Sinn Fein Councillor Refers to Victims of Suicide as 'Death Wanters.'

Guest writer Thomas Dixie Elliot taking the media to task over its non responsiveness to a consistent patter on comments from Sinn Fein councillor Michael Henry McIvor, a frequent commenter on this blog.

Why are the media giving SF's Cookstown Councilor Michael Henry McIvor a fool's pardon in regards to the vile comments he repeatedly makes online?

He has gloated that 'dissident' groups haven't killed many Brits or cops, even in the Irish News/2006 (That's how I was able to link Michaelhenry to SF'S Michael McIvor of Cookstown).

He mocked the brutal murder of Paul Quinn and now refers to victims of suicide as "death wanters" who 'think they are to important to live' yet there is no outcry from anyone in the media or political circles.

Could you imagine the media outcry if any politician in any other political party North or South made such repugnant comments online?

Yet Michaelhenry aka Michael Henry McIvor seems for some reason to be given a fool's pardon?

For the record here is his full comment taken from The Pensive Quill...

Don't know about other peoples attitude towards wakes and funerals but I find it as awkward as fcuk going to the wake of a person who as committed suicide and having to shake hands with the relatives and not having the words except 'sorry for your loss'- the last thing them familys wanted or needed was to find a son or daughter hanging in the shed - I think those death wanters think they are to important to live.

Councillor McIvor's comment about Paul Quinn @ 10.24


  1. That is pretty low from that snake, it's akin to uneducated loyalists accusing our 10 brave hunger strikers of committing suicide.

  2. ah ! Dixie you beat me to it - i was going to do exactly the same thing !!!

    Good job getting there first :P

  3. does 'that old sore bones' mean what i think it does. sad and scary comment, completely horrible. MH u need help and u need to be voted out.

  4. Im still waiting for him to come to Belfast and repeat his comments on Joe O'Connor in front of his family.
    He's more of a keyboard man though.

  5. “the last thing them familys wanted or needed was to find a son or daughter hanging in the shed - I think
    those death wanters think they are to important to live.”

    What a despicable incompetent idiotic remark to make concerning victims of suicide that shows his total disregard towards mental health suffers.

    Shame on you!

    Ps: Can someone put a picture up of this shinner because I would love to see what a confirmed idiot with an attitude looks like.

    Go get’em Dixie give’em hell!

  6. What the feck are you on about Dixie? A couple of weeks ago, Pensive Quill stalwarts AM and Nuala Perry in posts to PQ described MH as decent so much so they liked to have him in their corner!!
    Why would you expect the media to take up the issue of MH and his comments on the PQ if contributers to PQ including Mackers and Nuala Perry think he is dead on?

  7. Eddie,

    is the problem really that you can't abide an opinion different from your own? Dixie is entitled to express a view contrary to any other view offered on this site. We don't do the dictatorship of the decentariat here.

  8. Dixie-

    I was going to say more on suicide during that other debate but some got a wee bit emotional and I am not that
    Insensitive so I decided to say no more on the subject in case half of youse topped yourselves-

    I notice AM and some of the others got a bit of stick for allowing me on here or debating with me but I won't change for no-one-they are just my views-

  9. Michaelhenry,

    I think you are hopelessly wrong on this matter and Dixie is absolutely right. But I don't care what criticism we get for allowing you the right to have a different view. It matters not.

  10. Hes like the rest of them an many councilers were operating during the troubles LOL .now their talking my fight for irish freedom ffs i carried more in my school

  11. ' I am not that
    Insensitive so I decided to say no more on the subject in case half of youse topped yourselves-' yeah thats right michaelhenry, you are such a sweet sensitive soul, thanks for that.

  12. ' I am not that Insensitive so I decided to say no more on the subject in case half of youse topped yourselves-' yeah thats right michaelhenry, you are such a sweet sensitive soul, thanks for that. i actually think now that u are a dissident planted in PSF to make them look........u pick a word.

  13. Mickey,

    As you know this “death wanter” penned the article and I don’t take personal offense to what you say.
    I am pretty much in agreement with Anthony on the issue of censorship even if I find the comments despicable and callous my anti censorship view dictates it is better to hear what is said rather than ignore and leave it unchallenged.

    I haven’t got the chance to read Dixies article but I will and probably find myself in agreement.
    For a long time now Mickey you have been tying your shoelaces together and on this one have tripped yourself up.

  14. Eddie,
    Have you really nothing better to do with your time, really?

    What is your problem with me? Is it the fact that I don't have a crowd mentality?
    Do I speak too straight Eddie omitting the snide and innuendo ?

    If you want to build a case against Michael Henry do it on your own steam and leave my name out of it.
    I have went from fed up to bored.

    I have challenged MH more times on this blog than you have.

    There are people in this world who revel in melting and silliness. Why not stir the pot with one of them and leave me out of it.

  15. @ Billy Brooks.

    My late wife carried more in her pram. I ask my self, What For?.

    For SF to call those who committed suicide, they should look into their own minds and they will see the answer.
    They are the ones who drove them to it. Michaelhenry included,

  16. AM
    You sound rattled. What I cant abide is inconsistencies in peoples arguments.

    The point I made to Dixie and the way I made it wont be lost on Dixie. Dixie is always consistent and I have every respect for him for his consistency and in a whole lot of other regards.

    When I posted that MH was at least being disrepectful (and I might add unnecessarily so) in his response to an article by Brendon McClenaghan; and when I went to repeat MH comments about the war crime murder of Joe O Connor, you replied to my post and added (incredibly in my opinion) that you found MH to be a decent sort.

    In a post last night I asked you in light of MH's suicide comments if you were still of the opinion that MH was a decent sort.
    You casually replied that you would find it harder to defend him! What the fcuk? Why are you defending him, why do you feel the need to defend him?

    I will ask you again, are you still of the opinion that MH is a decent sort and is so why do you still think he is a decent sort?

  17. Michael is certainly not very clever, not that long ago he was using thatcher quotes to try and get his point across on facebook, eh michael...

  18. Eddie,

    rattled? Is that why you threw the rattle out of the pram and left us when you failed to persuade?

    Inconsistent? Is that why you came back when you told us you had left us?


  19. It wasn't too many months ago that I stood in the home of a Republican friend as rescue services searched the River Foyle for his son.

    I never witnessed a more harrowing sight than during the wake when that father took what I can only describe as a fit of grief, so bad that for a time all in the room believed he had taken a heart attack.

    Not only doesn't McIvor not regret what he said, he chooses to make fun of it...

    " so I decided to say no more on the subject in case half of youse topped yourselves..."

  20. fionnuala, he's an arse-hole, i practice my own section 31 on arse-holes now, i luv the net - u can censor arse-holes urself now, hav been reading the pensive quill for only a few weeks but ive just put michaelhenry mc arse-hole on my list of banned writers now, im not allowed read him anymore - ive just ordered myself not to read his offensive comments anymore or i'll hav to punish myself, the suicide shite is bad enuf but the quinn comment wrecked my head, it takes a lot of discipline to censor when the temptation to read crap when ur bored/unemployed/drunk/ (all of the above right now) is intense, but at the end of the day i'm happy with my section 31censorship. thanks to it i havent heard or read in ages - kevin my-arse, eoghan har-arse, ruth dudley edw-arse, john wat-arse, roy for-arse-ter, henry pat-arse-on, i cud go on, i will go on - martin mcguinn-arse, owen pat-arse-on, micheal martian, fintan the tool, dermot the ferrit, and all the other irish arse-holes we are bombarded with thru the mainstream media. censorship is good but difficult, especially with 120 sauvignon blanc in yer belly. i am goin on amnt i. but yeah conor cruise o brien was a big inspiratation to me, the arse-hole.

  21. AM
    Regardless of your lol's which are more in keeping with a teenagers facebook page and your deflection you still havent said if MH is still a decent character in your book

    Now given that the subject of Dixie's article is about the character of MH or lack of character
    I cant think why you or Nuala for that matter would not stand up and provide References and Testimonials for MH as you both previously did in past posts to the PQ

    By the way I have absolutely no problem if you both still think MH is a sound guy. I more wonder how anybody could be taken in by him or more to the point why they are taken in by him. I could speculate.

    The only person who is likely to be amused by all of this and full of lol's is MH as he thinks of those he suckered in.

  22. Michael Henry is in the wrong job. He is a perfect candidate for a job as an ATOS assessor, deciding which claimants of sickness benefits are fit for work. The main attributes required in such a role are;

    An inability to use discretion.

    An attitude of 'I was born knowing it all so I don't need to learn'.

    A complete lack of human empathy.

    Lack of remorse bordering on the psychotic.

    These 'health care professionals' have been recorded asking claimants who suffer suicidal depression 'why are you still alive?'

  23. MH.youve the same attitude as mr pierpoint.hope it doesnt come to your own door.then again nothing would surprise me with your attitude

  24. Dixie
    Round about the time DUP councilor Ruth Patterson was taken into custody by PSNI respect of her fanciful comments on Facebook about a fantasy attack on SF, Michael Henry McIvor, SF councilor, was posting on The Pensive Quill at the same time and giving every indication that he had certain and detailed information about an unsolved murder.

    SF councilor Michael McIvor appeared to be certain as to why Joe O Connor was shot dead, where he was shot in terms of wounds to the body and certain that the Provo's shot Joe O Connor.

    Now I think you would agree that The Pensive Quill website is undoubtedly being monitored by the Intelligence services and so we have to assume they and the PSNI are aware of the SF councilor and his comments in regard to the murder of Joe O Connor.

    Can you offer any rational as to why the PSNI would move against DUP councilor Ruth Patterson for her frivolous comments on Facebook but not move against SF Councilor Michael McIvor for his comments made on The Pensive Quill about a murder and a murder I presume that is still under investigstion?

  25. Grough,
    Yes that is your entitlement!
    Eddie has now elected himself as a type of thought police, watching and waiting for every remark made about MH to strengthen his own case.

    Michael Henry was decent to me at a time when I was getting anonymous letters, dangerous cut outs from newspapers about the death of a policeman.
    He sided with me openly on this blog, as did other Republicans it meant a lot to me at the time and it still does.

    I had crossed with him for years long before I ever wrote on this blog.
    And I have crossed with him continually here.

    Mackers lost his home and life as he knew it in the North for speaking out against what happened to Joe Joe. We seen at that time how Sinn Fein dealt with free speech.
    Now, ironically he is being held to account as someone who is standing by and letting his name be tarnished.
    There are people you will never please when you think you have given your all, they'll say, 'what about your blood gives us your blood'

    I'm not going along with something grouch just to suit popular opinion and I don't care how that sits with Eddie or anyone else.

  26. Nuala (Im not really addressing this to you in particular but just as reference to what you have said above in respect of the post from Grouch and where you mentioned me. I know you are not interested in me or what I have to say specially on this matter, and I wont be offended if you decide to ignore this as I know it is being read by others, none of whom, bar you and Mackers, have weighed in against me)

    Paul Quinn from S Armagh got one of the sorest deaths imaginable, almost on a par in my opinion, with that of the hunger strikers. Every bone in Paul Quinns body was broken in the course of him being murdered by a gang of up to 20 people. And as someone who was on the receiving end of a couple of severe beatings I still cannot imagine what it must have been like for Paul Quinn before he succumed.

    Shortly after this, MH in talking about the incident referred to Paul Quinn as "old sore bones" Now as a result of such a remark I dont have to be the thought police to deduce that MH is either lacking in compassion or incapable of compassion in respect of not only Paul Quinn but Paul Quinn's family.

    I can only speak for myself but if MH was to offer me some compassion in the form of sympathy for something or other, I would be suspicious, I would wonder 'when did he start having a heart'. And even if I didnt have the wide circle of family and friends that I do have I would still say Thanks but no thanks to MH's offer of support.

    Now if you think a few words of support for yourself from MH on the PQ or anywhere for that matter mediates the other atrocious things he has said on the PQ then maybe you need to get out more and/or increase your support network.

    And by the way I am not holding Mackers to account re Joe O Connor. I dont understand how after putting himself and his family in the firing line in standing up publicly in the aftermath or Joe O Connor murder that he can remain detached from the comments MH made in relation to Joe O Connor's murder and go on to say that MH is a decent sort!? I just dont get it, it doesnt seem to stack up. AM has made no attempt to reconcile his different positions as is his right. But we should have a right to infer without being ridiculously labelled as thought police by you or anyone else for that matter.

    Maybe I am too stupid and rigid and need to start taking drugs to loosen myself up and so be more understanding of the likes of MH

  27. Suicide is an irrational act carried out by people in an irrational state of mind,can there be any other logical explanation, Mickybroy is a quisling $inn £eind whose party is in partnership with bigots in the farce called Stormont,these people will probably be responsible for a large increase in the numbers of suicides here through the social welfare cuts and austerity measures that the are or will be implemented on behalf of the millionaire cabinet that makes up the government that rules in Westminster,quisling $inn £eind every last one of them are part of the blight that is destroying this society,were they to all go and hang themselves would I cry ?what the fuck do you think?

  28. Michael Henry McIvor or is it Karl Pilkington aka An idiot abroad.

  29. Ah fuck Mark I love that dickhead.he at least is fucking harmless,

  30. eddie, paul quinn's torture murder is something i will never be able to get my head around. They are monsters. To think some in PSF began a smear campaign against him after his torture murder is unconscienable. They are a shower of Rockefeller wannabees who will do anything to hang onto their racket and do anything to anybody who stands up to them. Ireland is a shithole. Did Martin Hurson die for green diesel. To some Slab the Slob Murphy is a good republican and Brendan hughes is a liar. What happened to us. I have a feeling and a hope that Paul Quinn will be remembered forever. I used to stand up for S.Armagh years ago from being labelled bandit country (i live in the south in a shoneen town). Bandit is too nice a word. we need healing on this island, and anybody who was involved in what happened that day who feels genuine remorse i hope they can help paul's family. i have a feeling there might hav been youngfellas involved who werent expecting what happened to happen.

    sound fionnuala, i hate the general public opinion most times. to quote sid vicious - i met the 'man on the street' and he was a c**t.

  31. After reading the posts relating to the blight of suicide and more specifically the comments made by MH. I cant help despair, most of you are republican and share much of the same anger being felt by many former provos at the antics of SF.

    Has it occurred to some of you that you may all have valid arguements, but, from your own perspectives. This current discussion is reflective of the problems faced by the wider republican/nationalist community. Squabbaling over SF mouthpieces like MH only serve to retain disunity.

    Though I find MH a very trying person, there is no way I would want him silenced. If he is representative of SF then give him the mike, because people need to know who they are voting for.

  32. Grouch,
    I apologise for spelling your name wrong and the other typos.

    Did we all suffer at the hands of the thought police to have new thought police take their place?

    Your right,the comment about Paul Quinn is vile but I think, Mick and itsjustmacker framed it better than anyone.
    Mick said he does it shock. Itsjustmacker said during the war his wife did more!

    What annoys me about all this is where does it stop?
    Calls to ask why people haven't been arrested? Lovely isn't it?

    I do what you do. If I have issues with who's making a comment, genuine issues, I simply don't read what they say!
    Unless they address me of course?

  33. Eddie,
    You certainly didn't offer me any?
    I don't need to increase my network of friends or my support base.
    I have friends that anyone would envy, good, solid, sincere people. Not fair weather.
    I remember everyone who offered me support and irrespective of other things I will always remember at time they were concerned for me.

  34. This had to be reposted due to a problem with the link putting the page out of kilter.

    Dixie said...

    This hasn't been a new thing as has been pointed out already; McIvor's remarks about Paul Quinn and Joe O'Connor were other vile attacks on the dead.

    Not only that but Michael Henry McIvor a Sinn Fein councilor was able to go public in the the Irish News
    in 2006 and mock 'dissidents' because they have "never killed a member of the Brit forces"...

    He has made the same comments over and over online - behind the username Michaelhenry (His 1st & 2nd Christian names) and using his own name on Michael McIvor - mocking 'dissidents' because they hadn't killed cops or brits...

    What other politician North or South would last a wet week if he or she gloated over the fact that 'dissident' groups weren't killing enough to be able to claim the mantle of PIRA?

    A so called supporter of peace mocking about a lack of violence?
    The mind boggles.

    How long would any politician last if he or she referred to victims of suicide as 'death wanters'?

    Any politician outside the peace processors that is...

  35. Fair enough Fionnula I accept that what you say and Im happy do so at face value as you have done with MH. I would have offered you support had I known you had being going through a bad time due to those things you alluded to in an earlier post today. But the truth is I must have been busy at work and unable to be online at that particular time and so missed all that. Im sure the PQ record would reflect that. For what it is worth I hope you are well with all that stuff behind you now

  36. Surprised you are calling The Hunger Strikers death wanters MH , I would have thought you being a public servant to the Queen you would have been more sensitive to their relations, but sure maybe you are just being honest taking one's life is as you say suicide end of story

  37. Strangely enough, today the Derry Journal carried as one of their 'Tweets of the Week' the following from Martina Anderson...

    MEP-MartinaAnderson ‏@MEPStandingUp4U 8 Jan

    Met a man today in North Belfast who lost his twin daughters through suicide -heartbreaking yet inspirational how he is helping others #hope

    The tweet was made on 8th January so I'll cast any doubts aside but it seems that Martina doesn't share Michael McIvor's chilling attitude to suicide...

  38. Eddie,

    By the way I have absolutely no problem if you both still think MH is a sound guy.

    This is a viewpoint that I can find no grounds for sharing.

    Your stated reason for deciding to no longer participate with TPQ was that the opinions expressed here were generally ones you did not approve of and as such it put you in ‘the wrong boat.’ It wasn’t because you lost the argument (which you didn’t) or that anybody gave you a rough time or prevented you from saying what you wanted to say: simply that people had views that did not reflect your own. That you could not abide by.

    You later rowed back from that decision and returned to the blog. In coming back and then commenting on Dixie’s piece you snarled at him not because you opposed what he said about MH but because he put the article in a blog where contributors had expressed an opinion that you couldn’t agree with. Which suggests to me that Dixie’s article was not the problem to you, rather that it didn’t appear on a blog where everybody or at least a majority agreed with your opinion.

    So, rather than you being someone who is at ease with somebody having a different opinion, I think you are unremittingly hostile to the idea of a different opinion to your own.

    So on the web when we meet people who are very intolerant of a different viewpoint and opinionated in their belief, we tend to do what we do when we would do offline: just reach what Nuala called the ‘whatever’ moment and give them a wide berth.
    It’s unfortunate but that’s life.

    People who obsess so much about so little might be great characters who would do us a good turn before they would a bad one – they are just not the type of company I prefer to keep.

  39. Dixie-

    " yet inspirational how he is helping others "-

    I will second that-he never took his own life yet he is still going out of his way to help others who are still alive-

  40. Eddie,
    I wish you well also. I have never wished anything other than well.

    I don't know if life allows us to put that stuff behind us?
    Some poisonous person sent it to me and it is highly unlikely I will ever know who?

    It was wrong of me to condemn you for that!
    Of course you didn't know but I was trying to make the point that MH and other people who I have fallen out of flavour with cared about my predicament and yes it meant a lot.

    Mackers could have lost a lot more than his home for advocating the right to freely express an opinion.
    I have read opinions on this blog that have genuinely made me want to weep.

    No-one disputes MH behaves in a way we can't comprehend. Challenge is the best remedy though and if challenge is not the order of the day then just ignore.

    In saying that, I am in no-way trying to understate the seriousness of the Paul Quinn and Joe Joe remarks, they were despicable and should be treated as such.

    I just feel as contributors to this site, we are individuals and I think we should be treated as such.

  41. You people have to much time on your hands. Mackers I don't see a difference now between you and Paula Makin.

  42. Nuala,

    it doesn't matter one iota that Eddie doesn't agree with me or that I don't agree with him. I am not in the slightest disconcerted that he has a different opinion. It is what we do here. If there is small stuff to be sweated I am going to sweat my own rather than somebody else's. My opinion of Michael Henry hardly interests me, why it might interest anybody else I am not going to try very hard to find out.

    On the Joe O'Connor thing, we took the heat and survived. It wasn't easy, there was very little support, but the line had to be held. I don't criticise people who didn't support us or ask them where they were at the time. They had their own reasons or fears: not for me to judge them. I am just appreciative of those few who did. And it has to be said there were a few still in the Provos who took enormous risks to protect and ferry us.

    I have always been at ease with my stance on the Joe O'Connor thing. Eddie's comments don't concern me one way or the other.

  43. Dixie,

    Although I have nothing personal against Mickey I do hope the media pick up on this and have a good nosey not only into him but other councilors to see if they are earning their penny or just like Mickey buying a fancy new computer to waste his days away on.

  44. united16 said...

    "You people have to much time on your hands. Mackers I don't see a difference now between you and Paula Makin..."

    What has this got to do with Mackers? I posted the piece after Michaelhenry aka McIvor posted the vile comments.

    Mackers has always stood over his stance on censorship and was willing to give McIvor his say as he did the rest of us including Unionists and Loyalists.

    My point has been that this SF Councilor seems to have been immune from the media regarding his comments which including gloating groups about the lack of killing even in the Irish News.

    His latest remark brought it to a head, as I pointed out, because I recently stood in the home of a suicide victim and saw the grief of his family. The victims father was so bad on one occasion we thought he had took a heart attack and in fact he ended up in A&E...

  45. Dixie,
    Why are the media giving SF's Cookstown Councilor Michael Henry McIvor a fool's pardon in regards to the vile comments he repeatedly makes online?
    I think the question should be "why are sinn fein giving Michael a fools pardon?" That kind of talk is dangerous from anyone in public office, but coming from a fascistic party, it is very surprising. I didn't think shinners were allowed to have opinions.
    I have disagreed with nearly everything Michael has said since I know him but I still like him. I'm also not surprised that he hasn't backed away from his statement. As long as I know Michael,he has always stuck to his guns.

  46. This is a good piece by Dixie which raises serious questions about Michael Henry's suitability for elected office.

    I like Michael, but I think he behaves appallingly at times. Leaving aside his views about suicide (which, as Anthony pointed out, are still fairly common in this country), his comments about the killings of Paul Quinn and Joe O'Connor are absolutely abhorrent. So too were his attempts to discredit Suzanne Breen because of her exposé of the Liam Adams case. Moreover, as Dixie rightly argues, Michael's analysis of armed dissident republicanism is simply idiotic. I mean, Michael is a member of the pro-peace process, pro-PSNI Sinn Féin party, yet his main problem with the current crop of physical force republicans seems to be that they aren't killing enough "cops" or "Brits". Does that make any sense at all? For all of these issues then, it is completely right and proper that Michael Henry is held to account.

    Having said all of that, I still consider Michael my friend. I have castigated him more times than I care to remember during the last couple of years on TPQ and Facebook. Indeed, there were times when I crossed the line from robust criticism into personal abuse. Yet Michael never responded in kind; in fact, he has always treated me with kindness and respect even after he became aware of my long-standing mental ill health.

    Though I have not met him in person, I have exchanged many emails with Michael via Facebook and, in that context, he seems a decent chap with a self-deprecating sense of humour. Indeed, it baffles me that this is the same fellow who is spewing near-gleeful vitriol here and who still appears to be utterly unrepentant about it. In the end, the fact that Michael and I get on is irrelevant. He is just as entitled to express his opinions as Dixie and others have to subject them to robust public scrutiny and if Michael falls foul of his party or his constituents over this debacle, he has nobody to blame but himself.

  47. Alfie,

    for me this captures the matter accurately and adequately. Nothing much there that I would disagree with. My experience of Michael pretty much reflects your own.

    Dixie was right to make the call that he did and as you say Michael has really only himself to blame.

  48. AM
    "My opinion of Michael Henry hardly interests me, why it might interest anyone else I am not going to try very hard to find out"

    See Dixie's facebook page.

    Its just as well Dixie had enough interest to expose him, so Im taking no more bets that MH will be back posting on the PQ, and the families of the dead wont be subject to anymore of his vile abuse again. But that wont matter to you if you werent sufficiently interested in the first place.

  49. Alfie
    Without being disrepectful to you or the issue of mental health at all did it occur to you at all that given MH's vile comments that he made on the PQ on a regular basis and contrast that with his ability then to be seemingly so personable and so easily so with those from the opposite end of the political scale that MH might have been suffereing from some form of mental health illness himself?

  50. I see he is now denying he posted the sick comments.

  51. b keane, except for the guns that his bosses decomissioned

  52. AM
    and whatever..... the MH thing and your defence of MH puts a big question mark over you and your credibilty. I suppose its easier to say whatever than grow a set a of balls. Its funny that 'the whatever' was an attitude that MH relied heavily on in all his madness

  53. Tain Bo,

    there will be a certain irony that it is on this blog where he was called out rather than in the media as such.

    Of course he is free to have whatever views he wants, and people have been called worse things on this blog (legitimate target for example), but it is the right of others to call him out on it and express their own view of his opinions. Dixie did that and made a solid case.

    I have nothing personal against him either, just find his views woeful. But there is no point in asking him to have views then seek to censor them when expressed. He is hardly the sole possessor of views we regard woeful.

    What he should do rather than pretend he did not make the comments Dixie has nailed him on is to stand over them so that they can be tested and put to the electorate. It should have the call on the matter. I think his failure to defend what he said undermines his expressed opinions more than any criticism he has got here.

    His views on the subjects he comments on are out there and are more widespread than we sometimes think.

  54. Dixie,

    why bother?!! Insults to me are like water off a duck's back, I have got so many of them! I forgot all about that comment of United 16 until reading your response. Eevn Eddie has taken to insults now because I won't agree with him! It is life.

  55. Feeltelove,

    Though I find MH a very trying person, there is no way I would want him silenced.

    For sure. There is one thing worse than hearing his views, not being allowed to hear them because some thought peeler so decides. Fortunatley, we have had no demands for him to be censored.

    If he is representative of SF then give him the mike, because
    people need to know who they are voting for.

    Agreed, but it would also have to apply even if he was a member of some other party or none. Dixie did not call him out because he was in SF.

  56. Eddie,
    Whatever, usually comes as an exasperated response!
    It's likend to brick wall or chasing your own tail syndrome
    When people feel they have exhausted the common sense approach. All that's left is whatever!

    1. Fair enough Fionnuala but Im exasperated myself so much so that I posted again to PQ in between seeing your 6.20 post. Please read my latest post and tell me if I am wrong to be exasperated never mind wrong altogether!

  57. MH affair, BAD JOURNALISM?

    The many comments MH made and which were published on the PQ time and time again were outrageous and vile to say the least. There were that bad that even MH chose to deny them rather than stand over them when he was outed by Dixie.

    All this shit about not wanting to censor MH by AM is exactly that pure bullshit.

    Had MH sought to have his outrageous and vile remarks published in the rag of the moment the Newsletter or Irish News the newspaper quite properly would have insisted, given the nature of his comments, that MH provided full verification of his identity before they would have published. And they would have done so - at least and if for no other reason - to prevent the newspaper being exposed to any legal action.

    Even if they did receive the identity verification from MH I dont think any newspaper would have published anything from MH so outrageous and vile were his comments as a rule.

    Thats not the newpapers practising censorship, thats whats called responsible journalism.

    At any time or any point of his outrageous and vile postings and given the nature of them, AM could have insisted that MH provide some proof as to his identity before he would publish MH's comments on the PQ.

    Had AM sought proof from MH's of his true identity for verication purposes and MH refused, given the outrageous and vile nature of MH's postings, a decision should have been made as to whether to publish or not. If MH was not prepared to reveal his true identity and so stand over his comments then they should not, given their nature, been published. If he was not prepared to stand over his gross comments that would have been self censorship by MH himself not censorship.

    It would seem AM did not seek to verify the identity of MH at any point despite the concerns of many of the PQ followers. Instead it was left to Dixie to get to the truth and do the Investigative Journalism.

    Followers of the PQ dont really need an apology from AM for the way he wily nily published the grossly offensive postings of MH on a regular basis but we do need an explantion. The families of the dead who may have been exposed to MH's casual and inhumane jokes about their loved ones may need a whole lot more.

  58. @brendan webster...
    Kudo's for spotting the denial of Michael McIvor...

    “I don’t know who is behind this,” he told the Mail, saying he had been wrongly connected to the name ‘Michael Henry’.

    Michael McIvor said this...

    "When asked if he would be seeking legal advice over the online allegations linking him to the suicide comments, Mr McIvor said ‘there’s little point, as I don’t know who to go after’."

    I'd not only seek legal advice, I'd personally sue the person behind it.. But you aren't???? Maths don't add up Michael. Then again how do you sue yourself..?

    When the Mid Ulster Mail contacted Mr McIvor, he denied any knowledge of the comments, and said he had not contributed to the blog.

    Maybe there is more than one person penning the Michael Henry post's. Personally I think they are one and the same...Why didn't you come out before and deny you are not Michael Henry? I am sure you (Michael McIvor) have been reading TPQ for a while and seen references to you being outted as Michael Henry several times.. First person I read here who joined the dots on who you are, was 'it'sjustmackers' (about 18mths ago). Dixie Elliot has repeatedly said you are both one and the same...Why wait until now to deny it? Why didn't you contact the TPQ and say 'I am not Michael Henry'. I'd like to think both Anthony & Carrie would have helped you to clear your name. Even though they don't agree on SF's postion on most things..

    Would you be prepared to have an independant person examine your hard drives and devices? That would clear the mystery up.

  59. Frankie,

    If Michael Henry and Michael Henry McIvor are not one and the same person why was MH taking and responding to praise for MHMcI on the following review? He should stand over his views rather than run away from them and dig an even bigger hole. Is there any regular on this blog who didn’t know MH was MHMcI? They have been slagging him off about it for as far back as I remember.

  60. he has been caught but the paper have to keep themselves legal, keep pushing the truth will out

  61. Anthony,

    I have nothing personal against Mickey or for that matter anyone else on the blog.

    In a nutshell Mickey at the best of times sees the Quill as a lamppost to piss on, on the way home from the pub.
    He is brutal in his language but wise enough not to go so far as he earns a place in the Quills sewer though there is always that possibility.

    Calling to ban or censor him is not an option (in my opinion)… first they came for the Jews… comes to mind.
    We lived through the long conflict I would assume or skin is thick enough to take on squarely and challenge anything we find offensive.

    Personally I would rather it is said as worse is said beyond the internet.

    I believe Dixie adapted the right approach and if nothing else gives Mickey something to seriously consider.

    Argument tends to lose its meaning when it is coated in too much personal sensitivity.

    I have on a few occasions in the past exchanged a few rough words with Mickey but overtime have become accustomed to him and adapted my challenging his view accordingly.

    I am against banning or censoring as that path always leads to a dead end.

    There are and will be some that don’t deserve to have their comment even placed in the sewer of the quill but Mickey although harsh does not meet that requirement in my opinion.

  62. Frankie,

    Mickey denying he is Mickey might point out he may have the qualities of one mental disorder that being multiple personality disorder.
    There you go Mickey you can always use that as a defense when seeking re-election.

  63. Eddie , i dont really see your point, a lot of people use aliases on this site and I thought the whole point was people would comment and then there would be a debate. The whole responsible journalism comment is just a nice way to say your censoring people. There is always someone who will be offended.

    1. David
      The difference is when what was being posted is as controversial and as regular as what MH was doing their is an onus and responsibility on the publisher to protect the rights of those who are diectly affected by the posts

  64. Thanks Anthony, never seen the review Michael wrote until now..( I agree with André's posts on the one sideness of the movie..But what else would anyone expect from Hollywood).

    As a few posters have said Michael...When you are in a hole, stop digging. Tracing all commets back to your PC/Device(s), it isn't rocet science.

    I wonder has Michael McGlade seen the review and commets on Argo? And if he happened to see them, would he follow up on Michael McIvors denial?

    What would Michael say then????

  65. Tain Bo,

    Michael McIvor has already penned a review for TPQ. And tracing it from the IP (it'll be on the email header) to the MAC addy isn't rocket science (lets just say it's very doable). Then all anyone has to do is trace Michael Henry's post's to probably the same MAC (s) addy's ...Game over..

    I can take on board Michael defending SF & the GFA..I don't agree with is points of view but I understand why he takes them. But joking about suicide or how Paul Quinn was beaten to death is to far beyond the pale...

    Maybe Michael is really a 'disso' and is working to destroy SF from the inside... I don't know..

    Michael, If I was you i'd hire the best PR guru around and try to do as much damage limitation as possible.. Dunno, I'm glad I'm not in your shoes...

  66. Eddie,

    'All this shit about not wanting to censor MH by AM is exactly that pure bullshit.'

    I assume you are are a newcomer to TPQ and as such your coat continues to swing. As it does so it appears to be obscuring your view of the 'Bullshitometer' - you are redlining.

  67. Robert,

    good to see you reemerge. But as I am on the drink I will refrain from commenting on this matter. Besides, my biggest battle at the minute is trying to get two monsters to bed who look at me as if I am suffering from some insanity that needs treated with a strong dose of being ignored.

  68. Frankie,

    I am sure Mickey is feeling the heat from cooking his on goose Dixie merely adjusted the temperature
    I think you would have to draw a diagram for Mickey on the IP tracing.

    Mickey has always or for as long as I can recall on here held the same views he is either pulling the wool over or eyes or is someone who needs help via the psychiatric chair.

    He takes a liberty with the freedom offered and uses it not to add to any debate but usually to inject his own bitter view.

    Personally it is better read and challenged than ignored as it goes on beyond the Quill.
    The only one that understands any reason for it is Mickey for the most part his wings get clipped and none of his views take off.

  69. Tain Bo,
    As I said before maybe he was pissed. But the denial in the paper saying he has never graced the quill... When he wrote the Argo review just before xmas. Maybe like you said he has a personality disorder, deffo short term memory loss.
    His latest outburst...The sword of damocles is deffo hanging over his head..

  70. Robert
    Newcomer to TPQ?

    I was imprisoned at 17 when I was arrested and and achieved the status of 18 years old
    when I was on the blanket. Obviously I am a bit older now but even at that I have been a regular reader and contributer to TPQ for the past 3 years at least. Since your post and since AM in correspondence has welcomed you back it would appear that you have returned to the TPQ after some absence. Who are you to assume I am a newcomer to TPQ?

    PS Dixie, we need to have a private conversation, there is something rotten in the air!

  71. Following the outing of MH and Robert's all of a sudden return to TPQ, the TPQ is without credibility, Out yourself Mackers as the true wanker you are, you had no balls on the blanket and unbelievablely given the time in between to evolve, you have less balls now. You'd make Danny Morrison look like a super hero!

  72. Frankie,

    no surprise, denial being a very common theme from the head of SF down through the ranks I am waiting the denial that “Provisional” SF ever existed.

    If the proverbial sword drops then so be it largely by his own hand.

    Personally I think he should have just said yes I said it the denial only adds to the problem. There is plenty of the same brand of thought out there and he certainly is not alone in those type of remarks.

    To me over the years he is just a part of the woodwork here I don’t like what he has to say most of the time but he has the right to say it.

    I personally have nothing against him and definitely oppose censoring him.
    His opinions although beyond callous at times but they are found all over the net on the street in pubs…etc but it is always better to challenge those views rather than ignore it.
    I suppose in his case he is a public servant so he should know better as his comments usually don’t sound favourable to better the community he represents.

    Minor note but the person who wrote the Argo article lets himself down by repeating callous insults and the Argo review proves Mickey is not an idiot but for whatever reasons certainly acts the part with some of his ruthless comments.

  73. Alfie,

    I admire the way you approach the subject with a very distinct humane quality.
    I hold no personal grudge against Mickey and took no personal offence at his “death wanters” remark although I do find his language unnecessary and blatant verbal poison I still like the bloke.
    I don’t know him well enough but like us all he has good qualities and of course the not so good.
    Saying that I would still buy him a pint and a drop of the good stuff outside of the volatile world of politics as I wish no ill will upon him as perhaps like many the long conflict affects people in different ways and left a lot of us to deal with the mental wounds in whatever way we can.
    I am not making excuse for his remarks as there is no excusing some of the things he has said.
    Politics aside I still like Mickey and am empathetic to him on a problem he brought upon himself.
    I have said to him many times before that he lets himself down as although he acts the eejit at the best of times I am convinced he has more to offer in debates than he chooses too.

  74. Mackers it is more than likely that Dixie called MH out because of what was said and for no other reason. I agree that anyone should be challenged and not just because they are in SF.

    Have said and done my own fair share of doing and saying the wrong thing. Hopefully MH will learn from this and not come out to scarred.

  75. Frankie

    'As I said before maybe he was pissed. But the denial in the paper saying he has never graced the quill... When he wrote the Argo review just before xmas. Maybe like you said he has a personality disorder, deffo short term memory loss'.

    Must admit that seems to be standard SF credentials. But as for MH I do recon he just spouts it out most of the time to get a rise and I for one always get a good laugh at his antics. The fact he's an elected rep' just makes it all the more fun. SF...where did it all go wrong lol


  76. Michael a wee bird just told me that this story isn't over . And it's going to run and run...bit like a snowball going down a hill.

    Telling a jounrnalist you've never posted on TPQ...between us it was stupid (I'd call it a peroxide moment)..

    When the Mid Ulster Mail contacted Mr McIvor, he denied any knowledge of the comments, and said he had not contributed to the blog

    I was going to suggest you smash all your PC's/Devices but unfortunately it's too late. If you hadn't of printed anything here under your real name, you might have had a figthing chance to distance yourself.

    I don't know if you should resign from your position within SF, thats not my call.

    But you need to publically apologize. And the sooner the better (thats simply advice, take it if you want, your call not mine)....

  77. From TPQ editor Carrie Twomey

    The difference is when what was being posted is as controversial and as regular as what MH was doing their is an onus and responsibility on the publisher to protect the rights of those who are diectly affected by the posts

    Whose rights? If this were an issue of libel I could understand where Eddie is coming from but thankfully there is no legal compulsion upon publishers to protect readers from reading comment or opinion they may find offensive. Who is to decide what is offensive to whom? In the case of MH's views on suicide and murder victims, it is up to MH to defend his views - he's every right to hold and express them. If he can't take the heat, he should keep his mouth shut. Given the amount of forums he has been banned from over the years, and the abuse he gives and takes all over the internet, I'd say he's well able to handle this and will do as he always does - wind everyone up by saying even more outrageous things. It's never been any secret who he is and for him to deny it now is a little daft but totally in keeping with his idiosyncratic ways.

    But so what if what is posted is controversial? We assume our readers are somewhat intelligent and don't need us to be their net nanny. If you disagree or don't like what someone has written, you are free and welcome to challenge their views. Calls for censorship will always fall on deaf ears, however. You can make them but… making them on TPQ will only make you look as daft as MH when he pretends he's not himself. What's the point? Why are you here? Have you not been paying any attention?

    Just because views are published here does not mean we endorse or share them. MH has been posting on TPQ quite a long time. I don’t agree with him on many things. I deeply appreciate that he has defended TPQ and freedom of speech at every point. But that is the thing about free speech, I don't have to like what people say all the time, but I will always defend their right to say it. I am not so green that I don't know there are people who think horrible things. I will always believe it is better to know, to have it expressed in the open, to have to defend views, than to think by silencing or censoring a problem or disagreeable thought it is eradicated. That is just foolish.

    If you're easily offended, or think everyone else should think what you do in order for you to consider them worthy, which it appears you are one or both, as the only comments you've made here have been the equivalent of attempting to pound TPQ's unwieldy square peg into your tiny round hole, you may find your enjoyment of the site is enhanced if you cover your eyes while reading.

    All the best xx

  78. Eddie,
    what is currently unravelling here doesn't sit easy with me and I cant pretend otherwise.

    I told you I agreed totally with Mick Hall, that MH says things to shock, 'pulling wings of butterflies' to get a reaction.
    I also agree with Alfie who over on another piece, but a similar thread stated, 'The best way to deal with bigotry and other idiocies is to expose them to fierce public scrutiny.
    It is a damn sight better than having a censorial elite decide what is appropriate for the rabble
    to talk about.'

    What struck me about Alfie's comment was the fact, if any one had wanted to take serious and personal issue because of MH's remarks it should have been him.
    Instead he provided something very different and very fair.

    I also stated on the other thread that, I have close friends, great people who battle the demons of depression daily.
    I told MH some of them would, 'Kick him into another dimension' if I relayed his remarks back to them. In saying that, they wouldn't be up for this though because that's not how we play.
    They are straight talkers. Scrap it out and get on with it people and the least deserving of what they go through.

    What I am saying in no way ignores the fact, that MH has been reckless and ultra insensitive but then who amongst us hasn't been?
    Sometimes, an even handed remark can be construed as something different depending on the audience.
    Quite inadvertently you can hit on a raw and sensitive nerve and then maybe have to deal with the consequences.

    I think a very dangerous precedent could now be set here.
    I told you I found the question as to why Michael Henry hadn't been arrested as disturbing as anything he has written.

  79. Feel te love,

    not much to disagree with there. Dixie for certain would have behaved the same were it anybody else making those comments.

    Have said and done my own fair share of doing and saying the wrong thing.

    Do you know anyone who hasn't?

    Unfortunatley, I think what Michaelhenry will learn is to not get caught so easily. I doubt if he will change his views much. But they are his views and he can stand over them if he is up for it.

    The sense of seething hatred towards him is as ominous as his expressed lack of compassion. Hatred - and we all have it for something or someone - is so corrosive, and on occasion perhaps even moreso of the self than anything else.

  80. Anthony,

    Thanks as always for your warm words of welcome.

    I see I have re-emerged for the wake of Michael Henry! I can’t help observing that, ‘.. he went very quick at the end.’ Whollly inane and impervious to any reason I feel strangely melancholy that the blog has lost its’ village idiot. More sad than bad I think. Not to despair ... I see a worthy replacement has just come through the door!

  81. Eddie,
    ‘Who are you to assume I am a newcomer to TPQ?’
    Making an observation, even where that observation may be in error, is part of the human condition that occurs involuntarily and independently of the who. I am nothing more than a common or garden and occasional contributor here. You appear overly defensive, paranoid and angry with life? Perhaps as a result of your imprisonment?
    Providing that aspect of your personal history appears as illogical to establishing the longevity of your presence on this blog as your insistence that Anthony gag Michaelhenry on account that his opinion is vile only for you to address Anthony in an equally vile manner. Your imprisonment has no more relevance to me or to anything under discussion here than had you informed me that your name was Emily, were once a circus dwarf and celebrated your 18th birthday, mid air, while being fired out of a cannon. Hardly currency that will have any purchase with me.

  82. Robert-

    " he went very Quick at the end "-

    I have not gone away you know-

    I was reading the portadown times and it says that their was 12 suicides in Craigavon last month and the local mayor has been prompted to organise a evening to raise awareness of mental health issues and suicide-some might see this as to little to late but there are still a few people about trying to keep others alive-

  83. Michaelhenry,

    fine words but they don't amount to a hill of beans if you undermine their efforts by venting gratuitously harsh, ridiculing and contemptuous words towards the people the mayor and company are trying to keep alive.

    Maybe you should talk to the mayor and his colleagues and ask them just what impact on their work comments like yours make: this is even more relevant given that you are an elected councillor. I or nobody else buys into your denial. I know telling a porkie can in the words of Camus 'simplify life' but this was something vastly different, a complete abandonment of what you professed to feel and was an attempt to publicly mislead the people who elcted you to lead not misled them.

    It would have been much better for you to have explained why you said what you did and then either stand over it or accept you were wrong. I strongly feel you were wrong but were you to acknowledge it, I would not be breaking your balls over it.

    I have said worse. I used to call people legitimate targets.

  84. Michaelhenry,

    Ah Mr McIvor either you have the political acumen of a pot noodle or the 'Brilliant Comrade' has provided you with a special dispensation to return here at the risk of making a monkey of yourself and the party. Gerry may even have identified and admired your self denial. Thriiled to know that my report of your demise was greatly exagerated.

  85. AM said;

    The sense of seething hatred towards him is as ominous as his expressed lack of compassion. Hatred - and we all have it for something or someone - is so corrosive, and on occasion perhaps even moreso of the self than anything else."

    I often tell myself that hatred is a childish/futile emotion, but that's probably not right. We have a build-in disgust which makes us reel when we see great piles of human corpses being bulldozed into mass graves, or at the thought of eating our own excrement. I feel that same sense of revulsion towards those who have no empathy for other human beings.

    I know that you are constantly goaded about censorship, and on the M.H. issue, about your view of him as a person.

    I tend to sway with you on the censorship issue but how far does it go? If Nick Griffin wanted to post or comment on TPQ would you encourage him?

  86. AM said;

    The sense of seething hatred towards him is as ominous as his expressed lack of compassion. Hatred - and we all have it for something or someone - is so corrosive, and on occasion perhaps even moreso of the self than anything else."

    I often tell myself that hatred is a childish/futile emotion, but that's probably not right. We have a build-in disgust which makes us reel when we see great piles of human corpses being bulldozed into mass graves, or at the thought of eating our own excrement. I feel that same sense of revulsion towards those who have no empathy for other human beings.

    I know that you are constantly goaded about censorship, and on the M.H. issue, about your view of him as a person.

    I tend to sway with you on the censorship issue but how far does it go? If Nick Griffin wanted to post or comment on TPQ would you encourage him?

  87. Michael,

    I would not encourage Griffin to post but if he were to I would permit it. I have elsewhere argued that it was right to allow him on Question Time so I would be up against myself to refuse him on here.

    Abhorrent ideas can only be tested when they are out in the open. On a personal level I don't want anybody else deciding what I should or should not hear and then reaching my own conclusion on it.

    If the only things I allowed on this site were what I agreed with there would be little appearing.

    Suicide is such an emotive topic. And those of us who have either being suicidal or suffered depression have an experience they can draw upon when it comes to these matters.

  88. Michael Henry (It wasn't me, I was never a member of that blog) McIvor now at last has something tangible in common with his idol Gerry (It wasn't me I was never a member) Adams.

  89. All this talk of censorship and would you let Griifin on. How are you supposed to have a debate if you only hear half an argument.
    Eddie i dont know you or Anthony and your disagreement seems personal and nothing to do with me but how can you say a blanketman any blanketman had no balls?

  90. Anthony,

    I agree, and would strongly support your view. I used the question as a means of putting the current issue into perspective.

    The protest outside the BBC against Griffin appearing on Q-Time backfired in many ways. Allowing Griffin to have his say did him more damage than censorship could have, and it allowed the political police to arrest protesters, excluding of course the fascist Griffin supporters, which ended up with the trial of a young lawyer.

  91. Michael,

    I thought Griffin made a fool of himself and his perspective that evening. I think when these people are censored they spread their views in ways that they can't be challenged. I have no doubt if he appeared on our site it would create a storm. But there is no point in affirming freedom of expression and then denying it when what is expressed is something we don't like. And where there are exceptions to the rule they have to be dealt with on a case by case basis as suggested by AC Grayling.

  92. eddie said...

    "Out yourself Mackers as the true wanker you are, you had no balls on the blanket and unbelievablely given the time in between to evolve, you have less balls now. You'd make Danny Morrison look like a super hero!"

    eddie that was an outrageous remark to make, especially as you were on the Blanket yourself. You'd know as well I as do that Mackers was held in the highest regard on that protest. Like Bobby and Tommy McKearney etc he was an educator of us who were less politically aware. Not only that he spent the greater part of his life in one prison or the other.

    After the murder of Joe O'Connor Mackers had the courage to stand up and point the finger at the Provos and they set the dogs on him and his pregnant wife. Outside of the Dark and Tommy Gorman he stood alone and was forced to move South.

    That took some balls mo chara...

    Mackers didn't censor MH by banning him from the Quill and by doing so he gave him the rope with which to hang himself.

    MH spent years online venting his outrageous views instead of working for those who elected him. Yet no one outside of internet forums knew who he was because he was repeatedly banned.

    Because he was allowed to air his views on the Quill he stands exposed today as being no better than one of those bigots who hate everything because they love Jesus.

    He stands exposed as someone who preaches peace yet gloats others as not being up to killing Brits or cops. He even mocks the dead.

    Because he is exposed the spotlight is now on the media as to why they give his likes a by-ball because had a member of any other political party North or South been exposed as holding such views they would be crucified in public.

    eddie what your attacks on Mackers has achieved is to draw the spotlight away from MH each time you air them.

    I'd suggest you write a separate opinion piece on why the likes of MH should be or should have been banned and I know that the Quill will carry it.

  93. Still on the topic of censorship and very relevant to this discussion. If you allow people to post here using pseudonyms while the rest of us are completely open about our identities is that not a form of censorship?
    Or should we take the view that not allowing a commenter the right to hide their identity would be censorship?

  94. Dixie,

    'I'd suggest you write a separate opinion piece on why the likes of MH should be or should have been banned and I know that the Quill will carry it.'

    You have effectively ushered the tide out on the matter and as Warren Buffet put it we will soon, ' who is swimming naked.'

  95. Micheal Craig, i dont see how thats relevant people should be allowed to say what they feel, and if they say it under their own name or the angel Gabriel what does it matter?

  96. Michael,

    it is a form of censorship but self censorship, not a censorship we impose. And I think there is merit in the argument that invisible people have invisible rights.

    I prefer everyone to use their own name and stand over what they say in all circumstances. It is always my preference. And where people feel the need to use a pen name they should do so to bring information into the public domain rather than using it as a shield from behind which they can take it out on people they take an umbrage at. And that applies even when the people they attack are, in my view, fair game.

    If I have a view on somebody I would summon up the strength to say it under my own name rather than use a pen name or simply refrain from saying anything. Often people are only vitriolic because they have the safety of a shield and their target does not.

    On this blog, many of those using pen names are known and make no attempt to conceal their identity. Michael Henry is a case in point. He attacked all and sundry but only now that Dixie has called him out has he sought to deny who he is. Others we don't know but they make their points and don't seek to smear.

    We are always open to suggestion. I have thought at times we should ask somebody external to the blog to make a judgement call on some of the comments and take it out of our hands.

  97. If you allow people to post here using pseudonyms while the rest of us are completely open about our identities is that not a form of censorship?

    For example I set a profile and call myself... John Smith. How do you know I'm really John Smith. Simply because my name would sound plausible?

  98. David Higgins,

    this might or might not be your real name. But you make well reasoned points (whether I agree or not is immaterial) don't smear people, put ideas into the public domain. So there is never a problem with that but overall I prefer the use of our own identities.

  99. I have thought at times we should ask somebody external to the blog to make a judgement call on some of the comments and take it out of our hands.

    Anthony I thought that was the reason you or Carrie started the Bates and Wilkes centeral...basically if anything came in that was a vile (or stupid) as what Michael Henry said...Then it wouldn't be censored but put somewhere to be read but so not detract from the article being talked about...

  100. Frankie,

    that is true. But it doesn't take much effort to find out if you really want to tie it down. I think the debates would be much less informative if we insisted on all using their own name. I also think people like to try ideas out and they get a bit of confidence from having a pen name: if it goes pear shaped they don't get laughed at. I tend to look at the comments section of a blog as a draft of what people are thinking rather than the finished product. I don't hold them to account or stand watching for every word. Anonymous comments really only cause a problem when people use it to spread smear and inneundo.

  101. Frankie,

    that is true but we still have to make the call when maybe somebody else could. I don't know: just thinking out lod. It is all too easy to throw something in. And on reflection I am sure a case could be made that Michaelhenry should have gone there but when people become part of the furniture there is a tendency to race through their comments and perhaps not give them the time that is merited.

    We have got it wrong in the past and will continue to do so in the future but our readers will help push us to get it right. We try to improve but are wary of perfecting.

  102. Dixie’s right, give'm enough rope and he’ll politically hang himself on his own accord which I believe he has done. There is no need for censorship measures as he’s only a liability to himself and his party.
    Right now I can imagine he’s swinging like a pendulum in a state of political suspended animation waiting for his masters in Sinn Fein to come to his rescue and cut him down.

    It would be the opinion of most people with a hint of compassion towards others even strangers that an individual without such a quality especially regarding the suffering of suicide victims and their loved ones, that such an individual is not fit to represent anyone in any council throughout the land irrespective of the political views of his constituency.

    My guess is his political fate is now in the hands of his masters who may well cut him down under the condition that he stays away from posting his opinions on line.

    “One under immense heat”
    9 down, 7 across
    (Cookstown sizzler)

  103. AM,

    "I strongly feel you were wrong but were you to acknowledge it, I would not be breaking your balls over it."

    I see The Sopranos is rubbing off on you! To lighten the mood, here is one of the funniest scenes from the entire series.

  104. Am, its my real name, i have no problem saying to peoples face or on a blog what i believe. My point is i started commenting on this blog because i read peoples opinions and i thought it was a good place to have debates on republicanism, politics, Irish and global affairs and if someone makes a point i dont care what name he does it under. If someone attacks someone else using an alias it says a lot about that particular person but it is still no reason to ignore what he says

  105. Frankie, As AM said it doesn't take much effort to find out, and I'm sure that within five minutes you could find out that this is my real name, who my family are and what my political and other activities are.

    The evidence has shown that M.H. used anonymity in order to get away with behaviour that would not be accepted under his own name.

    I'm not saying that everyone who uses anonymity would take such liberties, but I will always be a tad suspicious about their reasons for hiding.

  106. Michael,

    he used a pen name but not anonymity as such. They would slag him regularly about who he was. There was never any secret about it. I took it for granted tha anyone following the threads he was on knew exactly who he was.


    fine. We will continue our stance but I do have a preference for proper identities. Years ago it struck me that people were not on strong ground to complain about censorship if the first thing they did was censor their own name. In any even I always think an anonymous comment carries less weight.

  107. I've no problem with usernames myself and in fact I've spent quite a few hours on the shinner site arguing with shinners with fake names.

    If truth be told there were one or two like the Mellows poster who I had a respect for, even though I knew not who they were, because they could go toe to toe in debating.

    Aye I've been given a few names for Mellows but because it was a few names it might as well have been anyone. In fact on occasions I knew straight away if someone else was using his profile as to be fair while I debated with him Mellows remained respectful while the odd time that someone else used his name they came across as right nasty feckers...

    You can respect an opposite opinion even if you don't know who is giving it but there are many times I've also come across the nasty boyos and the odd girlo or two on various sites, most recently on Slugger.

    Anonymous gulpins who throw out the old 'tout' tag at the likes of, unbelievably, the Dark, Ricky, Mackers etc... Other times they fling out whatever else they can drag up.

    I find what usually shuts them up...for a while anyway... Is to point out that these people have the balls to say what they say without hiding behind usernames. Then challenge them to come out and say what they are saying using there own names.

    Not once has anyone taken me up on that challenge.

    However as I pointed out I can respect debating with a username as long as that person comes out and fights cleanly.

  108. David Higgins, xaid

    "Micheal Craig, i dont see how thats relevant people should be allowed to say what they feel, and if they say it under their own name or the angel Gabriel what does it matter?"

    Sorry David, I missed this earlier, lest you thought I ignored you :)

    You are right, It doesn't matter except that their input won't carry as much weight, with me anyway. Also someone whose identity is known is less likely to make offensive remarks to others in case they might bump into those others in the street.

  109. Michael,

    'I'm not saying that everyone who uses anonymity would take such liberties, but I will always be a tad suspicious about their reasons for hiding.'

    There may be many legitimate reasons why people seek to comment from a position of anonymity. I comment here with partial anonymity in that I choose to do so using my forename. I have no malign intent for doing so. It is peoples' perspective not their identity that is the subject of my interest and engagement.

  110. Fair enough Robert, And I've been impressed by some of your contributions!

  111. As Dixie said the bold Michael Henry has been given enough rope to hang himself. I'd safely say Gary Fleming, or whoever's directing the elections in May, will hit the roof if and when (as I'm sure has already happened by this stage) he gets to hear about all this. Although Mickeybroy divides opinion I can't help but feel sorry for him given the hole he's dug for himself and I'd second much of Alfie's narrative - at least I did until being informed recently that he conducted a malicious campaign against Gerry McGeough and his family under his various online guises/disguises. He needs to apologise for all the viscous attacks he's mounted, resign and set about changing the entire way he conducts himself - for his own personal development above all else. If he has the strength of character to do so I can forgive his behaviour but I don't see it coming and I say Gary will read him the riot act and probably advise him to stand down. An ignominious end for the boul' McIvor

  112. Sean,

    I think whatever we might say in the way of mitigation (and you don't, to be fair, have much to say!) it is dwarfed by the stark fact that he has done much more harm than good. And in the cold light of day, it does not matter if we might buy him a pint or go to a game with him, his stance in the round has been much more detrimental than beneficial. Dixie's calling him out on it stands to the good.

    Will he change the entire way of conducting himself as you advise? In my view, not a chance of it. He might resort to a more plausible deniability given that his current deniability is implausible, but that is probably about as much as we can expect.

  113. No matter how he handles it whatever credibility he may have held on here is gone. I'm sure you know Gary yourself Mackers and he'll not be taking this lightly, he really has dug himself a hole here but at least to his credit for once in his life he's stopped digging. Will it cost him his job? Maybe not, we'll have to wait and see. But if that man still runs for Sinn Fein in May it'll add credence to the notion Antainne and others have expressed that he's actually on here to disrupt at the behest of the party apparatus. Either way as far as I'm concerned his opinions from here-in should carry no weight in the face of these denials and he'd be better ignored. Sad end really for him as it's plain from some of the comments that many had a soft-spot for him as some sort of likeable rogue despite his viscous comments directed at the likes of the Notarantino's. He was his own worst enemy I feel because I genuinely think there's better qualities to the man but at the end of the day he's been deservedly exposed and should do the honourable thing - apologise to all those he directed his unwarranted attacks at - in particular the McGeough and O'Connor families - apologise for his offensive remarks on suicide and resign. If he genuinely done so I'd have no problem in supporting him but until he does he just doesn't deserve to be excused and as I said should be ignored on here. Maybe that's harsh, I'm not quite sure just yet. I'd like to see the best in him as I try to do with everyone but it's difficult at the moment

  114. He still has some neck on him to be denying anything, the facebook and tiwtter profiles are hi, he cannot deny them his family was wishing him happy birthday on them yesterday.

    Who are these SF Councillors anyway and what exactly do they contribute to politics other that win a seat under the illusion of other maybe greater people who came before them.

    Whenever I have isolated, sat down and rationally explained many different policies to them I always get the seam speak, I didnt know, or I thought, problme is they are not thinking and not smart enough o speak outside of a very short script that is written for them.

    If he had came clean and apologized I may not of said anything more but to deny it and keep commenting on here Michael McIvor your leaving yourself open for more ridicule which more than me is going to use against you.

    When I tweeted McIvor, the account I have always known him by:
    @pensheik some statement on suicide should be ashamed of yourself … @StanCampbell5@hughmccloy @StanCampbell5 That's my point of view-should everyone just listen to your point of view-

    With the reality dawning on most people that these people are actually running the country its only a matter of time to they are now

  115. What I still can't fathom is why Michael hasn't tried to make amends and hold his hands up and say "sorry"...It would be starting point if nothing else..

  116. not bein sure of who's who some of the time and eventually findin out who the who really is - is all part of the 'buzz' of blogs i think. sorry but so what if a sinn fein councillor doesnt do himself any favors and if people smear and abuse each other here. Its what happens on the street now and this is the media of the street in many ways. i hav to stay anonymous because im a multi billionaire who owns loads of the irish media and i also happen to be a tax exile.i'd be fuc*ked if my backers found out i was a closet independent republican. as for the dark mackers and others bein touts this is what i think. Our grandkids will look back on the 'troubles' with a different eye when all the touts agents and dirty war secrets will have come to the surface by then. They also might see the shafting of Eire Nua as the beginning of the end for republicans in the movement. I do now anyway. Where did all these Marxist revolutionaries and lefties who saw eire nua as a sop to unionists end up - fuc*ing Stormont!!!! one of them is one half of the chuckle bros - chuckle ar la! They will be shocked that only a handful of republicans stood up against the sell-outs and bullies and control freaks of PSF. I honestly think they might think us irish were a shower of losers when they learn a fighter and above all else an HONEST man like the dark ended up alone, shunned and impoverished a hundred yards up in the air in divis. tiocfaidh ar la me hole.

  117. A thought just came to me.

    Is this a big fuck the bloggers up game on TPQ and MH is being prompted by others to write some off the crap he does.

  118. Robert,

    I have to admit I missed that wit you deliver and inject with such ease.
    Just a minor observation though curious as to when we Ulaidh/ Ulster folk became overly sensitive was that a sub-clause slipped in under the GFA.

    I am also a wee bit baffled as to what we are to be protected from it may be the medications I take though assume anyone arriving at the door of the PQ does so under their own volition.
    Personally over the years the policy of no captain on the ship has and does work very well on TPQ minus a few exceptions where the captain has to take the helm and navigate some of the debates out of troubled waters.

    I believe the system works well on auto pilot for the greater part commenter’s are generally responsible and respectful not to take advantage of the open policy.
    I recall when TPQ was a wee community with the usual suspects commenting now it has grown into larger wider community could that be the reason it rubs some the wrong way and in some strange sense believe we should be protected from what they deem offensive.
    I believe we should appreciate the “concern” (insert laughter) but reality would dictate we are old enough and definitely thick skinned enough to define what we find personally offensive.

    Again it is probably the medications but I would appreciate if someone would explain why the TPQ is obligated to protect me from what?

    No castle is complete without its court jester and Mickey holds that position so if Eddie is gunning for his position I suggest a Joust or a more boring round of golf to settle that dispute.

  119. Michael Craig, (et al)

    Firstly welcome to TPQ I don’t recall seeing your name before so am assuming you are new to posting here I could be wrong but the welcome still stands.

    Personally I have no objections to people using pen names obviously I use one so that might sound a little lopsided and to a point a slight bias on my approach to the question of anonymity.
    In the greater sense there is no obscurity as British Intelligence keep tabs on the web and sites like TPQ would be under heavier scrutiny given the political nature so in that sense anonymous is unattainable whether one uses a real name or pen name and those of us that use a pen name would peak their interest until they matched a proper name belonging to the pen name which would be accomplished in minutes.

    I prefer to judge the content of the post rather than the name does it standout and can I learn anything from it will I find reason to be critical or agree will I ask a question or make a counterpoint…etc.. usually those with pen names that have an agenda or just feel the need to insult drift in now and then but are usually washed out by a direct challenge and takeoff into the sunset knowing they have no answers and the regulars tend to show boredom to insult as it just becomes tedious.
    It is par for the course on the Quills open policy and in general part of life.

    Prior to the social media revolution the computer was not as open and encouraged people to use an alias and to be careful with not giving out your own personal information.
    Even E-Mail encouraged people to use an alias and like most other sites and forums reminded people to protect their personal information.

    With the rise of social media the focus shifted from careful who you are giving out your personal information too to tell us everything about yourself under the guise of it benefits your friends and continue to tell us even more.

    There is billions to be made in the buying and selling and trading people’s personal information. People are more than obliging nowadays when it comes to feeding the machine with more and more personal details in return we get a false sense of privacy which adds up to zero privacy.

    Long story short “Tain Bo” was actually more accidental than intentional. I didn’t create a Google account to post just used the alternative e mail option out of being lazy (that and I loathe Google and their policy of collecting data). Phones became more popular and for me e mail became almost obsolete.
    I remember looking at my first post here and the name Tain Bo sounded so foreign and it took a wee while for me to get used with it as at the time I wasn’t sure about commenting but became comfortable with the Quill and continued.

    It was just mostly the regular’s back then and I can’t recall the issue of pen names being raised and to be honest I don’t notice it.
    It has no political meaning it just stems from my love of mythology.

    I can understand the reason for debate on names as long as it doesn’t create a paranoid environment and doesn’t chase away potential posters who for whatever reason would prefer using a pen name.

    I had a recent conversation about using my proper name but was convinced otherwise as all these years on the regulars know me as Tain Bo and part of the woodwork.

    The other important issue would be not to create a police environment where everyone must have a name and be identified.

    I know Robert as Robert and that is good enough for me as I know his posts are always worth a gander at.
    The same applies for most of the posters I am familiar with their contributions are always worth a read.
    Both those who use their names and those with pen names in my opinion the system works well here and here is about the only place I post.

    Anthony has my personal information and phone number and has always treated me with respect and in turn I make the effort to treat his blog with the same respect things may get heated now and again but I have no agenda or hold no ill will to anyone here if we are talking politics then it is nothing personal.

  120. Tain Bo,

    Thankyou for the welcome. I've been here a couple of months now, and as well as contributing the occasional comment AM has kindly published a couple of articles of mine which were originally written for other blogs.

    I find your own contribution well informed and well written, and even though I don't always agree with your views, your input is consistently lucid and logical.

    I prefer 'Mike', as Anthony has often addressed me, but because my Google account connects my presence here to the real world my full name appears :)

  121. Mike,

    My short term memory is notoriously faulty and lately preoccupied with other discourse on several articles.
    Thank you for the generous consideration of my contribution and I do appreciate your honesty.

    I would be more concerned if we all were in agreement all of the time I have no problem with people who disagree with what I say or even if they are critical of my view.
    I try and take it onboard as part of the ongoing learning process one thing I can say with confidence is I am not above being wrong.
    And certainly not above offering an apology when necessary I try to be fair in my criticism or disagreement but it is still easy to offend without intending to.

    The community here for the greater part is relaxed friendly and generally sincere and honest in opinion the open door policy makes it easy for anyone to join in.

    As I said I was originally uncertain about commenting as it was just something I didn’t do but became comfortable and felt welcomed here which over the years found the articles and comments to be educational and informative.

    I have had my share of heated debates but hold no grudge or ill will as it is politics so to me it is nothing personal.
    I do however hold a dislike for those who weigh in with an agenda which is usually to fire of personal insults so it is always refreshing when others weigh in and raise the standard of debate.

    On a personal note the Quill for me is therapeutic as it helps me make sense or gain a better understanding of the long conflict.

    Anyway welcome again Mike and if you find disagreement in anything I say feel free to point it out as I said its politics so it is nothing personal and I definitely take no offence when people do disagree with me.

  122. MichaelHenry..

    You might find this interesting and maybe it will change your opinion..

    Suicide kills as many as the Troubles