Guest writer Tain Bo with his take on the problems posed for academic freedom arising out of the Boston College oral history project, and the ongoing Sinn Fein campaign of intimidation.
I think that is the problem facing academics and researchers in what is today still a politically hostile environment where paramilitaries still enforce their brand of law.
The Belfast Project had been turned upside down and gutted for political expediency with a small portion being over sensationalised which is reason enough for those opposed to Anthony McIntyre to brand him a tout under Paramilitary law.
The main objectors being the leadership in SF who espouse peace and reconciliation yet put their own Paramilitary brand on the researcher and the research denying it has any reconciliatory value to the peace process.
It could be as simple as the project was ahead of the times and Northern Ireland is not ready to move on and make serious inroads to begin understanding the recent conflict.
Given the glee from the Sinn Fein camp at the destruction of the Academic project it would be safe to assume that truth in conflict will not be on the agenda anytime soon.
Political policing and Paramilitary law have won a victory over academic research. Perhaps all is not lost because academics worldwide now have a model to work from and ensure future research and the fine print of confidentiality laws is understood and protected from those who view academia as the enemy and wish to use confidential research for political or other nefarious reasons.
I suppose this rational initiative was too rational for some who propose peace and reconciliation by removing important testimonies from combatants. The true history of the conflict will hold a deficit of direct knowledge and filling in the blank pages will be left to those who silenced the project.
At least we can advise future academics and historical researchers to avoid Boston College as their denial of any confidentiality breach on their part is on par with Gerry Adams and his constant denials regarding his involvement direct or indirect during the conflict.
This prestigious college had the most to gain by defending academic freedoms yet when they heard "the British are coming" they practically surrendered before the Red Coats fired the first legal shot.
Now they are in good standing: along with Benedict Arnold they continue to lie and lessen their role in the attack on academic "freedoms."
Without question there is that reflexive thought of "touts" but this was not an exercise in collaborating or collusion with the crown forces. Sinn Fein has been promoting the research with such inflammatory language "touts and traitors" knowing that the word "tout" is reflexive and engrained into the republican psyche with a predictable understanding and the severe consequence of execution.
In-depth research of former combatants based in confidentiality was and is a complicated undertaking which should have allowed future examination and critical inquiry creating a more reasoned explanation of the conflict rather than just the accepted "they started it" from the 3 sides.
The word academic is treated like an enemy and it is this basically foreign world of academia that Sinn Fein exploited and reduced it to the more accepted and understood term of "touting."
This demonstrates how far Sinn Fein has moved on from the Paramilitary past as not that far considering their vicious opposition to the academic project or at least to the republican part.
Sinn Fein keeps repeating the same words to militant republicans that our society has no place for them yet Sinn Fein has no issue with using paramilitary language to incite fear into those who participated in valuable historical research.
This threatening language we all understand my question is why can Sinn Fein use the threat of paramilitaries and at the same time repeat they are committed to peace.
They were more than willing to demolish historical truth as the party wishes to dismiss its recent violent origins. The problem with that is it only adds to the suspicion of what they want to hide from.
What else will they seek to destroy as it appears their only concern is protecting the party and its new image with only one concrete truth they want to rule the island as the dominant force so much for democracy?
How much longer can Sinn Fein keep repeating the same paranoid excuse that all non Sinn Fein republicans harbour a hatred of the party and all are liars?
It is a powerful tool for governments who wish to silence anyone or thing they consider a threat.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Tain Bo,
ReplyDelete“I think that is the problem facing academics and researchers.....”
I hold a difference to that statement. This wasn’t about academics and researchers in the true sense of their concepts. It was about terrorists and terrorist supporters. Moloney and McIntyre were not perceived as what you think. They were and are perceived by what the British and Americans think - terrorists.
In the long run, this will have no effect whatsoever on academia for the project was and is viewed by many in academia as a terrorist talking to a terrorist. And hence no need to defend or be concerned from Boston.
Moloney or McIntyre standing with a note pad and pen in their hands doesn’t make them journalists. What it does make them is an unarmed terrorist supporter and an unarmed convicted terrorist double murderer. And that is what they and everyone else from any Irish republican ‘ism’ will be. Irish Republicans, and this includes Adams and McGuiness et al irrespective who they toast will always be just that....a terrorist....the British have won and to the victor the spoils.
So your concerns over future academic security.....easy man, there’s no need for concern.
Tain Bo
ReplyDeleteIt was never going to be played out any other way.
It's their history and their lies that dominate.
Things are on the turn very slowly and very surely and that's when they are at their most dangerous!
We seen the sting spilling out of Storey!
This wasn’t about academics and researchers in the true sense of their concepts. It was about terrorists and terrorist supporters
ReplyDeleteNiall,
Exactly who are the terrorists. Were the New Lodge Six shot dead by the 'dark forces' that Martin McGuinness talked about or by terrorists. ?
What happened with the release of some of the transcripts and the 'ripple' effect it is starting to have is a huge kick in the balls to academia Niall. It's almost on par with PSF signing away everything the Provisional struggle was about when they signed up to the GFA.
I've read about Anthony or who ever was involved in the Belfast Project called a 'tout' etc..What I have yet to read is Anthony, Wiston or Ed mention any names outside of Brendan Hughes, David Ervine (becasue of Voices) and Dolours Price (because of an Irish News/Sunday Life interview). Growing up in Ardoyne during the conflict this poster was on lamposts, walls.... Who's doing the loose talking and mentioning names.. Every other name I've read connected in any shape or form to the Belfast Project has come from the radio, newspapers, blogs, the PSNI, the leadership of PSF up to and including the party president.
Moloney and McIntyre were not perceived as what you think. They were and are perceived by what the British and Americans think - terrorists.
When you consider both British & Americam histories then they are the last two who should be name calling.
And hence no need to defend or be concerned from Boston.
Moloney or McIntyre standing with a note pad and pen in their hands doesn’t make them journalists. What it does make them is an unarmed terrorist supporter and an unarmed convicted terrorist double murderer.
Get off your soap box and stop throwing the word 'terrorist' around willy-nilly. Denis Bradley in a previous life was a priest, today he is a married man. Gordon Summer was a school teacher in a previous life, today he's know as Sting a pop signer. In previous lives both Anthony & Wiston were both paramilitaries in guerrilla armies. Today both are journalists, historians..armed with nothing more than pensive quills and an ink refill.
In the long run, this will have no effect whatsoever on academia. So your concerns over future academic security.....easy man, there’s no need for concern..
No one can be sure of what damage this ripple effect from Boston will have on the future Niall. What we know today is it's very possible that the two narratives in Boston could be lost forever and an oral history project that was being set up by former members of the RUC..
Colin Breen, a former Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC) detective who was the target of at least one IRA murder attempt during the Troubles, said this potential parallel security force historic archive is in effect "dead in the water, at least for the foreseeable future.."I cannot see former colleagues of mine in the RUC or the Garda who were by nature cynical and suspicious coming forward now to talk openly about what they did to counter the terrorist threat after this Boston College debacle," he said. "They realise that the guarantee of confidentiality unto death is no longer legally safe.
Niall the ripples have started..
Niall,
ReplyDeletewhat exactly is the “true sense of academia” your own hostility to this particular research would suggest there is today a hostile environment regarding “paramilitary research” and even if we accept your terms of a “terrorist talking with terrorists” it was still done under the supervision and approval of a prestigious college.
You don’t have a valid argument on its historical research value but a shut off predetermined prejudice against two of the people involved.
The media seem to influence your prejudice with the scrub all solution of labeling one a “terrorist” engaging in “terrorism” but it is not that simple as that.
The research would definitely argue against the labels and without doubt ideology would surface as an influence. Naturally it is difficult subject matter asymmetrical warfare that you don’t seem to mind as being recorded as purely terrorism by republicans.
Certainly the British will always look down on Irish republicanism and continue to label it as anything else but a principled ideology.
I am unsure how you manage to condemn the research more so the researcher in your case that is unless you have read the project cover to cover.
If not how do you arrive at it being academically valueless?
I don’t think we will lose sleep over what the British call the Irish and if their spoils include Sinn Fein then that is not such a great victory.
If you believe that Boston College done nothing wrong then that is your belief but it is not so much your belief as it is your opposition to Anthony and a lesser degree Ed.
It was a clear blow against academic research of this nature where interested governments gained access to what should have been confidential testimonies that alone is and will be a concern for researchers.
What effects this case will have cannot be satisfied with “easy man” as there is reason for concern and reason to question the lengths governments will go to obtain confidential information which raises the question of how free are academic and journalistic freedoms?
You are entitled to your opinion but making a media presumption and having a go at Anthony would suggest you have no interest in the academic world.
Nuala,
ReplyDeletewith Storey at the wonder wall it quickly became the blunder wall. More of a self-inflicted political embarrassment the different faces of SF on display and the sinister side reminding us they haven’t gone away.
Whilst it sounded good to the party faithful the show of aging strength was not directed at the British occupiers but at Anthony and others involved in the project.
Though, it does show that all is not as cohesive in the upper echelons of SF as they all seem to be jockeying for a better position when the vice grip of Adams and McGuinness is eventually gone.
I doubt the vultures will be able to hold the party together as the Armailite old guard fades the Ballot box generation will have an entirely different view and direction.
Sorry about the late response long story.
niall said:
ReplyDeleteMoloney or McIntyre standing with a note pad and pen in their hands doesn’t make them journalists. What it does make them is an unarmed terrorist supporter and an unarmed convicted terrorist double murderer.
thanks for that. i needed a laugh today.
u also say many in academia view it as a terrorist talking to a terrorist. and. whats wrong with terrorists talking. u have a bee in ur bonnet over terrorists. in fact i think ur very prejudiced. ur a terroristist.
terrorists arent the worst. i mean compared to genocidalists they are sound....easy man.
tain, hope ur okay old bean. im curious about the long story.
ReplyDeleteta, you had me laughing with the old bean. Long story short, I had an operation which left me out for the count so, have been out of it for a few weeks.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, keep the flag flying over Sardonia the new Red Coats are coming.
a speedy recovery to you tain bo, and its the fuc*ing white coats im more worried about!
ReplyDeleteTa, Grouch, and now I am paranoid as your right the white coats are the dangerous ones.
ReplyDeleteBest a luck