of what those imprisoned within fought for inside and out.

    Lives needlessly lost with time that would become Disneyfied to ensure running costs are met as European money evaporates.

    The best thing that could happen to a shithole of torture and brutality that was about to be given an agreed SF/DUP narrative is that it be ploughed back to farmland.

    It is clear little finally grew from the prison struggle that many republicans would value. Let grass grow there and let it be fed by bullshit - that's half what SF intended for the place anyhow.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Thanks Mackers!! I just got to read your last two comments after I returned from Radio Foyle tonight.

    There was no one in so I left them a - I'm not one bit pleased - message in a milk bottle...

    Filled with unleaded...with a lit rag.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Yeah I concur... Well done Dixie is right, great interview. Heard a recording of if on Facebook the other day, you spoke we'll and with confidence

    ReplyDelete
  18. Kev- "The best thing that could happen to a shithole of torture and brutality that was about to be given an agreed SF/DUP narrative is that it be ploughed back to farmland."

    I would disagree. You might not want to visit the site but other people see the value in retaining it. You speak of the "ghoulishness" of the condemned man's cell in Crumlin Road Jail. Perhaps your response was the right one. I have been to Anne Frank's House, Kilmainham Jail, a number of cemetary tours, the 1916 Dublin walking tour and the Battle of the Boyne site. They all provoked different levels of revulsion but I wasn't titilated. I found it important to experience the atmosphere of those places so I could more easily understand the history and accompanying stories. Tears came to my eyes in Kilmainham and I cried at Anne Frank's house, these weren't pleasant experiences but educational ones.

    The place for historical sites to educate and for preserving and keeping important parts of our history in our minds is invaluable. The absence of a site would necessarily mean less people would discuss and be aware of the accompanying history. People aren't easily duped and many more people will be aware of the "torture and brutality" than would otherwise be. No need to airbrush it out of history. Destroying historical sites is akin to burning unwelcome books.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Dixie,
    Tony Benn anytime he was asked to do a pre recorded interview, recorded the interview himself on his own tapes, he ended up with thousands of recordings, due to his total distrust of the media representation of what he said.

    Now, the internet can be used as a medium like never before, it might be wise for anyone not particulary happy with the version presented after editing to make available these recordings on various blogs, sites and listening points.

    It is the only sure way of proper representation of what you said, it could also give the listener another avenue other than written accounts to tune in and gauge your honesty on a oral/visual format.

    Listening and video media are power tools in marketing, it is also the preferred channel in which people tune into, sure billions would not be spent on advertising, TV, radio.

    This generation and the next few in my opinion are mostly visual and audio based, advancing technology is leading the way. In my opinion there is nothing like a documentary or U- tube representation, studies suggest people really gravitate towards these, kind of lazy viewing I know. But to coin a phrase "It is what it is".

    But, for what I read, it was successful on your part in line with your thinking.



    ReplyDelete
  20. Simon I visited the Anne Frank House earlier this year with my 15 year old son who was looking forward to seeing it.

    Both of us agreed that it was an anticlimax.

    On the website they showed rooms with furniture etc however what we saw were empty rooms with perspex covering posters etc on the walls.

    There were artifacts in the modern museum attached to the house but not what we expected.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Dixie, I read Anne Frank's diary a month before I went to Amsterdam so the story was fresh in my mind.

    I remember Anne Frank's original posters and cuttings on the walls behind perspex to prevent damage and some photographs of the house as it was when the Franks lived there.

    I can't remember a museum but remember a shop with copies of Anne Frank's diary in different languages which I thought was appropriate as the diary is what led to the house being preserved.

    I can't remember the layout of any furniture but it was 10 years ago when I visited. Maybe the furniture was lost during the war or some items removed to keep them safe from visitors?

    I remember a steady stream of people and the annex and thinking about the enormity of the holocaust with millions of stories like Anne's. Thinking of the unfathomable misery of countless innocents, it was too much to bear.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Kev,

    There is nothing you write that I don’t find thought out and well argued. This is in similar vein. I think maybe a few years ago I would have agreed with your sentiments.

    One function of the preservation of sites is as you say it is – allowing a form of titillation. But so is news and literature and many aspects of our activities as cultural human beings. It is not the only function. I took my son then two in along with my wife to the very cell I was held in during most of the blanket protest. I found it a very positive experience. The bringing of new life to a place that had been the site of such death was very rewarding. The first time I went in it was as part of a delegation that included a former loyalist prisoner. He and I brought different takes to it but there was argument about it being a shared space which held significant memories for both of us.

    There is also the question of cultural memory. I don’t think these sites should be destroyed unless the circumstances are extenuating. In this case political unionism is trying to obliterate a memory purely because it is republican.
    Those for whom Tom Williams meant something special would be expected to mark the spot out.

    What I think sad is the fact that the others had no one to remember them or care enough to mark their spots. The unmarked grave that the authorities insisted upon seems to me to have been an attempt to just depersonalise and treat with contempt.

    It certainly won't be a place where an oppressor's transgressions are exposed through it's penal system. The oppressor won. Its narrative will be main aspect of the £5 audio-guide available in 8 languages. The narrative will be of imprisonment breaking resistance and not great escape stories a la Kelly, McFarlane and Storey - £10 entry, carvery and rebel sing-a-long included.

    I think you have hit the nail on the head but this is the problem with the way it is being preserved rather than it being preserved per se.

    ReplyDelete
  23. i think it should be opened as a prison again and i know who id chuck in it

    ReplyDelete