Anthony McIntyre's Blog, page 1187

The Fianna Fail Shinners Vs The Fine Gael Unionists

Finnian O Domhnaill  surveys the political landscape and discusses possibilities. Finnian O Domhnaill is a political writer from Donegal, currently living in Derry. He is the creator of the political page  No Bones About It.
As we head closer to a general election in the South, seeing more openness to coalition by Fianna Fail /Sinn Fein and a growing partnership with Fine Gael and DUP, could we be seeing somewhat of a teaming up of parties and a continuation of a two tier government in a possible united Ireland? "If it’s good enough for the DUP it’s good enough for Sinn Fein’."

In The Beginning
As the carving up of Ireland was put in place, the sectarian scar that is partition had birthed the intentionally and strategically chosen six counties to be a predominantly protestant statelet to remain in the United Kingdom leaving the remaining 26 to be a catholic dominion ironically called "The Irish Free State" with the British Crown still remaining head of state until 1937. The Treaty was signed in 1921 and caused a split in Sinn Fein Between those prepared to take the deal and those who were not. De Valera walked out of the Dail and took a large portion of Sinn Fein members with him, sparking the civil war. The pro-treaty Sinn Fein renamed themselves Cumann na nGaedheal and lasted from 1922 to 1932. Sinn Fein went through a further spilt after De Valera proposed the removal of abstention from the Dail which divided the party. While Sinn Fein stuck with abstentionism, De Valera entered the Dail in 1927 with his new party, Fianna Fáil.

As southern unionists were left somewhat abandoned in the south especially in border counties, the Irish Unionist Alliance members and voters (formerly the Irish Conservative Party ) decided to support and/or join the pro-treaty Cumann na nGaedhael party in 1922 as opposed to anti-treaty Sinn Fein and ‘republican’ Fianna Fail 5 years later. It could be argued that a unionist mentality had seeped into the Irish Free State and aided in the continued stranglehold of the British presence in Ireland. However, in 1932 Fianna Fail became a minority government in a coalition with the Labour Party. In 1933, the previous executive dissolved and along with its unionist members, The National Centre Party and The National Guard (Blueshirts), Cumann na nGaedhael became what is today the christian democratic, liberal conservative political party, Fine Gael.

As for unionists in the north, the Irish Unionist Alliance had dominated the six counties since the foundation of the statelet. In 1921 the alliance changed it’s name to The Ulster Unionist Party (UUP). The party reigned supreme up until 1972 before direct rule from Westminster was brought in. The UUP became divided when former member, Desmond Boal founded a party along with Ian Paisley called The Democratic Unionist Party (Formally The Protestant Unionist Party) and slowly toppled The UUP over the decades to become to leading party in the north today.

Fast Forward To The Present Day Political Spectrum
Ireland remains partitioned, the two main political parties Fianna Fail and Fine Gael rule the south while Sinn Fein and DUP share power (when they are not at logger heads) in the North. As the DUP have cosied up with the Conservatives there seems to be some sort of old companionship being reunited between Fianna Fail and Sinn Fein. If its good enough for the DUP its good enough for Sinn Fein.
Last April, the Irish Times called a Fianna Fail/Sinn Fein coalition ‘’only a matter of time’’. Some Fianna Fail TD’s, including frontbenchers have come out as being open to going in to government with Sinn Fein. Other FF TD’s said they would want Gerry Adams to retire first before any discussions of a coalition could be made. Anne Rabitte said “There would have to be a change of leader, Under the current leadership, no way”. With Adams looking to be stepping down in the next few years and the former Fianna Fail Dubliner, Mary Lou Mc Donald likely to take up the role, that red line issue could be met without compromise from Sinn Fein.As the two parties have always claimed to be a republican party, were both against the treaty and seem to be hunkering down comfortably in the political centre nowadays more than ever, there could be a real possibility of this coalition between what was quoted by George Galloway in the Late Late show about Fianna Fail and Fine Gael as ‘"two cheeks of the same arse."

Fine Gael have shown lesser tolerance for Sinn Fein not just because of it’s deep ties with the IRA in the past but in present times. Enda Kenny has ruled out any coalition with Gerry Adams stating that Sinn Fein’s policies would "create huge job losses" and are "not fit for government". In contrast, the "Blueshirts", the pro - treatyites and converted free state unionists of old, have started a friendship with their Right Wing, Christian Democratic neighbors, the DUP in the North. In 2012, DUP Junior Minister, Jonathon Bell became the first Unionist to give a speech at the Fine Gael Ard Fheis. Applauded by the audience after referencing the Queen’s speech in Ireland, Bell said “Let us demonstrate what partnership can deliver." Later that year, Simon Coveney spoke at the DUP’s annual confernce. The then Agriculture Minister said "I hope we can develop the kind of friendship and kind of trust politically that's needed between the largest party in Northern Ireland and the largest party in the Republic of Ireland." Alan Shatter’s ‘Londonderry’ remark could only please the DUP even more.
So what about the future? Not since the foundation of Free State and Statelet has there been more talk in the political landscape of a united Ireland. Besides the obvious Sinn Fein rhetoric on Irish Unity, Fianna Fail have brought out their 12 point plan on reunification and have said they will run candidates in the North by 2019. People Before Profit are standing by there policy on a 32 County Socialist Republic, SDLP have upped their nationalism after their defeat at the general election with Colum Eastwood stating "Irish Unity is the biggest and best idea around" and his party are calling for a border poll after Brexit is fully implemented. Even Fine Gael have jumped on the band wagon with Leo Varadkar claiming that his party is a United Ireland party. As the parties on the island push ‘The Irish Question’ up their priority list it seems you can’t say united Ireland without saying inevitable. 

Merging Of Parties
So lets say hypothetically, what a united Ireland would look like in the political atmosphere. Going by what has been stated previously it could clearly be argued that even in a 32 county republic we would still have Fianna Fail and Fine Gael remaining as the top parties but perhaps not as powerful, being propped up by a coalition by either Sinn Fein for FF and DUP for FG. In this ‘new’ Ireland, it could be possible that the Dup and UUP would merge together calling themselves simply as ‘The Unionist Party’. Some Independent unionists along with the Progressive Unionist Party and Conservative Party members may also merge or dissolve completely. The real ‘hardliners’, TUV would merely fade away as they would not be able to stomach the Dail though some may move to the ‘darkside’ and work within a united Ireland. This will most likely go the other way with supporters, members, even MLA’s and MP’s turning their backs on their parties resulting in a small split in unionism.

We could also see another merger of the SDLP and Labour. As these two parties have a close affiliation with one another it is most likely that they would join together in a united Ireland. Ironically this new ‘Labour Party’ could be used again to be included in a Fine Gael/Unionist or Fianna Fail/Sinn Fein coalition. As Labour have worked with and has previously been in government with Fine Gael, SDLP working with Unionists and even talked about a merger with Fianna Fail, The, (lets call them) ‘United Labour Party’ could swing in any direction.
Smaller parties
Out of the possible 7th and 8th largest parties, The Green Party and Alliance Party could play its part in tipping the scale of power in Ireland. The Green Party would more than likely merge into one party in a 32 County Republic as it would be pointless to have two separate Green Parties in one country, Leaving them about par with Alliance. Both parties have no green or orange allegiance and have worked with other parties openly in both the North and South. Alliance could make inroads in the South but may take some time while the Greens tend to fluctuate in the south with 2 seats in the last southern election and none in the one previous.

In the South, the Social Democrats and Renua Ireland may not survive in a new Ireland and could possibly dissolve or merge with another party. Social Democrats founding member, Stephen Donnelly moved to Fianna Fail, leaving his former party with only two seats. Renua Ireland lost all three seats in the 2016 election.

As an all island party, AAA - PBP seem set on not shifting in their policies and only want to see a 32 County Socialist Republic, They could be seen as too left even for the left. Currently, the party have 6 seats in the Dail and only 1 in Stormont. As the only party in Ireland who seem unwilling to compromise and are fully against the largest parties both North and South, it will be likely that the new shorter named ‘People Before Profit’ would stand alone once again in a united Ireland.


In The End
A united Ireland might not be what some believe as the simple amalgamation of the six counties merging into the 26 but rather the 26 merging into the politically sectarian mine field that is the North. With a possible Fine Gael/Unionist or Fianna Fail/Sinn Fein coalition government in a united Ireland, it could well pit the old divide once more of Republican Nationalism against right wing capitalist unionism; with the new ‘United Labour Party’ and their flexible socialism tipping the balance of power on occasions where the margins aren’t enough for a victor; leaving people before profit, so called ‘Dissident Republicans’ and other socialist groups out in the political wilderness screaming out at their ignorant, lost comrades for not joining them to make real change but instead selling out for a place on the throne. A nation once again or perhaps just a little bit of history repeating? 


(Combining Number of votes taking from results of North/South elections 2016.)                                                                                                             
Fianna Fail/Sinn Fein 1,038,920
Fine Gael/UUP/DUP       872,867 
Labour Party/SDLP        236,851 
People Before Profit        98,268 
Green Party                      76,526                                                                                                                                     
Alliance Party                   72,717  

Stopping Profit From Israeli Apartheid

Catherine Hutton, Chairperson, Derry Branch IPSC with a:
Statement By Derry Branch Of Ireland Palestine Solidarity Campaign
The Derry branch and national Ireland Palestine Solidarity Campaign welcomed the passage of the motion. In supporting the BDS motion the DCSDC agreed to institute BDS into its own corporate policies. This means, for example, the DCSDC would work towards ending contracts with companies such as Hewlett-Packard who profit from Israeli apartheid.

There is also a need for ethical investment. Local government pensions equity holdings through NILGOSC are invested in a wide range of corporations, some of which are involved in the international arms trade. Derry has a proud record of taking a stand against companies such as Raytheon who were forced to relinquish their operations here in the city after a successful campaign against the weapons manufacturer. These corporations are complicit in human rights abuses not just in Palestine, but in Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan to name just a few. These investments stain the good name of Derry & Strabane District Council.
However, one year on, the DCSDC is yet to implement BDS. Derry IPSC made it clear its support of the motion was based on making sure it was not simply 'symbolic' or 'ornamental'. Over the last year, IPSC members have met regularly with DCSDC officers and councillors to discuss how to assist the implementation of BDS. This has become a frustrating experience and there appears to be a lack of will to move forward. An email was sent to all councillors and council officers first week in September reminding them of the council’s obligation to implement the motion. The silence has been deafening.

Derry IPSC will be attending the full DCSDC September meeting to renew the call for the BDS motion to be implemented. We are ready and willing, as we have been over the last year, to help the DCSDC in this process in anyway we can.

We will be delivering a petition to the DCSDC supporting implementation of the BDS motion. We are also inviting Palestine solidarity activists to Derry to strategize on how to see the BDS motion implemented and campaign for more councils to pass similar motions across Ireland. 
Israel is a powerful state backed by the most powerful states and corporations in the world. Apartheid Israel fears the growth of the BDS movement and is doing everything it can to impede it. But the BDS movement is growing stronger and stronger all across the world. The present situation in Gaza speaks to how conditions for Palestinians continue to deteriorate. This is why the DCSDC motion and what happens here is so important. 

Hell’s A Comin’

Unionists should jump on any plan to given Northern politicians seats in the Republic’s Parliament in Leinster House. In his latest Fearless Flying Column, controversial political commentator, Dr John Coulter, maintains that such a move could be part of a cunning plan to integrate the ‘Occupied 26 Counties’ back into the Union.

When is a Union not a Union? Sounds like a daft question, but the time has now come – like Unionist unity – for Unionists to embrace the idea of an all-island identity on the geographical island of Ireland.

This is not about the Unionist family admitting to surrender, compromise, concessions or betrayal, but simply recognising that in preparing for Brexit in 2019, Northern Unionists need to be ready with a cunning plan to integrate the ‘Occupied 26 Counties’ back into a Union with the United Kingdom.

Yes, for fear of being accused of a grammatical error, let me reiterate the central core of my ideology of Revolutionary Unionism – I did write ‘Occupied TWENTY-SIX Counties.’ The ideology of Revolutionary Unionism takes its ethos from the Glorious Revolution of the 1690s, which saw the Protestant Ascendancy rule all of Ireland.

The current Irish Republic’s political elite and economic gurus can crow all they want about the rebirth of the Celtic Tiger following the disastrous collapse, prompting a European Union bailout.

Such elite and gurus can boast as much as they like that the Southern economy is growing at a faster rate than the Northern Ireland economy given the political stagnation at Stormont.

But to quote one famous fundamentalist maxim – ‘Hell’s a comin’!’ And the name of that economic Hell is called Brexit.

No bobbing and weaving, ducking and diving will protect the South from the isolation that Brexit will heap on the 26 Counties. To survive, the Republic must be prepared to sell its soul – and that means a new Union between Britain and Ireland.

As a Unionist, the message is simple – your experiment known as ‘the republic’ will fail again, and we want those precious 26 counties back!

Indeed, the stage is set for this new political marriage, namely the opportunity for Northern politicians to take seats in Dublin. Ironically, this was a Sinn Fein notion, but one which if Unionists play their cards cleverly, will backfire badly on the republican movement.

Let’s have a reality check. The House of the Oireachtas, the National Parliament of the Irish Republic, is no longer the political House of Horrors to Unionism – thanks to the impressive range of cross-border institutions spawned by the 1998 Good Friday Agreement.

Gone are the days when Unionist politicians would be severely disciplined if they dared to cross the Irish border to carry of their civic duties.

This was due in part to the Dail Eireann, the House of Representatives, or the main Dublin Parliament, failing to adopt a ‘gloves off’ policy towards republican terrorists from the Provisional IRA and INLA using the Republic as a springboard for attacks on the Northern Unionist community and security forces.

But thanks to closer cross-border co-operation between the Dail and Westminster, with Stormont in the middle, Northern and Southern security forces are implementing a realistic policy which is adopting zero tolerance towards dissident republican terrorists bitterly opposed to the Irish peace process.

Cross-border co-operation is at its strongest, not just since the signing of the Belfast Agreement in 1998, the St Andrews Agreement in 2006, or even the Hillsborough Castle Deal a few years later.

Indeed, among Northern Unionists, the 30th Dail – or lower house – which was constituted following the May 2007 General Election, was perhaps the most constructive and popular since the Dail moved to its present home in Dublin’s Leinster House in 1922.

1999 was a key year in cementing Dail/Stormont relations. That was when Articles Two and Three of the Irish Constitution were amended to take account of the consent of the Northern Ireland people if they wanted to join the Republic.

Previously, these contentious articles had laid claim that the six counties which comprised Northern Ireland – and a part of the United Kingdom – were part of a whole island which formed one national territory.

Central to this vital cog in the Irish peace process was then Southern Prime Minister, or Taoiseach, Brian Cowen, a veteran centre-Right Fianna Fail leader. In May 2008, Cowen succeeded Bertie Ahern as Irish PM and FF leader, himself one of the key architects in developing a stable, devolved Stormont administration.

Later, the Stormont Assembly gained the necessary cross-community votes to secure the transfer of policing and justice powers back to a Northern administration; the first time since the early 1970s.

The seeds of this process were sown by Cowen during his years as Irish Foreign Minister and deputy Irish PM.

That Dail could also provide some parliamentary lessons for the Stormont Assembly. The Dail has 166 members representing 26 Irish counties, compared to the North’s 90 Assembly members representing six counties. The original Stormont Parliament axed in 1972 had only just over 50 MPs.

The Dail has mastered the art of coalition government. Cowen’s Fianna Fail had 77 TDs, or Deputies. He headed the largest party, but not enough to form a government.

This was achieved with a coalition with one of the minority parties, the Greens. But what has strengthened that Dail’s relations with Stormont has been the range of successful cross-border institutions.

These include: the North South Ministerial Council; the six North South Implementation Bodies, and the British Irish Inter-Governmental Conference set up in 1999.

Ironically, the current global economic crisis will see the need for the Dail and Stormont to work even closer, but we need Stormont up and running again if this is to be practically achieved.

The Dail prided itself on developing a strong economy within the European Union. It became known as the Celtic Tiger.

The world-wide banking fiasco saw the roaring Celtic Tiger deteriorate into the strangled yelps of a dying pussy cat.

The Republic benefited considerably from its EU membership, but with the South still set to become mainly a giver of European funding rather than a receiver, it took the then Fianna Fail coalition government two attempts to secure a Yes vote for the Lisbon Treaty.

However, the success of the Northern peace process and growth of cross-border institutions was not be enough to convince Southern voters that Cowen’s Fianna Fail should continue to run the Republic.

The 31st Dail became a rare political concoction of the Right-wing Fine Gael, the socialist Irish Labour Party, and the centre-Left Greens and Progressive Democrats, plus a gentle smattering of Independent TDs.

Sinn Fein may be the junior power-sharing Executive partner in the North, but in the Republic, the party is still viewed with suspicion as a hardline Marxist movement pretending to be a nationalist movement for Irish unity.

As the Southern Protestant population begins to grow again after decades of decline, the new political partnership which the Dail has cemented with Stormont has taken a new twist with some sections of the Unionist community, much to the delight of a Revolutionary Unionist like myself.

Just as the Dail was the key player in convincing Unionists to embrace a power-sharing Executive, so too, some Unionists want the Dail to embrace a new relationship with the Commonwealth, and especially the increasingly influential Commonwealth Parliamentary Association.

The CPA represents more than 50 national and regional parliaments, and not all of them were part of the former British Empire. The phrase “united strength of the colonial network” is becoming a new political buzz term I want whispered discreetly in Leinster House.

Political jungle drums are sounding a steady beat of the success of Royal visits to the Republic. Many Unionists see this as a potential springboard to get the Republic to have a closer bond with the CPA, of which the Northern Assembly is already a member.

Maybe if the CPA is still a step too far for the Dail, Northern politicians could be given seats in Leinster House. This certainly would be the thin edge of the wedge of Unionists having a say once more in the running of the ‘Occupied 26 Counties.’

Then again, what was seen as a Sinn Fein stunt could well be ripped out of the republican movement’s manifesto if Unionist politicians pile into Leinster House. Let the revolution begin!


Follow John Coulter on Twitter @JohnAHCoulter

Truth Will Out

Anthony McIntyre reviews a recently published book by a former blanketman.


Much of the content was committed to paper from memory many years ago and Gallagher had the task of pulling it together while McGlinchey was ill.



This perhaps explains the tension between what appears in the book and McGlinchey’s real thought on the political direction in which Sinn Fein has travelled. The politics expressed towards the end veer between the current Sinn Fein project in the North being okay to one of it being a sell-out. The evolution of the former blankeman's  thinking is not considered. However, McGlinchey has set out his thoughts sufficiently elsewhere to leave the knowledgeable reader in no doubt about where his perspective sits.

There have been other books written about life on the blanket. That should not serve to discourage former protestors from adding to their number. These personalised accounts fill out the narrative, and allow the contributions of the participants to make up a larger portion of the historiography. Personalised narratives accentuate the uniqueness of each of the protesters. What it was like for one may have looked vastly different through the eyes of another.

Some familiar with the protest will observe that the chronology is not as firmly pinned down as it might have been. It is not that the detail is wrong, just that it is not always in the right sequential order. Against that, the work doesn’t claim to be a fine-tuned work of history. Its appeal lies in its impressionistic conveyance of life in the blocks, which is graphically reinforced throughout with a range of sketches.

The book sets out the family background of the McGlinchey clan as it developed in impoverished and troubled times when tensions with Protestant neighbours were rising to the surface. Paul talks of the seemingly decent Protestant neighbours attacking student marchers with a hatred: even the sweetie shop man cursed the pope while he threw a brick. 

Paul was a witness to the politicisation of his older sibling Dominic who would later go on to become a formidable armed bane of the British state. The interest of Dominic was ignited by a lack of civil rights rather than the existence of partition. Dominic is reported to have said to his father: “we are entitled to dignity and respect, and have a right to jobs and housing”. The internment of Dominic was followed but the imprisonment of Sean, another brother.  Paul was following in the footsteps laid out in front of him.

Sentenced to 14 years for possession of rifles and IRA membership, Paul made his way to the H Blocks as one of the pioneers of prolonged protest. From this point on the book focusses on the daily brutality he had to endure. It seems inexcusable that in an era of addressing institutional abuse the official gaze is diverted away from the prisons.

In the earliest days of the protest other prisoners including loyalists would push rolled up cigarettes beneath his cell door, allowing him to experience the relief of a smoke. On occasion he would return from washing to find a Mars Bar under his pillow. The book is replete with names of blanket stalwarts from those days who no longer walk the earth.

Because his was an upbringing in a religious setting in a home where the Rosary was recited every evening, this came to have a bearing on how he came to see prison staff who often professed to be Christians yet had no compunction about brutalising naked prisoners. His hatred for them could be visceral as comes through with the vignette of making friends with a mouse. The tiny rodent was later killed by the squelch of a screw's boot.  McGlinchey remains unforgiving.

The book captures the nervousness and the fear that would grip the wings particularly ahead of wing shifts where the chances of a beating increased exponentially: “There is nothing as defenceless as a naked man in front of three hate filled males intent on beating you up. I was terrified.”

The violence could be severe. Paul refers to being raped by a screw who rammed “something cold and hard” inside him during a forced search: a baton perhaps. He passed out and bled for days, being denied medical attention.

All of this led him to ponder, much in the same way that Jimmy Boyle had ruminated in Scottish solitary, about how screws could conduct normal family life after a day of tormenting and abusing naked prisoners.

While the violence is prominent his point that “the protest was very long and boring” has more resonance. Tedium rather than terror was the chief adversary. It was a constantly battle between deprived minds and depraved minds. To ward off the imposed ennui prisoners devised numerous ways to stimulate their minds. While the “books” told out the door in the evenings once the jail had gone into night-time lockdown might not have included sex in his wing, on ours it was very different. For all the Rosaries offered up nightly, most couldn’t wait for the main bill. There was nothing like a titillating tale: the smuttier the better.

Nevertheless, religiosity keeps breaking through in the narrative. The reliance on prayer, the attendance at mass. Any port in a storm seemingly as most prisoners abandoned the devotion once they had other things to occupy their minds.

McGlinchey recalls Bobby Sands vising his wing on the 18th of December, 1980to state in Irish “we got nothing”. Something reported from other wings which seriously challenges the Sinn Fein narrative that the British had proposed a solution acceptable to the prisoners but which they later reneged on. One of the more salient errors from this time is the assertion that Tom McFeely never spoke to Brendan Hughes again after the hunger strike, on which both men had been. There is no foundation to that belief, although Paul McGlinchey merely says as far as he was aware.

At the same time the book errs seriously on who was in charge of the hunger strike. While the prisoners were determined to mount a second hunger strike, the leadership was not wary of a strike per se, but would only endorse one that would not collapse like the first one. The book would have benefited greatly from engaging with the ideas of Richard O’Rawe.

The book is overly harsh on Denis Faul, the priest who stepped up to the plate and tried to bring a halt to the hunger strikes when the leadership abdicated its responsibility to do so.

Whatever minor shortcomings accompany it, Truth Will Out is a poignant read which is at its strongest when it conveys the desolation that accompanies endurance in the face of prison management violence and systemically imposed deprivation. Ultimately, it is the tale of how ferocity was trumped by fortitude.

Philomena Gallagher And Paul McGlinchey, 2017. Truth Will Out. Calton Books. ISBN: 9780956417271. Copies can be obtained via philomena1.gallagher@googlemail.com

Dear Women, Christianity Was Never About God. It’s About You

Writing for Atheist Republic Katilyn Pulcher contends that Christianity was a patriarchal device for the control ad subjugation of women.

I’m writing to let you in on a secret, and a book, both of which I hope you’ll pass on to every woman you know and to every future female brought into this world. The secret has been kept for centuries and used to keep you oppressed, not only by misogynistic men, but also by yourselves. Once you know the secret, you can free yourself. If you share it with other females, you can free them, too. Are you ready?



The secret is, Christianity was never about God; it’s about you. To be blunt, it’s about controlling you. And since I’m also a woman, it’s about controlling me, too. The oppression American women still deal with every day did not stem from us being created by a god to be unequal to, and less important than, men, although Christians would have you believe that is the case. Rather, these inequities stem directly from the men who viewed women as “less-than” themselves and made up Christianity. Simply put: the entire invention of Christianity was nothing more than gaslighting.

A long time ago, these men wrote the Bible and made up an omnipresent, all-knowing, eternal god that people can’t see or hear because that’s scarier than a human being. If a woman doesn’t want to obey a human man, she can get out of it by moving away to the next town or murdering him. In other words, if he’s not around, she doesn’t have to follow his rules. So, these men made up someone who would always be around (omnipresent), even after we die (eternal), and claimed that everything they wanted her to do or not do (all the instructions) actually came from him (“God”). They convinced her that God was always around, even when these men weren’t, so she always had to follow God’s rules.

Women are typically smaller in stature and often less physically strong than males, so an incentive to obey men (for physical safety) already existed. Fearing that if they didn’t follow the rules, they would be punished both in this life (by men) and after they died (by God), the women started to obey. But the truth is, the Christian god was never going to punish those women for disobeying the rules of the Bible, nor is he going to punish us for doing the same. This is because they’re not his rules. They’re not his rules, because he’s not real. A Christian man may punish us for not following the rules of the Bible, or you may punish yourself, but that’s all.

How do I know that the rules in the Bible reflect nothing more than the desires of the men who wrote it to control everything and everyone - especially their desire to control us? Simple; I started reading it. If you read the Bible, you, too, will see that the book was written by someone who deeply dislikes women, rather than by an all-loving heavenly creator. The rules that men wrote in the Bible led directly to the rape culture, pay gap, sexual harassment, restricted access to abortion and birth control, and imposter syndrome that continue to poison the lives of females in America today.

You can tell that men wrote and loosely interpreted the rules because no woman in her right mind would write and follow directives that she, herself, should conceive as many children as possible; birth all children she conceives (even if she’s raped); be prohibited from speaking while men are not; control grown men’s sexual urges; and be stoned to death for having sex with a man but refusing to marry him. Following the first rule would be extremely, physically painful and unwise; the second, psychologically traumatic; the third, demeaning; the fourth, impossible; and the fifth, a denial of her own survival instincts as a mammal. Coincidentally, only some of those rules are written in the Bible, yet Christian churches preach varied interpretations of most, if not all, of them.

So, if you read the Bible you will also see that some of the Christian values according to which people live their lives and choose their political candidates are not even in the book. You can also tell that a loving god didn’t write the rules because whoever wrote them clearly did not even like women. If that god doesn’t like women, he certainly doesn’t love them and want to “save” them, contrary to what Christians would have you believe.

If you’re like most people, you don’t want to read the Bible, regardless of whether it’s to learn how to live your life or, as I’m suggesting, to see how it was designed to control you. You probably don’t want to read it for good reason - it’s incredibly long and rather boring. But here’s another secret.....the men who wrote it made it long on purpose, because they were counting on you NOT to read it. They were counting on you going to church every Sunday for the Cliff’s Notes. In the Cliff’s Notes version, other men can cherry pick the passages they want to use to manipulate your perspectives (a.k.a. gaslighting) and share them with you.

If you don’t want to read the Bible, you can read the much shorter book, Status Quon’t: A Woman’s Perspective On How Christianity Was Never About God.

This is the book I mentioned that I’m hoping you’ll pass on to the other females in your lives and your future daughters. It’s written by a cheeky, female millennial, complete with listicles, sarcastic rhetorical questions, and hashtags. Unlike the Bible, it’ll make you laugh. It’s also only 225 pages in length – you could finish it on a plane ride or a beach vacation. In addition to tying feminist topics, such as dress codes and slut-shaming, to their origins in religion, it contains truly crazy quotes, straight out of the Bible, that you’ve likely never heard in church.

Status Quon’t: will not tell you what you’re doing wrong and what you need to do instead, unlike the Bible or a self-help book. As a woman who is tired of hearing men constantly telling us what to do, I wanted to write a book that tells you, woman to woman, to think for yourself, trust your gut feelings, and answer your own questions. You know what’s best for you better than I do, and you certainly know it better than a man preaching from a podium in a church.


I hope you’re starting to see that the Christian church is not a safe place for us. If I could, I would sit next to each of you in church and, like any closing bartender, tell you, “You don’t have to go home, but you can’t stay here”. Perhaps you’ve known for a while that you need to leave the Christian church, but you’ve stayed put because you don’t know where to go next. Maybe you already don’t believe in the Christian god, but you’re not entirely certain that no god exists, whatsoever. Maybe you’re convinced no god exists but have your doubts about having evolved from apes. What you’re now dealing with is a conundrum of status quo, or widespread groupthink about the answers to life’s questions.

You don’t have to drop one status quo and adopt another. Rather, I encourage you to embrace a status quon’t, which I define as an ever-evolving state of critical thought and personalized beliefs. What I mean is, it’s okay to know what you need to leave (Christianity) without knowing where you’re going next. It’s also okay to form your own, individualized beliefs, rather than abandoning one commonly shared belief for another. You can leave the Christian church without jumping straight into atheism and immediately adopting the theory of evolution as your own.

I don’t care if you visualize a god that no one has ever thought of or spoken of and believe that she created the Earth and everything on it and then promptly died; I simply care that you leave the Christian church and fight against its oppressive teachings. My right to make choices about my own body is at stake the longer you believe in the Christian god and stay in church, as is yours. Regardless of where you’re going, it’s time to leave now.

The goal of Status Quon’t is not to move my readers from a current “incorrect” shared belief (e.g. in the Christian god) to a “correct” shared belief (e.g. lack of belief in any gods). I acknowledge that there is no single belief that could be universally comforting. I don’t want to lead you toward something else, I simply want to lead you away from something that is harmful to you (Christianity).

I also know that if we each crafted our own, original beliefs, we would not visualize the same image of a loving god or universal force, if we even visualized one at all. Personally, I sometimes get the feeling there is, or was, something out there beyond us, but I have no doubt that it’s not the god that was described in the Bible. Rather than attempting to explain what that “something” is, Status Quon’t encourages us to embrace the uncertainty until we have reliable information. We don’t all need to answer life’s questions the same way to be at peace. They are essay questions, not multiple choice. The variety of solutions is as great as the variety of our problems, so I hope you read my book and it prompts you to think of, or find, your solutions, not mine.

All the best,

Katilyn

You can purchase the book here

About the Author: Katilyn Pulcher grew up in a Baptist family in Missouri and became an atheist in her mid-twenties when a close relative became an alcoholic. No amount of prayer improved the situation, so Katilyn decided no one must be listening to those prayers and, thus, that God didn't exist. At first, she upheld the status quo and attempted to work a twelve-step program for family members of alcoholics, but she found it challenging without a belief in a higher power. Failing to have found peace and the answers to all of life’s questions in either the Bible or the twelve-step literature, she wrote her own book that will encourage you to think, rather than tell you what to do.

Sandals and Scandals

Sean Mallory irreverently has a go at a Belfast reverend and a few others along the way.


Although to be fair, with the slight exception to such teachings being those of love thy neighbour, John chapter 0, verse 0: “if thy neighbour should turn out to be Catholic or Irish then smite him down to linger in eternal pain among the heathens and the non-believers in Orangism.”
The good reverend, being a man of God, declared that he finds ‘offensive’ attempts to persuade Unionists to join a United Ireland. And that the UVF gun running of 1912 was not terrorism but that “they were of their period” and “ a community prepared to defend themselves”, and:

I’m British, I was born British, I will die British and I want no part of a united Ireland. I can’t be bought. I can’t be bribed.

Mmmmmm, a Unionist that can’t be bribed, now there is something unique - and obviously not a member of the DUP!

In union with ‘Mervyn's World’ perspective on the history of his community, the heirs of the 1912 gun runners, the UVF's Red Hand Commando have started their own initiative which is backed by the nefarious Loyalist Communities Council.  The latter represents loyalist paramilitary groups including the UDA, UVF and Red Hand Commando, and who publicly endorsed three DUP candidates in the recent Westminster elections - Nigel Dodds, Gavin Robinson and Emma Little-Pengelly. It also endorsed the Ulster Unionist party (UUP) candidate in Fermanagh and South Tyrone, Tom Elliott. The RHC has lodged a request with the British government to have themselves absolved of their murderous past, sorry, de-proscribed.

Former DUP economy minister Simon Hamilton has previously credited the LCC with attempting to move paramilitaries such as the RHC away from violence but didn’t specifically reject its backing.

I acknowledge the work that the Loyalist Communities Council has been doing in trying to work with paramilitary organisations to try to take them away from their past - I think that is positive, that is something to be encouraged.

He said shortly after the murder of Colin Horner, which is believed to have been part of a UDA internal feud. Now that is an unambiguous method of removing the past or more precisely the person from the past!

Considering their recent endorsement of the DUP, and the DUP being in a coalition of sorts with May's Tories, one can only surmise the outcome of such a request!

Speaking of which ...  the release of the £1bn DUP-Tory deal monies for Norn Iron must be approved by a Commons vote, admits May's government. A condition heretofore never mentioned and one that is unlike their Faustian pact not a done deal especially since  the DUP deal is being challenged in a crowdfunded legal case by Green party activist Ciaran McClean. He claims the deal breaks the promise of impartiality in the Good Friday agreement and also is in breach of the Bribery Act.

The high court has notified both sides’ legal teams that, because of the urgency of the claim, it should be heard in October, at the beginning of the new legal term. It is likely to begin on 26 October.

John Taylor – AKA Lord Kilclooney – and an Ulster Unionist supporter, joined Mervyn's World when he made the apparently rational claim that Nationalists, since they are in the minority to Unionists, could never be regarded as equals.

Applying Taylor's logical thinking to Unionism it would logically conclude that Unionists being in the minority in Britain should never be considered equal to the general British public!Elsewhere

IOC (international Olympic Committee) member Patrick Hickey, has resigned his executive post. he stated that he didn’t want the scrutiny surrounding his personal ‘deployment’ of tickets in Rio to tarnish or sully the good name of the already tarnished and sullied Committee, Seb Coe anyone. Especially since they gave him £326,000 to pay his bail money .... another Faustian pact ... bless’m!

The Republic's Garda Commissioner Noirin O’Sullivan quit her post due to an ‘unending cycle of scrutiny amid efforts to rectify the failures and mistakes of the past.’ These pertain to the recent garda scandals, including falsified alcohol breath tests, wrongful motoring convictions, financial irregularities at the Garda Training College, and the ill treatment of garda whistleblowers. A pity Foster couldn’t take a leaf out her book!

But all is not lost! Former RUC officer and PSNI deputy chief constable Judith Gillespie who currently sits on the Republic's Policing Authority - and what a job they’ve done - has been tipped as her replacement. That should keep a certain car bonnet-hopping Shinner happy!

Newton Emmerson, Irish News, 17/08/2017, takes a swing at ‘Rebel’ music. He relates a chimerical anecdote where he and a colleague, English perhaps, were ‘compelled’ to join in while sojourning in Ballycastle. The incident lead him to conclude that due to it being a “coy phenomenon” then "rebel music must be a source of embarrassment among nationalists themselves.” 
A common problem for Newton and other Unionists is that they presume to have an understanding of Irish Nationalism and its various facets, based on their own Britishness.


Internationally

Wirathu, a Myanmar Buddhist monk - but no follower of the Dalai Lama - has ignited and stoked through his teachings, the brutal and murderous military campaign of the Myanmar army against the Rohingya Muslims.

Amid reports of the burning of villages and extrajudicial killings, the military campaign is described by The UN High Commissioner of Human Rights, Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein as “clearly disproportionate and without regard for basic principles of international law.” And calling on the Myanmar government to end its bloody campaign added, “the situation seems a textbook example of ethnic cleansing.”

Aung Sang Suu Kyi, the de facto Myanmar leader, said her government, the first civilian led government in years, blamed the violence on “terrorists” and claimed the controversy has been caused by “a huge iceberg of misinformation” with a good dose of Trump's fake news also!

In response to the brutality, over 400,000 people have signed a petition to strip Aung Sang Suu Kyi of her Nobel Peace Prize. When you look back at some of the past laureates, she's in fine company!

Radio Free Eireann Broadcasting 16 September 2017

Martin Galvin with details of this weekend's broadcast from Radio Free Eireann.
Radio Free Eireann will broadcast this Saturday September 16th on WBAI 99.5 FM radio or wbai.org at 12noon New York time or 5 pm-6pm Irish time or listen any time after the broadcast on wbai.org/archives.

Derry based journalist Eamon Sweeney will:

➤ contrast the crown's decision to prosecute veteran Republican Ivor Bell despite severe medical issues for a 1972 incident, while making no moves against Bloody Sunday troopers.

➤ discuss the application by the loyalist paramilitary Red Hand Commandos to become a legal community group eligible for community work and grants.

➤ comment on recent moves by the Fianna Fail Party to expand into the North. Kieran O'Reilly will tell us what is going on at the Irish Repertory Theater.

Sean Whelan of the National Graves Association will discuss the debate over commemorations of events during the Irish Civil War where Republicans fought against the Irish Free State.

We will have any details that can be made public on the protest at the Free Derry Museum and the interim mediation. 

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.

‘Supergrass’ Tactic A Grotesque Violation Of The Right To A Fair Trial

The Thomas Ashe branch of the 1916 Societies slams the use of the supergrass evidence.



The Thomas Ashe Society note with alarm the use of the long-discredited ‘Supergrass’ tactic in the 26-Counties, this being employed by the state as a means to target and imprison Irish republicans without meaningful evidence or due process.
We call on those who have set in place this reactionary policy – which is a fundamental, grotesque violation of the right to a fair trial – to desist at once. We call for all charges against those concerned to be dropped forthwith and for those currently imprisoned on the say-so of a paid agent of the state, Dave Cullen, to be released without further ado.

To those effected by these reprehensible measures, we extend our solidarity and support. We call also at this time on republicans and progressives to join in our opposition to this frightening development, which is a cause of concern for us all as to the future direction our society is set toward.

Ringland Blames The Victims

Martin Galvin, a New York Attorney-At-Law with a complete version of his letter in the Irish News earlier this week.
Re: Trevor Ringland - For a change let's put innocent victims first Irish News August 24, 2017

A chara,
Trevor Ringland wants a Thatcher-like compromise to fund Troubles victims' pensions. Thatcher proposed to end H-Block brutality, if Republican political prisoners accepted costumes that made criminals of themselves and their struggle. Now Mr. Ringland proposes to end the DUP holdup on victims' funds, if Sinn Fein excludes severely injured Republicans, thereby making criminals of these victims and their struggle.

Mr. Ringland seems less worried about helping victims win pensions than using victims to win political points. Why should Republicans submit to this bullying? His idea is a sad reminder of the scornful arrogance at the heart of the collapse of Stormont.
The statutory definition of injured victims includes everyone who was physically or psychologically injured as a result of or in consequence of a conflict related incident. Implicit in this definition was acceptance that Republicans, were among the victims. A family member of a slain IRA Volunteer served as a Victims Commissioner, alongside the widow of an RUC Reservist, a nationalist mediator and unionist television commentator.

Mr. Ringland says funds for 400 injured Troubles victims are blocked because there is "no agreement" about including 6 loyalists and 4 severely injured Republicans as victims. When did the DUP worry about paying loyalists? Mr. Ringland means the DUP are holding 400 victims hostage to brand Republican victims and the Republican struggle as criminal perpetrators. He says pay the ransom demands, adding "is it too much to ask?"

Despite years of peace and power-sharing, Mr. Ringland, like the DUP, can see no moral Republican viewpoint or honorable motives in those who fought to end British rule.

He imagines a conflict pitting the blameless British against Republican villains. Former members of the IRA, elected representatives and Stormont ministers included, wanted only "to take life and cause destruction". British crown forces shot down innocents in Ballymurphy or on Bloody Sunday, tortured political prisoners, or paid criminal loyalist agents like Robin Jackson to carry out hundreds of murders, only "to save lives and prevent damage."

Mr. Ringland typifies the disdainful arrogance at Stormont towards Republicans and anyone they elect. Once former Stormont head David Trimble spoke of representatives elected by the Republican community coming to be "house trained".

Years of peace, power-sharing and unrequited reconciliation seem to have hardened such attitudes. Today the DUP uses 4 severely disabled victims as a leash to pull Republicans back from thinking even our victims will ever get their respect or compassion.

Slan,


Martin Galvin

Pride Parade In Vancouver Rejects Iranian Over Veil Float

Maryam Namazie with a piece about Vancouver's Pride Parade deferring to religious sentiment. The piece was first published in The Freethinker.







Cirque de So Gay,
Iranian Shawn Shirazi and his group Cirque de So Gay were denied entry to the Pride Parade in Vancouver, Canada this year because their float criticising the veil was deemed to be ‘culturally [in]sensitive’.
In the application for Cirque de So Gay, he wrote:

Our entry in the 2017 Pride Parade will be visually stunning, while simultaneously encouraging dialogue about freedom of expression. We will be walking and dancing behind our pickup truck wearing black niqabs (ie the Islamic full-body covering plus veil). 
At times we will be demure, with the niqabs wrapped around our bodies, but all that will change when, in perfect unison, we cast off the shroud of oppression to unveil the Persian Princess beneath. 
The unexpected reveal will surprise and delight the parade audience, who will be enjoying the dramatic and infectious beat of our lively Middle Eastern music. Along the parade route, some of our participants will also be handing out wrapped candy, such as lollipops.

In the application, he asked the group to be introduced in this way:

Please welcome back the ever-popular Cirque de So Gay, focused this year on encouraging dialogue about individual freedom, and defying oppression so people can express themselves, as they choose, without the threat of being flogged, stoned, or beheaded. 
The Islamic attire is more than just a piece of black fabric. It’s a tool used by governments to impose absolute control and authority over their citizens and even tourists.
Instead of hiding our true selves, we must cast off the shroud of tyranny to reveal the fabulous princess beneath – to shine our special light upon this incredible world where we live and love.

In the refusal letter, the Vancouver Pride Society simply wrote:

Upon review of your application and your proposed float activities, we are declining your entry for this year. The members of our Parade Working Group felt that the theme and activities proposed were not culturally sensitive. There are many people who choose to wear niqabs as part of their religious beliefs and do not feel that it is oppressive.
We really appreciate the creativity and encourage you to apply next year with a different theme.

Whilst the Vancouver Pride Society is trying to spin its abhorrent decision every which way possible on social media, its verdict is unsurprising and not unlike what has happened with the Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain’s entry in Pride in London this year (see Pride has the Chance to do the Right Thing) or attempts by “anti-fascists” to stop Iranian refugees marching at Pride Toronto prior to that.
The presence of the Council of Ex-Muslims at London Pride this year left hard-line Islamists seething with rage
It’s the “do-gooders” who only seem to do good for the Islamic regime of Iran and the Islamists and never the dissenters.

Everyone except the Vancouver Pride Society knows the veil has been imposed by brute force in Iran and for that matter in many places. But throw enough acid in women’s faces, beat enough unveiled or “improperly-veiled” women or imprison enough of them over decades as has been done in Iran and you will always find collaborators like those at VancouverPride Society saying “it’s your culture, shut up and enjoy the oppression.”

Of course, there are some women who like wearing the veil just as there are some gay men who willingly go to conversion sessions and exorcisms to become straight, but you don’t stop defending LGBT or women’s rights because there are those who have bought into the religious-right’s narrative and culture.

After all, culture isn’t homogenous. For every person defending the veil or therapies for “curing” LGBT, there are plenty of people opposing them and the Iranian regime’s “culture” imposed by brute force.

It’s a good thing the Vancouver Pride Society wasn’t around to tell the suffragettes demanding women’s right to vote or the black civil rights activists entering white only diners to end segregation to shut up and go home and be more “culturally sensitive”.

There were some whose culture it was to consider women and LGBT sub-human and others whose culture it was to demand equal rights. Unfortunately for Vancouver Pride Society, it has decided to firmly stand with the defenders of the veil (which implies that women’s bodies are so dangerous causing fitnah and chaos in society, thereby the need to conceal them), rather than those criticising and opposing the veil.

If the Society was around in the 1970s, what would they have told those organising Pride Vancouver? It’s people’s culture to be homophobic – “stop being culturally insensitive”, “shut up and go home and enjoy the oppression.”

If everyone listened to the likes of the Society, where would any of us be?

Yes, racism exists– and by the way, we refugees and migrants from Iran and the Middle East know that better than those sitting on the “Parade Working Group”. We all live it as we do sexism and homophobia and xenophobia but you can’t fight racism by ignoring misogyny and homophobia.

Vancouver Pride has done the Iranian regime proud and turned its back on those who it should be standing with.

It has a lot of explaining and apologising to do, including by making sure that Cirque de So Gay is there next year and with the same not “different theme”.

Freethinker Editor’s note: The picture used to illustrate Maryam’s piece is a file photo of Cirque de So Gay, a group of mainly Middle Eastern gay and transgender men who marched in the 2011 Vancouver Gay Pride Parade, dancing and throwing off their niqabs to highlight the oppression of women in countries like Iran.