Lesley Stock ✒ with the second part of a conversation she had with the author Richard O'Rawe.

Inside 

Is £11,000 worth the subsequent trials endured in prison?

Ricky was arrested in 1977, for robbing a Northern Bank ... No! Not that Heist – but he has managed to write about that too!! He and 3 others had robbed a Northern Bank at Mallusk ... Got away as well, until the van they were in crashed in the White City in North Belfast.

Ricky relates quite matter-of-factly how he made his way through gardens, wondering what he should do next. He hid himself in a hut, while hearing police sirens searching for him on the outside, while he searched for his next move. I can only imagine the panic, the mind whirring and heavy breathing that was done while in that temporary sanctuary. To cut a relatively long story short, Ricky found himself arrested and being interviewed in relation to the robbery.

‘Noble cause corruption’ - I’d heard the term, and perhaps, once in a past-life would have possibly agreed. Thank God, my integrity never had to be challenged in that scenario where the end justifies the means. The term means basically, we know the truth, but to make sure it sticks, we’ll have to perhaps pull a few untruths. And so, a ‘witness’, an RUC officer, who Ricky had never clapped eyes on, made a statement that he had observed Ricky from start to finish of his ‘escape’. No forensic evidence, no other evidence, as of course, Ricky wasn’t about to ‘squeal’. And as a result – Ricky – Volunteer O’Rawe, was sentenced to a ‘stretch’ inside Long Kesh in the infamous H-Blocks.

It was during Ricky’s time in the H-Blocks that the blanket protest started on 14th September 1976, with a newly imprisoned Kieran Nugent, refusing to wear prison uniform. The Special Category Status for ‘political prisoners’ had been phased out and so the prisoners in the H Blocks stripped off and refused to wear the prison uniform. The Blanket protest had officially begun!

The prisoners only had the blankets in the cells – so was born the Blanket men. They were locked in their cells for 24 hours a day (presumably as punishment) and left their cells once a month for a 30-minute visit with family. Now, whilst I find it hard to sympathise such is my own view on law and order etc, the human in me cannot fathom how difficult this would have been on these men, and of course, their mental health. Lockdown has taught us all that isolation, (although in small doses, is something which many of us relish,) can be a nightmare on the head! Brendan Hughes had been in charge of the prisoners, and it was Brendan Aka The Dark, who instigated the ‘Dirty Protest’. Prisoners refused to wash, went to the toilet in their cells and then proceeded to smear their faeces on their walls. I don’t think I was able to hide my disgust and will never fathom out why these men did this animalistic act ... So, I asked, I needed to know Why?

Ricky explained that one had to remember that being in the IRA was like being in the Army…. Rules and orders were not there to be questioned or broken. With a laugh I stated the obvious – ‘I’d have been shit in any paramilitary organisation or in the British Army!’ The organisation was one of discipline and so – if the command ordered it, you did it! As this immaculately dressed man explains the hardships of those days, being beaten by the ‘screws’, having beards down to their belly buttons, living in their own filth, having broken all the windows in the cells, endured the cold for nearly 4 years, and I still find it incomprehensible that anyone would put themselves through that, through days of (albeit in many folks eyes self inflicted) misery and hurt. Was it ‘self inflicted’ in the blanket men’s eyes? I don’t think that any of them thought this, they were Republicans, they were fighting for their ‘rights’ and perhaps in some way ‘honour. For those of you who think I am glorifying this story, I, cannot condone, nor make sense of the actions of the blanket men, or what was to become the hunger strikers. I can merely tell you the feelings I got and thoughts I had when hearing this testimony. I tried to put myself in their shoes. I still can’t comprehend going through what they went through, perhaps because the only thing I’ve ever truly believed in was family and keeping my integrity. I have often said, I have never believed in dying for any piece of green grass, but one thing is certain, these men had conviction for their cause and Ricky is very clear that the same more than likely held true for the loyalists.

The first of the two hunger strikes started in October 1980. One of the first men who went on it had made Brendan Hughes promise that they wouldn’t allow him to die. Seven men started this hunger strike, but even while negotiations were on-going on 18th December when Sean McKenna lapsed into a coma, Brendan kept his word, and the hunger strike was called off.

The second hunger strike was started knowing there Had to be deaths, so they decided to stagger the hunger strikes. By this stage, Bobby Sands was O.C. of the H Blocks, and as he was going to be the first to refuse food. O.C. was then passed to Bik McFarlane and Ricky then was made P.R.O. 

I was curious, and I suppose always wanted to know just how the hunger strike was started. Did the men themselves put their names in a hat? How were they chosen to die? There were two criteria I was told. The leadership were well aware that, during a hunger strike, public opinion was everything and their ‘crimes’ should reinforce the vision of the Republican Movement. Hunger strikers must be ‘clean’ of any crimes and actions of the like of the Shankill Butchers. Now to me this was a misnomer given the fact that these men had been on the dirty protest and many of whom were incarcerated for causing the deaths of human beings. The IRA needed these men to be martyrs. 

And criteria number 2? They must be ready to die. So, all the prospective hunger strikers put their names forward. I asked the question, which, when I was given the answer, I have to admit, I had a ‘moment’. I’m not even sure if I made an audible gasp, but I know I had to take a few seconds to compose myself. And in those seconds, what did I feel for this man across the marble table? I will be completely honest, I felt sorrow, for the question was ‘And how were they chosen to go on the strike?’  

‘Bik and I chose them’ was the simple reply.. Then every striker was sent in a communication from the ‘Leadership’ asking them to consider their position very carefully because in all probability, they would be dead in a couple of months. And so, on 1 March 1981, Sands led the hunger strike which would indeed lift his status to martyrdom.

⏩ Lesley Stock is a former PSNI and RUC Officer currently involved in community work. 

From The Eyes Of An Adversary ➖ Inside

Lesley Stock ✒ with the second part of a conversation she had with the author Richard O'Rawe.

Inside 

Is £11,000 worth the subsequent trials endured in prison?

Ricky was arrested in 1977, for robbing a Northern Bank ... No! Not that Heist – but he has managed to write about that too!! He and 3 others had robbed a Northern Bank at Mallusk ... Got away as well, until the van they were in crashed in the White City in North Belfast.

Ricky relates quite matter-of-factly how he made his way through gardens, wondering what he should do next. He hid himself in a hut, while hearing police sirens searching for him on the outside, while he searched for his next move. I can only imagine the panic, the mind whirring and heavy breathing that was done while in that temporary sanctuary. To cut a relatively long story short, Ricky found himself arrested and being interviewed in relation to the robbery.

‘Noble cause corruption’ - I’d heard the term, and perhaps, once in a past-life would have possibly agreed. Thank God, my integrity never had to be challenged in that scenario where the end justifies the means. The term means basically, we know the truth, but to make sure it sticks, we’ll have to perhaps pull a few untruths. And so, a ‘witness’, an RUC officer, who Ricky had never clapped eyes on, made a statement that he had observed Ricky from start to finish of his ‘escape’. No forensic evidence, no other evidence, as of course, Ricky wasn’t about to ‘squeal’. And as a result – Ricky – Volunteer O’Rawe, was sentenced to a ‘stretch’ inside Long Kesh in the infamous H-Blocks.

It was during Ricky’s time in the H-Blocks that the blanket protest started on 14th September 1976, with a newly imprisoned Kieran Nugent, refusing to wear prison uniform. The Special Category Status for ‘political prisoners’ had been phased out and so the prisoners in the H Blocks stripped off and refused to wear the prison uniform. The Blanket protest had officially begun!

The prisoners only had the blankets in the cells – so was born the Blanket men. They were locked in their cells for 24 hours a day (presumably as punishment) and left their cells once a month for a 30-minute visit with family. Now, whilst I find it hard to sympathise such is my own view on law and order etc, the human in me cannot fathom how difficult this would have been on these men, and of course, their mental health. Lockdown has taught us all that isolation, (although in small doses, is something which many of us relish,) can be a nightmare on the head! Brendan Hughes had been in charge of the prisoners, and it was Brendan Aka The Dark, who instigated the ‘Dirty Protest’. Prisoners refused to wash, went to the toilet in their cells and then proceeded to smear their faeces on their walls. I don’t think I was able to hide my disgust and will never fathom out why these men did this animalistic act ... So, I asked, I needed to know Why?

Ricky explained that one had to remember that being in the IRA was like being in the Army…. Rules and orders were not there to be questioned or broken. With a laugh I stated the obvious – ‘I’d have been shit in any paramilitary organisation or in the British Army!’ The organisation was one of discipline and so – if the command ordered it, you did it! As this immaculately dressed man explains the hardships of those days, being beaten by the ‘screws’, having beards down to their belly buttons, living in their own filth, having broken all the windows in the cells, endured the cold for nearly 4 years, and I still find it incomprehensible that anyone would put themselves through that, through days of (albeit in many folks eyes self inflicted) misery and hurt. Was it ‘self inflicted’ in the blanket men’s eyes? I don’t think that any of them thought this, they were Republicans, they were fighting for their ‘rights’ and perhaps in some way ‘honour. For those of you who think I am glorifying this story, I, cannot condone, nor make sense of the actions of the blanket men, or what was to become the hunger strikers. I can merely tell you the feelings I got and thoughts I had when hearing this testimony. I tried to put myself in their shoes. I still can’t comprehend going through what they went through, perhaps because the only thing I’ve ever truly believed in was family and keeping my integrity. I have often said, I have never believed in dying for any piece of green grass, but one thing is certain, these men had conviction for their cause and Ricky is very clear that the same more than likely held true for the loyalists.

The first of the two hunger strikes started in October 1980. One of the first men who went on it had made Brendan Hughes promise that they wouldn’t allow him to die. Seven men started this hunger strike, but even while negotiations were on-going on 18th December when Sean McKenna lapsed into a coma, Brendan kept his word, and the hunger strike was called off.

The second hunger strike was started knowing there Had to be deaths, so they decided to stagger the hunger strikes. By this stage, Bobby Sands was O.C. of the H Blocks, and as he was going to be the first to refuse food. O.C. was then passed to Bik McFarlane and Ricky then was made P.R.O. 

I was curious, and I suppose always wanted to know just how the hunger strike was started. Did the men themselves put their names in a hat? How were they chosen to die? There were two criteria I was told. The leadership were well aware that, during a hunger strike, public opinion was everything and their ‘crimes’ should reinforce the vision of the Republican Movement. Hunger strikers must be ‘clean’ of any crimes and actions of the like of the Shankill Butchers. Now to me this was a misnomer given the fact that these men had been on the dirty protest and many of whom were incarcerated for causing the deaths of human beings. The IRA needed these men to be martyrs. 

And criteria number 2? They must be ready to die. So, all the prospective hunger strikers put their names forward. I asked the question, which, when I was given the answer, I have to admit, I had a ‘moment’. I’m not even sure if I made an audible gasp, but I know I had to take a few seconds to compose myself. And in those seconds, what did I feel for this man across the marble table? I will be completely honest, I felt sorrow, for the question was ‘And how were they chosen to go on the strike?’  

‘Bik and I chose them’ was the simple reply.. Then every striker was sent in a communication from the ‘Leadership’ asking them to consider their position very carefully because in all probability, they would be dead in a couple of months. And so, on 1 March 1981, Sands led the hunger strike which would indeed lift his status to martyrdom.

⏩ Lesley Stock is a former PSNI and RUC Officer currently involved in community work. 

56 comments:

  1. I sense a ditsy quality from Stock's writing; is she contriving naivety to serve her own motives for avoiding the violent and sordid background of her own organization, the RUC? I mean if one were truly trying to understand how the blanket protest transitioned into the dirty protest concluding in a hunger-strike, then is her failure to mention about systemic brutality of defenseless naked men an indication of her ignorance, or, her intention? Or were the beatings, in her eyes, also self-inflicted or just well deserved? As a recipient of a severe beating in Castlereagh from 2 of her colleagues reeking of alcohol and suffering from hang-overs I can certainly imagine what running the daily gauntlet of Screws in the H-Blocks would have been like. I doubt RO'R would have not have recalled the abusive nature of drunken and sober sectarian screws during his recall of his days in the Blocks.

    Note: In Booker's Dozen she humorously recounts being on duty in the RUC with a seemingly harmless hang-over to anyone else but herself -many innocent Nationalists suffered the price for RUC hang-overs. Further, many people suffered at the hands of corrupt RUC men and women. Stock may not have been the worst of them but that might have more to do with when she was a member because I figure she would have have been a loyal colleague during the worst of the Troubles.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Christy I get where you're coming from on this.
      I find Lesley's surface-skating over the underlying causes of conflict as equally frustrating and disturbing as you evidently do.
      (Given the injustices a corrupt system foisted upon you personally, I can scarcely imagine how great the hurtful feelings her use of the phrase ‘Noble cause corruption’ evoked for you).

      Though the piece overall is generally well-written I had to re-read the opening paragraph several times to make sense of them. Did she think Ricky and his comrades were to be the personal beneficiaries of the £11k ????

      Delete
  2. Walsh - since you address me with merely my surname. I let Ricky read and approve the piece saying ANY changes he felt were necessary I would change.....Seems that he was happy enough that it was a fair enough translation of the chat we had.... As for keeping the money - Of course I knew they weren't going to which makes it all the more ironic that they'd be subjected to that for the 'organisation'.

    ReplyDelete
  3. HJ

    Ditsy is not a term I've ever used before but I feel it accurate for a number of things; alluding to RO'R profiting from the 11k.

    Overall I find her writing insulting as if because she is interviewing a former POW and being published on the TPQ that her own behaviour is of less concern. How hard is it to get dismissed from the RUC for professional misconduct?? No easy achievement to my knowledge. Maybe it has caused her to reflect on the mistreatment of others but I think not.

    Had she wrote anything that suggested that she was grappling with her own biases or prejudices then I'd get the motive behind whatever exercise she is trying to achieve or reveal. She started out thinking that the Blanket men had contrived and self inflicted their own conditions and nothing in her writing suggests she has learned anything other than, without his Blanket, RO'R dresses like anyone else in society. Not exactly an ah-ha realisation or sign of deeper understanding of who RO'R was, is, or his circumstances.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Christy,
      as wordy as I sometimes like to be I had to dictionary check 'ditsy' (LOL). Knowing something of your own story I really understood your response.

      I have no more of an axe to grind with Lesley personally than I have with anyone else who consciously or unconsciously misrepresents or misunderstands the essential nature of conflict; conflict which eventually culminates in life destructive violence.

      My best hunch, a bit like yours, is that Leslie is working through her own stuff. She's on a similar journey as that of many of us who visit here.

      Maybe we ought give her a chance to catch up?

      Delete
  4. I found this a great piece Lesley - as Henry Joy said, well written. As one of the former blanketmen you write about I really like the way you are seeking to engage and sounding remarkably non-judgemental while doing it. Yeah, there are some things I could take issue with but they are minor.

    I think some of the points Christy and Henry Joy raise have no reason to be addressed in the type of the piece you are trying to write but I do feel it would be beneficial if a republican was to talk with you in the same way you have talked to Richard. That would seek to tease out how you address some of the very real concerns republicans have about the RUC.

    I don't think either you or Christy addressing each other by surnames does anything for civil discussion. Common courtesy would work much better no matter how robust the exchanges happen to be. And yes, you returned the serve but best not to.
    It is not something however that TPQ will seek to police. It might be impolite but it is hardly an insult.

    Keep writing - the pieces are being so well read.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think the word used for Henry's description of my writing 'insulting'... I refuse to be brought into the conversation (YET AGAIN) regarding the RUC colleagues.... I have explained MY position on how I conducted myself enough times. If bull headed republicans don't want to accept that, then I can't - nor will I explain any more. What many who contribute on here think is that I have to change my views to somehow accept honour republicanism. I won't and whilst I have said before I completely understand how men and women joined the republican movement, I will neither stick up for that, nor ever condone the murder of so many of their own people. Just as I will NEVER condone the brutality and insufferable treatment meted out by members of state forces - or indeed prison officers. If my writing is so 'insulting' I'd advise those who feel like that to scroll on by.....

      Delete
    2. AM if you check it out you'll find the umbrage I've taken with Leslie has invariably arisen from her follow on comments rather than from her pieces per se.

      Delete
    3. entitled to take umbrage with whoever you want Henry Joy - Just as whomever can take umbrage with you. It is not a walk on eggshells blog. We will protect writers from abuse and bullying but we haven't had any of that here.

      Delete
    4. Lesley / NRH - you don't have to accept any aspect of republicanism or its narrative in order to be able to write here. You are free to disagree vehemently with every thought I or others disseminate. This blog is not the equivalent of Gay Conversion Therapy where people with unapproved ideas are not welcome and must be worked on to cope with their wicked thoughts.
      People don't like your stuff? Too bad. You set out your stall just the way you are doing and it will be fine here. If your thinking doesn't trouble someone, then it is not sharp enough to make the cut. It does not matter whose feathers you ruffle.
      This is not like one of those pages where the Facebook Pharisees assemble to pass judgement on all us sinners and howl like they have just received an electric shock when offered an alternative idea.

      Delete
  5. Lesser/AM

    No insult intended, I just naturally addressed LS in a way I thought she relates to, cops and screws generally just barked surnames.

    Nor do I expect her to change her spots. The articles might be considered progressive or enlightened on a site like itstillonlythursday and I don't really read stuff there because it's is self-serving drivel. I could accept the articles at face value as inoffensive mush but what point is there in that? The greatest discovery she seems to have learned about RO'R is that he no longer wishes to go unwashed or dress in a blanket. I can't explain why ROR is ok about that or that he insist that she cover other things that she choose to omit. LS was writing her own pieces and he left her to it in the way she has chosen to do it. He likely sees it as inoffensive and probably did not want to pressure her to include things that were/are important to him and how the dirty protest came about... I would imagine he too might have cringed at the self-inflicted bit and airbrushing the acts of sadistic brutality. As a frequent reader here I wanted to read about what, if any, conflict that created in the author given her political background. I have subsequently gotten my answer on that.


    ReplyDelete
  6. Lesser Stokes

    For clarity, I am taking issue with what you have written and not you personally. Among other things, 'The human in you' wrote "For those of you who think I am glorifying this story, I, cannot condone, nor make sense of the actions of the blanket men, or what was to become the hunger strikers."

    But, by omission, you condone and sympathise oppression and sadistic brutality that created men like RO'R. You glorify or are sympathetic to 'Noble cause corruption'. Your concept of what is honourable has seen innocent people spend years in prison or brutally murdered, for example, Nora McCabe was a neighbour of mine and noble cause corruption murdered her with a plastic bullet and then ensured her killer escaped justice. You are blind to your own reality and how it has affected or influenced those you, and your former colleagues, abused and now feel threatened by.

    You might not agree with RO'R but why does the 'human in you' refuse to recognise that they were right to refuse to run the daily gauntlet of beatings and inhumane treatment? Your failure to tackle those thorny issues means your article is not simply unfinished but intentionally disingenuous.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Lesley... my phones predictive text changed your name to Lesser, sorry about that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. that's disappointing Christy! I thought Lesser had a nice ring to it. A bit like Wolfie when we are talking with Wolfsbane.

      Delete
  8. My two bits for what's it is worth is....I learnt nothing. The pieces are called From The Eyes Of An Adversary ➖ Inside, so far it reads like a poor review of Richard O'Rawes excellent books on the 'how's and why's' he and countless other young men ended up in the H-Blocks wrapped in a blanket.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. your two bits are always worth something Frankie - at least to the Quillers.
      I think it was you who first started calling us that!

      Delete
  9. Lesley,

    as AM has pointed out we're all free to take as little or as much umbrage as one wishes. I have challenged some of the positions you've taken in your comments; the criminalisation of political prisoners in particular. Do you believe all of the men and women caught up in the conflict were criminals?
    Difference is I don't. I believe most of them were involved in a heroic response to a supremacist regime and that but for political Unionism's unconstitutional and anti-democratic interventions neither the Easter Rebellion, the Northern State nor the ensuing phases of political violence, nor internment, nor thousands of POW's of all hues would ever have come about.

    Had Unionism not threatened violence to oppose the constitutional move to grant Home Rule there'd be no such thing as an Irish independent state. The Irish, the Scots, the Welsh and English would all be carrying U.K. passports.

    Now that's hardly a republican position!

    ReplyDelete
  10. Francie

    I read them with that expectation but without considering the Nationalist/Republican experience as the downtrodden and oppressed nothing was achieved.

    In absence of pertinent formative and motivating elements other things things struck me. LS makes off the cuff remarks that she is not even aware of how they manifest in real consequences for the lives or liberty of those on the receiving end. The RUC was disbanded for its 'noble cause activities that destroyed lives.

    I would love to read something that actually had some meat on it rather than just fluff.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Aye , because the RUC never suffered at the hands of Republicans even before 69.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I think Lesley has tried quite valiantly to get into the shoes of Republican prisoners in her conversations with Richard O'Rawe which coming from where she is coming from must be very challenging. It is to your credit, Lesley that you develop this skill of empathy; a quality which is necessary to help those involved in the NI conflict to make sense of their experiences.

    TPQ plays an invaluable role in just such processes.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Regardless of what is taking place in this discussion which might be more down to individual personalities who engage with republicans in the same way they engage with Lesley - their own house style rather than reading off from a republican catechism - there is an inherited trait within republicanism which is very intolerant and abhors being disagreed with. And it replicates itself right across the republican spectrum. Often we can see on social media the same strident approach to dissent that we see from Shinnerbots. There is endless waffle about traitors and anybody suggesting the IRA was defeated is howled down while the pretence is maintained that republicans are still fighting a war. The preaching that goes on from the Facebook Revolutionaries has a remarkably similar tone to that from the Facebook Pharisees and their scripture squawking.
      I never go looking for it but it occasionally comes across my feed. Dixie asks me every now and then if I saw this comment or that comment. I invariably say no. He has more patience for it than I have. My eyebrows raise when I hear some that never spent a day in jail and never will tear into those that did countless years over some arcane or irrelevant ideological difference.
      Richard has challenged this firmly and goes as far as to identify a fascistic streak within republicanism, wholly incapable of accepting dissent.
      TPQ seeks to avoid that type of intolerance. It does not want the precious or the pompous and those inflated with their own bull.
      Lesley comes here as an ex-cop. She is very welcome but there will be friction because how often do people on this blog get a chance to debate things with somebody who was once in the RUC and makes no apologies for it?
      Lesley does not have to change her spots, to cite Christy, to be here. Nor does anyone else. There is no entrance test to feature here or mea culpa required. People do not come here as penitents. There is no confession required nor absolution from some republican priest.
      Carry on as you are Lesley - you'll just become part of the furniture much like everybody else here regardless of the views you hold.

      Delete
    2. Just to add to AMS response and my own contributions. I respect that LS has put herself out. And I may be throwing some hard punches her way but do not think I am throwing any foul ones.

      Delete
    3. I totally understand and agree AM,
      there is indeed an intolerant streak running through republicanism.

      However, I feel its erroneous to call it 'fascist'. Once such labelling has been introduced, and as with Godwin's law and Nazism references, you can be sure the debate is coming closer to an end. By this point the exchanges have descended into mere name calling and a trading of insults.
      I think its more accurate to label such behaviour as 'cultish', and let's face it cultish behaviour eventually emerges in most groupings, especially among it's most enthusiastic adherents. Its not just applicable to republicanism in Ireland though; we only have to look to the US to see similar bollox behaviour. In fact blinkered fundamentalism emerges across all domains. We all know 'foodie fundamentalists' and even 'yoga fundamentalists'. This stuff is but a function of grouping.

      And so back to fascism; a beast of a completely different colour.

      "As an ideology, fascism typically centres around extreme nationalism and an opposition to democracy and liberalism."

      I'm pretty convinced that political Unionism and Loyalism fills those clothes much more neatly than did ever Irish Republicanism or Irish Nationalism.

      And that evaluation sir, I'll respectfully contend is neither bull nor pompous!

      Delete
    4. Henry Joy - I have always resiled from calling it fascist myself for the very reasons you point out. I think fascistic is as far as we can go as that is more a description of form rather than content. And cultic is as good a term as any. I think much the same applies to labels like Stalinist. Stalinesque is as far as I would go. The Facebook Revolutionaries are forever hurling Stalinist and Trot labels at each other. I like many others just switch off. I suppose it is the regressive left for you.

      Delete
  13. Steve R

    There are no doubt many reasons why people joined the RUC as there are for those who joined the IRA. In the context of the Blanketmen, dirty protest and hungerstrike, I can't think of any comparable example and maybe you can provide one?

    LS has written an article wherein she emphasised that she is neither sympathetic nor condones naked prisoners response to the daily sadistic brutality of the screws. In her failure to address that in her consideration tends to confirm for me that she condones the abuse and believes it to have been deserved(self-inflicted). She herself was an active participant in what she refers to 'noble cause corruption'. I am not sympathetic nor would I condone her concept of justice.

    Whatever LS intention, her article reveals more to me about her and not RO'R.



    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Christy,

      Probably from..Const Thomas James Forbes

      Died 8 April 1942, aged 40

      Fatally wounded in an exchange of gunfire trying to arrest IRA gunmen.

      And the approx 60+ murdered by Republicans since the 1940's up until the Blanket protest started in the mid 70's.

      All of those had family members some of which undoubtedly were spurred into joining the RUC after the murder of their loved one, and no doubt their friends joined up too. I know it was certainly the case for some of my own family members.

      Delete
  14. This is NOT the finished piece. However, I'm not sure labelling me as an active participant in the abuse suffered at the hands of some of my colleagues is very a) correct b) helpful - for a start please remember in '80's I was still at school....
    Please don't continue to assume you know about me nor what I did to people in the communities I served..... I don't think I've labelled anyone else here purely based on their political outlook.... I'd appreciate not being labelled as a monster, as some of my colleagues obviously were. Then again, in that time, there were monsters in every section of the community.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think there is always a grey area in terms of what culpability the individual carries for the actions of the institution. The purist approach is to label all individuals with the full weight to the collective guilt of the institution. I am far from persuaded that this works as it can sound too much like virtual signalling rooted in formalism. Those who seek to take the moral high ground are often trapped on it when the tide goes out.
      I doubt anybody is depicting you as a monster. You have a different experience from your detractors and they speak from their own experience and you from a different one. I think it is useful that these things can be discussed without insult or airbrushing.

      Delete
  15. Lesley

    I was in no way implying that you are or were a monster. I was trying to highlight that any idea of 'noble cause corruption' as some sort of benign practice within the security forces has resulted in terrible consequences for innocent people. I am no fan of Jamie Bryson but would not support the rules being bent or ignored in any attempt to secure his conviction. Given what I do know about you informs my speculation on what sort of cop I think that you would have been at the height of the Troubles. I also have knowledge and experience with the Diplock System of justice that it was designed to put men like RO'R and myself away for many years whether we were innocent or not.

    You have already made some definitive statements, and omissions, that sit uneasy with me and I do not think that you will contradict or retract them in any concluding installment. To me, your writing about RO'R is akin to writing about Beethoven's life and talents and omitting the fact that he was deaf.

    I would welcome any written submissions from you or anyone else from your community but I am not going to just accept it if it jars with the reality that I know. I would not want to discourage you but you ought to expect that you might face a tough audience. I can understand that meeting RO'R might have been a big deal for you, and it is one I do respect; however I view it in equal terms in that he also met with you where he views the RUC in the same way that you view the IRA.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Anthony,
    Intolerance within Republicanism, hogwash! Anymore comments like that, you'll get a visit in the night. Hahahahaha, who'd be a republican? We fucking hate each other, I don't think we like ourselves, leave one of us in a hall of mirrors long enough and they'd be carnage, I can picture the scene an attendant comes in, glass everywhere, 'what happened here?' 'Didn't like the way that quisling bastard was looking at me' hahaha.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. David - it is a serious turn off for people. They just reach for the figurative remote control and switch the channel the minute its starts.

      Delete
    2. Your comment about people waffling without spending a day in prison, resonated, sums my generation up. We're delusional. We're the recipients of a massive bit of serendipity and won't accept it. I'm 39 tomorrow, so I'd have been what, 15 when the gfa was signed, we dodged a bullet and yet we all think we're revolutionaries.
      I'll tell you a story that sums my generation up. These monitored sites are not the place for gossip, I'll be vague. A friend of mine asked an older friend of mine to do something illegal, nothing serious, enough to have his license revoked so naturally he told him no, my mate then says to me 'his balls have fell off' I replied 'what are you on about ya tit, the man was an operator, our generation idea of an operation is writing IRA on a gable' This went on 'til we exchanged blows, ended up rolling about the street like a couple of headers. We've got a diseased mindset, we all think we have the answer. For every Republican like yourself who will have a muse over the scenario, there is a thousand head cases who just shout gibberish. No wonder people turn off.

      Delete
    3. Enjoy your birthday tomorrow. I am a firm believer in people who did not spend a day in jail having their say. But for them to pontificate and shake their fists at those who did the heavy lifting for no good reason, that's another thing. I saw Laurence McKeown being lambasted once by a merchant who never spent a day inside, avoided doing anything to go inside, had no problem winding up the clock but would never be there when it struck - and here he was calling Laurence a waster and a traitor. What possible time would anybody serious about their republicanism give to someone like that? There is much I would not agree with Laurence on but to call him a waster or traitor for having a different opinion from me - that would never enter my head. Laurence wore the blanket and almost died as a result. So I am not going to listen to people who have never risked a day in jail having that type of go at him. If they want to say they think he is wrong - fine.

      Delete
    4. David,

      And why do think so many people, as you so astutely observe, hate themselves? What is it about themselves that they dislike so much?

      My hunch is, people in the main prefer to be mere spectators of life, hurlers on the ditch. They'd rather not tog out. Deep down they really would like to participate and play, but alas, preferring the collective comfort and safety of the stands, they can't find it within themselves to tog out, to get out on the pitch, endure real risk and commit their best.

      Its understandably easier, to roar one's hateful critique from the side-line than it is to risk humiliating oneself unnecessarily further by sublimation to the current and pervasive milieu of saccharine rapprochement or anodyne acquiescence.

      Of course, there's also a middle way.

      Delete
  17. Thanks,
    It's hard to give them a balanced hearing when it's just shite from the get go. I am no longer involved with Republicanism, very seldom go home. I miss things, I miss people, I miss the idea of community, the sum is greater than the parts ideology. I don't miss the egomaniacal invasion of conscious thought, I don't miss the disrespect and I don't miss the lies. On a profound level I wonder if Irish republicanism ever existed. I wonder if physical force can lead anywhere except the warlord mentality. I wonder if the traitor chanters have pondered the mechanisms of betrayal in the abstract, what were the betraying? How do you betray an ideology that has so many different definitions.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I guess when you look at the state of it there is little incentive to be involved in it. Even the best of them can't avoid howling at a different opinion. I am forever remined of fundamentalist Christians.

      Delete
  18. David

    Alex Murphy from Andytown had as formidable reputation as any IRA volunteer. I don't know his full history but other hard-core volunteers spook highly of his courage and commitment that one can only imagine what ops he may have been involved in. I met him on H4 where the IRA jail staff had not a good word to say of him. I understand he had been in and out of jail a number of times. His offence on this occassion, when I met him, was that he wanted to focus more on his family rather than take up a leadership role in the jail. That is how easily men like him could fall from grace and anything he had done before was meaningless. One of the camp staff who ran him down got caught on his first op and went on the blanket(which took its own courage) ... shortly after his release he got caught on his second op... all he knew was how to play jail politics. Its probably the same thing with those of the younger generation you speak off, all they can do is talk a good fight and resent anyone who may make them feel insecure about themselves. Republicans can be a very begrudging and resentful lot.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Republicans can be a very begrudging and resentful lot.
      How true that is

      Delete
  19. Met Alex a couple of times didn't know him well, his anniversary not about now? A lot of top operators were slandered for having an opinion or simply wanting time to themselves. Look the author of this site, he told the truth and his reward was slander aplenty, tout, alcoholic any old shite rather than take an argument on face value. It's tiring and demoralising.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I knew him very well. His anniversary was a couple of days ago.
      Their smears were never going to work with me. But nice to know I was an alco - thought they had stuck that on somebody else!

      Delete
  20. The minute someone smears I tend to tune out. If you can't tackle the substance of the argument just be quiet, all they do is show their ignorance. I wouldn't mind being a alky apparently I am a drug dealer. Don't know who gets the income from these narcotics, I break my back at least five days out of seven and barely can afford a holiday. Can't be any good at it.
    I thought that, I was in the leaf drunk, talking nonsense round about this time last year and there was people having a commemoration for Alex.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I believe Alex Murphy and Pat McGeown were travelling with Paddy Joe Crawford when he was arrested and put in Long Kesh.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Henry,
    I just noticed you replied to me, apologies. I don't know, I think we have a defeatist mentality, maybe lack self worth because our ideology was defeated, psychology being what it is it inevitably turns inwards to ourselves and own community. Maybe we believe we're the victims and all the perceived weakness that manifests itself with that. Maybe we have collective narcissism where we think our ideology is unique and superior and other people just can't see it which depresses us, who knows? I do know we are not a happy bunch.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're right David, its more than likely all an inside job but getting a handle on the inside isn't always going to be easy. My best guess is that the stronger the sense of self the individual can develop then the less enmeshed he or she will be in community.

      And the unfortunate corollary of that being, the weaker the sense of individual self then the greater the need for a communal one.
      It all then unfortunately becomes a double whammy of sorts. If the individual is all at sea and the community views itself as having lost something and/or perhaps sees itself as being lesser than, then all that you've alluded to is likely to follow.

      Delete
  23. Replies
    1. I can repeat the question slightly differently if you wish Christopher.

      Were Alex, Pat & Paddy Joe criminals? ... Lesley would have us believe so.

      Delete
    2. Thank you for clarifying Christopher.

      Delete
  24. Malachy O'Doherty once said that where he hears the word "community"; he smells fascism. So do I, at the very least enforced conformity and internal totalitarianism.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't recall Malachi saying that - he might have. But he is usually more measured in his use of terminology. What I do remember is his questioning of the "community as one." That is also a dangerous concept but it can hardly be described as fascist.

      Delete
    2. Barry,

      as you well understand we're social animals too and the herding instinct survives because it confers evolutionary advantage. 'Grouping' is inevitable and generally advantageous. Of course this utilitarian phenomenon has a shadow side too, which in the extreme manifests as fascism.
      This tendency towards 'grouping', like all phenomena, is best viewed in the context of a continuum.

      In an ever increasingly atomised world its important not to discount the value of community and to throw the baby out with the bath water. In fact community groups and charities overall make very positive contributions. Its now well recognised and accepted that isolation and loneliness are having negative impact on peoples' physical, mental and emotional health and also that volunteering has hugely positive effects for those undertaking it.

      Delete
  25. Isn’t that the sort of attitude that leads Remainers to dismiss Brexiteers as small minded racists voting against their interests?

    ReplyDelete
  26. AM

    "Community as one" is exactly what he and I mean.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Henry JoY
    All three fellons and criminals?

    Alex Murphy, Pat McGeown or Paddy Joe Crawford weren't criminals but what happened to Paddy Joe Crawford was a crime.......From the vortex of TPQ... A Song For Paddy Joe Crawford – ‘Buried In Full View, But Disappeared’..

    Again from the vortex of TPQ, Paddy Joe Crawford: A View from the Boards ....What the screws done with Paddy Joe Crawford's body was criminal.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks Frankie, I had forgotten how Paddy Joe died.

      As I commented on 'A Song for Paddy Joe Crawford' ... "Sad, sordid and shameful".

      Delete