Anthony McIntyre's Blog, page 1186

My Journey To Atheism - After 50 Years As A Christian

After 50 years in the Christian faith, Wendy McClelland turned to atheism. She is now a free speech activist amongst other things. Below she explains her reasoning.

Éire Nua: A New Way Forward For Ireland Post-Brexit

Writing for TPQ on constitutional options for a United Ireland post-Brexit, Sean Bresnahan, Chair of the Thomas Ashe Society Omagh, argues that the Éire Nua initiative for a Federal All-Ireland Republic can best advance a new beginning for all of the Irish people.


Irish republicanism sets toward new political arrangements in Ireland where the highest standards of democracy and independence are reflected in the institutions of the republic. The ‘Éire Nua’ policy, developed in the early 1970s as an alternative to the partition system, can deliver on this and more, setting republicanism within the parameters of anti-establishment politics – where it has always belonged – while presenting a vision for a 'New Ireland' worthy of our people and befitting their needs today.

Éire Nua proposes a federal republic based on the historic Provinces of Ireland, where the power of the state is broken down through commitment to decentralised governance. It imagines a participatory democratic polity, where decision-making processes are devolved to the maximum, with communities awarded a real say in the issues that impact their lives. This is to include voluntary councils, where all have the right to audience, with local councils elected from there and so on up to Provincial Assemblies and a National Dáil, whose remit would be restricted to issues such as monetary policy, energy regulation and other such matters of a similar concern.

Overly-centralised government is the common experience in Ireland, whether in the South – among the most centralised polities in the West – or in the Six Counties – where only the illusion of devolved decision-making exists and where policy is really decided at Whitehall. The negatives of such in mind, the structures envisaged by Éire Nua – by its plans for regional federation and strengthening of local government – carry ever-greater appeal among those intent on new ways of ‘doing politics’. While they might not realise it, many of their ideas have long been a feature of this initiative – most likely because it has been subject to massive censorship, given its threat to the existing establishment.

Post-Brexit and as Ireland moves to reconcile tensions unleashed with those already in play, Éire Nua presents a viable platform to build on. The proposals it contains can be the building blocks of a re-born Irish Republic – one deserving of our people; one they need now more than ever: a republic that can unite all Irish people, in their diversity and differences, in a constitutional order where all have influence, all have protection and all have a role within the affairs of the nation.

Its obvious strong-point lies in its ability to reconcile our respective traditions within an all-Ireland republic. But its intent is also, at a more fundamental level, that a much-increased role in the affairs of the republic be awarded to ALL citizens – regardless their identity or tradition – increasing the scope of democracy and the commitment of our people to the would-be institutions of that republic. Reconciling our people and safeguarding minority interests is an outworking of that process, rather than its guiding intent of itself. It should then in no way be mislabeled as a 'sop to unionism', as has been charged by those who undermined the policy en route to their signing of the Good Friday Agreement.

As Irish republicans intent on change, rebuilding the idea of a 'New Ireland', one where egalitarian and democratic institutions help empower the people and protect their interests, is an immediate option to hand. Towards as much, Éire Nua brings advanced, though achievable, options to the table, options we can set in train without creating unnecessary and potentially damaging political and economic instability – the fear of which, among ordinary people, is the most significant force ranged against the argument for change today.

Daithi Ó Conaill, a key architect of the policy, once described Éire Nua as 'the hand of friendship' to the Ulster Protestant tradition in our country, arguing also that in the same instance it would advance a democratic process that would benefit all constituent parts of Irish society. The Ireland he imagined, still and to this day, can not only realise a lasting peace between our people but with it a complete transformation of democratic practices for the benefit of all.

These ideas are workable and can be the future for our country. They represent a credible alternative to the unchecked corruption of modern government in Ireland, which has utterly failed our people – be they from Belfast or Dublin, Kerry or Tyrone, whether north, south, east or west. Decentralised power would shatter the privilege for too long enjoyed by the few, offering the Irish people a new way forward in a democratic republic for all. Such a republic is surely their right. The work before us at this time is to see it achieved.

(For full details on the Éire Nua policy, visit the Republican Sinn Féin national website: RSF.ie.)

Radio Free Eireann Broadcasting 23 September 2017

Martin Galvin with details of this weekend's broadcast from Radio Free Eireann.
Radio Free Eireann will broadcast this Saturday September 23rd on WBAI 99.5 FM radio or wbai.org at 12 noon New York time or 5 pm-6pm Irish time. Or listen any time after the broadcast on wbai.org/archives.

Belfast civil rights lawyer Niall Murphy will preview the premiere of the investigative documentary film No Stone Unturned, about the shocking murder of 6 patrons in a quiet pub in Loughinisland, County Down, as they gathered to watch the Ireland vs Italy World Cup Match, and the shocking British crown force cover-up which continues to shield the murderers.

Armagh Republican Cait Treanor - who will be the main speaker at the Duleek Commemoration for Irish patriot, Thomas Ashe, whose death took place after a hunger strike and brutal force-feeding 100 years ago - will talk about Ashe's life and legacy, the Duleek County Meath Memorial Committee ,and the commemorative events including a special launch of Paul McGlinchey's book about the 1981 Hunger Strike, Truth Will Out .

We will have a special live report from the McLean Avenue Fall Festival along Woodlawn's Emerald Mile, still one of New York's great Irish neighborhoods.

Co-host John McDonagh will update us on final preparations for his one man show, Off The Meter, On The Record , set to begin at the Irish Rep Theatre.


John McDonagh and Martin Galvin co- host.

Radio Free Eireann is heard Saturdays at 12 Noon New York time on wbai 99.5 FM and wbai.org.

It can be heard at wbai.org in Ireland from 5pm to 6pm or anytime after the program concludes on wbai.org/archives.

"Anyone But Bibi"

A Uri Avnery Column from last month illustrates the deep unpopularity of Israeli PM Binyamin Netanyahu.

So are the human carnivores – the politicians.

They sing his praises, swear to defend him with all their heart – but in their heads they are already calculating who might be his successor.
Each of them mutters to themself: Why not me?

Binyamin Netanyahu is facing the greatest crisis in his long career. The police are about to conclude their investigations. The Attorney General is under huge pressure to issue official indictments. The large demonstrations near the Attorney General's home are growing from week to week.

The Attorney General, the Inspector General of the Police and the Minister for Internal Security were all personally picked by Netanyahu (and his wife). Now even this does not help. The pressure is too strong.

The investigations may drag on for another few months, but the end seems certain: State of Israel v. Binyamin Netanyahu will go to court.

When A member of the government is indicted for a felony, they usually resign, or at least take leave of absence. Not Netanyahu. No sir!

If he resigned, who would guard Israel and save it from the numerous dreadful dangers threatening the state from all sides? The Iranians are promising our extinction, the evil Arabs all around want to kill us, the leftists and other traitors threaten the state from within. How can we survive without Bibi? The danger is too awful to contemplate!

Netanyahu seems to believe this himself. He, his wife and his eldest son behave like a royal family. They buy without paying, travel as guests of others, receive expensive gifts as a matter of course.

Popular humor accompanies all these transgressions. The police has entered this spirit and decorated his files with many zeros.

File 1000 concerns the gifts. The Netanyahus are surrounded by a crowd of billionaires, who compete with each other in presenting gifts. Many jokes were made about the expensive cigars and pink champagne given to the family – until it transpired that their value amounts to tens of thousands of dollars. And the donors expect something in return from the donees.

File 2000 concerns a peculiar matter. Yedioth Ahronoth ("Latest News") was Israel’s largest daily newspaper, until Israel Hayom ("Israel Today") appeared – a paper distributed for nothing. It was founded by Sheldon Adelson, an admirer of Netanyahu and the owner of huge casinos in Las Vegas and Macao. It is devoted to the single task of glorifying King Bibi. In a recorded private conversation, Netanyahu offered Noni Moses, the owner of Yedioth, a deal: Israel Today would reduce its size and circulation if Yedioth started to glorify Bibi. Legally, this may amount to bribery.

And then there is File 3000, deep beneath the sea. The German shipbuilder ThyssenKrupp (two names well remembered as Hitler's weapons suppliers) builds our submarines. Three, six, nine. The sky – or the sea – is the limit.

What do we need submarines for? Not to sink enemy fleets. Our enemies, such as they are, have no powerful fleets. But they may obtain nuclear missiles. Israel is a very small territory, and a nuclear bomb or two could destroy it. But no one will dream of doing so if they know that out there lurk submarines, which will respond with nuclear missiles within minutes.

The German shipyard, with the support of the German government, sells the submarines to the Israeli navy. No middlemen needed. But there are middlemen who put millions in their pockets. How many pockets? Ah, there we are. Quite a number of pockets, and all these pockets belong to people very close to the Prime Minister.

Perverted minds may imagine that tens of millions have reached the PM himself, perish the thought.

This week, a prestigious TV program aired an investigation, and the picture was shocking. The entire military and civilian environment seems to be infected by corruption, as in a failed African state.

One of the few lessons I have learned in my life is that nobody reaches the top of any profession if they are not devoted to it absolutely, totally.

To get stinking rich, you must love stinking money. Not the things money can buy, but money itself. Like the miser of Moliere, who sits all day and counts his riches. If you also want something else, love or glory, you will not get to be a multi-multi-billionaire.

Don Juan did not care for anything but women. Not love. Just women, more and more of them.

David Ben-Gurion wanted power. Not the pleasures of power. Not cigars. Not champagne. Not several villas. Just power. Everything else, like his Bible club and his reading Don Quixote in Spanish, was just pretense. He wanted power and held on to it as long as he could. (In the end, when he surrounded himself with a praetorian guard of youngsters like Moshe Dayan and Shimon Peres, his colleagues ganged up on him and kicked him out, with some help from me.)

A person who wants political power, but also the amenities of life, several villas and a lot of money will not really reach the very top. Netanyahu is a good example.

He is no exception. His predecessor is in prison, and so are several former ministers. A former President of the State was just released from prison (for sexual offenses).

Netanyahu grew up in the a family which was not affluent. So did Ehud Olmert. So did Ehud Barak. So did Moshe Dayan. They all loved money too much.

Sarah Netanyahu, the Prime Minister's wife, is also about to be indicted. She is accused of paying for her extensive private needs with government funds. She is not widely appreciated. Everybody calls her Sarah'le ("Little Sarah"), but not from love. She also grew up in straitened circumstances and was a low-grade air stewardess when she met Bibi in a duty-free shop.

I was lucky. Until my tenth birthday, my family was quite rich. When we fled to Palestine, we soon became as poor as synagogue-mice, but much happier.)

Another Lesson: no one in power should stay there for more than eight years.

People in power attract flatterers. Every day, year after year, they are told that they are just wonderful. So wise, so clever, so handsome. Slowly they become convinced themselves. After all, so many good people can't be wrong.

Their critical senses become blunted. They get used to being obeyed even by people who know better. They become immune to criticism, and even get angry when criticized.

After the 12 year tenure of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, a wise and successful president, the American people changed their constitution and limited the terms of the president to two, altogether eight consecutive years. Very sensible.

I speak from experience. I was elected to the Knesset three times. I very much enjoyed the first two terms – eight consecutive years – because I felt that I was doing the right things in the right way. During my third term I felt that I was less keen, less innovative, less original. So I resigned.

Netanyahu is now in his fourth term. High time for him to be thrown out.

The Bible enjoins us: "Rejoice not when thine enemy falleth and let not thine heart be glad when he stumbleth" (Proverbs 24, 17). I do not rejoice, but I shall be very glad if he goes.

I do not hate him. Neither do I like him. I don't think that I have spoken with him on more than two or three occasions in my whole life. Once when he introduced me to his second – not last - wife, a nice young American woman, and once when he saw my picture in a photo exhibition, wearing a pilot's cap. He told me that I looked like Errol Flynn.

My attitude towards him is not based on emotion. It is purely political. He is a talented politician, a clever demagogue. But I believe that he is leading Israel slowly but surely towards a historic disaster.

People believe that he is devoid of principles, that he will do anything – just anything – to stay in power. That is true. But underneath everything there hide some ironclad convictions – the weltanschauung of his late father, the history professor, whose special field was the Spanish inquisition. Father Benzion Netanyahu was an embittered man, convinced that his colleagues despised him and blocked his career because of his extreme right-wing views. He was a fanatic, for whom even Vladimir Jabotinsky was far too moderate.

The father admired his elder son, Yoni, an army officer who was killed in the famous Entebbe raid, and did not respect Bibi very much. He once said that Bibi was not fit to be prime minister, but could make a good foreign minister – a very shrewd observation.

If Binyamin Netanyahu falls, which seems possible, who will replace him?

Like every clever (and unsure) leader, Bibi has destroyed every likely rival along the way. Now there is no obvious heir around.

But many people are now repeating a slogan: "Anyone, Just Not Bibi!"

Duleek Remembers Thomas Ashe

Thomas Lynch of the Duleek 1916-1981 Monument Committee with information about a commemorative event due to take place in Duleek tomorrow. Thomas Ashe
Duleek 1916-1981 Monument Committee will host a commemoration on Saturday 23rd September in Duleek to remember the 100th anniversary of the death on hunger strike of Thomas Ashe.
The event will commence at 4pm with a march to the hunger strike monument on Station Road with a re-enactment by the Irish Citizen Army on the way.
Spokesperson for the monument committee Thomas Lynch said this will be a very special event where the leader of the “Battle of Ashbourne” during the Easter rising in 1916 Thomas Ashe will be remembered on the 100th anniversary of his death on hunger strike on 25th September 1917.
Thomas Ashe was born in Kinard East, Lispole, Dingle Co, Kerry. He was a member of the Gaelic League, the Irish Republican Brotherhood (IRB) and a founding member of the Irish Volunteers. He went on to become principal of Corduff National School in Lusk Co, Dublin.
He spent his last years before his death teaching children in Lusk, where he founded the award-winning Lusk Black Raven Pipe Band as well as Round Towers Lusk.
A fundraising event by the monument committee will follow the commemoration in the Greyhound Bar Duleek with a book launch The Truth Will Out by Paul McGlinchey.
Please not this is a non-party political event. All welcome to attend.

Right2Water Ireland Blocks Buncrana Together Writer

A piece written by Enda Craig @ Buncrana Together about being blocked from the R2W Facebook page.



Stevie Fitzpatrick and David Gibney Rigth2Water trade unions go on Dáil record as accepting excessive usage charge.  Graphic from Twitter
Engineer Meets R2w Wall Of Silence



Enginee , Mr Martin Lavelle asked R2W on their Facebook page on Aug 28 - "You tell me how a District Metering Zone meter can identify bone fide usage and leakages. You said it could."

Two full days have come and gone since R2W was asked to explain how district metering can measure an individual daily allowance of water to each Irish home as they, R2W, have proposed.

No answer has so far been forthcoming.

Nor will there be one because it is an engineering impossibility.

R2W has signed up in your name (listen to clip above) in the Oireachtas Committee on Water Charges to a ' small daily ration of water with charges for excessive use ' .

This means they have accepted in your name, regardless of statements to the contrary, a domestic metering programme.

Right2WaterIreland's comment 

Right2WaterIreland Enda, we are R2W, you are Enda Craig, we will tell you our 'official position', you can do what you want with your own, but please have a little bit of decorum and stop misrepresenting us.  We have had an official position for more than two years now - one which was sanctioned by a conference of delegates from unions, political parties and community groups. You already know this. Your obsession with misrepresenting R2W is getting highly suspicious at this stage. If you keep it up, and keep spreading lies, we will block you from this page. Thanks

So which is the official version: the above or one that is on Dáil records, in full video, supporting a statement on radio by Brendan Ogle agreeing with excessive or maybe it is R2W support for Lynn Boylan's (Sinn Féin) 2015 European Citizen's Initiative calling for 'excessive use charges'?

Republicanism Cannot Unite Ireland

Via The Transcripts, Martin Galvin speaks to former IRA Volunteer now historian, author and political commentator, Anthony McIntyre, about the comments Sinn Féin president Gerry Adams made about the future of his party. 
WBAI 99.5FM Pacifica Radio
New York City
Audio Player
(begins time stamp ~ 31:27)

Martin: With us on the line – I referred to you in the announcement, you know, I always say ‘doctor’ Anthony McIntyre, because you have a doctorate. I always say he’s an author because you have the book, one of the best books, collection of essays and analysis of the Good Friday Agreement, Good Friday: The Death of Irish Republicanism. I say you’re the person who runs the blogsite, The Pensive Quill, but I had to put down that you’re a journalist because you’re able to get so many articles recently into the Belfast Telegraph. And I have to tell you, Anthony, I actually was attacked by name by Ruth Dudley Edwards and she had some headline that Martin Galvin’s getting older and he still hates people – and Ruth’s certainly is not getting any younger and she’s never been behind a back door in terms of hating Republicans – but how and ever I had to get a lawyer and sue and make a complaint before I got even my right to reply in but you, now, are being listed as a journalist for your articles with the Belfast Telegraph recently so we welcome you with that new addition to your title onto Radio Free Éireann.
Anthony: Well thank you very much, Martin, although I’ve been a member of the National Union of Journalists for seventeen years. And I never use the title ‘doctor’ – I’ve become so disillusioned with academia that I think the title ‘doctor’ is a badge of shame given that the academics at Boston College rolled over. I would say that if Boston College were in charge of America at the time of Pearl Harbor everybody over there would be speaking Japanese today, but anyway…

Martin: Okay. This week, there was – I read the newspapers on, I think it was Tuesday, and some of the most respected journalists – they heard an announcement that Gerry Adams gave at a party conference that he was talking about a ten year programme, a generational change and future announcements after he runs for Sinn Fein president again. And some of the headlines really surprised me. I interpreted it a certain way. Henry McDonald, one of the most reliable reporters in Ireland, writes for the Guardian, said: Gerry Adams signals intention to stand down as Sinn Féin leader. The president says he’ll seek re-election in November but wishes to implement a planned process of generational change.

Brian Feeney, again, one of the best columnists, very reliable, did a piece. Brian Feeney: Sinn Féin deputy leader Mary Lou McDonald will succeed Gerry Adams. And he made that prediction that that’s going to happen in the spring or early summer of next year. Alex Kane, who’s a Unionist columnist but I like his work, he’s usually fairly accurate or a lot more accurate than some, has a column: Love Him or Hate Him is One in a Hundred. Now you had a piece that was more consistent with the way I interpreted the announcement: Gerry Adams has led Sinn Féin for more than half of his lifetime and there’s still no sign of him letting go. How did you interpret the announcement that Gerry Adams made?

Anthony: Well I viewed it in very simple terms: It was Mr. Adams using the opportunity provided to him to announce an extension of his political career and to bamboozle the media and, unfortunately, some of them swallowed the bait, bamboozle them into pushing the line that he was actually thinking of standing aside. The whole notion of a ten year plan seems absurd. Why should the leadership in a so-called democratic party devise a ten year plan for changing leadership? Surely the grassroots should be making that decision, not the leadership. The grassroots should be deciding when Adams goes, not Adams himself. But this is such a top-down, authoritarian party that democratic decisions of the type that would lead to a different outcome, a different leader, simply do not take place. It’s not like any other democratic party on the island or in Europe and in fact, it’s more like the right wing parties, with their authoritarianism and their deference to authority.

Martin: Anthony, when I read that, actually a line that you wrote, I actually don’t recall exactly whether it was the Good Friday Agreement, the Downing Street Declaration or where ever you wrote it but it’s a line that always stuck with me – you said it was a British declaration of intent to remain in Ireland. And I read Gerry Adams’ remarks and it seemed like a declaration of intent to remain as president of Sinn Féin. And in fact I just – I have to credit Newton Emerson, he wrote in the Irish News I believe today, that last year there was a similar announcement that there was a ten year plan that Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness had agreed that was going to start last year, a year ago at this same conference. And now we’re here a year later and it’s still got ten years to go. How does Gerry Adams remain as head of Sinn Fein for so long? Why is he kept there?

Anthony: Well, I mean, Adams is a martial politician and he has always operated with a military mindset and that’s about hierarchy and authority and the imposition of authority and certain contempt for the people who are regarded as the grunts, or the privates, in the army. So what he does is - he rules through a mixture of fear – because they use an awful lot of smearing, bullying and intimidation to keep people in line. We have an instance recently where the youngest councillor in the country resigned from Sinn Féin because she said the bullying was so intense – a twenty-three year old. But he also inspires an enormous amount of loyalty; I think Suzanne Breen has touched on this. He is very popular within the party, certainly with The North, I think people have seen him as standing up to the British. People also, many of the Republicans, respect him for his IRA credentials and he has managed through tight control, tight imposition of authority, ruling out all democratic challenges – and I mean snuffing them out at birth – any challenge that may come to his authority and he has ruled, and quite efficiently – his grip on the party has been quite efficient for many, many years – and he has always managed to convince the grassroots of the party that his political career interests are synonymous with the party interests so the party moves always in the direction that good for Adams’ career and as he wants to be a successful politician and he has used the movement as a launching pad for a successful political career. He’s around longer than any politician and I suppose, if one respects that sort of thing one, has to begrudgingly acknowledge that he has done it very, very well.

Martin: Well one of the things I just want to ask about is how much control on party policy does he have? For example, when Martin McGuinness was there Martin McGuinness would have some kind of independent sway or independent position but how much, for example – you have Michelle O’Neill, who’s now the party leader at Stormont, you have Mary Lou McDonald, who’s the deputy leader – how much say does Gerry Adams have in terms of what Sinn Féin’s positions are going to be in the Stormont talks, in Leinster House, as opposed to those people around him?

Anthony: Well I would say he would have the lion’s share of the say. I don’t think any movement in the world, even in Nazi Germany – you know Hitler himself was undermined by people within the party scheming, in pursuit of their own agendas – and I imagine that within Sinn Féin there are people who will issue challenges but the bulk of party policy would have the imprimatur of Gerry Adams on it. There’s very, very few decisions that would be made that he would be opposed to and I imagine that Mary Lou McDonald is very much a bit player as is Michelle O’Neill in terms of deciding strategy or formulating strategy. I think the main strategist in the movement has been Adams. And McGuinness, I think, was useful for Adams in a way that Michelle O’Neill is not. I mean Martin could have carried a lot of people who Michelle may not be able to carry but at the same time Michelle would be someone who would not stand up in any way to Adams and would just be sort of a puppet and he would be the puppet master – and I don’t want to say this in any unkind sense.

But I remember taking to Tony Catney: and Tony Catney said that when he attended Ard Comhairle meetings the only person at the Ard Comhairle who would challenge Adams or stand up to him was Martin McGuinness. But I tend to think that Martin McGuinness was undermined, to some extent, by Adams and I will often wonder and I wonder if it will ever emerge in the light of day that McGuinness was toppled in a sort of internal coup d’etat – and I’ve speculated on this before.

Martin: Okay. I just want to read something. I want you to give an assessment of Gerry Adams’ career so far and I’m just going to read a couple of lines from the piece by Alex Kane, writing in the Irish News. Now Alex Kane is a Unionist. He actually – he’s somebody whose writing I enjoy, he’s very balanced in some ways but he quotes the – Love him or hate him – Adams is one in a hundred. He talks about how Adams has not only brought the struggle to an end and conceded constitutional arrangements but he has access to British and Irish Prime Ministers and the US President. He’s become a statesman admired around the world but still reviled by some at home. He says he has brought Sinn Féin within sniffing distance of reunification. Alright. How do you judge Gerry Adams’ performance or Sinn Féin’s performance or achievements, record, during the period in which Gerry Adams was president or the Republican Movement’s progress during the period in which Gerry Adams has been a leading figure?

Anthony: Well, apart from the last comment by Alex Kane I think that’s pretty accurate. I mean he hasn’t brought Sinn Féin within an inch of reunification – reunification’s not going to happen. And Alex Kane is a very astute and very clever writer who I much admire for the clarity of his thought. Adams has, in many ways I think, has reduced the whole Republican project to a lie – there’s virtually nothing about him that he says that we can believe. Republicanism, under his reign, is one massive lie. He has de-fanged and de-radicalised Republicanism and he simply turned it into another constitutional-nationalist entity – no different from the people that went before him in the Official Republican Movement and Fine Gael, Fianna Fáil.


And if we want to take a longer historical view of it: We cannot place the current Sinn Féin in the Republican anti-treaty camp that emerged around the time of the formation of the Free State. We have to place him in the Cumann na nGaedheal instead, that camp, the pro-treaty party, the party that ended up endorsing partition. Because Adams does now endorse partition even though I read recently a strange, convoluted article from Danny Morrison saying why he wouldn’t/couldn’t, as a Republican, take a seat at Westminster. Now, we know all that’s nonsense coming from Morrison and if they take their seats in Westminster he’d somersault to endorse it. The taking of the seats is pretty immaterial to whether one supports or endorses partition. What endorses partition is the support for the Consent Principle. And once you support the right of a majority in the Six Counties to maintain partition then you support the partition, you support the partition principle, and there’s no getting away from it. So Sinn Féin under Adams has been very successful not in terms of furthering any Republican objective – he’s been no more successful in that than, say, Tony Blair has in furthering a socialist objective – but what we have is Adams being very successful in constitutionalising Sinn Féin and making Sinn Féin a constitutional party that can advance the case of Nationalists within the Northern state. But that’s not really what Republicanism was about. Republicanism was about abolishing the Northern state. And we see today that the greatest defenders of the Northern state, along with the Unionists, are Sinn Féin.

Martin: Alright. There are people who have talked about: Well, we might get a united Ireland in the form of having Sinn Féin in coalition with either Fine Gael or Fianna Fáil in The South and at the same time being in coalition, or partnership, with the DUP (Democratic Unionist Party) in The North and there would be some kind of cross-border bodies and this would be some form of a united Ireland. What’s your reaction? How does that compare to what you joined the Republican Movement to get a united Ireland? How does that stack up?
Add captionThe Belfast Telegraph
31 August 2017

Anthony: Well, it’s not a united Ireland. It’s a partitioned Ireland. All we have is a bridge that sits over partition. And, I mean, Adams would probably tell you if Sinn Féin were in government in The North and government in The South that it was a united Ireland and then, if you object, he would tell you: Catch yourself on and you’re an anti-peace process element, you know – all the usual rubbish – but it’s a far cry from the type of Republicanism that I was associated with when I was a member of the Republican Movement. But against that you know there is no way for Ireland to be united unless a majority in The North say so. And that becomes the realpolitik of Irish politics. There’s no military campaign capable of doing it. I wouldn’t want the same military campaign doing it – it brings too much hardship, too much misery, too much death, too much pain and therefore, in my view, it’s not worth it. So even though we may criticise Adams and criticise his strategy and insist that we’re under no obligation whatsoever to believe the lies that he tells there’s no Republican strategy for a united Ireland. Republicanism cannot unite Ireland. It cannot bring Ireland to a point where the Consent Principle’s going to be abolished and the two separate entities at the minute are going to be drawn together as one political entity. So I am of the view that, and I’ve said this before and haven’t not too popular with Republicans for saying it, that the Northern state is not the failed political entity. Republicanism is the failed political entity. The only thing that can bring about Irish unity is constitutional-nationalism which Republicanism was always opposed to. And the chances of constitutional- nationalism bringing about a united Ireland are very slim, indeed.

Martin: Well, what – going into Stormont how – it’s said that the strategy of that was that Sinn Féin was going to work with the DUP. They would bargain away the injustices, they’d work together, they’d establish some kind of reconciliation and respect and attitudes are going to change and then you’d gradually gain acceptance for a united Ireland as a away forward that’s more prosperous for everybody. Do you see that ever working?

Anthony: No. It’s wishful thinking. I don’t see how it would come about. I think the opposite would come about that when it settles down in the way that you’ve described, reconciliation and other things, that what would happen is that the Nationalists in The North would become more comfortable with rule from London and there would be no indication that the Unionists in The North would become more comfortable with rule from Dublin. There’s a ‘push-pull factor’ at play here and always has been. And in my view Nationalists have always been prepared to reconcile themselves with the British state to a degree much more strong than what the Unionists have been prepared to reconcile themselves with the Dublin state, Dublin rule, so I can’t see that situation coming about. I think what happens there is that it’s a veneer that Sinn Féin put on their constitutional-nationalist internal settlement strategy as a means to create an illusion of forward momentum just to keep people on board and to tell them that they’ve been doing the same thing they always do. Like, I mean, I listened to a friend of mine in Sinn Féin, a couple – a year back - Pat Sheehan. Pat Sheehan was a hunger striker, a very committed IRA Volunteer, almost lost his life on hunger strike, done lengthy time in prison – and Pat’s says he was doing the same thing today as he was doing in 1972. That’s patently absurd! He isn’t. He’s doing the complete opposite of what he was doing in 1972.

Martin: Alright. We’re going to have to leave it there. We’re out of time. We could go on a lot longer with you and with questions like this. We want to thank you for being with us, Anthony McIntyre, former political prisoner – I won’t say ‘doctor’, can say journalist…

Anthony: …Thank you very much.

Martin: Okay. And look…

Anthony: …All the best!

Martin: …Anthony has The Pensive Quill. You can see Kate Nash’s interview from last week. She wouldn’t come on this week. You can see Dixie Elliott telling us, (Ed: In the comments section) quoting exactly, the words that Sinn Féin used when they were complaining about British troops being listed along side members of, Irish patriots in Glasnevin in Dublin. They don’t seem to have that objection in Doire in the Free Derry Museum.
(ends time stamp ~ 52:07)

Celebrating 185 Years: St. Andrew's Church Culture Night

Gerry Adams: An Unauthorised Life

Christopher Owens reviews the latest book on Gerry Adams. Influenced by post punk and industrial music, Christopher Owens reviews for Metal Ireland and finds time to study the history and inherent contradictions of Ireland.
The term 'unauthorised biography' still carries a lot of connotations in today's world, and none of them tend to be positive: hatchet job, exploitative, cheap cash in. While this may be the case for those who prefer their biographies to lean towards celebrities and the culture surges that spawn them, it can be quite different when it comes to the world of politics.

All too often, this lack of endorsement means that a writer has much more freedom to be critical and indulge in speculation, linking events together and questioning the mindset of the subject during periods of euphoria or defeat. Robert Dallek's excellent book on Kennedy is an example of what can be achieved without approval from the subject/subject's descendants.

And so, Malachi O'Doherty enters the arena with a book about Gerry Adams. The first biography of Adams since 1998.

With his reappearance on the North's political stage, O'Doherty's timing couldn't be any better. The recent death of Martin McGuinness, Sinn Fein crashing the Assembly and his re-election as President of Sinn Fein has now led to a re-evaluation of his life's work. A lot not particularly favourable.

So a biography offering new insights into Adams is to be welcomed. And the title, while an obvious twist on the aforementioned phrase, can also be used to describe O'Doherty's take on Adams: contempt, with a certain amount of exasperation at his enduring influence.

O'Doherty tells the tale of Adams' life in fairly straightforward fashion. Anyone familiar with the recent history of this country will find nothing surprising or revelatory. It's a fairly straightforward take of someone being born into a republican family, joining up almost as if it was expected of him, and finding outside events spiralling out of control.

Strangely, O'Doherty doesn't mention that Adams was a founding member of the NICRA (Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association), which he wrote about in Twenty Years On, a collection of essays published in 1988. Ok, he was there under orders from Cathal Goulding, but he still voted in favour of the formation of the organisation. 
The main problem with the book is that O'Doherty has a tendency to oversimplify events, basically pitting it down to one side being oh so manipulative and the other side naïve. An example of this would be the early battles between the Provos and the just landed British Army.

What O'Doherty doesn't inform the reader is that the Army were under the control of the Stormont government, who wanted the IRA crushed, and undoubtedly suspected the overall Catholic population as being equal participants. So this overarching force (Stormont) were putting pressure on an army that did not know the area and were building relations with the ordinary Catholic population, only to have to use excessive force, which was then used by the Provos as proof that the British Army were there to suppress them.

As another example, he cites (via Anthony McIntyre) conflicting reports of the strength of the Provos during the 1975 ceasefire, while allowing Richard O'Rawe to suggest that Adams perpetuated the "IRA as broken by the ceasefire" line in order to allow people to portray him as the saviour of the movement.

Highly compelling, but it overlooks the fact that IRA members were routinely breaking in Castlereagh (more often than not through torturous methods by the RUC) from 1976 onwards (a year after the ceasefire) and the descent into sectarian violence. So, regardless of individual company strengths, the IRA were clearly heading in the wrong direction. Whether that was because of, or helped along, by the stipulations of the ceasefire is open to interpretation. But, once again, O'Doherty never leaves the reader aware of this.

There are no new stories and no new insights into the man. The people interviewed are mixed in their reasons for disliking him, and all too often talk about how personable he is, but also how devious he is. This gets quite tedious very quickly, and his use of Paul Durkin's poetry to illustrate general disgust is reminiscent of 'The Young Ones', where Rik Mayall's character recites lines like "Oh Cliff/Sometimes it must be difficult/Not to feel as if/You really are Cliff."

Overall, it's a rather bland, insipid read, with a tendency to simplify events in order to shift the blame onto Adams and co. Of course, there’s no denying that Adams deserves a chunk of the blame for what happened during the Troubles, but a bit of perspective from O’Doherty would have been nice.

There are attempts at psychoanalysis, with Mairia Cahill providing the necessary zinger when she states that she believes that "...Gerry Adams doesn't know who Gerry Adams is." It's easy to see how she has come to this conclusion but she is wrong.

Ultimately, in order to get to the position that Adams currently finds himself in, one has to be adept at being all things to all people while still maintaining a distinct personality. Some may call that sociopathology. Others would refer to it as the necessary key to being a leader.

Ian Brady once wrote that:

as years have passed and you are no longer the person who committed or would repeat such crimes, do you believe you should not be punished? Would you honestly sacrifice yourself simply to satisfy the abstract principle of public deterrent or divine/secular justice? In which case, do you still believe that a captured criminal who has similarly altered with passing years should continue to be punished regardless ... law-abiding souls must have their victims, too, experiencing no guilt at how pleasurable it feels to punish others for crimes they themselves have contemplated or succeeded in getting away with. Further, in punishing others for these crimes, they actually feel they are making retribution of some sort for their own. That’s why punishing others subconsciously feels so good. Beneath the civilised veneer, man remains the supreme predator. Cursed with what he believes is understanding, his true soul blossoms godlike in the heart of the nuclear inferno. Again, only does punishment and retaliation frighten him, not the crime.

Imagine if O'Doherty had taken that idea, a proper psychoanalysis of Adams and really wrestled with it. It would have had the hallmarks of a fascinating read. Instead, we've got this bland soup of nothingness.

If you really want a good book on Adams, read A Secret History of the IRA by Ed Moloney.


Malachi O'Doherty, 2017. Gerry Adams: An Unauthorised Life. Faber and Faber. ISBN-13: 978-0571315956

I Know Dave Cullen, Thank God Dave Cullen Doesn't Know Me!!

From her blog, Damn Your Concessions, Cait Trainor is scathing of the use of Supergrass evidence.

Some may be just local snoops, 50p touts as they are known In Armagh. And they give anything ranging from very valuable information, such as surveying the movements of someone of interest to the Police, to informing that someone had an argument with their wife.

Then we have what is known as the super-grass: this is an informer on speed! The supergrass is generally someone who is involved with those they inform on, someone who has been around a while and is trusted; they are not your commoner garden 50p tout. What makes them “super” is the sizable numbers of people they implicate. The trials that follow are usually show trials, with the super grass divulging a lot of information.Some of it may be true, much of it lies. The trials generally have major protests outside and a lot of media interest. In Ireland being a tout makes you pond life, scum of the earth some people will say: lower than whale shite is a term I particularly enjoy.

The term supergrass came into popular use in Ireland in 1981. Christopher Black a member of the Provisional IRA was arrested. After securing assurances that he would have protection from prosecution, saving his own skin like the coward that he is, Black gave statements which led to 38 arrests of alleged IRA members. This was the first big super-grass trial. Two years later on 5th August 1983, 22 (alleged) members of the Provisional IRA were sentenced to a total of more than 4,000 cumulative years in prison, based on Black's testimonies alone.

18 of those convicted on Black’s evidence had their conviction subsequently overturned in 1986: such is the reliability of supergrass tainted evidence. It is well established that supergrasses lie, their motivating factor being providing “evidence” to avoid prosecution.

Black, however, would not be the last big supergrass, nor would it only affect the Republican community. In all, over 500 people from both Loyalist and Republican backgrounds were put on trial on the word of a supergrass. It was a corrupt system of course. Supergrasses were seduced into telling lies and implicating innocent people to save their own skins, given large cash inducements and promises of an anonymous new life.

By the mid-1980s, the supergrass system had collapsed. Public concerns about the credibility of the evidence could no longer be ignored and even members of the judiciary complained they were being used as political tools to implement government security policy.

So there we are, all ancient history. Supergrass trials are proven to be flawed. The evidence provided by these cretins is known to be non-credible. Thank God we don’t have to worry about supergrass trials in 2017 and the prospect of innocent men and women going to jail on the word of a fantasist…….

Uh-oh! Not the case at all, today in 2017 we have a new super-grass, and his name is Dave Cullen.

In March 2013 Dave Cullen was arrested and remanded to Portlaoise Prison charged in connection with the fatal shooting in Gormanstown of Peter Butterly. Just over a year later, in June 2014 Dave Cullen offered to turn state witness in return for the charge to be dropped. Two days later Dave Cullen was removed from Portlaoise Prison under the protection of armed Guards. This secured Dave Cullen’s status as Ireland’s most recent super-grass.

To date based on the statements of Dave Cullen 9 men in total have been arrested. So far 2 of them have been convicted and are serving lengthy sentences. The rest are either remanded in Portlaoise or on bail while one man is currently unaccounted for (on the run).

Dave Cullen like many supergrasses before him has brazenly given evidence to the Special Criminal Court; the special criminal court is a non-jury Diplock court in the 26 counties. It is believed that in return for this Cullen has secured immunity from the murder charge, has been assigned a new identity and has been given a cash lump sum along with a monthly stipend. Anyone who knows anything about Irish politics knows this is a recipe for disaster.

The arrests did not come in a flurry after Cullen turning supergrass. The arrests have continued right up until this current month (September 2017). He has to justify his payments somehow. Like all touts anything he says should be taken with a bucket of salt.
It appears that the State has learned nothing, that so intent are they on breaking Republicanism that they are prepared to employ the services of the most despised and reviled creature of all, the supergrass!

The fate of the tout is never pleasant. They generally go on to live a desperate lonely life, the money runs out, and their usefulness expires. They live out the rest of their lives looking over their shoulder as they are all too aware that they are marked men.

Their state protection only goes so far because the reality of the situation is that no one likes a tout, a deceiver, a liar, not even the people they are touting to as they have proven they cannot be trusted. They are a commodity for a short period of time and when they outlive their usefulness they are thrown to the mercy of the waves by their handlers. Touts like Martin McGartland and Kevin Fulton (real name Peter Keeley) have been very open about their unimportance after the fact, even going to court to try and secure money that was promised to them. So it would seem on top of being liars and cretins we can add stupid to the list.

As per my previous blog published in July where I spoke about the upsurge in IRA membership charges, it is clear that the 26 County state is intent on smashing Republicanism. If they are not using the word of a superintendent to jail political activists, they are prepared to use the word of an even more despicable type which is the super-grass.
For our part we must do what those before us did and protest these sham show trials with every fibre of our being.