Fra Hughes finds sectarianism in the PSNI when it comes to managing the North's bonfire culture. 

 
When is a bonfire not a bonfire? Apparently when it’s being built by antisocial elements hell-bent on destroying their own community, endangering lives and property while putting their own selfish interests before that of society?

That is the rationale being used to remove nationalist bonfires?

The recent heavy-handedness of the police in removing bonfire material from Divis exemplifies the hypocrisy of the state, local political representatives and those who claim to be fighting for equality within our community.

Having witnessed on social media the police deployment into the Divis area in full riot gear, with a military-style operation, saturating Albert Street and the surrounding streets with armoured vehicles to remove what is, in essence, a small insignificant bonfire, when we compare this to their actions in respect of the huge provocative bonfire on the Tigers Bay, Duncairn Garden, New Lodge Road, North Queen Street interface we can see a seismic shift in attitude. The optics do not look good for the Police.

In a gigantic undertaking whereby loyalism was allowed to build a significant sized bonfire on an interface, to weld shut gates that allowed entrance onto the road, where police at times actually appeared be protecting the bonfire and the state and others fully facilitate this illegal edifice, through the abdication of its duties to remove it, the question must be asked, how far has the state of Northern Ireland actually come in the 21st century?

As I witnessed the police removal of the bonfire material from Divis, I was struck by the comparison with the removal of the ‘Tricolour’ from Divis in 1964 leading to four nights of street disturbances known as the ‘Tricolour Riots’ during that year’s elections for Parliament.

The flag had been placed in the window of the Republican party offices in Divis who were running a candidate.

The Tricolour at that time was banned under the ‘flags and emblems act’ and was seen by loyalists, unionists and the state, to be highly provocative. When Ian Paisley called on thousands of Protestants to descend on Belfast City Hall in protest, the Police moved in and forcibly removed the offending flag.

Being unable to gain entrance to the building the Royal Ulster Constabulary simply broke the window, made several arrests, removed the flag and through their actions ignited four nights of serious street disorder.

Now in 2020, we have the police storming Divis again.

This time the rational is not the threat of public disorder by loyalism led by a firebrand political and pseudo-religious preacher but on the pretext that the bonfire is illegal and unwanted by the local population and as such it is within their prerogative under the right ‘to protect the community’ presumably from itself, to remove it.

Bonfires must be removed because they are illegal. They must not be tolerated.

Excuses must not be made by those who build them nor accepted by the state or the media or our elected representatives.

Bonfires in and of themselves become a magnet for drunken anti-social behaviour with their attendant sectarian and race hate messages.

While unionist / loyalist bonfires are facilitated by local councils, the Departments of Justice and Infrastructure, the police and other quasi-official bodies, there will be calls and demands from young nationalists and others to have reciprocal bonfires?

The cowardice and complicity shown by the state towards loyalist bonfires and the violent intolerant attitude displayed towards nationalist bonfires, prove for all to see that sectarianism and discrimination are still the foundations of the state.

Unionist / loyalist bonfires are not only facilitated but celebrated by the state.

The only differences that I can see between the removal of the Tricolour in 1964 and the removal of the bonfire material in 2020 is a time gap of 56 years and in the former instance, Sinn Fein was fully against the provocative police actions in removing the ‘Tricolour’ yet in the latter example Sinn Fein is fully acquiescent if not endorsing the removal of the bonfire material by a group, many still see as an unreformed, partisan, colonial militia, the Police Service of Northern Ireland.

In Derry, in August there are normally huge bonfires related to the’ Siege of Derry ‘.

There are no demands from Nationalist / Republican politicians to ban them, no calls for police and contractors to remove the illegal material, just a total capitulation, and abdication of responsibility by the state in the face of perceived loyalist threats.

The State has not fundamentally changed but sections of the Republican movement have.

They are now part of the establishment endorsing this sectarian discrimination.

While Ian Paisley may be no longer be with us, there are others who carry on his unionist legacy such as former unionist politician now Lord Kilclooney member of the British House Lords

Who tweeted “The Irish Republican violence in West and North Belfast cannot be tolerated. It is a total rejection of everything that John Hume promoted. I hope that the PSNI identifies those responsible and successfully prosecutes them!”

The violence, arrests, prosecutions and incarcerations are all avoidable if we have clear and equal policing of both sides of the divide to include managing illegal bonfires.

Unfortunately, we have neither!

Look, Over There, A Republican Bonfire!

Fra Hughes finds sectarianism in the PSNI when it comes to managing the North's bonfire culture. 

 
When is a bonfire not a bonfire? Apparently when it’s being built by antisocial elements hell-bent on destroying their own community, endangering lives and property while putting their own selfish interests before that of society?

That is the rationale being used to remove nationalist bonfires?

The recent heavy-handedness of the police in removing bonfire material from Divis exemplifies the hypocrisy of the state, local political representatives and those who claim to be fighting for equality within our community.

Having witnessed on social media the police deployment into the Divis area in full riot gear, with a military-style operation, saturating Albert Street and the surrounding streets with armoured vehicles to remove what is, in essence, a small insignificant bonfire, when we compare this to their actions in respect of the huge provocative bonfire on the Tigers Bay, Duncairn Garden, New Lodge Road, North Queen Street interface we can see a seismic shift in attitude. The optics do not look good for the Police.

In a gigantic undertaking whereby loyalism was allowed to build a significant sized bonfire on an interface, to weld shut gates that allowed entrance onto the road, where police at times actually appeared be protecting the bonfire and the state and others fully facilitate this illegal edifice, through the abdication of its duties to remove it, the question must be asked, how far has the state of Northern Ireland actually come in the 21st century?

As I witnessed the police removal of the bonfire material from Divis, I was struck by the comparison with the removal of the ‘Tricolour’ from Divis in 1964 leading to four nights of street disturbances known as the ‘Tricolour Riots’ during that year’s elections for Parliament.

The flag had been placed in the window of the Republican party offices in Divis who were running a candidate.

The Tricolour at that time was banned under the ‘flags and emblems act’ and was seen by loyalists, unionists and the state, to be highly provocative. When Ian Paisley called on thousands of Protestants to descend on Belfast City Hall in protest, the Police moved in and forcibly removed the offending flag.

Being unable to gain entrance to the building the Royal Ulster Constabulary simply broke the window, made several arrests, removed the flag and through their actions ignited four nights of serious street disorder.

Now in 2020, we have the police storming Divis again.

This time the rational is not the threat of public disorder by loyalism led by a firebrand political and pseudo-religious preacher but on the pretext that the bonfire is illegal and unwanted by the local population and as such it is within their prerogative under the right ‘to protect the community’ presumably from itself, to remove it.

Bonfires must be removed because they are illegal. They must not be tolerated.

Excuses must not be made by those who build them nor accepted by the state or the media or our elected representatives.

Bonfires in and of themselves become a magnet for drunken anti-social behaviour with their attendant sectarian and race hate messages.

While unionist / loyalist bonfires are facilitated by local councils, the Departments of Justice and Infrastructure, the police and other quasi-official bodies, there will be calls and demands from young nationalists and others to have reciprocal bonfires?

The cowardice and complicity shown by the state towards loyalist bonfires and the violent intolerant attitude displayed towards nationalist bonfires, prove for all to see that sectarianism and discrimination are still the foundations of the state.

Unionist / loyalist bonfires are not only facilitated but celebrated by the state.

The only differences that I can see between the removal of the Tricolour in 1964 and the removal of the bonfire material in 2020 is a time gap of 56 years and in the former instance, Sinn Fein was fully against the provocative police actions in removing the ‘Tricolour’ yet in the latter example Sinn Fein is fully acquiescent if not endorsing the removal of the bonfire material by a group, many still see as an unreformed, partisan, colonial militia, the Police Service of Northern Ireland.

In Derry, in August there are normally huge bonfires related to the’ Siege of Derry ‘.

There are no demands from Nationalist / Republican politicians to ban them, no calls for police and contractors to remove the illegal material, just a total capitulation, and abdication of responsibility by the state in the face of perceived loyalist threats.

The State has not fundamentally changed but sections of the Republican movement have.

They are now part of the establishment endorsing this sectarian discrimination.

While Ian Paisley may be no longer be with us, there are others who carry on his unionist legacy such as former unionist politician now Lord Kilclooney member of the British House Lords

Who tweeted “The Irish Republican violence in West and North Belfast cannot be tolerated. It is a total rejection of everything that John Hume promoted. I hope that the PSNI identifies those responsible and successfully prosecutes them!”

The violence, arrests, prosecutions and incarcerations are all avoidable if we have clear and equal policing of both sides of the divide to include managing illegal bonfires.

Unfortunately, we have neither!

19 comments:

  1. 29 police officers injured and not once does the author comment on that. Republicans (and loyalists) seem to have this innate belief that they have the right to kill or injure their fellow human beings. The police were in an impossible 'damned if I do damned if I don't' position, pulled this way and that by political and community influences. Unionists slammed them for standing taking the barrage of bricks and bottles from drunken scumbags with no sign of making any arrests. The men in uniform are just doing their job, obeying orders and do not deserve what was given to them. Maybe Fra could comment on that.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Peter - police, republicans, loyalist and military all suffer from the belief that they have the right to kill or injure their fellow human beings. I feel the author has r=tired to address the issue of sectarianism that he feels shapes policy within the PSNI. A force largely unionist arguably with a DUP mindset gives rise to such suspicions.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Nonsense, the police and military must account for their actions and in this day and age that is very strict. And the PSNI will bend over backwards to stay on the right side of PSF. The PSNI would not be 'mostly unionist' if it wasn't for threats against and demonisation of catholic police recruits. You've been living in the south too long. The author is extremely biased and not condemning the injury of so many police makes that clear.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Account to who? To this day they are covering up for numerous atrocities throughout the conflict. In Afghanistan they are under investigation for war crimes which they are trying to cover up. The PSNI continue to lie in court; the continue to lie on sworn affidavit. You are still living in a bubble. The threat against Catholic police recruit probably makes only a negligible difference given that the people making the threat are for the most part incompetent and incapable. It is unionist and would remain unionist and broadly DUP.
      The author might be biased but he does not have to be balanced. He wants to focus on the sectarian manner in which the bonfires are policed.
      Kenova will show us just how little the security services have progressed.

      Delete
  4. It was PSF that wanted the bonfire moved, because they didn't want drunken fleggers wrecking the place, not unionists. So how is the policing sectarian? The police move in and adopt a defensive mode, how is that sectarian? If they were DUPers they would have beat all round them but they can't because they have the policing board, police ombudsman and the DoJ watching their every move. Which of those bodies is sectarian? The article is an anti-police hatchet job that doesn't even acknowledge the 29 young men and women who were injured.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Because when SF want loyalist bonfires removed or the hate effigies removed from loyalist bonfires the approach by the PSNI is much more relaxed. Can you show one equivalent where the same level of military force was used to deal with a loyalist bonfire?
      They don't beta all around them at the moment because beating all round them is not required at the policy level like it was back in our day. If it was required it would happen. The perceived level of threat to the state is not considered the same.
      If the PSNI were anything like the decent old force you seek to depict it as, why the cover up in relation to the past, the lying, the withholding of the files, the delay, the deferral, the defiance of the Ombudsman to the point where a judicial review had to be pursued?
      The article is not an anti-police hatchet job but asks questions that should be asked of any police force that uses such might to deal with a fairly minor issue compared against what the North has been used to.
      You need to get it into your head that the security forces are as enamored to killing as anyone else. Probably one reason that governments throughout the world kill more people than anybody else. Much as the old British military murder machine has been up to its neck in perpetrating war crimes abroad. And they did not just injure 29 civilians: they murdered many more than that. So perhaps the writer sees these things in the round.
      I remember as a 14 year old being spread-eagled over a radiator in Musgrave Street barracks and beaten for hours by a detective. Some people think the police would never do that. It made me very cynical about the good police narrative. Experience is a good teacher.

      Delete
  5. I've been beaten by the police as well, and for fuck all. And I've had the drug squad plant drugs on me. I'm in no way saying that all cops are great. I'm under no illusions as to what goes on. The article accuses the PSNI of sectarianism relating to this bonfire. I don't agree, I think the author is biased. Commanders have difficult decisions to make, this one obviously fucked up because he got so many of his men and women injured. What ever reason he had for his plan of action and the political weighing up to do, I doubt very much that his decision was based on what church the drunken fleggers were baptised in.

    ReplyDelete
  6. LOL I was at the Oval peacefully watching the game and the next minute I'm on the deck with a riot cop beating me. You'd have been cheering them on you Glens bastard!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In full voice Shouting "Yes, Yes, RUC" !!!!

      Delete
  7. Anthony

    That was a dreadful experience for you to go through at the age of 14. No doubt you were not the only minor to have been abused by the RUC at the time. More should surely have been done then to highlight such brutality inflicted on kids.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Barry - dragged out of bed at 6 o'clock on a freezing February morning, slammed face down in a saracen, driven about 300 yards where I then felt my mate being thrown in on top of me, and then off to Musgrave Street for the brutality. I always remember the old bastard - grey hair and glasses. By the time he was finished I reckon he hated me as much as I hated him as the fucker never got a word out of me.

      Delete
  8. @AM - I'm always curious about what happens after incidents like this. Did you ever see the RUC man again? And if so, what was said?

    Belfast being small as it is, so many people must have encountered people from their past like this.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't believe I did. But who knows with the way they used to employ relay teams during interrogation in later years?

      Delete
  9. I meant if you had heard of anyone beaten by RUC or prison officers encountering their assailants in public?

    I remember reading a book with interviews with former Maze officers. One of them said he could "go for a pint on the Falls Road" and be safe as he treated the prisoners decently. He openly stated that some of his colleagues used brutality and some of them were killed. I think it was possibly one of Colin Crawford's books, but I could be wrong.

    I wonder if the interrogators truly hated the people they were beating, or whether it was a means to an end.

    The psychology of it all is fascinating. The Guardian had an interview with an ex-RUC man who talked euphemistically about "slap and tickle" some years ago, if memory serves me correctly.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. on a couple of occasions we ran into Blanket screws and others. We met a number of screws (not Blanket) in the Empire one day and they offered to buy us a round. We declined and bought them one instead. I met a Blanket screw driving a bus one day from Armagh to Belfast. I just sat right behind him to his left for the duration of the journey.

      Delete
  10. How interesting. Alastair Little recounted (in his book Give a Boy a Gun) a story of how he and other former UVF men were in Kosovo on some sort of peace studies event and heard a rendition of the Billy Boys from a bar. They went to see who it was an it was a group of (former, I think) RUC men. From what I recall, there was no love lost between the two groups and it was tense.

    An interesting story in an otherwise below average book, I thought.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have met Alastair but have not read his book.
      I have met plenty of former RUC and currently serving PSNI at political conferences in England for the most part. There was never any acrimony or tension despite some vigorous debate.
      You might find this of some use.

      Delete
  11. I remember one cop in plain clothes trying to drink in a bar on Donegal Pass. Bad move. Wherever he went there was a forcefield of about 2 meters all around him then the owner told him to get tae fuck lol

    ReplyDelete