There will be no similar funerary ritual for the killer of Garda Golden, Adrian Crevan Mackin, no matter how many tricolours might be placed over his coffin. The only conceivable reason to even consider putting the national flag on the coffin of Mackin would be to conceal it from public view much in the same way as people making court appearances often have their faces covered.
A report in the Irish News seemed to capture the mood:
Mackin’s body had lain unclaimed in the morgue of Our Lady of Lourdes Hospital in Drogheda as the families of both his victims received outpourings of support from both sides of the border. However, sources confirmed on Thursday night the murderer's remains had been taken from the hospital and quietly brought to Newry by a local funeral director. A no-fuss funeral, out of the glare of the media, is expected to take place within days.
Mackin, despite claiming to be a republican, posed virtually no threat to Britain and very much a grave threat to Irish society with his penchant for violence. Tony Golden, by contrast, died performing a vital societal function: he responded to a distress call from a vulnerable member of the public seeking refuge from a violent thug and paid for it with his life. An act more steeped in a republican ethos than anything Mackin seems to have accomplished.
Tony Golden is the 88th Garda to have been killed “while on active service for the force” since the formation of the state. While most likely nothing more than an act of gratuitous viciousness, the thought occurred to me that Mackin, having inherited a traditional armed republican hostility towards Gardaí, might have laboured under some warped notion that as a republican there was an established precedent which he could call upon to legitimise his homicidal foray: an inherited and induced dissolvent of the standard moral inhibition against murder.
A considerable number of those 88 dead lost their lives to the Provisional IRA. That organisation’s former chief of staff Martin McGuinness, on whose watch gardaí were killed, was reminded during his bid for the Irish Presidency that he had at one time outlined the circumstances in which IRA members could shoot gardaí or members of the Irish Defence Force. He told Hot Press magazine that gardaí could only be shot “in certain circumstances, like in Ballinamore where IRA volunteers felt they were going to be shot dead and were defending themselves against armed gardaí and soldiers.”
McGuinness, sensing that such an assertion must ring murderously maniacal in today’s world, later resiled from his comments. No longer the director of the IRA’s war machine and currently deputy to the North’s First Minister, Peter Robinson, the Derry politician, probably acquiescing to “needs must” rather than a genuine democratic imperative, later claimed he could not remember making those comments but if he did they were absolutely wrong. ”I don’t recall that interview. I am totally and absolutely opposed to any attack.”
In this society where citizens often come into conflict with the State over issues like water charges and political policing there are many good reasons to be critical of An Garda Síochána. There are no good reasons for killing them.
This comment has been removed by the author.ReplyDelete
You struggle to believe a lot that makes sense to most people. If you read the article rather than your own prejudices you might just get some real impression of what it is actually saying. I am not responsible for that scrambling device you call a brain.ReplyDelete
The prejudices it would seem are yours, the suggestion this lad would have a tricolour on his coffin or that the murder of Tony Golden somehow relates to republicanism are off the wall, something you'd expect to find in the gutter press, not TPQ. I asked you not to post that comment but you did it anyway, probably for pure spite. The scrambling device I call a brain? I deleted the comment as soon as it appeared but what I said was nothing to do with a scrambling device for a brain. You are consciously and deliberately linking the murder of Tony Golden to Irish republicanism when it has absolutely zero to do with it. Sin é, justify it how you like but that's what you doneReplyDelete
Where did you ask that the comment not be posted? You certainly did not ask on the comment section. You might well have asked on Facebook or email but don't be deluding yourself that I sit waiting on your correspondence. If you really didn't want it published you would have followed up where you knew I had to see it - in the comments section. I see now that you have deleted it but it would have been better for you to leave a record of what you say given that you started a dialogue on the matter.ReplyDelete
How you interpret or misinterpret is a matter for yourself. I have the confidence of my conviction on this matter - not a word will be changed or withdrawn without good reason. So far you have offered none.
Had this thug killed a PSNI officer, responding to a distress plea from a young woman, would you feel the same toward him and his family as the guard? I expect some sections of the community would, if not support it, almost try and assuage it.ReplyDelete
The man was a thug and a murderer - pure and simple. There is simply no good reason to drag republicanism into it, regardless of this 'confidence of your convictions'. This was a domestic incident with zero connection to republicanism but you wouldn't know it from your piece. As for the rest of what you wrote, pure and utter rubbish Anthony. You seem to forget that you yourself were part of the very organisation you speak of that had a role in 'a considerable number of those 88 dead'. What makes you different to McGuinness here? You'll have no need to worry about 'sitting waiting on my correspondence', you're off your rocker and I've better things to be at than arguing this nonsense. SlanReplyDelete
I doubt the killing had anything directly to do with Republicanism. However, I read online that the perpetrator pleaded guilty in a Newry court in 2012 to possessing "extreme pornographic images" of women having sex with animals.ReplyDelete
If that's the case why is he even given credibility or standing of whatever kind or level by any group claiming to be Republican? Surely such a criminal past makes the person a loose cannon, more likely to be targeted as an informer and makes them very unreliable. Surely anti-social people should be shunned? I don't support Dissidents in fact Anthony has described me as more of a nationalist than a Republican. However, even to me the strangeness of this man's past seems an obvious flaw.
Such a lenient recruitment process may add to the downfall of Republicanism in whatever guise. Recruit criminals and you criminalise yourselves and your cause.
Simon I take your point however just a few points of interest.ReplyDelete
Firstly, all paramilitary/military groups have recruited unsavoury characters not to mention psychopaths. The provisional IRA had many - yet few speak of such. The modern republican narrative is one that bases its "proud tradition" on a hand-full of individuals - namely The Hunger strikers, The Dark, the exploits of the South Armagh and South Tyrone brigades and a few success stories like Brighton and the Maze escape etc. Few mention the sectarian killings, the use of human bombs, the covered up rape, Child abuse, torture and barroom back ally slayings that only disturbed individuals could possibly partake in. When we think of Brendan Hughes, Bobby Sands, or the Loughgall martyrs we don't have visions of men in a back room gorging people to pieces with rusty blades, nor killing children for menial crimes or hanging people in prison cells. I'm not suggesting any of the above adhered to such actions rather, illuminating a juxtaposition of ideals that form the grand narrative of "the struggle" a substantial part of which was served up by disturbed individuals; yet one which few think of when standing for the oration on Easter Sunday or allude to when toasting the "movement"
as I understand the circumstances this troubled man was on bail pending charges of IRA membership.
Weren't you aware of that?
Those whom were recruited into the IRA in the early seventies (as I assume Anthony was) were 'sworn in' subject to being familiar with General Army Orders; no:8 of which forbade use of arms against Free-State Forces'. Volunteers were instructed to render their weapons ineffective if possible and offer no resistance.
Or weren't you aware of that either?
such a lenient recruitment process did in fact lead to the demise of the Republican Movement. Recruit a member of a paedophile family and you have a problem. Unfortunately we ended up with a catastrophe.
I have no idea if truth be told if Crevan was involved in any shape or form with anything remotely republican. The media has certainly ensured that the public believe he was in one way or another. If as been reported there is a grain of truth in the media claim that Crevan re-activated deactivated guns hence his involvement/ relationship with any republican grouping then yes there is a stain of disgrace.ReplyDelete
Anthony I read your piece several times, those that wish to read it with a mind not open or aware or honest will see and interpret it as an attack on their belief system. Feck them, closed minds need to be challenged regardless of circumstance. It is a noble thing and a courageous thing to speak the truth, however unpalatable to some. Fair dues to you for doing so, yet again. The essence of truth in this article is obvious.
HJ more ridicolous garbage from yourself...again.ReplyDelete
Read about the Brits and Kincora before you start your anti Republican dirge.
Strangely Kincora doesn't stop you brown nosing to the Brits and Loyalists.
One standard for "them" and a higher standard for the Irish who oppossed them?
Absolute rot..and on a daily basis too.
I think you are right - republicanism cannot be held accountable for this act. But you are eminently capable of logically discussing republicanism in the context of the killing.
That was a generous comment. Closed minds and republican intolerance unfortunately go with the turf. It comes out when people refuse to acquiesce in demands to believe what others believe they should believe. Ciaran Cunningham had a great piece on TPQ on the effects of the phenomenon when taken to the extreme. As Rosa Luxemburg said freedom is always freedom for the dissenter
I guess by now we are well used to you leaving this site with a promise never to return. Sorta doesn’t work too well for you.
I asked you not to post that comment but you did it anyway, probably for pure spite.
We could make a panto out of it and bat back and forth “oh yes you did. Oh no I didn’t”. Best to allow our readers to decide if your responses or mine to those who disagree with us more closely suits the label “spite”.
You are consciously and deliberately linking the murder of Tony Golden to Irish republicanism
This more resembles theological thinking than logical thinking given the tendency for the former to reach conclusions at variance with the evidence. It is the type of reasoning that leads people to believe in virgin births and being able to survive their own deaths despite all the evidence being to the contrary.
The piece did not “consciously and deliberately” link republicanism to the killing. It asked the not unreasonable question, while expressing a serious doubt about an affirmative answer, if there is a residual hangover that in some refracted way feeds into the decision making process that led to the loss of Tony Golden’s life. The possibility was backed up by reference to Martin McGuinness having previously outlined the conditions whereby Gardai could be killed. This is in my view an important question given that the current Sinn Fein leadership pretend that current republican violence wholly separate from this killing, is not in some way a legacy of decisions they made and the logic they espoused some years ago. This killing is no less justified than the killing of Ronan Kerr but the Sinn Fein leadership would distance itself equally from both. I don’t believe that is a plausible narrative. You might claim my point stands in relation only to Kerr but not Golden. While that is a much more likely scenario it is not something we can be either dogmatic or definitive about.
The man was a thug and a murderer - pure and simple. There is simply no good reason to drag republicanism into it
Any different a thug or a murder from those who took the lives of Robert McCartney, Barney McDonald or Paul Quinn? Yet republicanism was brought into discussion of all 3 killings. It doesn’t mean that republicanism was responsible for those murders but nor can it be ruled out of discussions about them.
You seem to forget that you yourself were part of the very organisation you speak of that had a role in 'a considerable number of those 88 dead'. What makes you different to McGuinness here?
This is where the reasoning really resembles the theological rather than the logical.
The reason I can write about these matters is that rather than forgetting I was a member of the organisation that killed gardai I remember it all too well. The difference between myself and Martin McGuinness is that he forgets, thinking he left it around 1974.
Too logical perhaps for you to grasp.
Ats it get yer bare belly out mackers and plough into the bastards like big Joe Joyce ;) lolReplyDelete
Sean bres, this is your old friend grouch here, do not bite the bait, this site is going one way and that is down. The utter windbaggery of the above article is absolutely nauseating and utterly pathetic and does not merit a response from you or anyone claiming to be a republican. The following statement actually broke the waffelometer -ReplyDelete
"the thought occurred to me that Mackin, having inherited a traditional armed republican hostility towards Gardaí, might have laboured under some warped notion that as a republican there was an established precedent which he could call upon to legitimise his homicidal foray: an inherited and induced dissolvent of the standard moral inhibition against murder. "
I have never in my life read such utter tripe. Actually scrap that. I have. Here.
Macintyre, you need to get a job and get out into the real world, you spent too long in jail and way too long in the library. Get a life. And i dont mean sentence.
Welcome back Grouch.ReplyDelete
I haven't read this article..But I agree with you that there is a defeatist tone loud and clear here. Most loudly by Crackhead I think Anthony is experiencing the Stockholm syndrome to HJ.
As for hatred of the Gardai.
The batoning of the anti Shell protestors,the arrest of an Irish Citizen who gave his name in Irish..The corruption over Penality points for the "great and the good" whilst the great unwashed get punished with the full rigor of the law,
The 50,000 Euros worth of booze that the Shell Fixer in Corrib gave to the Garda for beating up protestors and the fact that the Irish media ignored this.
All these things show the garda are not about Law and Order ..They are about protecting the elites and whomever pays them. See Water protests for more details.
This has everything to do with my attitude to this dead Garda..And nothing whatsoever to do with 30 years of RUC deaths.
In short the Garda have violated their own rights to be treated with any sort of respect.
And None of the reasons are linked to the North. None
In this video made by vice. about young Irish Nationalists.ReplyDelete
Garda have told these young guys that "they would rather be dead than be an Irish Republican..And If they were an irish Republican they would commit suicide.."
Now let's leave aside the fact that suicide rates in Ireland are Off The Scale
I ask you is that any way to behave for "brave" gardai??????
There are no eugleoies from me for these Boys in Blew.
I shall leave it up to you.
Here's the exact point of that video.ReplyDelete
"Here's the exact point of that video."
About 16minutes into the video we see the face of the Gardai that you wish to emphasis as justification why they should be killed -even by a deranged thug who dissidents are hell bent on defending rather than trying to distance themselves from. The Garda in your video clip says something awful - he defends the constitutional right to march and he is not even aggressive when he does so. Meanwhile in the video clip we see a 12year old boy (child) being militarized and his posture being corrected had he been holding a real riffle.
But you think it would be ok if some woman beating thug decided to kill him -I presume providing the thug is also associated with violent dissidents as with the recent case??
I would reiterate what AM that is no good reason for killing a garda (or anyone else for that matter).
I too only like AM when he dissents from others sensibilities and not my own.ReplyDelete
while your contribution might well have merit in a different type of discussion, it really adds nothing to the issue here. You talk of respect whereas the above article is about rights.
I don't think you argued for garda to be denied the right not to be killed but you argued for them to be denied respect. In that sense I think Diplock Courts might have read you wrong when he made the point that you were somehow justifying killing Garda. At the same time your comment that This has everything to do with my attitude to this dead Garda leaves the reader uncertain. You have not told us your attitude to this dead Garda but leave us to draw an inference from your generalisation that you don't respect the Gardaí. The inference is you don't respect the dead garda either.
I have not watched the video so can't comment on their content. I can only comment on what you said above. The Garda has a right to hold the opinion that he would prefer suicide to republicanism. Just as a creationist like the DUP's Edwin Poots has the right to believe he is the result of special creation that took place in the last 6000 years and is not the product of a long process of biological evolution over millions of years. We don't have to respect either opinion, merely recognise the right to hold them. We certainly would not argue that they be killed for holding crackpot views.
They are about protecting the elites
Just like every police force in the world and almost every political party in this country North and South and every group of revolutionaries who ever seized power.
This dead Garda was protecting 21 year old Siobhan Philips from a murderous thug when he died. She hardly qualifies as part of the elites.
We all know the type of Garda behaviour you point out and protest it. But it does nothing to address the point of this article which basically throws up the following two questions: do the Gardaí have the right not to be murdered? Does anyone have the right to murder them?
Not in my view.
this is the point - dissent from the ordained opinion and you are off your rocker or a rim licker!! An old SF tactic we are well equipped to deal with.
bad bwits ... and bad fwee-state police!
You sir are in the grip of a pretty serious obsession. You seem to have great difficulty when it comes to acknowledging reality.
You reject the consensual agreement of a vast majority to only pursue unification based on consent and by your latest comments reject the broad consensual support for the Garda Siochana.
Your obsession with an Irish Republican Nirvana is symptomatic of your deluded magical and immature thinking. Off to 'grouch's' separatist and isolationist saordonia with ya ... and bring a few more of your dull friends with you.
yeaooooooooooo Mackers has them on the ropes now with a barrage of quick one twos. These brawlers are no match for this ring specialist. It will be interesting to see if his opponents come out of their draconian corner for round 4. Stay tuned folks, we will be back after this party political broadcast from the loony party. ;)ReplyDelete
If you locked ruth dudley edwards and eoghan harris into a room with a big bag of crack cocaine, they would not come out with the utter shite that this increasingly pathetic site regularly spews from both the author of the above polysyllabic pseudo intellectual nonsense, and his ever decreasing team of sycophants. What a shame, initially I thought this was going to be like THE BLANKET site of yesteryear. By the way Henry Joyless Mc Crackhead, you are the epitome of 'dull' and perhaps the most pretentious pompous poncey pseud i have encountered. In my seperatist isolationist dwelling i eat natural food, drink uncontaminated water, protect my health and most of all, have a good time. Yourself and Grogan probably have a sperm count of 17 between the two of ye and i wouldn't be a bit surprised if ye were both living at home.ReplyDelete
Anthony.Your headline is "No good reason for killing Gardai."ReplyDelete
Fine I agree with that.
And this discussion is rapidly heading into the area of criticising Israel means your are anti semitic, type terrority.
I haven't read any articles on the Oirish endapendent about this case..But they never miss an opportunity for propaganda; So I can well imagine what their output consists of at this time.frenzied outpourings of sacrine grief. an orgy of self glorification for a putrid mess that is the free State.
Because propaganda is all you'll ever get from that rag edited by a former editor of the Garda Gazette; who sacked a journalist for door stepping the Garda commissioner over the penality points scandal. Democracy in action, eh folks. . So that is at least one good reason not to follow the party line.
This is the reality of the "golden circle" ( no pun intended )of both the Irish media and it's police force.
So yes, shooting Garda is wrong.
But guilding the lilly of a corrupt depraved rotten system which has got none; if very few effective checks and balances is also wrong. certainly no media spotlight. I learned all of the above and about van loads of booze to Mayo Garda from the British Guardian newspaper.
Not from Irish Media.
But who is surprised , eh? and who goes along with it??
And I say we are badly served..Badly served in various ways. in policing and media scrunity
As for "all police protect elites.."
And this is for HJ also.
As Oscar Wilde says.
" We all live in the gutter..but some of us dream of the stars."
I live in the gutter of the State that failed.And it will fail again tomorrow.
until people put down the propaganda spread sheets and reject the sermons from the Altar.
I think that sums up my view. I want something better. So I am not in joining in a
ritual hagiography for the state that failed.
I don't praise Gardai..I don't shoot them either; And I don't feel bad about this episode.
Partly because I didn't do it..Partly because I believe the system is corrupt..And Partly because I know the media aka the Oirish Endapendent will go into overload to praise this victim and offer him up as a martyr to a broken statlet. And eulogise the heck out of it.
I don't partake of that.
Garda Golden is an unwitting and involuntary "poster boy" for an unholy mess.
I won't partake of the Kool aid.
And btw, as to the central point; the narrative issue.. That this Garda, somehow met his death by some sort of Over spill from the Northern Conflict.
Well I could blame Grand Theft Auto on Playstation 4..or the Hippy Hop music that the youngsters all listen to.
In fact Al Gore's wife has just emailed me already.
And If I really wanted to I could make a case for those arguments.But I won't because I don't believe in them.Just like I don't believe that Republicans are in the frame for this one.
Heck let's blame NWA and their song Fcuk the Police.
They did it. I saw them do it.
I for one am not undergoing some Catholic inspired guilt trip or hand wringing exercise for Garda Golden. I reject catholicism and all it's works for one thing.. It never stuck with me..And the system that Garda Golden worked for stinks.
Just what did the Garda do when the catholic Church was making it's plans against us?
Has the Oirish Endapendent ever posed that question?
I shall answer my own questions A) Nothing and B) never did and never will.
Well I am..and today of all days.
Call me insensitive..Call me what you like.
But tell me I am wrong about any substance issue.
I do not mourn
Killing Gardai is never right..But never right also describes the Rotten State. The rotten state that failed.
I rest my case.
And that HJ is the reality.
This is a police AND media issue.
And we are been sold down the river on both fronts..Well in every possible front imaginable. but those two are germaine
If you like dissenters maybe you should work in Dublin Castle.
They got plenty of files on dissenters there.
Dissenters ;such as If I read this right. The Gardai have been instructed to collect information of water protestors. And also political parties which work in that area.
Them water protestors bringing down the state in a conspiracy of one meter at a time.
It's a police state. Is what it is.
And since when is praising a police State Dissent.
Only from the pen of George Orwell in full double think mode is it dissent.
Sadly the files in Dublin Castle on the 1974 Dublin/Monaghan bombings are evisareted.
Qui Bene? Eh?
Did the MI5 mole code named "The Badger" have anything to do with it? Source TG4 series Braithadoiri
Or are there more like him out there??? They haven't gone away you know?
Hey Grouch meet the new Guest Editor.ReplyDelete
None other than RoboCop
Because there's No good reason not to leave a protestors' head unmarked by a baton.
oh ho - Did I hear someone just mention my sperm count? We must have a doctor here - certainly not a PHD holder that's for sure :)ReplyDelete
Jerome, fancy examining my prostate for me? since your so familiar with shit!
something best taken up with the Irish Independent. It does little to impact on the subject of the above article and is more the expression of your view on the state and the Gardaí which is not what the article was about. It is a piece that dissents from the power of murder and any claim to a right to murder. Given that you also seem to dissent from what the article dissents from, your argument is with sentiments not expressed in the article.
That pathetic comment says everything about the type of pseud you are Grogan. As i'm an acupuncturist/naturopath I will give you some advice about your prostrate. Prostrate cancer, like all cancers, are skyrocketing in the so called developed world. There is a link between laptops and prostrate cancer which isnt rocket science when you think about how close these devices are usually placed to the aforementioned gland. So my advice for you is to get a laptop radiation shield for yourself if you are one of those nerds who spends half the day watching telly with a laptop on your crotch. As regards shit, i am very familiar with shit as stool analysis is a big part of diagnosing in my line of work. Now go suck up to your PHD idols you sycophantic gimp.ReplyDelete
Two things I (now) know about Emmett.ReplyDelete
1) He likes to dress up in leather. Purely in the interest of his motorcycling hobbyist of course. don't read anything into this
2) he has just invited another guy to feel his prostate over the internets.
I am sure these are unrelated.just like a Norfolk Husband and wife.
My two cents get a smart phone Emmett and download some apps for your ahem hobbies.
And you go girl.
And Two..The bould Larry Hughes warned us all about this sort of thing over Gay cakes and same sex voting stuff.
We all should have paid more heed. Come back Larry.
I am amazed that what seems to me to be a very reasonable article would meet with such vitriol - if you are so consumed with your own prejudices that you have to concede somewhat reluctantly after some back and forth that killing an innocent Garda cannot be justified, then perhaps it is time to re-examine if your world view is serving you well.ReplyDelete
The "my country right or wrong" attitude has allowed Britain and others to excuse away murderous and abhorrent behavior, but although on a smaller scale, those who adopt a "my world view right or wrong" can end up in debates like this saying things like "well the murder of the Garda is not right, well sorta not right, in that it is not entirely wrong because well the gardai have done some things I disagree with and the state has failed me and the church has oppressed me..."
What is so wrong in calling something that is wrong, simply wrong without having to be prompted a number of time before you can grudgingly concede it?
I've only just come across this article and the ensuing comments, or rather attacks on Mackers, which are totally unwarranted. In fact I'll go as far as to say that the lack of respect shown for a Republican's opinion on this particular subject carries with it the stink of Adamsite fanaticism at it's worst.ReplyDelete
It only proves the correctness in what I and other old hands have discussed in recent months. That discussion centered round the fact that some former members of PIRA might have walked away and joined the various Republican groups out there but that they have also brought the old Provo mentality along with them. That same mentality which led the Shinners by the noses into the system which stripped them of all Republicanism.
If you dare criticise or speak out against what we are doing then you are our enemy. I've often come across it myself. I'm a great guy when slamming the Shinners and it's cheers all around but dare question those who cannot unify in order to achieve unity or the continued use of the gun when it only benefits the so called peace process then I'm a heathen in Republican terms.
As for the article itself, fair enough the point that a tricolour might be placed over his coffin was wrong. I seriously doubt that any Republican would consider placing a tricolour on the coffin of someone so deranged as to try and kill his partner never mind actually kill someone attempting to protect her.
I wondered, was he actually a member of any IRA or did he just admit to it? Where did he get the weapon if not from an IRA source? Again doubtful as weapons can be bought from any drug dealer.
Would any IRA bring a person who was charged with viewing sickening porn into their ranks? I seriously doubt it but if it was possible then those who did should dig holes in some bog and disappear themselves.
The thought that 'Mackin, having inherited a traditional armed republican hostility towards Gardaí' was, I feel, not thought out before and after Mackers typed it. How could a person like Mackin for the reasons I pointed out have inherited anything remotely Republican in his life?
As for the Gardaí, they like the PSNI are the force of the State which pays their wages. You don't see them beating drug dealers off the street and I won't waste much more of this paragraph listing the various times they were used against the people they claim to serve.
However we can no longer justify killing any person whether they be a cop or a screw because that killing will only grab the headlines briefly. It will give rise to public anger and to self-righteous outpourings of false outrage from politicians and the saintly hypocrites who are called into a studio. It will not further the objectives of Republicanism one iota because, as I already pointed out, Republicanism cannot even unite itself never mind a people who need leadership, especially now.
As young men and women we were handed guns and sent out to fight a war. We never questioned because you didn't question until the answers came too late.
Our youth need to be able to feel that they can question decisions if they are to learn from the failures of the past but how can they if they are shouted down as Mackers was when he wrote what he believed to be right?
"Rotten state that failed"
Now, I by no means wish to make a contribution to your decried hagiography of the southern state but in a, probably fruitless attempt, to bring some balance about such issues to your obviously polarised thinking I'd ask, if it is really a "Rotten state that failed" then that's compared to which other states in particular?
And perhaps you'd like to give this evaluation some context? Some examples please of more wholesome and functioning states, particularly as compared to other younger states emerging from the throws of a long history of colonial domination? Maybe you'd look too at those that are more "rotten" and that have "failed" more miserably. Then consider setting all out in some sort of meritorious hierarchy and ranking the southern state accordingly.
If you were to do all that then you might arrive at a more realistic evaluation of the realities. Our state is far from perfect, its has many current shortcomings and challenges but some objectivity please. Otherwise your commentary too will be judged as merely 'propagandist'.
(Read jgr33n comments. He also poses some questions that might be useful for you to answer.)
Ozzy and others views are transparent even if not outright stated. You made the premise of the article evident from the outset. Ozzy and others do not agree with your sentiment but instead have been throwing up all and any reason why to dislike the Gardai from which I conclude they are arguing that there are good reasons for Gardai to be killed. Some of these same people have also launched personal attacks against yourself and HJ for things unrelated to this article but appear to be long festering resentments or grudges.
jgr33n seems to be reading Ozzy and others the same way that I do. Ozzy posted videos to make his point of how horrendous the Gardai are and the one and only Garda I saw in one of the clips could not be faulted, he was not aggressive, offensive or dismissive of the dissidents out parading. In fact he did not represent anything Ozzy has been saying about the Gardai at all! The video I saw was one of indoctrination of children (one at most 12years old) being militarised and only because it was shot in Ireland and not the Congo or some other African conflict zone these kids might otherwise be child soldiers.
I have come to realize that dissidents are more up to speed with the latest scores of British football clubs than they are with the rights of the child, human rights or other realities that have left them behind. They certainly do not represent republicanism which like the gardai deserve to be critised... but not all the time.
Do you include the unborn child's right to life when you say 'right of the child' diplock. Or do you mean the child has the right to two gay daddies.ReplyDelete
I don't find Ozzy'z view as transparent as you do. I think you draw an inference. It might be a correct inference but Ozzy disputes it and I feel his explanation is plausible. People need to have the space to make their points without being dragged under by the anchor of what they didn't say. I realise that jgr33n in a very robust post shares your view. I just happen to dissent from that joint opinion.
Ozzy in my view is making a polemic against the Gardaí. Polemics are an authentic way of making an argument even though easily undermined if they fail to keep their distance from diatribe. Why he needs to make the polemic here I do not know. He cannot make the case that the Gardaí were defended from critique in the piece: they were not. They were defended from being murdered. His ire seems more provoked by the Gardaí than it is by their being murdered. That is what I take from his contribution. He has been pretty blunt in stating his lack of sympathy. I just don't think that can be extended to saying he approves the killing of Gardaí.
Henry Joy has drawn attention to the limitations of polemic - there are a number of hurdles it has to leap before being grounded in something other than its own sound.
Festering resentments and grudges, I'll exclude Ozzy and Sean Bres from that, but there has been an element of it from elsewhere and about which I remain wholly indifferent. It just passes over my head. Old dog for the hard road LOL
"No Good Reason For Killing Gardaí" By refuting or attacking that statement logically implies that there are good reasons to kill Gardai -among his listed grievances Ozzy provided at least one video link to make his point. The Gardai can and have been heavy handed and abusive at times but if Ozzy thinks the video is evidence of Garda abuse then the standard he puts on the Gardai is not realistic. The video I watched does not support the abusive heavy handed allegations he was making but in fact shows the opposite -a Garda pretty laid back and courteous when dealing with people out marching in proximity to another march.
If your article were about 'no good reason to kill a republican' for trying to do a good deed and someone did not agree with your article and trotted out everything bad about republicanism would you really not see it as an attempt to justify the death of the republican? We have seen these arguments in the past -especially in shoot to kill cases of unarmed people, for example, -'the victims should not have been killed but look at at their credentials -it's therefore understandable how security forces make these unfortunate mistakes'.
Ozzy can make his own case but without going back thru the comments I do believe he said he agreed with the title of the article.
The argument you make towards the end also works the other way. When human rights people or journalists highlighted RUC torture or Shoot To Kill another motive was ascribed to them; they were giving succour to terrorism and suchlike. Ozzy referred to the phenomenon himself when he pointed out how people are labelled as being anti-Semitic when in fact they are anti-Israeli terror.
I haven't watched the video but from reading what you say of it I fail to see how he is using it as support for the killing of Garda rather than using it to reaffirm his view that the Gardai are a bad lot. And that as a bad lot he has little sympathy for them. Even if you are right and the video shows nothing of the sort about the Gardaí, his intense dislike of them is not tantamount to advocating anybody killing them.
In the case of the title of the article being No Good Reason To Kill Republicans, I might be tempted to see it as you suggest but it would be built on emotion rather than reason. It is a mistake I have frequently made and am no more immune from the pull of proximity than others. But I would hope to have the consistency not to see it in that way. Enough people who were very critical of the Real IRA back in 2000 and who expressed that criticism in the wake of Joe O'Connor being killed by the Provisionals are not viewed by me as defending his killing. I might have thought different at the time but can no longer remember.
In these matters there has to be space for the widest range of opinion without those expressing it actually facing the charge that they advocate murder. Ironically enough, Adams labelled myself and Tommy Gorman fellow travellers of the Real IRA for opposing his IRA's slaying of Joe O'Connor.
Thank you Anthony. You have put things better than what I could myself.ReplyDelete
Ergo I have little sympathy for the Gardai.
Also my ire is raised by how the mainstream media will jump all over this killing for their own ends. Just like the Maria Cahill case. Same thing.
And I am surprised that your article would suit their purposes..Although I do NOT say that you share their ( the medias ) view...Just that in this one case
You have written here for years. hundreds of pieces. And you allow freedom of censorship down here.
I have trust in you and I think I understand your world view. And I repesct that you served the cause and that you came out the other side.
I Did NOT.. And I have never been a joiner in.
As for Diplock. Please notice I have never mentioned this perps name..Not once.
That was deliberate..I refuse him the oxygen of publicty.. This is my own way of dealing with what I have to say. I don't expect others to do likewise Just that I won't "glorify" Him. Just Like I'd never write that Norweigen perps name who shot all those on that island.
The video I posted a link to. Shows a youngster who relates how a Garda told him to commit suicide. That is it's only purpose from my POV. It backs up what somewhat expect in my memory it was an actual Gard that said it..And NOT a second hand account. My "false" memory. But it still stands. Because I believe it to be true. I never really paid any attention to guards shown in that video, otherwise.
I do get your point and the distinctions you make. I have considered some of his criticisms and I would not say they are wrong. But other things influence me. The context sways me; your article is more closely an eulogy/obituary to one Garda Officer killed in the line of duty. It was a needless death of a Garda who did nothing more offensive than try assist a member of the public. Dredging up all and any ills against the Force as a whole is out of place in this context. I did look at one of the video clips he used to make his point and it baffles me to understand what it is he found so offensive? There was one Garda in the clip, and this Garda does not represent any point Ozzy was trying to make about the force in general, in fact, I thought the Garda handled the situation as good as it could have been handled -so maybe his dislike or lack of respect for the Gardai is excessive and misplaced?
Maybe you are right, and yes I have seen he is not outwardly advocating for Gardai to be killed, it appears that your expression of sympathy at the senseless murder of one seems to have triggered him.
I have never personally been oppressed by the church. Previous generations to me blunted it's power.Doesn't stop me viewing it as horrid though.So I never claimed that as an excuse for my behaviour.
So let's see If I can explain myself more fully.
In my view..I stress these words "my view " Anthony's article was speculating on a link to Republicanism and this here event.. I disagreed..And then tried to set forth a view as to why there is a lack of Respect for Gardai.. other than..repeat other than Republicanism.
I should have realised that Anthony is in Louth and that this story has Local interest to him. Which gives him plenty more reason than I have to comment. I have not tried to have a personal attack.. And I admit to gong overboard due to other "mainstream " media reaction to this story. I believe they are twisting this story for their own ends which are namely: to discredit Republicanism in the first instance and by doing this to discredit Irish Nationalism.. Am I wrong to tackle this on Anthony's article???? Yes. Why did I do so??? Because sometimes those guys( mainstream media ) grab things off the internet to suit their own purposes. And just like I am finding out personally. You have to choose your words carefully. Very easy to have a clear idea in your head..Much different when it's out there in black or white.
Is there ambigiuity in my views, as written??.. Yes there is. Why is it there? Because What I wanted to say that whilst I don't feel sorrow. I do subscribe to the view that bad things happen to good people. And I tried to follow thru the opposite of that remark i.e bad guys emerge unscathed. Without falling into the obvious bear trap.
My thought were only half completed. Hence why things seem left hanging open and open to question. I trust I have gone some way to explain what I was at. Everything else about the Free State is clear and doesn't require explaining.
I just saw your post after I had posted again. That you did not mention the perps name was not something that stood out to me but that you point that out now is helpful. Yes some Gardai do inexcusable things. But others behave in ways that we expect from them and it is a loss to the community if or when such Gardai are killed and they deserve our thanks and sympathy if they are killed trying to assist a member of the community as Garda Golden was doing.
While I agree that the mainstream media and others may use stories to advance their own agendas, the reality is that in the cases of Garda Golden and Maria Cahill it doesn't alter the fundamental facts that what happened to them was wrong - not to mention in Maria Cahill's case the actions of some in PSF have been utterly disgraceful - that was my point about "my world view right or wrong" - just because those you consider your opponents may use any incident to reinforce their views/prejudices etc. does not mean that you should do the same in reverse.ReplyDelete
In reality why does it matter if some people use unfortunate events such as these for their own ends, does that make the underlying events any less wrong? And if you agree then it is an opportunity to stand up with some moral fortitude to say that it is wrong even when (especially when) it is your own "side/group/party" that is at fault.
The obvious Polar opposite to Free State is Denmark. Occupied by Germany they shielded their Jewish citizens by the simple expedient of getting Christians to wear a Yellow Star as well as the jewish pple.. There you go Henry. Denmark survived trial by Fire. Could the Free State? Norway got it's independence in early 20th Century. Count them in. South Korea Henry. Occupied by the Japanese in early 20th Century. Now beating the Japanese in every area Japan excels in. Electronics, autos etc. They have used colonial occupation to beat their former tormentors.A lesson you'll agree Ireland should follow over the use of bombs and bullets. As Anthony said himself Harder to build something up than to destroy something.Ergo the effort that is expired in building something must be admired all the more. Vietnam, Henry. for their sheer tenacity.I'd be real proud to call myself Vietnamese. Would you?
Irish Stocism may have helped us under occupation..It cripples us now in the face of "men in mohair suits"
Rotten state , henry?
A debt mountain of Euro 212 Billion. A debt per person of 60.000 US Dollars second only to Japan at 90,000. That alone would cover it. Do we compare well with Japan on grounds of industry? Infastructure?? exports??? I don't think so. But we run them close on debt. How nice.
But how about emigration???Back again from the 1980's when what 50,000 left per annum???
Under Devalera 1.2 Million left whilst he was "in charge" from 1932 -1960's.
How about that? Only Haiti and Ireland have lower populations NOW than what they did in the 19th Century??? How does that grab you??
BTW I am glad you accept that colonialism has damaged Ireland And I suppose you would agree that the effects are widely felt even today. Any other past occasion I have raised it I was told it was in the past. So I am glad you seem to feel as I do.That it is not quite as past as people say it is.
Henry I purpose that the only solution ..Is to get people to run Ireland in the National Interest..In order to do that you must agree on what the "nation State" is..Is it 32 Counties? or 27?..or 24? or 26?. My view is partition must end before the question of getting the "national Interest" attended to. You think you can do it with 26 Counties? Nada. Won't happen.
Ofc getting unionists to agree will be a hard slog.
In defence of the Free State? Well Ardnacrusha and Airports and the fact that unlike the post WW2 economic boom..Ireland participated in the last World economic boom...And then promptly squandered it's best chance. Maybe we will never get such an "easy" chance again.
And yet this same state will act with maximum efficiency and competence when it wants too. Go figure.
Throw them to the lions. lolouderReplyDelete
"Henry I purpose (sic) that the only solution ..Is to get people to run Ireland in the National Interest..In order to do that you must agree on what the "nation State" is..Is it 32 Counties? or 27?..or 24? or 26?'
What "people"? Republicans? Which faction from the queue of groups at Bodenstown do you propose? What "national interest"? What if the majority of people aren't interested? Which economic model? Who will run the police and army? If you want to change the status quo then you are going to have to put some flesh on the bones of your revolutionary ideas. Just at a guess I would say that if any republican faction will hold any power in this "New Ireland" then a vast majority of Irish citizens will not go with your plan.
thanks for taking time to respond. You finished off with the admonishment 'go figure'.
I'll do my best to disentangle what you present and see if there's anything I can respond to. Though after your performance on this thread I'm really left wondering if there is any point in engaging with you or any others of your reactionary temperament.
You jumped gob first into this thread on Saturday last around lunchtime to give me yet another ad hominem earful... no relevance to either AM's original piece nor to my previous comments save to critique them as garbage and rot.
You came back into the conversation again 24 hrs later to welcome Jermome (aka 'grouch') back to the fold. You acknowledged to 'grouch' you hadn't read the article but none the less had yet another go at poor old HJ and had a go at AM too. You then proceeded to vent your anger at the Gardaí causing all the confusion that followed ... and all that without reading the article!
Its becoming increasingly difficult to take you serious at all Ozzy.
Such behaviour you'll have to admit is quite bizarre.
Like I once advised sean bres it'd suit you better to take a breath and count to ten before jumping in ... restraint of pen and tongue and all that.