Anti-Catholic bigotry of many in DUP still significant

Posted by Jim on February 23, 2017

Andy Pollak. Irish Times. Dublin. Wednesday, 22, 2017
Andy Pollak is former religious affairs correspondent and Belfast reporter with The Irish Times.

“It is disappointing that the deep and overlapping anti-Irish and
anti-Catholic bigotry of so many DUP- supporting unionists appears
to still play a significant role in Northern life and politics.”
Above, DUP leader Arlene Foster. Photograph: Paul Faith/AFP/Getty Images

How much did continuing religious bigotry have to do with the collapse of the Northern Ireland Executive last month? It was clear from Martin McGuinness’s resignation statement that the row which led to that collapse was not only – or even mainly – about the Renewable Heat Initiative fiasco.

McGuinness accused First Minister Arlene Foster of “deep-seated arrogance” and the DUP of rejecting his attempts to reach out to Unionists, of “shameful disrespect” to women, gay people and ethnic minorities, and “crude and crass bigotry” to Irish language speakers.

In a follow-up RTÉ interview, McGuinness said there were many people in the DUP who “hate anything to do with Irish nationalism and Irish republicanism.”

As somebody who began studying the DUP more than 30 years ago (in the course of researching a biography of the late Ian Paisley), I recognize the truth in all these charges. I had hoped that
their antiquated prejudices would have begun to diminish as a realization that they had to share their divided little society with their nationalist neighbors started to dawn on Unionists in a new century.

It is disappointing that the deep and overlapping anti-Irish and anti-Catholic bigotry of so many DUP-supporting Unionists appears to still play a significant role in Northern life and politics.
Inherently superior

Back in 1986, I wrote about the people who followed Paisley as follows: “They believed they were inherently superior to their Roman Catholic neighbors because of their religion. They were ‘born again’ Christians, living in the ‘light’ of pure Protestantism, free men who communed with God without the interference of priests or man-made rituals. Catholics, on the other hand, were benighted and ignorant souls who were enslaved by the ‘darkness’ of Roman superstition, the idolatry of the Mass, and the rule of the papal anti-Christ.

“Such a view tallied perfectly with the superiority they felt anyway as the descendants of the people who had ‘civilized’ Ulster. Thus the underprivileged position of Northern Catholics was nothing to do with injustice: quite the opposite – it was living proof of God’s justice in rewarding those who followed the true religion.”

I wonder how many Northern Unionists of the DUP persuasion still hold such appalling, near- racist views. Too many, I suspect, although friends tell me that such bigotry is far less prevalent among younger DUP members (and I have at least one young DUP councilor acquaintance who bears that out).

A politically-minded Belfast Protestant minister told me recently that about a third of DUP Assembly members were old-fashioned conservative evangelicals – some might call them fundamentalists – who continue to oppose Roman Catholicism as non-Christian, and to look down on its followers.

This kind of anti-Catholic Protestantism also remains a significant factor in the North’s largest Protestant denomination, the Presbyterian Church. Its younger ministers are overwhelmingly conservative evangelicals, and many of its congregations are closed off from wider society, with a pietistic belief system that has little to say about issues of sectarianism and social justice.

As the outspoken former moderator, the Rev John Dunlop, says, whereas much of the thinking of Northern Catholics remains strongly influenced by anti-Britishness, the equivalent influence among many Northern Protestants is still anti-Catholicism.

Religious nightclubs

Church attendance in Northern Ireland, as everywhere in Europe, is in decline. Belfast is no longer a city where nothing opens on a Sunday and the only entertainment on that day is of the soul-saving type – “a city of religious nightclubs”, to use Methodist leader Donald Soper’s memorable phrase from the 1950s.

No longer is there an atmosphere of cold war between Irish (and British) Protestantism and Catholicism, the kind of atmosphere that saw the Archbishop of Canterbury in 1953 denounce “the oppressions and denials of just liberties which lie at the door of the Roman Catholic Church”.

Relations between the churches have improved hugely since then. In 2004, the Rev Ken Newell, that year’s courageously liberal (and peacemaking) Presbyterian moderator, incurred the wrath of conservatives by inviting the Catholic primate, Cardinal Seán Brady, to its annual general assembly for the first time.

This invitation was not repeated, although there have been other high-level gestures, such as Archbishop of Armagh Eamon Martin’s attendance at a Presbyterian conference on 1916 last year.

Even 30 years ago I estimated that as many as 80 per cent of DUP members would have been Catholic-fearing fundamentalists. A lot has been done, but there is still a lot to do to overcome religious bigotry and fearfulness in the Protestant North.

If anyone is having trouble getting on site with BrooklynIrish.com, it will also be on BrooklynIrish.net. Note Net not Com, it may not happen for a month but as of now both are working. Sorry for the inconvience

Posted by Jim on February 18, 2017

LAST CALL!!!!! WE NEED TO KNOW BY TOMORROW SUNDAY FEBRUARY 19, 2017 AS TO WHO IS ATTENDING THIS MAJOR DEGREE……

Posted by Jim on

Torture of ‘Hooded Men’ is a war crime, court is told

Posted by Jim on February 17, 2017

One of 14 Irish nationalists tortured during internment was bitten by a
British soldier’s dog and forced to drink from the animal’s dish, the
High Court heard this week.

School caretaker Sean McKenna was also slammed into concrete posts and
dragged through streets barefoot after being taken from his Newry home
in August 1971, it was revealed.

Lawyers for his daughter argued that the interrogation techniques
“ruined” him and worsened a heart condition that led his death four
years later at the age of 45.

Mary McKenna is taking legal action along with other surviving members
of those who became known as the ‘Hooded Men’, in a bid to secure an
independent and human rights-compliant investigation into their
treatment.

Proceedings have been issued against the the PSNI police, British and
Stormont authorities over their failure to properly investigate and
order a full inquiry.

Five standard torture techniques were used against the men as part of
what was called “deep interrogation”, but others faced other acts of
brutality and violence with the aim of extracting information from them.

Government papers recently uncovered have shown that former British
Prime Minister Edward Heath was involved in the decision-making process
which directed the torture, while Stormont’s Prime Minister at the time,
Brian Faulkner, was said to have been personally briefed on the
deployment of the methods.

The court heard Ms McKenna was 14-years-old when her father and brother
were both taken from their house by British soldiers. In a statement she
recalled how when he returned home 10 days later he was “a very broken
man”.

Reading from her affidavit, barrister Karen Quinlivan QC said: “He was
sitting crying and was very shaky. I remember him telling me that he had
been hooded and handcuffed to a British solider who had an Alsatian dog
with him.

“He told me that the dog had been allowed to bite him and that he had
been required to drink from the same dish as the dog.”

His internment ended in May 1972, when he was released on medical
grounds to enter a psychiatric hospital. But the impact of being
subjected to the torture caused his psychiatric break-down, according to
his daughter, and he died of a heart attack just three years later.

The medical evidence backed allegations that his trauma was responsible
for death as well as psychiatric injuries, the court was told.

It was further revealed that a government minister visited a training
exercise for the “interrogation methods” in 1971. The court was told
that the military taught the torture methods to RUC Special Branch
officers who sought assurances of immunity from prosecution before
carrying them out.

“The allegation in this case is that the decision to sanction that
torture was taken by senior ministers,” said Hugh Southey QC.

“We would argue that the failure to prosecute government ministers has
the potential to undermine the rule of law; it suggests impunity, it
suggests ministers are above the law.”

In another statement heard by the court, one of the group recalled
collapsing and being punched in the stomach to revive him. He was
against the wall for three days, subjected to kicks or beatings every
time he dropped to the ground or fell asleep.

“The applicant described suffering hallucinations and prayed for death,”
Mr Southey said.

His treatment also resulted in serious psychiatric and psychological
consequences, including treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder.

Based on the contents of memos and other documents, Mr Southey pointed
out it was not in question that the men were subjected to treatment that
violated their human rights, nor was it disputed either that
authorisation came from senior government ministers.

A deliberate decision was made to prevent the full truth coming out with
accusations of criminality against the state, he argued.

“There was throughout the 1970s a lack of candour essentially about
precisely what ministers were aware of,” Mr Southey said.

He insisted that any ministerial involvement in what happened to the
‘Hooded Men’ should be subjected to criminal proceedings.

“If one doesn’t prosecute people at the highest level it gives rise to a
greater sense of impunity,” he said.

He also referred to the definition of war crimes applied under the Rome
Statute governing the International Criminal Court sitting at The Hague.

“It’s difficult to see how torture in the context one is talking about,
people detained by the State in the circumstances they were, is any less
serious than torture inflicted in a wartime situation,” the barrister
said.

“Where one is looking at allegations of torture, which is an issue in
this case, one is at the level of a war crime.”

Injustice breeds injustice

Posted by Jim on

———————————————————————-
A former British soldier backs calls for prosecutions for the
Ballymurphy Massacre of 1971, when eleven unarmed civilians were killed
by the British Army, among them Father Hugh Mullen, shot in the back
after going to the aid of another casualty, and Danny Teggart, who was
shot 14 times.
———————————————————————-

By Richard Rudkin

The events of Bloody Sunday are well documented. Forty-five years ago on
Sunday January 30 1972, 13 people were shot and killed by the British
army in Londonderry.

After 38 years of campaigning for justice, the Saville Report, published
in 2010, unequivocally blamed the soldiers of the 1st Battalion
Parachute Regiment.

David Cameron, then prime minister, apologised to the victims of Bloody
Sunday on behalf of the British government. His apology sparked a chain
of events culminating in the Northern Ireland police arresting a former
soldier on a charge of murder. Reactions to the arrest were mixed.
Families of those murdered welcomed the decision stating: “It was a step
in the right direction.”

By contrast the Daily Telegraph claimed in a headline: “Paras were
betrayed over arrest of former soldier.”

Almost predictably, ex-service personnel who had served in Northern
Ireland claimed it was a slap in the face for the service they gave.
Others questioned why, under the 1998 Good Friday agreement, anyone
convicted of paramilitary crimes became eligible for early release, yet
former soldiers who have been responsible for killings could be
investigated and possibly charged with murder.

Where is the fairness in that, they ask? A question I have asked many
times over many years but not in the same context.

For I am a former soldier and went to Londonderry in 1972, days after my
18th birthday. I spoke with soldiers who had been at the civil rights
march in Londonderry on Bloody Sunday. Some told me shots had been fired
by troops from the Derry walls into the crowd below. Was it true or were
they just spinning stories? If it’s true, where is the fairness in that?

Later that year in August, I was based in the Falls Road area of
Belfast. I witnessed things that changed not only my political views for
life but also my view on the role of the British army in Northern
Ireland.

This left me speaking out against some of my former colleagues on
methods used and treatment of the Catholic population. So not only do I
welcome the investigation into those killed by the British army but I
too want justice for the families.

However, for the relatives of the victims of the Ballymurphy Massacre,
who have been waiting almost 46 years, justice is yet to be done. So
where’s the fairness in that?

When Operation Demetrius was launched in the early hours of Monday
August 9 1971, the purpose was to “lift” known IRA members.

However, it was evident from the start that the operation was not going
to plan.

The Royal Ulster Constabulary’s intelligence was found to be inaccurate
and the wrong houses were raided and in some cases the “target” had left
the area. In all, approximately 340 people were arrested and taken in
for “screening.”

Although released without charge some time later, many were traumatised
because of what they had experienced and some even turned their support
towards the IRA.

But the tragedy of the events that commenced on that August morning was
not about the treatment given to those arrested — although that may well
have been bad enough — but about the 36 hours that followed, by the end
of which 10 civilians would lay dead, having been shot by the British
army with an 11th person dying from a heart attack following a mock
execution. Despite claims by the soldiers that they came under fire, not
one weapon was recovered.

Among the dead was a priest, Father Hugh Mullen, who was shot in the
back after going to the aid of another casualty, a mother of eight, Joan
Connolly. She too was going to help the injured and another victim,
father of 14 Danny Teggart, shot 14 times — that’s not a typo. Surely
questions have to be asked? If not where’s the fairness in that?

Nine of the victims were shot by the Parachute Regiment who would go on
to be involved in the tragic events of Bloody Sunday five months later.
There is little doubt that if, like Bloody Sunday, all the shootings had
occurred on the same day, the Ballymurphy Massacre would have a higher
profile which would also help the victims’ families get the justice they
deserve.

Moreover, as a former soldier, I would argue if the events of these
three days had been fully investigated and justice done, Bloody Sunday
may never have occurred.

There was no Royal Ulster Constabulary investigation. The military
police were the only official body to question and take statements from
the soldiers involved in the shootings. It would be interesting to read
the soldiers’ statement on why 14 shots had to be fired at one person
and why a priest, walking away from the soldiers, posed such a threat to
life that the use of lethal force was justified.

By failing to uphold justice, the government sent a clear message to the
British army that they could virtually take any action they liked
without having to face the consequences.

The relatives of the victims continue their fight for justice despite
their first meeting with the secretary of state for Northern Ireland
James Brokenshire in September 2016 ending in disappointment after the
families walked out claiming Brokenshire had failed to answer any
questions.

Nevertheless all the families that have had relatives killed by the
British army in Northern Ireland, in circumstances that, being polite
“gave cause for concern,” must receive justice.

In Northern Ireland, the British army operated under the orders set out
on the “Yellow Card,” which all soldiers carried.

The orders contained such items as power of arrest and opening fire.

So to answer those opposed to former soldiers being investigated: if
they can demonstrate how they complied with the “Yellow Card” then
surely there is no problem. However, if there are discrepancies it must
be for the courts to decide, based on evidence to determine if a crime
was committed.

If found guilty, then the appropriate sentence should be given. If not,
where’s the fairness in that?