Posted by Jim on January 25, 2014
Friday, January 24, 2014 AM
“Q: What do you say to those people who are unhappy but are pulled the other way by feelings of loyalty?
A: Examine their consciences. Take a good look at what is going on. If they agree – ok. If not then speak out.” – Fourthwrite interview with Brendan Hughes
Dominic McGlinchey Interview: Saying What Needs Said
TPQ features an unedited interview that the republican Dominic McGlinchey gave to Connla Young of the Irish News. The interview initially featured in the paper today, Friday 24 January 2014. The unedited version was provided to TPQ by Dominic McGlinchey.
Well known in anti-agreement circles Dominic McGlinchey has been a staunch opponent of Sinn Fein’s political strategy. But with “little appetite” for armed conflict, the republican activist asks whether the time is right for an end to armed struggle as he urges “conversations” to take place on the future for militant republicanism.
A prominent opponent of Sinn Fein’s political strategy has said there is “little appetite” for armed conflict in nationalist communities in the north.
In a rare interview Dominic McGlinchey urged those opposed Sinn Fein’s strategy to hold a ‘conversation about the future of the republican movement’ and ‘question the integrity of those standing beside them’.
His comments come after a period of intense debate within anti-agreement circles about the merits of various republican paramilitary campaigns.
In recent weeks a number of other high profile anti-agreement republicans, including former Provisional IRA hunger strikers Gerard Hodgins and Tommy McKearney, have said it is time for armed republican groups to “reconsider” their campaigns.
Mr McGlinchey believes republicans have little to fear from making tough decisions.
‘Republicans have shown they are well capable of taking decisive action against the British,’ he said.
‘That’s not something that they need to prove and nobody is saying you shouldn’t do this or do that.’
Born into a staunch republican family from Bellaghy in south Derry, Mr McGlinchey’s decision to enter a public debate at this time will be viewed as significant.
There are currently several active republican groups including the IRA, Oglaigh na hEireann and the Continuity IRA.
The IRA, which was formed as after a merger between the Real IRA, Republican Action Against Drugs and independent republicans in 2012, and Oglaigh na hEireann have been particularly active in recent months.
Although he keeps a low public profile, Mr McGlinchey is a well-known figure in anti-agreement circles.
Speaking last night the father-of-three said that in some cases “armed action” was being used to ‘stifle republicanism at the present time. It’s not that you are asking republicans to give something up, it’s not a matter of giving something up,’ he said.
“It’s a matter of being pragmatic and astute about where the battle is at and where it needs to be brought. Republicanism need to be aware of where it sits and the battles that are opening up in front of it and if certain tactics are holding you back from entering a new field of battle.”
The 36-year-old left Sinn Fein in 2006 partly because of its support for policing in the north.
He later joined republican socialist party Eirigi before resigning from that group in 2009.
He remains opposed to Sinn Fein and believes support for the party ‘is support for British rule in Ireland and the administering of British rule in Ireland’.
In 2012 Mr McGlinchey was questioned by police about a Real IRA gun attack which claimed the lives of two British soldiers in Massereene in County Antrim in 2009.
He strongly denies any involvement in the attack and believes his name was connected to the ambush by ‘the British media, MI5 and (PSNI) special branch’.
The Co Derry man believes there is little support for a paramilitary campaign in nationalist communities.
“I don’t believe the appetite exists among the people,” he said.
“That’s not to say there is not considerable support among certain segments of republicanism for particular types of resistance, but what is very clear is that the appetite is not there for a full blown campaign. Never has the groundwork been done for a campaign like that to be launched.”
Mr McGlinchey says that republican groups must answer to the people they claim to represent.
‘As republicans we say our loyalty is to the Republic and the people make up the Republic and our loyalty has to be to those people,’ he said.
“For us to enforce rather than to persuade and debate and bring the people with you on a particular road map, what sort of Republic would we have at the end of it all?
There are those involved in a process who have already delivered us to one surrender and they have no right to deliver us to another surrender.”
Mr McGlinchey is of the view that republican ‘activists on the ground need to have an understanding of what they want’.
He said the activities of republican paramilitary groups do not constitute a sustained “campaign”.
He urged anti-agreement republicans to consider alternative methods to further their aims and reject any romantic notions about the Provisional IRA’s campaign.
‘Resistance is good,’ he said.
“But it doesn’t mean you have to be running around with an Armalite in your hand.
You can’t refer back to the “good old days”, the fact of the matter is there was nothing good in it.
I am 36-years-of-age and I never saw the IRA walking the streets. There was a resistance movement but the IRA were on the back foot.”
As a child Mr McGlinchey saw both his parents being shot dead in separate gun attacks in Co Louth.
His father Dominic, a former INLA Chief of Staff, was gunned down in Drogheda in February 1994 by gunmen who have never been apprehended.
His mother Mary, also a former senior member of the INLA, was shot dead in her Dundalk home in January 1987 as she bathed the then nine-year-old along with his brother Declan.
Again, her killers have never been caught.
Mr McGlinchey says alternative ways of expressing republican politics should not be dismissed by hardliners.
‘There are hundreds of ways to expose the status quo for what it is,’ he said.
‘Through civil disobedience or not recognising institutions. Republicanism cannot be viewed as a one-trick pony, there needs to be a proper analysis of where it is at.’
The former Sinn Fein man believes that conversations about the future of militant republicanism can be held privately.
‘I don’t think republicans need to say they are calling a halt,’ he said.
‘It’s clear that as republicans you have a duty to reflect, gather your thoughts and analyse our strategy. There needs to be a conversation about the future of the republican movement.’
He revealed that hardline republicans have already entered into a “period of reflection” but that efforts to move away from violence are opposed by elements within the British security establishment.
‘MI5 and the security services have moved certain people from our streets that are of a more moderate persuasion to stifle that,’ he said.
‘The security forces, MI5 and British intelligence have a vested interest in keeping things going.’
He also believes that at times in the past British “agent provocateurs” within the Republican Movement have steered its direction.
‘Whether we like it or dislike it at the minute the Brits are controlling both sides of the argument, or certainly have major influences in terms of both sides of the argument,’ he said.
Mr McGlinchey believes the in recent years ‘republicans are trying to swim in a dirty pond and there’s not even enough oxygen for anything to breathe in it never mind grow’.
He says this has been demonstrated more so in Dublin where hardline factions have descended into a “gang structure” whose members “masquerade as republicans”.
‘There’s been too much sacrificed just to be lost on a gangland in Dublin or a corrupt person in Belfast,’ he said.
“We are now many, many years since the signing of the Good Friday Agreement and the name of republicanism, especially in the 26 counties, has been trailed through the mud by people who should never never ever been allowed on the bus. There needs to be a crdible middle ground.”
The South Derry man says militant republicans have encountered tougher challenges in the past.
‘We have been shot by our own, hanged by our own, hanged by the Brits, we have been raped and beaten by the church and starved by colonialism – there’s nothing in this world we cannot face,’ he said.
‘By taking a step back you actually do move forward. You need a bit of luck, but you can’t have luck if you don’t have a plan.’
Mr McGlinchey is convinced the time is right for him to speak out now.
‘We were told to go and sit in the corner and that’s not acceptable any more,’ he said.
Posted by Jim on
By Padraic Mac Oitir
Without any doubt, the release from prison of Lurgan man Martin Corey
will be welcomed by all persons with an interest in justice.
Martin Corey has spent almost four years in Maghaberry prison. At no
time during that period was he ever questioned about or charged with any
offence. He was held on the basis of secret evidence – if such evidence
ever even existed – which his own legal team was never allowed to see,
let alone challenge.
In short, Martin Corey was effectively interned without charge and
without trial for almost four years.
Despite his release from prison, Martin Corey is now subject to
conditions comparable to those which first saw the light of day under
the draconian Special Powers Acts introduced by the Unionist regime at
Stormont in 1922.
He has been ordered not to reside at his home in Lurgan or to enter the
Lurgan area.
He has also been ordered not to speak to the media about his case.
Internment without charge or without trial was a feature of the Special
Powers Act.
Another of the Special Powers Act regulations allowed the then Minister
of Home affairs to prohibit any person from entering all or parts of the
Six Counties or to grant permission for a person to reside under certain
stipulated conditions. This was later condemned by the Commission of
Inquiry into the Special Powers Act held by the National Council for
Civil Liberties in 1936.
Section 25 of the Special Powers Act amounted to censorship of the
rights to freedom of speech and political opinion. It prohibited any
person “by word of mouth, or in writing, or in any newspaper,
periodical, book, circular, or other printed publication” from making
statements likely to cause “disaffection to His Majesty” or statements
critical of the policing and justice system.
The repeal of the Special Powers Act was one of the core demands of the
Civil Rights movement. Although it was repealed in 1973, it has been
incrementally replaced over the past forty years by harsher, if not more
draconian, legislation.
The legislation which allowed Martin Corey to be imprisoned for four
years without charge and without trial, and the conditions imposed upon
his release, resemble those of the Special Powers Act against which the
Civil Rights movement campaigned.
Martin Corey is not unique.
Other persons have been arrested under dubious circumstances and
spurious evidence, and have yet to face trial – as such they are
innocent until proven guilty. A number of these are being granted bail
on conditions which prevent them living in their family homes and from
entering their home towns.
Like Martin Corey, they are faced with internal exclusion within the Six
County state – not unlike the internal exclusion practiced by the
Pinochet regime in Chile.
The ‘old’ Stormont with its bad, old laws is long since gone – at least
that’s what constitutional nationalist parties in the ‘new’ Stormont
keep publicly repeating.
To all intents and purposes, those same politicians who clamoured for a
return of justice and policing powers to Stormont appear to be
comfortable with, if not complicit in, the special powers enacted and
enforced under their watch.
Slowly but surely, the old Stormont ways are being resurrected.
Posted by Jim on
Former unionist firebrand Ian Paisley has publicly accused the current
leadership of the party he founded of betraying him and of suddenly, and
brutally, ousting him.
In the second part of a televised interview broadcast on British
television, Paisley also criticises his successor Peter Robinson for
losing the DUP Westminster seat in east Belfast, and contrasts it with
the performance of his son who had a “marvellous victory” in North
Antrim.
And in a spectacular assault on the current DUP leader’s family, Ian
Paisley’s wife Eileen branded the Robinsons as a source of “sleaze” — a
clear reference to Iris Robinson’s scandalous affair with a 19-year-old
youth.
Describing his ouster to journalist Eamonn Mallie, Paisley says he was
leaving for a meeting in Dublin in February 2008 when he was confronted
by Robinson, DUP MP Nigel Dodds, and his own special adviser Timothy
Johnston. He says Mr Dodds told him he was to be out of office by the
end of the week.
“He said: ‘We want you gone by Friday’.
“I just more or less smirked, and Peter said: ‘Oh no, no he needs to
stay in for another couple of months’.”
“One wanted two months to prepare the way for himself and the other
one… I don’t know what he wanted,” he said.
The man famous for shouting ‘Never’, and for denouncing decades of peace
talks, ultimately won the renegotiation of the 1998 Good Friday
Agreement and secured a triple-lock guarantee of unionist majority rule.
But he also found himself as First Minister at the Stormont Six-County
Assembly — alongside Sinn Fein’s Deputy First Minister, unionist hate
figure Martin McGuiness.
Amid upheaval in unionism and after coming intense pressure from
colleagues, Ian Paisley announced his resignation as first minister in
2008, just a year after Paisley signed the St Andrew’s Agreement.
Peter Robinson took over as both first minister and DUP leader, while
Ian Paisley’s son, Ian Paisley Jr, was sidelined. But Robinson was then
beset with difficulties when it emerged his wife Iris, then also a DUP
MP, had had an affair with a teenager.
The fall-out from the episode was one of the factors attributed to Mr
Robinson losing his East Belfast Westminster seat in the 2010 general
election.
Paisley said: “The man that they put in my position couldn’t keep his
own seat in Westminster, and my son who followed me had a marvellous
victory [easily winning his father’s Westminster seat in north Antrim]
“And for once we are seeing the true nature of the beast – that there
was a beast here who was prepared to go forward to the destruction of
the party, because losing seats in Northern Ireland is very serious and
for East Belfast not to be a unionist seat in the House of Commons is a
terrible blow.”
Commenting on accusations of corruption against her son, Ian Jr, Mrs
Paisley tells the documentary:
“Ian’s name was cleared by the authorities in Stormont, everything that
was said against him was proved to be false and he never brought any
sleaze. His wife didn’t do anything wrong, he didn’t do anything wrong.
“There was nothing morally wrong with his character or his life. And we
know eventually where the sleaze did come from.
“It came in the home of the man who is now leader himself, Peter
Robinson, it came from his family, not from the Paisley family.”
However, the shifting power dynamic has seen the Paisley family
increasingly marginalised by unionist hardliners, such as former DUP
founder Desmond Boal, and even the extremist anti-Catholic church they
helped to found.
In the documentary, Mr Paisley said he was forced to retire from the
Free Presbyterian Church in early 2012. A letter from elders in the
church requesting he step down precipitated the move.
His wife described the letter from the kirk as “absolutely shattering”.
“It was hurtful that was the way they thought they would treat us,” he
says.
Posted by Jim on January 18, 2014
By Gerry Adams (for Leargas)
The Good Friday Agreement marked a historic shift in politics on the
island of Ireland and put in place a firm foundation from which it is
possible to continue building the peace process. For the first time
since partition, almost 100 years ago, there is an international
agreement involving the Irish and British governments, as well as
nationalist, republican and unionist parties on a way forward. This
includes power sharing political institutions which have the support of
the overwhelming majority of citizens.
The GFA tackles constitutional issues, political and institutional
matters, policing, weapons, justice and equality, and more. Subsequent
agreements at St. Andrews and Hillsborough built on this progress.
However, not all aspects of the Good Friday Agreement have been
implemented and outstanding issues like flags and emblems; the legacy of
the past; parades; equality and the status of the Irish language, as
well as culture and identity issues have continued to bedevil the
process.
This time last year Belfast witnessed rioting as loyalists attacked the
PSNI, the nationalist Short Strand area; and held illegal demonstrations
demanding the right to fly the Union flag whenever and wherever they
wanted. This issue and protests over orange parades have placed a
significant strain at times on the political institutions.
For that reason and because all of these difficult issues are not going
to go away the First and Deputy First Ministers – Peter Robinson and
Martin McGuinness – invited U.S. diplomats Richard Haass and Meghan O
Sullivan to come to the north and to chair an All Party Group to
‘consider and make recommendations on matters including parades and
protests; flags, symbols, emblems and related matters; and the Past’.
Just before Christmas the negotiations entered an intense phase. The
Sinn Fein Ard Chomhairle met on December 23rd and authorised our talk’s
team to conclude an agreement with the other parties to be considered by
a subsequent meeting of the Ard Chomhairle. In the last plenary
session, in the early hours of Christmas Eve morning, the Sinn Fein
negotiators told the other delegates that ‘we believe there is the basis
for an agreement on the mechanisms proposed to deal with the three
issues under consideration.’
But despite a succession of amended draft proposals from the two US
Diplomats the talks failed to reach agreement. There was a real sense
of public disappointment at that outcome, which Sinn Fein shared.
Progress had been made and the Sinn Fein negotiating team believed that
agreement could be reached.
Unionists indicated that they had serious problems with important parts
of the proposals.
However, Richard Haass and Meghan O Sullivan agreed to return for one
last push between Christmas and New Year. The negotiations recommenced
only to conclude after 5 am on December 31st without agreement. By that
stage we had reached the seventh draft of the Haass proposals. Some in
the media interpreted this as an abject failure. It wasn’t. The process
has not concluded.
The Haass proposals have now to be brought to each of the five party
leaderships by their negotiating teams. It is up to those leaderships to
decide whether the proposals offer another step forward and what should
happen next.
In my view significant progress was made and in particular on two of the
three issues – Parades, Select Commemorations and Protests; and
Contending with the Past and the proposals produced by Dr Haass and
Meghan O’Sullivan do provide the basis for an agreement.
Of course, like every negotiation the document that has been produced is
a compromise position. Sinn Fein would like to have seen some aspects
strengthened and improved further. However agreement on everything was
not possible. This is particularly the case on the Flags issue. Like
others we have little confidence that the proposed Commission on
Identity, Culture and Tradition will resolve these issues. We
nevertheless welcome the potential of this process for further
mainstreaming parity of esteem and equality.
I was also disappointed that issues like Acht Na Gaeilge and the
development at Maze/Long Kesh which were part of previous agreements,
were not advanced. They remain to be resolved in the time ahead. These
issues are not going away. Much more work is required on parity of
esteem, equality and respect for all cultures and identities.
Sinn Fein has consistently advocated direct meaningful dialogue as the
best means of resolving the few remaining parading disputes. In the
absence of dialogue or a failure to reach agreement over contentious
parades there is an obvious requirement for a robust regulatory body.
The proposals contained in the Haass paper meet that demand.
And over a decade ago Sinn Fein proposed the establishment of an
Independent International Truth Commission. In our view that remains the
best option. But a basis for compromise on this issue has been proposed.
That is what the majority of our people want. Closure for victims and
survivors is the real benchmark against which this proposition will in
time be judged.
It is a fact that the issues of parades, flags and emblems and the
legacy of the past cannot be ignored. They are too important. There is
an onus on the Irish and British governments and all of the parties to
maintain the momentum that was created in recent weeks and to build on
the progress achieved.
To this end I called for all of the parties not to fudge their response
to the Haass proposals. I called for clear statements of support.
Regrettably the Ulster Unionist Party and the DUP have decided not to
support the proposals. The difference between these two parties is
purely tactical. The DUP said more work needed to be done to the
proposals and called for an all-party working group to be established
while the Ulster Unionist Party has rejected the Haass proposals as
neither ‘viable or acceptable’. Two slightly different ways of Ulster
Saying No! With Peter Robinson taking a slightly more nuanced position
than Michael Nesbitt. Beag an difir.
Irish Republicans have stretched ourselves in the negotiations and we
are up for the challenge the Haass proposals contain. The Sinn Fein Ard
Chomhairle of the Party will meet this Saturday to review the outcome of
the talks process, and agree our response.
This is a time for political leaders to lead. Unionist leaders are
failing their constituents and ignoring the clear desire by the vast
majority of citizens who want to see agreement on these outstanding
issues.
The Haass paper can aid this project. I would urge anyone interested in
the future to access it online, and read and consider the proposals it
contains.
* The proposals are online at http://northernireland.gov.uk/haass.pdf
Posted by Jim on
The Council of Europe has accused the Stormont administration of
blocking the growth and promotion of the Irish language in the north of
Ireland.
It said hostile attitudes by government officials were preventing its
use in the courts and in education, and warned that Stormont was also in
breach of a charter of rights because of delays and attempts to block
requests for bilingual street names.
One unionist councillor in county Fermanagh recently described the Irish
language as ‘foreign and gnomish’ and, in a leaked e-mail, vowed to
fight the “introduction” of Irish to Enniskillen — a town whose name
was anglicised in the 17th century from the Irish ‘Inis Ceithleann’.
The European review of minority languages also said the British
government has not been able to justify banning the use of Irish in the
courts, or allowing people to take citizenship tests through the
language.
The Council of Europe criticised attitudes to Irish in some official
circles and what it said is the Stormont Assembly’s “persisting hostile
climate”.
Caral Ni Chuilin, Minister for Culture, Arts and Leisure who is
responsible for overall promotion of the language, said she hoped this
would change.
But she pointed out any change to policy on languages in the north of
Ireland requires the agreement of the Executive and Assembly, ands is
therefore subject to a unionist veto.
“I hope that all supporters of the Irish language will work together to
convince the Executive, the Assembly and all our people of the merits of
supporting an Irish Language Act,” she said.
The review team hit out at the lack of the long-awaited Irish Language
Act, originally agreed as part of the 1998 Good Friday Agreement;
Irish-medium pre-schools; primary education in Irish; and free school
transport for Irish language schools, despite a recent judicial review
case against the Department of Education on the issue.
COMMISSIONER RESIGNS
Meanwhile, in the 26 Counties, a nationwide campaign to address the
Dublin government’s failure to provide ongoing support for the Irish
language is due to be launched in the coming weeks.
Over 200 people attended a public meeting in Dublin recently organised
by Conradh na Gaeilge in response to the resignation last month of an
Commisineir Teanga Sean O Cuirreain.
The meeting heard that Mr O Cuirreain quit his position in protest at
the failure by the Dublin government to implement legislation designed
to improve services to the public through Irish.
“Sean O Cuirreain’s resignation has really galvanised people – there is
a real sense of crisis that needs to be addressed,” said Conradh na
Gaeilge general secretary, Julian de Spainn.
ANTI-GAELIC RACISM
And in a bizarre development, a Glasgow private hire driver refused to
allow visitors to speak Irish Gaelic in his car — even though Gaelic is
also a native language in Scotland.
The man, who has not been named, reportedly threw the Donegal visitors
out at the side of the road at 2am after they objected to his demand
that they stop speaking in Irish.
Kathleen McAleer, a local mental health nurse, said her cousins were
talking to each other in Gaelic, which is their first language. “The
taxi driver turned around and said to them ‘Stop speaking in that
language’. We didn’t really know how to take it. He said: ‘When you are
in Britain, it is English you speak.’
“I said to the driver ‘Excuse me’, shocked that somebody would say that
to them. I said: ‘That is out of order’. He then said: ‘If they want to
speak in that language they can get out of my taxi.’ So we got out and
said we wouldn’t pay.”
The driver is currently under investigation under hate legislation.