Anthony McIntyre's Blog, page 1199

A Concealment Of Genocide

Chris Fogarty asks:
Are Canadians; at least Globe and Mail readers, really defined by a vicious lie - a concealment of genocide?
"Folio: Irish famine; A tiny park to mark what defines us" (Globe and Mail; June 19, 2017, A8 and A9) perpetuates falsehood with dire implications for mankind. 
Consciences such as George Bernard Shaw ( Man and Superman) denounced the "famine" label attached to Ireland's Holocaust* of 1845-1850. Our otherwise exemplary Marist Brother in Castlerea, Co. Roscommon was asked recently: "You now say 'genocide' why did you teach 'famine'?" - his tragic reply: "I had no choice; I had to teach the curriculum as provided by government."
Upon researching my grandfather's biography at Britain's National Archives I was shocked to find records showing that it took more than half of Britain's military to starve Ireland. Sixty-seven of its 130-regiment army, removed, at gunpoint, Ireland's abundant livestock and food crops to its ports for export, thus murdering approximately five million.
My book's fold-out map shows the locations of 180 Holocaust mass graves in Ireland; but we continue to document others. Exhibits C2 (1845 through 1850) show the dates that each named regiment entered and exited each Irish district during those six years. It records Lord Clarendon's 1847 statement: "But for the onerous duty of escorting of provisions (edibles) the army in Ireland would have little to do."

To put genocide permanently out-of-bounds as government policy we must cease encouraging mass murderers by concealing past and current ones.


*"Genocide" by historical precedence: The Cork Examiner newspaper (1847), Michael Davitt's published works (1847-1904); James Fitzgerald in his "The Causes of Irish Emigration..." (1911); Rev. Fr. Maguire of Sillers, Canada, upon the August 15, 1909 inauguration of the Grosse Ile monument; et al.


FYI: Knowing that newspaper editors do not open attachments I copy/paste here two small portions of my book.


(Extracted from my Ireland 1845-1852: the Perfect Holocaust, and Who Kept it ‘Perfect’ .)



From Exhibit A2: Some Holocaust Mass Graves Other Than Those Shown On The Map:

Prov. of Ontario: Toronto: Many thousands died during 1845-50, especially in 1847, in a tent city behind St. Paul’s (83 Power St.), a basilica built by an earlier Irish generation close to the disembarkation point.

The dead were buried in trenches adjacent to their tents. Unmarked. Now covered by St. Paul Catholic School, parking lot & playground, also by a City of Toronto off-leash dog toilet named Orphans Greenspace.

It was reported (Toronto Star; August 5, 2011) that that burial ground is also covered by the Don Valley Parkway overpass and probably extends south to Adelaide Street.

A dog toilet? Is the Orange Order that strong in Toronto? Are the Irish there that weak? This is reminiscent of the tourist guide at Edinburgh Castle some twenty years ago who, while pointing out the chapel of some Scottish Queen/Saint (Margaret?) told us all with obvious relish, that that royal, being a Catholic, was buried in the animal cemetery with the royal dogs, cats, and a donkey.

Toronto: A “Protestant Irish Famine Mass Grave.” Marked. (Location?)
Also, please note:


The Contents of my Ireland 1845-1850: the Perfect Holocaust, and Who Kept it ‘Perfect’.  
Contents

How to Read this Book………………………………………………………………………………………1

Acknowledgments………………………………………………………………………………………………………3

Foreword…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………9

Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………………………11

Chapters


1) Pre-Holocaust Ireland……………………………………………………………15

2) Pre-Holocaust Presence of British Army Rank and File in Ireland …………………………75

3) The Holocaust…………………………………………………………………………………77

4) Resistance to the Food Removal……………………………………99

5) Roles of the Government, Churches, and News Media …………………………………….……101

6) Toll of the Holocaust……………………………………………………………105

7) The Aftermath: The Continued Coercion Acts, Land War, Boycott, the Continued Evictions….123

8) England Repatriates its Landlords……………………….…141

9) But the Rent Extractions Continue………………….………143

10) The Truth-Tellers……………………………………………………………….…145

11) The Cover-Up Artists who Kept the Holocaust “Perfect” ……………………………………152

12) “Speranza” vs. Sir William Wilde…………………….…….175

13) How to Refute the History Falsifiers. ……….…185

14) What We Must Do………………………………………………………………….……195

Exhibits (Presented in their legal sense, as evidence of the crime of genocide.)

A: My “Smoking Gun” Map……………………………………………………………..…………197

A2: Other Mass Graves; A3: Map of Lisnabinnia; A4: Photos of Memorial of Lisnabinnia Village and of its Mass Grave Marker; A5; Kathleen Flanagan Kerlin’s Affidavit; A6: Lisnabinnia’s Holocaust memorial consecration/inauguration.

B: Sample News Reports of Food Leaving Ireland and Arriving in England …………..……216

C: The Immediate Perpetrators of the Holocaust…………..220

C1: The British Army Regiments that Removed the Food; their Provenances; C1.a: The Deployment of the Irish-Named British Army Regiments During 1845-1850. C1.b: The British Army Regiments that did NOT Participate in the Food Removal. C2: The British Army Reg’ts that Removed Ireland’s Food; by District and Year; C3: The Landlords’ Militias; C3.a: Record of a Typical County Disembodied (Reserve) Militia Regiment. C3.b: The Disembodied (Reserve) Militia Regiments of Ireland in 1845-1850. C4: The Constabulary; its Role. C4.a: Revenue Police; C4.b: Castle Police; C5: Locations of British Coast Guard Stations on Ireland’s Coasts; C6: Total Number of British Armed Enforcers of the Food Removal. C7: Deployments of the 68th of Foot During the Food Removal; C8: Typical Cess Seizures by Army Reg’ts; C9: Typical Cess Seizures by Constabulary.

D: Table of Non-Potato Crop Processors Extant…………………273

Prior to the Holocaust; by County. D1: Maps of Donegal and Sligo Showing Sequence of Ordnance Survey Sheets; D2: Details of Exhibit D, by Numerical Sequence of Sheets

E: The Landlords' Names …………………………………………………………………………306

(for space considerations, named from A through D only). Note their Non-Irish names, titles, clubs, addresses, etc. E2: Summary of Acreages of Landlords of 3,000 Acres or More, by county (1882). E3: Acreage owned by British Peers in each county. E4: List of Ireland’s 3000+-Acre Landlords from E through Z (in 1882) Who Were Also Members of Britain’s House of Commons or Had Access to the House of Lords via Their Titles (and could thus legislate in their own interests). E5: Lord Ashbrook; Evictor of my Paternal Great-Grandfather and Family. E6: Lord Ashbrook’s Arley Hall & the current Lord and Lady. E7; Some Other Landlords, E8; The Hawkins Family Crest.

F: Coercion Acts from 1800 to 1887. …………………………………………338

G: Pope Leo XIII on Boycotting. ……………………………………………………340

H. British Rule in Occupied Ireland. ………………………………………344

Glossary …………………………………………………………………………………………345

End Notes ………………………………………351

Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………………………365

Index……………………………………………………………………………………………388

Tony Taylor's Arbitrary And Unjust Detention

Wiping Their Feet On The Memories Of Our Loved Ones

Kate Nash appeals for people to sign a petition in support of relatives of victims of state forces whose memory they feel is being besmirched by the Museum Of Free Derry. The brother of Kate Nash was killed by war criminals on Bloody Sunday.



The background to the petition we invite people to sign is very simple. There is a display in the Museum Of Free Derry which features British soldiers, RUC and innocent victims of the Troubles - all being commemorated together.

The MOFD argument is that it's a list or record of 1969-1972 featuring people who lost their lives as a result of the political conflict in Free Derry. They also contend that it has been there for 10 years and in all that time nobody has complained. What they are not so clear about is that this idea was in text on a computer and not an actual Digital display on a wall.

The display, if I can describe it, has 53 images. There is a mix of British Army, UDR, RUC, IRA and 
innocent victims. Sammy Devenny, for example, is the first image.

There are twelve seconds between each image appearing. There are a few names which do not have a photograph and in place of that there is an image resembling a window with a cross in it. 

I strongly believe that this constitutes commemoration. Photographs of these can be seen on the Facebook wall of Helen Deery whose brother Manus was shot dead by British troops while he sat with friends, unarmed and innocent. 

We have asked The Bloody Sunday Trust to take the display down because nobody was consulted about it. It is causing unnecessary hurt. Add to that the complete inappropriateness of the entire venture and you can understand how we feel.

We have fought for justice for almost 46 years without success and now these people are wiping their feet on the memories of our loved ones. 

I contacted the Museum via their Facebook page and there was no response. I then called Raymond McCartney and Brian Tierney who sit on the Bloody Sunday Trust. Raymond said he would bring it up at the next meeting. He was, however, unable to give me a date for that.

We started a petition after I contacted the museum. That first week, we gathered 1000 signatures and presented them to the Museum.

We were told after the official opening that they would reconsider their stance. In fact there was some mention that the display would come down. We suspended the petition in hope of a good result. Nothing happened for weeks. 

A couple of weeks ago they said they were sending out appointments to each family to discuss the issue. Nothing has come of this to date.

We started the petition again on Saturday past at a local supermarket as well as starting a complementary online petition.

I would be very grateful if The Pensive Quill could promote the online petition. This issue is extremely important to us. We want this display taken down. All our energy should be directed at the PPS and not be wasted on trying to get our own people to do the decent thing.

A digital exhibition on show at the Museum of Free Derry depicts, alongside those murdered and injured by the state, pictures and information about members of state forces killed in Free Derry. This is an insult to those loved ones, their families and the people of Derry who know only too well the impact the Armed Forces and the RUC had on our City. Victims and perpetrators are not equal and they should not be commemorated together, despite what the Museum has said. Tell the Museum of Free Derry to remove the names of RUC and British Army members from alongside innocent Derry victims.


Please sign the petition and pass it along to your family, friends and associates to sign as well.

You will be helping the families of the victims of Bloody Sunday.

Thank you for your cooperation.

No Apologies

Maryam Namazie demands to know why so called progressives will not stand with her in terms of defending freedom of conscience. Maryam Namazie is an Iranian-born writer and activist. She is the Spokesperson of One Law for All and the Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain, hosts a weekly television programme in Persian and English called Bread and Roses and is organising an international conference on free conscience and expression dubbed the “Glastonbury of Freethinkers” during 22-24 July 2017 to defend the right to be free from and reject religion. #IWant2BFree.This is my letter to you, not you the racist or Islamist but you who I should call friend: I Accuse‬. Published in sister-hood, 27 June 2017.

Spanish Translation



This is my letter to you.

Not you, the Islamist, who wants me silent or dead whilst dreaming of your vile caliphate, nor you, the racist, who wants my Muslim and migrant family out whilst dreaming of your contemptible white, Christian Europe. To me, you are two sides of the same coin.

This is my letter to you who I should consider a friend, an ally, but who refuses to make a stand with me. You: the progressive, the anti-racist, the supposed defender of human rights.

How come your defence of freedom of conscience and expression never includes my right to reject and criticise Islam?

You exclude, bar, ban, blame and shame me – or at the very least – remain silent, simply because of who I am: an ex-Muslim, an atheist, a critic of Islam.

Of course, you have a right to your silence.

You are not responsible for my persecution. Only those who threaten, kill and harm freethinkers in countries and communities under Islamist control are directly responsible; justice, after all, can never be about placing collective blame.

But I do accuse.

I accuse you of blaming me and never the perpetrators.

They always seem to have some ‘legitimate’ grievance or ‘hurt’ sensibility that justifies their incitement to violence or mass murder.

I, on the other hand, am always at fault:

‘If only I had not offended’ Your religion offends me but I am still able to stand with you and defend your right to religion.

‘If only I had not provoked’ Islamists kill, maim, silence and I am the one provoking them by saying what I think? Is that you speaking or them?

‘If only I had respected Islam’ You don’t respect my atheism; why must I respect your religion? In any case, one is not required to respect beliefs but the right to belief.

‘If only I had kept my opinion about Islam to myself’… You do not keep your opinions to yourself. Every day, from every corner I hear how ‘Islam is a religion of peace’ and that ‘Islamists are not practising real Islam’. Religion is shoved down my throat until I suffocate; yet I must keep my opinions to myself? Do I not also have the right to speak and think as I choose? Until Islamists stop threatening me, I will shout my atheism from every rooftop.

‘I am aiding racism because I criticise Islam’ Are you promoting terrorism because you defend Islam? I do not blame you for terrorism; stop blaming me for racism – which, by the way, affects me too.

Dear ‘friend’,

Is it really so hard to grasp that freedom of conscience is not just for the believer? That it includes the right not to believe, the right to reject Islam – publicly or otherwise. That freedom of expression is not just for those who defend and promote Islam. It is also my and our freedom to criticise Islam, mock it, and even see it as the regressive ideology of the Islamist movement.

And to do so publicly without fear.

Frankly, when I hear the Quran recited, it feels like a kick to my stomach. It reminds me of executions in Iran and the totalitarian nightmare from which I have fled and sought refuge.

Nonetheless, I can still make a distinction between beliefs and human beings. I can still defend the right to religion; I can still stand with you against fascists of all stripes.

Why can you not defend my right to reject religion?

Why can you not stand with me?

Can you not see that freedom of religion is meaningless without freedom from religion? These are corresponding freedoms. They cannot exist fully without the other.

Maybe you can afford your silence. After all, religion and its defenders have always been privileged and freethinkers have always been persecuted throughout the ages. But I and we cannot.

Because we have no choice.

Because we have a right to think and live freely – even if it offends you.

Because if we don’t speak for ourselves, who will speak for us? You certainly won’t.

Because we must speak for ourselves, our loved ones, for those who cannot speak, for those who are beaten into submission in homes in London, imprisoned in Riyadh or are facing the gallows in Tehran and Karachi.

For Raif Badawi, for Sina Dehghan, Sahar Ilyasi, Ayaz Nizami, Ahmad Al-Shamri, Taimoor Raza, Avijit Roy…

Because we are the tsunami that is coming…

Yes, I don’t blame you for my persecution, but I do often wonder how much of a role your victim blaming and silence play – even if unwittingly – in normalising the open season on Islam’s atheists and freethinkers.

I wonder. If you were not so tolerant of the culture of offence and so intolerant of my criticism, would the world not be a different place?

I accuse.

#IWant2BFree

The Four-Letter Word

The Uri Avnery Column discusses the concept of peace.
Add caption
When a Briton or American speaks about a "four-letter word", he means a vulgar sexual term, a word not to be mentioned in polite society.

In Israel we also have such a word, a word of four letters. A word not to mention.This word is "Shalom", peace.

(In Hebrew, "sh" is one letter, and the "a" is not written.)

For years now this word has disappeared from intercourse (except as a greeting). Every politician knows that it is deadly. Every citizen knows that it is unmentionable.

There are many words to replace it. "Political agreement". "Separation". "We are here and they are there". “Regional arrangement". To name a few.

And here comes Donald Trump and brings the word up again. Trump, a complete ignoramus, does not know that in this country it is taboo.

He wants to make peace here. SH-A-L-O-M. So he says. True, there is not the slightest chance that he really will make peace. But he has brought the word back into the language. Now people speak again about peace. Shalom.

Peace? What is peace?

There are all kind of peaces. Starting from a little peace, a baby-peace, to a large, even mighty peace.

Therefore, before opening a serious debate about peace, we must define what we mean. An intermission between two wars? Non-belligerence? Existence on different sides of walls and fences? A prolonged armistice? A Hudna (in Arabic culture, an armistice with a fixed expiry date)?

Something like the peace between India and Pakistan? The peace between Germany and France – and if so, the peace before World War I or the peace prevailing now? The Cold War between the Soviet Union and the United States, or the Hot Peace between Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump?

There are all kinds of peace situations. What kind of Israeli-Palestinian peace are we talking about? The peace between a horse and its rider? The peace between a people of masters and a people of slaves? Something like the peace between the South African Apartheid regime and the Bantustans it had created for the Blacks? Or a quite different kind of peace, a peace between equals?

It's about this peace I would like to speak. Not "real" peace. Not "perfect" peace. Not "complete" peace.

About peace. Peace pure and simple. Without qualifications, please.

When Did it all start? The conflict that now dominates the lives of the two peoples, when did it begin?

Hard to say.

It is easy to say: it started when the first Jewish immigrant reached these shores.

Sounds simple. But it is not altogether true.

It seems that the pre-Zionist Bilu immigrants, who came here in the early 1800s, did not arouse hostility.

I have a theory about that: some time before the Bilu (short for "House of Jacob, Go!") came here, a religious German sect, the Templers, settled in this country. They had no political aims, just a religious vision. They set up model villages and townships, and the locals were grateful. When the first Jews arrived, the locals assumed that this was more of the same.

Then came the Zionist movement, which definitely had political aims. They spoke only about a "national home", but the founder, Theodor Herzl, had previously written a book called "The Jewish State" (or, more accurately, "The Jewstate"). The aim was hidden for a time, because the country belonged to the Ottoman Empire.

Only very few of the local population realized right from the beginning that this was a mortal danger for them. A large majority of the Muslims saw the Jews only as an inferior religious community, which the Prophet had commanded them to protect.

So when did the conflict start? There are various theories about that. I adhere to the theory of the almost-forgotten historian Aharon Cohen, who pointed to a particular event. In 1908, the revolution of the "Young Turks" broke out. The Islamic Ottoman Empire turned into a nationalist state. As a reaction, there arose in Palestine and the neighboring countries an Arab national movement, which called for the "decentralization" of the empire, giving autonomy to its many peoples.

A local Arab leader approached the Zionist representative in Jerusalem with a tempting offer: if the Jews support the Arab movement, the Arabs will support Zionist immigration.

In great excitement, the Zionist representative rushed to the then leader of the Zionist world movement, Max Nordau, a German Jew, and urged him to accept the offer. But Nordau treated the offer with contempt. After all, it was the Turks who were in possession of the country. What did the Arabs have to offer?

It is difficult to know how history would have evolved if such a Zionist-Arab cooperation had come into being. But a European Jew could not even imagine such a turn of events. Therefore the Zionists cooperated with the Turkish – and later with the British – colonial regime against the local Arab population.

Since then, the conflict between the two peoples has intensified from generation to generation. Now peace is further away than ever.

But What is peace?

The past cannot be obliterated. Anyone who suggests that the past should be ignored and that we "start again from the beginning" is dreaming.

Each of the two peoples lives in a past of its own. The past shapes their character and their behavior every day and every hour. But the past of one side is totally different from the past of the other.

This is not just a war between two peoples. It is also a war between two histories. Two histories which contradict each other in almost every particular, though they concern the very same events.

For example: Every Zionist knows that until the 1948 war, the Jews acquired land with good money, money contributed by Jews around the world. Every Arab knows that the Zionists bought the land from absentee landlords who lived in Haifa, Beirut or Monte Carlo, and then demanded that the Turkish (and later the British) police evict the fellahin who had tilled the land for many generations. (All the land had originally belonged to the Sultan, but when the empire was bankrupt the Sultan sold it to Arab speculators.)

Another example: Every Jew is proud of the Kibbutzim, a unique achievement of human progress and social justice, which were frequently attacked by their Arab neighbors. For the Arabs, the Kibbutzim were just sectarian instruments of displacement and deportation.

Another example: Every Jew knows that the Arabs started the 1948 war in order to exterminate the Jewish community. Every Arab knows that in that war, the Jews evicted half the Palestinian people from their homeland.

And so forth: nowadays the Israelis believe that the Palestinian Authority, which pays a monthly salary to the families of "murderers", supports terrorism. The Palestinians believe that the Authority is duty-bound to support the families whose sons and daughters have sacrificed their lives for their people.

And so forth, without end.

(By the way, I am very proud of having invented the only scientifically sound definition of "terrorist", which both sides can accept: "Freedom fighters are on my side, terrorists are on the other side.")

There Will never be peace if the two peoples do not know the historical narrative of the other side. There is no need to accept the narrative of the opponent. One can deny it totally. But one has to know it, in order to understand the other people and respect it.

Peace does not have to be based on mutual love. But it must be based on mutual respect. Mutual respect can arise only when each people knows the historical narrative of the other side. When it understands that, it will also understand why the other people acts the way it does, and what is needed for peaceful co-existence.

That would be much easier if every Israeli Jew learned Arabic, and every Palestinian Arab learned Hebrew. That would not solve the problem, of course, but it would bring the solution much closer.

When each of the two peoples understands that the other side is not a bloodthirsty monster, but acts from natural motives, it will discover many positive points in the culture of the other side. Personal contacts will be established, perhaps even friendships.

This is already happening in Israel, though on a small scale. In the academic world, for example. And in the hospitals. Jewish patients are often surprised to discover that their nice and competent doctor is an Arab and that Arab male nurses are frequently more gentle than the Jewish ones.

That cannot replace dealing with the real problems. Our two peoples are divided by real, weighty controversies. There is a problem about land, about borders, about refugees. There are problems of security and innumerable other issues. A war of more than a hundred years will not end without painful compromises.

When there is a basis for negotiations between equals, a basis of mutual respect, insoluble problems will suddenly become soluble problems.

But The precondition for this process is the return of the four-letter-word to the language.

It is impossible to do something big, something historic, if there is no belief that it is possible.

A person will not plug an electric cord into a wall if they do not believe that they will be connected to electricity. They must believe that the lights will go on.

Nobody will start peace negotiations if they believe that peace is impossible.

The belief in peace will not make peace certain. But at least it will make peace possible.

Sinn Féin’s Grassroots Got Very Angry

Via The Transcripts Martin Galvin @ Radio Free Eireann speaks to award-winning journalist, Suzanne Breen , via telephone from Belfast on 1 July 2017, who updates us on and provides her spot-on analysis of the most critical issues now occurring in North of Ireland. Radio Free Éireann
WBAI 99.5FM Pacifica Radio
New York City
listen on the internet: wbai.org Saturdays Noon EST
Audio Player
Begins time stamp ~ 30:23
Martin: With us on the line we have Suzanne Breen, she’s the award-winning Irish journalist based in Belfast. She has written, as I said, with the Sunday Tribune, with the Irish Times – she now contributes pieces – she’s been breaking stories once again – for the Belfast Telegraph, the Irish Independent among others on the talks that are going on at Stormont. Suzanne, welcome back to Radio Free Éireann.

Suzanne: Thank you.

Martin: Okay. We played that song for you in Irish because Irish is one of the sticking points, I believe, in the negotiations but just to bring our readers up-to-date: There’ve been two sets of negotiations going on. First of all, Stormont itself – the Executive in which Sinn Féin and the DUP (Democratic Unionist Party) which for ten years were the major partners and parties or the leading parties – that broke down. There was an election. They weren’t reconstituted. But in the interim Theresa May, the British Prime Minister, announced another Westminster election and she thought that that would give her an increased majority and a much freer hand. And instead, when the votes were counted she found that she was short of the majority, she needed a number of votes from another party and the DUP negotiated with her – they had ten seats. They negotiated with her and they’re due to get a billion pounds or more back to The North of Ireland together with side deals perhaps on issues like parades or legacy – we’ll wait to see what happens. Suzanne, they then were, the DUP, was then to go back to Stormont to negotiate with Sinn Féin and see if they could get a deal to bring all that money back to the Executive to be distributed within the Six C0unties and there was a deadline for that deal last Thursday. What happened and where are we now in those negotiations between those former partners, ten-year long partners, the Democratic Unionist Party and Sinn Féin?

James Brokenshire flies back to London as another deadline is missed. Cartoon: Ian Knox Source: The Irish News Date: 30 June 2017
Suzanne: Well the deadline on Thursday wasn’t met and the British Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, James Brokenshire, then extended the deadline and he gave the DUP and Sinn Féin another three days to try and reach a deal. The new deadline is Monday but it doesn’t look like there is going to be an agreement by Monday. In fact you know, it would be an odds-on shot for there not to be a deal – very, very unlikely. There is no sign that either of the parties are willing to make the compromises needed that would return them to power in Stormont. So the focus will, on Monday, go to James Brokenshire, the Secretary of State, about what he is going to do. He can either extend the deadline further, perhaps give them an autumn deadline, he can reintroduce some form of direct rule from London or he could call another snap Assembly election. An extended deadline, at the moment, would look like being the most likely option.

Martin: Okay. James Brokenshire, of course, is the British secretary – one of those individuals who gets sent to Ireland by a British prime minister to ‘audition’ for a job that they would rather have, some place they’d rather be – he’s going to make that statement in Westminster on Monday. Suzanne, you have the DUP and Sinn Féin – they were partners together for ten years, Martin McGuinness/Ian Paisley, Martin McGuinness with Peter Robinson – what are the issues that divide them now that you know, they worked together for ten years, why is it, what are the issues that separate them now and stop them from coming together particularly when, you know, you have this sort of bribe of a billion pounds that they can distribute if they come together and reconstitute the Executive?

Suzanne: Well the problems perhaps really lie in personalities and not in political issues. Sinn Féin had accepted a lot of things that it didn’t like for the ten years that it was in government with the DUP. But it found, near Christmas of last year, it found Arlene Foster’s attitude impossible in Stormont. The party found her arrogant and there was a scandal over a renewable heat energy scheme and they didn’t feel that Arlene Foster replied properly and responded properly and showed the humility that was necessary during that scandal. Sinn Féin’s grassroots got very angry and basically demanded that the party step outside Stormont and bring it down if necessary. And that happened. So now Sinn Féin are demanding an Irish Language Act. This Irish Language Act was initially promised to them ten years ago by the Blair government in the 2006 St. Andrews Agreement. It didn’t happen. But for ten years Sinn Féin turned a blind eye to the fact that it didn’t happen and stayed and remained in government. Now that the party has come out of Stormont it’s base are demanding gains if it goes back in and one of the demands that Sinn Féin is making is over the Irish language.

Now the issue of the Irish language came to prominence when, just before Christmas, the DUP stopped a fifty thousand pound grant for Liofa that enabled children from deprived backgrounds to go to the Gaeltacht on holiday and this move by the DUP, over what would be a relatively small amount of money, has basically catapulted the Irish language back to the centre of the political stage in Northern Ireland. So Sinn Féin’s demand is for a stand-alone Irish Language Act. The DUP are willing to move on an Irish Language Act but what they are proposing is a hybrid act that would also acknowledge Ulster-Scots and Sinn Féin is saying: No, there is no parity between the two and they want an Irish Language Act on its own. The other issue would be over reform of what is called the ‘petition of concern’ (PoC) in the Assembly – and this is a mechanism that basically has allowed the DUP, because it holds the most seats in Stormont to vote down, to prevent, other, other democratic decisions that the Assembly might take, and the main issue here is over equal marriage – that is allowing same-sex couples the right to marriage.

And the DUP has consistently voted this down in the Assembly when the numbers are there to support equal marriage and Sinn Féin is demanding reform of the petition of concern that would allow for a democratic vote in the Assembly to allow men to marry men or women to marry women. Those are the two main issues but the Irish language really, really is the biggie.

Belfast Protest Photo: BBC Date: 1 July 2017
Martin: Okay, And there had been another demand – you mentioned the Renewable Heat Incentive (RHI). There was a scandal. There was a special incentive, or a programme given, that you could put in special kind of heaters and you, it turned out – it was under Arlene Foster’s leadership – you would get paid we’ll say a dollar and a half or a pound and a half, whatever measure, for every pound or dollar you use so you would make money by burning heat – it was called a ‘money to burn’ scandal by some. Sinn Féin had demanded that she step aside and that that was another red line – that you couldn’t have somebody be the first minister of a government while it was investigating whether something was done wrong in terms of that particular scandal. What happened to that demand, that Arlene Foster step aside, until the inquiry that is now ongoing – it’s headed by a retired judge – came forward with some results?

Suzanne: Well Sinn Féin has signaled that it actually is prepared to drop this demand and this had been the central reason for Sinn Féin pulling out of the Executive and bringing Stormont down. It’s very, very hard for Sinn Féin to continue to demand that Arlene Foster steps down – her party has just had a magnificent election result getting almost three hundred thousand votes – the biggest share, the biggest number of votes that it has ever received.

Cartoon: Dave Brown for the IndependentSource: Belfast Telegraph
Date: 28 June 2017
It holds the balance of power in Westminster and Arlene Foster has just returned from London with a billion pounds extra money for the Executive in Northern Ireland for projects to do with health, education and infrastructure. She’s in a very, very strong position and for Sinn Féin to demand that she steps aside, potentially for a year, or over a year, while the inquiry into RHI goes on really would be nonsensical – she just isn’t going to do it. She’s not going to bring all this money to Stormont and then say: You know what? I’m prepared to stand in the shadows for a year so Sinn Féin is prepared to drop this demand – if the DUP gives ground over something like the Irish Language Act Sinn Féin will quietly accept Arlene Foster as First Minister.

Martin: It’s amazing, Suzanne, about the – we’re talking with Suzanne Breen, a journalist, Belfast-based journalist. (station identification). A few months ago after the Assembly elections Arlene Foster had made the famous statement about comparing the Irish language saying I’m not going to feed the crocodiles – they’ll be looking for more. Her party had a very poor result. Sinn Féin was just within a hair of overtaking them and it looked like Arlene Foster was one bad election, one bad statement, one bad action, one bad revelation in the RHI inquiry from being replaced as DUP leader. Now, Theresa May – it’s almost like that old term about a, that Greek device, about a Deus ex machina – you couldn’t figure out a way to get somebody out of a spot, a hero or heroine that you wanted to save, you pretend that God came down and pulled them out from a machine – all of a sudden the British general election has produced a tremendous result for Arlene Foster. She has now all the, they – the Unionist community – reacted to Sinn Féin’s reaction after the Assembly election and the Unionist community came out in force. They delivered a tremendous vote for her and Arlene Foster seems to be in a bigger, better position than she has even been before. Would that be correct?

Suzanne: Yes, that’s right. Sinn Féin is in a very, very strong position, again a stronger position than it’s ever been before within the Nationalist community. The SDLP (Social Democratic and Labour Party) lost its three MPs in the Westminster election, it’s vote is dwindling – it’s now just really a regional party reduced to representation in Stormont and if there was another Stormont election the SDLP, I think, would lose substantial number of its seats and representation on the local councils. Sinn Féin has also basically neutered the left-wing radical People Before Profit that looked like a real threat to the party especially in working class, urban areas of The North, in Belfast and in Doire – but really for all the power that Sinn Féin now has in the Nationalist communities in the larger political stage it very, very much is a bit player – it doesn’t take its seats in Westminster so its MPs can’t support, for example, the opposition and Jeremy Corbyn, and it’s not in power in Stormont and it really doesn’t look to have any leverage. There is a Fianna Gael government in power in The South. The Tories have their deal with the DUP. So Sinn Féin are bit players for all their strength within the Nationalist community they really don’t wield any greater power outside that and the DUP are just miles ahead in terms of votes in Northern Ireland. I mean in the Assembly election the parties were basically neck-and-neck. In the Westminster election the DUP asserted a very, very strong lead so Sinn Féin is limited at the moment in what it can do but of course we have seen, as you’ve mentioned with the fates of Arlene Foster and Theresa May, the politics, nowadays all over the world, changes very, very quickly and you really just don’t know what’s coming next.

Martin: Alright. Suzanne – two other stories that you broke this week: Peter Robinson claimed that the Irish Language Act had been promised by the – well, the British had represented to Sinn Féin that an Irish Language Act had been agreed to but that the Democratic Unionist Party never agreed to one. And they were told by the British: Don’t worry about it. Nothing’s going to happen. And he basically said that Tony Blair and the Labour Party, the British government at that time, had conned Sinn Féin into believing that there was an agreement on an Irish language act but that that had never happened.

Suzanne: That’s right. Peter Robinson said that Tony Blair’s government had conned Sinn Féin into believing that an Irish Language Act would be introduced and he accused the British government of deliberately misleading Sinn Féin and also of changing a document without the DUP’s knowledge. And he said that at the negotiations in 2006 the Reverend Ian Paisley was so troubled about this deception and the Blair government’s double-dealings that he vowed, in future negotiations, he would conduct them directly with Sinn Féin – that he wouldn’t have a government intermediary. And the Reverend Ian Paisley believed that if the British government could con Sinn Féin like that it would do the same to them. Basically all throughout the 2006 negotiations, according to Peter Robinson, the Irish Language Act was never, ever mentioned and then just right at the very end the government changed the document, he believes after consultation with Sinn Féin. And when the DUP said: Well, we don’t agree to this change in this document they were told that, contrary to what the document said, there never would be an Irish Language Act. The document said that the government would legislate for an Irish Language Act but what the DUP were told on the side was that the power in this area would be devolved from Westminster to Stormont and Stormont really wouldn’t have to do anything. So it was nudge, nudge, wink, wink – this language is here and it’s being used to fool Sinn Féin but in reality nothing will happen and that was exactly what did occur. The British government legislated for an Irish language ‘strategy’ along with an Ulster-Scots ‘strategy’ and nothing else. So much of what Mr. Robinson said has been shown to be accurate – that the wool was pulled over Sinn Féin’s eyes in the 2006 negotiations. It genuinely thought that there was, that an Irish Language Act was going to be introduced but really, when it came to the technical detail, it was never going to happen.

Martin: Alright. And you also have a situation where the British government is going, and Theresa May, is going to be in partnership with the DUP on an ongoing basis. They will need votes on different issues and there’s a concern: Are there any kind of side deals that are made? Will the British government, for example, move on the Parades Commission or in terms of legacy or in terms of any – the statute of limitations – other issues, after consultation with the DUP on areas which are within the British government’s authority where Sinn Féin would not be able to prevent them from taking any action?

Hundreds descend on Whitehall to protest Tory/DUP deal.
Photo: AP/Tim Ireland
Source: The Independent
Date: 10 June 2017Suzanne: Yes, well the DUP has a lot of power because the that it deal reached with Theresa May on Monday doesn’t just guarantee them money here and now for the DUP votes in the next five years in Parliament – the deal is only for two years. But it also leaves out plenty of votes that may arise on a daily basis in which DUP support will be known. Now from what we know and what we have been told those other more parochial issues are not part of the deal. But there obviously is a fear, with Nationalists, among Nationalists, that certain issues like parades and the like could be being sorted out between the DUP and the Tory government in private. The government is insisting that there is absolute transparency and this is just about things that’ll benefit the whole community in Northern Ireland generally. In some ways though if the government did go down that path in terms of doing side deals that very much irritated Nationalists it might reverberate for it in Westminster.

Generally, there might be a feeling that you know, this isn’t fair play because there are a lot of people, ordinary conservatives, more moderate conservatives, that really are quite irked by the fact that Theresa May has got into bed with Arlene Foster’s party and they’re not very happy about it. They regard the DUP as extremists, as conservative on social issues – they’re not happy with it. So Theresa May has to be very, very careful and not have a rebellion within her party’s ranks and keep everybody on board. Her majority, even with the DUP, is so, so slender she cannot afford to alienate people.

Martin: Okay and one final story you broke for the Belfast Telegraph: Outside Holy Cross Primary School, it’s an area just on the edge of a Nationalist area in Ardoyne just very close to a Unionist area already, leading up to July Twelfth, the kerbstones, or the pavement, outside that school have been painted red, white and blue – not to celebrate American Independence Day as people are here but to celebrate the British – and there had been graffiti, ‘LA’, Loyalist Ardoyne, to intimidate some of the students, the young children, who would go into that school. Is there anything that can be done to remove this or stop these tensions or diffuse them as we start to move forward into negotiations as we move forward towards July Twelfth?

‘LA’ and kerbstones painted at Holy Cross Primary School in ArdoyneSource: Belfast Telegraph
Date: 30 June 2017Suzanne: Well a local SDLP Councillor in North Belfast, Paul McCusker, he has approached the relevant authorities, which would be Belfast City Council and Transport NI, and he’s asked them to remove the paint from the road. However, he was told that this couldn’t be done without consultation with the wider community – that would be with the Loyalist community – so it looks like the paint is going to stay there because there isn’t the will there among the authorities to take action and to take steps that would anger the local Unionist community so it looks like the kerbstones will remain painted red, white and blue for the foreseeable future.

Martin: Alright. So that’s how the lead-up to July Twelfth is already started – those demonstrations and young children going to school are going to have to see that sort of graffiti. The British government can do nothing about it, according to themselves, other than to ask for consultation – which who knows how long that would take and who was going to say something on the Unionist side against the Loyalists who put up that graffiti – they’re going to be concerned about repercussions. Suzanne, we want to thank you. We’re looking forward to your stories – continue to cover and break the news on these stories in the Belfast Telegraph, in the Irish Independent and other stories that you write from.

Suzanne: Thank you.

Martin: Okay. That was Suzanne Breen, the award-winning journalist from the Irish Times, from the Sunday Tribune, more recently with the Belfast Telegraph and with the Irish Independent – she contributes stories to them on a continuing basis.
(ends time stamp ~ 51:06)

The Hypocrisy Of The Israeli Boycott

Matt Treacy writing @ Brocaire Books  hits out at the Roger Waters over the cultural boycott of Israel.
Rod Stewart and Radiohead have recently come in for some abuse over their decision to play concerts in Tel Aviv. Thus breaking the anti Jewish … sorry anti “Zionist” boycott. Der Judenrat as it might have been known in former days.

The “cultural boycott” of Israel – even that has resonances of the Nazi cultural campaign against the Jews, is organised chiefly by one Roger Waters, formerly of Pink Floyd.

Now, such is Roger’s deep concern for human rights that he has played concerts in China. Concerts where you have to be one of the pampered corrupt elite to even dream of getting a ticket. An elite whose power was built on the bones of millions of people murdered in the Cultural Revolution and artificial famines. A regime that enforces an a medieval oppression in Tibet. That has millions of people in labour camps.

Oh, but Woger doesn’t believe that any of this constitutes human rights abuses. Curiously also, he has never evinced any evidence of left wing activism other than this. That is if you consider, boycotting Jews to be left wing. He does, however, support fox hunting, and believes in climate change.

Roger obviously does believe that boycotting the Jooos is a good thing. Among his “progressive” views are that the Jews control America. Once upon a better time that would have made anyone expressing such nonsense anathema to the left, or indeed anyone who had not been lobotomised. Now it is almost unremarked upon. Just don’t saw Jews. Zionists is the new black.

Sash My Father Wore

Unionist commentator Dr John Coulter was an Orangeman for more than 20 years. In this exclusive article for The Pensive Quill , the ex-Blanket columnist reflects that it is as much in republicanism’s interests for the Orange Order to rediscover its political direction as it is in Unionism’s. Dr Coulter fears that unless this new role for the Order is achieved, a violent dissident loyalist movement will emerge based on Protestant working class frustrations.
I warned in August 2013 there was a danger that republicans could become too provocative towards the Protestant Unionist Loyalist (PUL) community.

Since that article on The Pensive Quill four years ago and in subsequent publications, that fear has increased with the recent bonfire saga on 11 July. A serious perception is emerging within the ranks of the PUL community that a cultural war is being successfully waged against the pro-Union community in the North, aided by a well-organised republican community and an increasingly-militant and vocal liberal Protestant lobby. 
First, the Loyal Orders were forced off the street, as with Obin Street in Portadown in the 1980s; then the Loyal Orders were forced off the roads, as with Portadown’s Garvaghy Road in the 1990s; then the Loyal Orders were forced out of the villages, such as Dunloy in Co Antrim.

The Parades Commission has been used effectively against the marching band fraternity. Now, it seems, the traditional bonfire community is next, while the so-called ‘Garden Centre Prods’ simply ‘tut-tut’ and bury their heads even deeper in the political sand.

Granted, the situation has not been helped by the current stalemate at Stormont and the decision by Irish voters to reinforce the ‘one party’ ethos in the republican and unionist communities – namely, the DUP and Sinn Fein.

In spite of the LGBT community’s ability to rally support on the ground behind the campaign for same-sex marriage in Northern Ireland, a lot of Christians who oppose same-sex marriage theologically and Biblically still attend church.

While the DUP has clear policies on same-sex marriage, abortion and divorce which the Christian Churches’ evangelical wings can flock too, there is always the doubt – what happens if the DUP decides to follow the election-battered Ulster Unionists and adopt a more liberal agenda?

Many Protestant denominations are witnessing the emergence of liberal wings, and this is especially true within the so-called ‘Big Three’ – the Church of Ireland, mainstream Methodist and mainstream Presbyterian. In recent weeks, there has even been talk of a so-called ‘liberal wing’ developing within one of the more fundamentalist denominations, the Elim Pentecostal movement, which was founded in Monaghan in the early 1900s.

Perhaps the time has come for the Protestant Loyal Orders to return to its religious roots, and launch an Irish Christian Party or a Christian Socialist Party, which would clearly adhere to staunch evangelical Biblical views. This situation would only become a reality if the DUP ‘went liberal’ on social issues.

Meanwhile, democratic republicans have a moral obligation to facilitate the Protestant Loyal Orders over contentious parades to prevent the establishment of a violent dissident loyalist movement. Certainly, the distinct lack of confrontational situations during the Twelfth 2017 is clear proof that this accommodation between republicanism and Unionism can be practically achieved.

I know that at first reading, this warning will be misinterpreted as a ‘let the Prods march traditional routes, or the loyalists will wreck the country!’

But this contentious and volatile political situation has been brought about because Provisional Sinn Fein has demonstrated its ability to ‘milk’ the benefits of the peace process better than the mainstream Unionist parties.

In spite of the current Stormont impasse and the threat of a return to Direct Rule from Westminster, the DUP is now locked firmly into a power-sharing Stormont Executive with Provisional Sinn Fein. However, the Provisionals have been able to sweep to power as the largest nationalist party in the North by eating electorally into the SDLP’s former traditional voter-rich Catholic middle class.

At the same time, the Provisionals held onto their own traditional republican working class heartlands. The DUP copied the Provisionals by electorally hammering the rival Ulster Unionists in the UUP’s middle class Unionist heartlands.

But the DUP made a serious tactical error in copying the Provisionals’ strategy. The DUP was so eager to get into power at Stormont that it left its traditional working class Protestant areas behind. The DUP under Arlene Foster in 2017 must avoid the same backlash in the Unionist community which former First Minister David Trimble faced with the UUP in 2003.

Provisional Sinn Fein also has an added advantage which the DUP does not enjoy – republican unity is stronger than so-called Unionist unity. The dissident republican movement and republican socialist movement could not mount a serious political challenge to Provisional Sinn Fein. In the past decade, Provisional Sinn Fein has electorally ‘wiped the floor’ with non-Sinn Fein alternative candidates.

For example, in spite of putting up a credible republican alternative ideologically to Provisional Sinn Fein, the group known as Concerned Republicans failed to win any seats in the Northern Assembly.

In spite of there being a range of political alternatives to Provisional Sinn Fein, such as Republican Sinn Fein, eirigi, the IRSP, and 32 County Sovereignty Movement, there is little chance of these groups substantially eating into the PSF vote to such an extent that Northern nationalism witnesses a revival of the election-battered SDLP.

Many loyalists – especially those in urban working class communities – have interpreted Provisional Sinn Fein’s reaping of the peace process benefits for Catholic districts as an erosion of Britishness by republicans in Northern Ireland.

Unionists abandoned the ballot box in their thousands - and especially the UUP, resulting in nationalists winning seats in traditionally safe Protestant areas. Had Unionists flocked to the polling booths in the same numbers as they did in the early 1970s, Belfast City Council would never have been under republican and Alliance control, and the Union flag dispute which has rocked the North would never have occurred.

The loyalist working class – which largely provided the manpower for the Protestant paramilitaries – feels that it is being hammered by a ‘double whammy’. On one hand, loyalists feel that Provisional Sinn Fein successfully working the peace process amounts to cultural ethnic cleansing of the British heritage and identity. On the other hand, loyalists feel deserted by the mainstream Unionist parties.

Added to this is the perception among loyalists that while Provisional Sinn Fein has been able to keep an electoral lid on rival dissident parties, could the DUP and UUP now face a range of political alternatives which will further fragment the pro-Union vote? The DUP, like the UUP in the 1960s, is the dominant elected voice in the pro-Union community, but could an alternative to the DUP emerge, or has the pro-Union electorate sent a clear message to the Unionist parties that it wants one major party to represent Unionism?

In the 2014 European poll, Provisional Sinn Fein easily ‘saw off’ any potential challenge from the SDLP with the former comfortably retaining its MEP.

The situation has also changed radically for Unionism. In the run-up to the 2014 Euro poll, Unionism saw the launch of two new political parties (the moderate pluralist NI21, and the hardline loyalist Protestant Coalition) plus an upsurge in interest for the staunchly Eurosceptic United Kingdom Independence Party. By 2017, the DUP reigned supreme in the Unionist community.

So where does the Orange Order sit in all of this in Unionism, apart from occupying its usual ‘piggy in the middle’ position with parade and bonfire disputes?

Similarly, the British and Southern Irish intelligence communities have the dissident republican movement so heavily infiltrated with spies, agents, informers and touts, that the concept of a PIRA Long War of terrorism has little chance of succeeding, let alone get off the ground. The assorted band of dissident republican terror groups can only mount a ‘start/stop’ staggered terror campaign at best.

In reality, the past Ardoyne Shops saga was not about Orange feet on a Catholic street, but which nationalist residents group held the balance of power in the area. Was it the Provisional Sinn Fein-supporting Crumlin Ardoyne Residents Association (CARA), or the non-Provisional Sinn Fein Greater Ardoyne Residents Collective (GARC)?

The British and Irish governments will be praying that CARA remains on top, because should GARC succeed in becoming the dominant voice in Ardoyne, it will prove that dissident republicans can mount a credible alternative to Provisional Sinn Fein.

This leaves the Orange Order in a dilemma. After years of posturing, the Loyal Orders have at long last recognised the benefits of talking directly to nationalist residents groups. A past Londonderry Twelfth solution proves the fruits of the PR spin – it’s good to talk!

But in the case of Ardoyne, which residents group does the Orange Order talk to – CARA or GARC, or both? But there is an even bigger boogie man looming on the horizon – a dissident loyalist terror campaign.

Lest I be accused of keyboard warrior scaremongering, let me emphasise that this article is based on private chats with sections of Protestant opinion who voice a similar concern. This is not an article I write lightly. As a born-again Christian (and I will allow only God, and the Lord ALONE to judge me on this matter, not the army of hypocritical, finger-pointing Pharisees which bedevils the Christian faith), I have tried to present a Biblical foundation to my Revolutionary Unionist ideology. I fear I am losing this battle.

This is not because I see my Radical Right-wing Unionist ideology of Revolutionary Unionism as being irrelevant to 21st century Protestantism, Orangeism, Unionism and loyalism, but because the growing frustration which is developing rapidly within the Protestant working class communities.

The Orange Order has got to become a political pressure group like the old Vanguard Unionist movement or the Ulster Monday Club faction which existed within the once dominant UUP. I attempted to address this issue in an exclusive article for the loyalist web site, Long Kesh Inside Out.

I know at first hand the power which the Orange Order can wield, as I was a member of the Order for more than two decades. I literally donned the sash my father wore.

While as a primary and grammar school pupil, the Twelfth was a time for family gatherings, my happiest memories of the Orange and Black Orders are of my dad – as a Deputy Imperial Grand Chaplain – preaching the Gospel of the Risen Saviour at annual divine services of both Loyal Orders. I only left the Order to care for my severely autistic son. I still believe passionately in the Qualifications of an Orangeman.

Likewise, as a journalist, I was always reporting on parades and only once did I get the opportunity to walk on the Twelfth. (I will leave the ethical debate as to whether journalists should be members of political parties, pressure groups, or other campaign organisations for another day!).

The biggest mistakes which the Order made was to sever its connections with the UUP and embark on a daft cultural venture headed up by a cartoon character dubbed Diamond Dan. Then again, over the past half-decade, the UUP sought to distance itself from its traditional voter bases in the Christian Churches, Loyal Orders, marching band scene and loyalist working class.

Culturally, the Orange Order will never be able to match republicanism in this battle. The power of the Order has always been its ability to act as a political conduit between the various factions and classes of pro-Union thinking.

Republicans have had centuries of marketing their culture. They have even turned Protestant-led rebellions, such as the Presbyterian-dominated United Irishmen into a republican celebration. It was also Radical Presbyterians who saved the Irish language from extinction, but republicans have again stolen gaelic from right under the noses of Presbyterianism.

A past Castlederg republican parade to mark two dead Provos killed by their own bomb is clear proof of how republicans can market former members. You need only see how Provisional Sinn Fein ‘milked’ the 10 dead hunger strikers in 1981 to see how effective republicans are at creating the ethos of nationalist culture.

In 1981, around 100,000 people marched behind the coffin of hunger striker Bobby Sands MP. How many walked behind the coffin of loyalist terrorist Billy Wright in Portadown after he was shot dead in the Maze in 1997 by the INLA?

It is only a matter of time before republicans cash in on the Twelfth celebrations pointing out that it was King Billy’s elite Catholic Dutch Blues troops who won the Boyne for the Orange champion, and that the Pope held a special Te Deum in Rome to commemorate William’s victory.

To survive the Orange Order must become a political pressure group, tone down the cultural hype and become a forum where the various classes and factions within the pro-Union community can meet to represent their people.

If the Order fails in this mission, especially among the Protestant working class, a body of opinion will emerge with the terrible conclusion that violence is the only way to gain recognition for the Unionist people. Where would Provisional Sinn Fein be today had it not been for the PIRA terror campaign?

But it takes two to tango. The Orange Order cannot achieve this pressure group role on its own. It is to republicans’ advantage for the Order to become a political cement for Unionism once again.

Even if a small faction of loyalism returns to armed conflict, it has the ability to create ‘Merry Hell’ in Southern Ireland and mainland Britain. Such a dissident loyalist movement will ironically adopt the ethos which PIRA maintained – one bomb in Britain is worth 100 in Belfast.

London and Dublin are not worried while any type of terror campaign is limited to the Six Counties. It is when that campaign lands on the front door steps of Leinster House and Westminster that both governments sit up and take notice.

Given the looming economic crisis in the Republic over Brexit, what would the added impact be of a dissident loyalist bombing campaign on a scale of the Dublin and Monaghan ‘no-warning’ massacres of the 1970s? In Britain, the Irish community is one of the largest of the ethnic groups on the mainland.

What would the impact be of a similar bombing campaign against Irish pubs, clubs and the Irish Embassy? Such a scenario can be dismissed at face value as tabloid-style scaremongering. But the emergence of a dissident loyalist terror movement is steadily becoming a reality and could catch Stormont, the Dail and Westminster on the hop.

The frustration generated by the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s eventually spawned PIRA. The same conditions and scenario are emerging again in the North, only in the loyalist communities this time. In the early 1970s, Stormont was ill-prepared to help the Irish Nationalist Party assist the calls for civil rights – civil rights which would also have benefited many working class Protestants.

Provisional Sinn Fein has a moral obligation not to taunt the working class loyalist community. PSF should be working directly with the Orange Order to heal the frustrations within the working class loyalist community.

If PSF can assist the Order in finding its true role within Protestantism, the knock-on effect will be to ensure the mainstream Unionist parties and the new movements engage with the loyalist working class communities.

Of course, PSF could sit back, hold up holy hands, and dismiss the Orange crisis as a ‘hun debacle’. But if Provisional Sinn Fein can negotiate with Unionists to bring about the Good Friday and St Andrews Agreements, surely Messrs Adams, Kelly and Ms O’Neill could negotiate with the Loyal Orders to bring working class loyalists in from the political cold.

It is in no one’s interests to see the emergence of a violent dissident loyalist movement. Some may argue that the seeds have already been sown for such a movement during the Union flag protest riots. Hopefully, the Christian Churches, too, will recognise the dilemma which the Order finds itself in.

Follow Dr John Coulter on Twitter @JohnAHCoulter

Bedsit Disco Queen

Anthony McIntyre enjoyed Tracy Thorn's  book on life in the music industry.
There seemed nothing like it since Judy Tzuke’s Stay With Me Till Dawn which was released almost two decades earlier: an enchanting piece of music with lyrics to match that required no Jennifer Warnes type lung power to achieve maximum lift.

Sultry but different, on a par with Terri Nunn rendering Take My Breath Away or Wuthering Heights by Kate Bush, there was  enchanting seductiveness in how the lyrics were powered by the dulcet voice of a female vocalist. Missing must be one of the defining songs of the 90s. I can still recall the bar I was in on first hearing it. I have very poignant memories of the occasion. Not many songs that can be said about.

Everything But The Girl seemed more like the title of a song than the name of a music band. Up until Missing burrowed deep into our existential need for pleasure I had never heard of Tracy Thorn, knowing nothing about her career in the Marine Girls, a part of her musical existence this book brings to life. Even the other day when talking to a friend about the book, she recalled EBTG as a one hit wonder band. Which is something the group most definitely was not. Its eighth album Walking Wounded sold 1.2 million copies.

Rarely do celeb books elevate themselves to the point where they might comfortably be described as literature. This is one that got away from the mundane dross that often appears written with a crayon and not a pen. The genre is better known for mass producing to satiate the adoring faithful. There is little in them that would interest an outside reader unless the celeb is controversial to the point where they simply cannot be ignored. Mediocre, at times moronic, they set in the motion the Ambrose Bierce thought that “the covers of this book are too far apart.” They gather dust as their buyer gathers years, wondering if their decision not to donate them to a charity outlet, is sentimental or silly, or even a bit of both.

The bit of both that Bedsit Disco Queen: How I Grew Up and Tried to Be a Pop Star proffers is very different. From "Pop Star Trace" to accomplished author and columnist, this book spans the lot in between, including the “grubby grottiness” of the 70s where she took part in Anti Nazi League demos. Its core strength lies in a narration of the fused outcome of the hugely creative talents of the author and her husband, Ben Watt. Tracy Thorn, one half of EBTG, is a very perceptive woman who just does not have ideas but knows how to convey them. A student at Hull University where she began to take music seriously outside of her academic day, she remained sufficiently focused to obtain a first before going on to write a Master’s on Beckett.

Often it is her relationship with Watt that stands out. The time he spent in hospital from a serious illness did not ground Thorn as such. She never had her head in the clouds to begin with. A thorn in the side of the musically pretentious, no effort is made to conceal the contempt for groups like Duran Duran, told in a casual drama-free manner. Still, surely she had to have a modicum of forgiveness in her heart if for no other reason than the brilliant View To A Kill track.

Then there is the awful moment when at a major awards ceremony she asked the penguin suited senior exec of her record company for a glass of wine, mistaking him as a waiter.

For Thorn, it was a Journey from Everything But The Girl to Everything But The Children. She felt her biological clock ticking away until the point that the yearning for motherhood would win out. A set of girl twins followed, who were shortly after joined by a boy. The vignette where she pushes the pram into a shop where Missing is being played and her daughter says “Mummy you are singing” is heartwarming. The child knew it from her mum singing about the house.

Non-pretentious, seemingly effortless prose, makes this a great read that anyone could pick up although, obviously, much better for those familiar with Missing. If books are not your thing, dip into her fortnightly column at the New Statesman. In her most recent outpouring she refer of the two children still at home with here while her husband is off on business: they live in their bedrooms. For other kids in their bedrooms with time on their hands - her own will find it all too familiar by this point - give them something about a girl who once sat in a bedsit. They are unlikely to be disappointed.

Tracey Thorn, 2013.  Bedsit Disco Queen: How I Grew Up and Tried to Be a Pop Star. Publisher: Virago. ASIN: B00HTJRB5M

Ex-Muslims Out And Proud In Pride London

Maryam Namazie with a piece on a recent Pride event in London which was attended by the Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain.
On 8 July, CEMB was at Pride in London in full force highlighting the plight of LGBT in countries under Islamic rule with bodypainting by the award-winning Victoria Gugenheim.

The march went ahead as planned, though police initially tried to remove placards with the slogan “Allah is Gay” because of complaints of “offence”.

Whilst a few were not pleased to see apostates in Pride, we were met with overwhelming and heart-warming support and solidarity. For all of those who participated, it was an unforgettable moment in the struggle for freedom of conscience, expression and the fight for LGBT rights in countries under Islamic rule.



Maryam Namazie, Spokesperson for CEMB, said:

In a world where apostasy, blasphemy and ‘immorality’ are punishable by death in many Islamic states, and religiously non-prescribed sex and women’s bodies are so despised, it becomes all the more important to celebrate them and show very clearly that people have a right to think, live and love as they choose without state or group intervention and persecution. Of course some were and will be offended by our message as we are offended by Islam and religion but offence can never be a reason to silence and threaten nor is blasphemy and offence more important than murder.

Daniel Fitzgerald, CEMB Pride organiser, said:

CEMB is challenging a narrative. Never before in the history of Pride London since its start in 1972 has a group consisting of those from a Muslim background, including refugees, come together to protest crimes committed to LGBT people in the name of Islam and topless too! These are VERY brave people who speak from direct experience. All states that have the death penalty for gays are Islamic, yet this alarming fact is ignored time and time again. No more excuses.

Gita Sahgal, Director of Centre for Secular Space, said:

I marched with… extraordinary activists who keep alive the idea of international solidarity. In many countries Islamic law decrees the death penalty for homosexuality and sex outside marriage. On a very corporate march we kept alive the idea that refugees are welcome, apostasy is a right and that we weep for those under constant vigilante and state death threats. My wonderful young friend marched with a banner for Xulhaz hacked to death in Bangladesh for the right to love. In some places we cannot celebrate. We honour those struggles.