Civil Rights today

A Civil Rights Commemoration Committee has been established. The committee aims: to honour all those who took part in the Civil Rights movement; to examine the civil rights challenges at home and abroad today, especially in the light of racism and sectarianism; to support and strengthen the protection of civil/human rights in Ireland and to share the lessons of the Northern Ireland Civil Rights movement with people working for human rights in situations of conflict.

To that end the committee will organise a series of lectures, exhibitions, seminars and discussions in the coming months. The committee officers are: Denis Haughey, chair; Michael Farrell, vice-chair; Fionnbarra Ó Dochartaigh, treasurer and Frank McManus vice-treasurer. Amongst the committee members and patrons are many who were active during the period, including Paul Bew, Paul Arthur, Ivan Barr, Ivan Cooper, Francie Brolly, John Hume, Bernadette McAliskey, Jean Coyle, Dr Con McCluskey and Mrs Patricia McCluskey.

The press release issued by the committee says: “Forty years ago, in 1968, a series of events took place here which changed the face of Northern Ireland irrevocably. These events were the culmination of attempts since the early 1960s by a number of different organisations and individuals to highlight injustices in Northern Ireland. The Campaign for Social Justice, the Derry Housing Action Committee and the Campaign for Democracy in Ulster were examples of this.

“Their concern was not with the great constitutional issues which had dominated political debate thereto, but with the everyday issues which dominated people's lives. In 1967, the Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association was founded to address all these issues. The following year, inspired by the courage of Civil Rights leaders in the United States, and by their example of peaceful non-violent protest, Civil Rights protesters began to take to the streets of Northern Ireland.

“Their objective was to bring an end to injustice in the system of public authority housing provision, injustice in public and private employment practices, injustice in voting and representational rights, and the arbitrary and oppressive powers available to the state to suppress dissent.

“The things that happened during that pivotal year had a profound effect upon our society, and precipitated an avalanche of change which left no part of our community untouched. Such was the importance of these events, and what they led to, that it is appropriate and even necessary, 40 years later, to commemorate them in a sober and reflective way, to seek to learn from what happened, to consider the significance of the Civil Rights Movement for our society today and the continuing resonance of the issues which it addressed, and the ideals which underpinned it.”

Information: Civil Rights Commemoration Committee, 66 Fairhill Road, Cookstown, Co Tyrone, BT80 8DF. Telephone: 078-842 370 62 or civilrights1968 [ - AT - ] yahoo.co.uk [Replace AT with @]

Caitriona Ruane, the unions and sectarian division.

On the 9th December the Department of Education, under the direction of Education Minister Caitriona Ruane, decided to remove Premature Retired Compensation from redundant teachers from 1st April 2008. The decision was made without consultation with a promised working group consisting of employing authorities and teaching unions; this group was never even convened. As well as screwing classroom assistants the Minister has set her sights on teachers too.

This is not all. From April 2009, as well as not receiving added years, teachers will have their actual years reduced if they retire below the age of 60. The INTO argue that this will change the goalposts for teachers considering voluntary redundancy when it had PRC and, as well as damaging the morale and welfare of teachers, will raise the spectre of compulsory redundancy; all this with young teachers finding it harder to enter the profession.

One must ask why the Minister never consulted with the unions beforehand and it is impossible to discount the possibility of the weak position of teaching unions in Northern Ireland as a key reason. The divide and rule tactics that saw spats between NIPSA and GMB during the classroom assistant strike undermined the collective action of the workers when GMB sided with the management. There are many teaching unions in operation in the North and in many schools the breakdown is such; "I'm a nationalist so I'll join INTO" or "I'm a Unionist so I'll join UTU." The INTO is more willing to call out its members than the UTU (its headquarters are on the Malone Road which scarcely suggests militancy!) but maybe if teachers got their act together and amalgamated, much like Amicus and TGWU did to form Unite, they would have a more coherent voice that is willing to embark on collective action for the betterment of all teachers.

In a broader sense one of the many pities of the sectarian divisions that have ripped apart this island for so long is that a collective consciousness among workers of all sorts has not developed. This has had negative effects on workers and has prevented the flourishing of a Labour party representing both sides of the sectarian divide. The Northern Ireland Labour Party inevitably split over the constitutional question and the SDLP has largely failed in its original goal to attract members from both sides. When one thinks of Northern Ireland and strikes one invariably recalls the 'political strikes' of the UWC in May 1974 or the DUP-provoked protests at Martin McGuinness's appointment as the Minister for Education in 1999, neither of which had anything to do with collective action in the sense of improving pay or working conditions.

An event we should all remember is the Strike and Lockout of 1913 when workers of both sides of the community marched in working-class solidarity against poor conditions and the tyranny of William Martin Murphy. Hopefully in this post-conflict society workers from all sides will see themselves not as principally as Catholics or Protestants, nor as Unionists or Nationalists; but as people, and as workers. Maybe then we can begin, in the words of Sean Farren, "labouring on the hard road to national reconciliation" to build "an Ireland of which Larkin and Connolly would be very proud."

Provo Slap In The Face For Victims

It should come as no surprise that the Provisional IRA are refusing to meet with the Consultative Group on the Past. After all, given their dirty little campaign of violence, they'll want to keep selective control over what parts of their past are recalled- remembering the shooting of Mairéad Farrell: ok; remembering the brutal killing of innocent people and the destruction of Belfast on Bloody Friday: not ok.

What have they got to hide? If they believe that collusion was endemic between the state and loyalists, then one would have thought they would have applauded any attempts to reveal the truth about the Troubles. If their 'war' was so virtuous and noble, surely they should have no problem with light being shone on the past. After all, aren't the provos all about recalling past events with their commemorations and demands for investigations into state killings?

But no, the provisionals don't want the truth exposed.

Why is that? Could it be that there is a lot of unsavoury information about their squalid campaign of violence that they don't want brought into the light? Could it be that they were so hopelessly riddled with informers that a full revelation would render them little more than laughing stocks?

The ridiculous excuse they use for refusing to engage with the Eames/ Bradley group is that it was set up by the British government. Sinn Féin is at the helm of a British devolved Assembly- are the IRA going to refuse to engage with them too? They might find it a bit tricky given the substantial cross-membership.

No, the simple answer is that the hard men of the north, the great defenders of Ireland, haven't got the balls to let the truth be told. They may talk the talk when it comes to exposing the details of events of the past, but ultimately it is the interests of the provos themselves which come first, above the rights of victims and indeed anyone else.

If you're waiting for the provisional movement to give a toss about truth, justice or openness, then you shouldn't hold your breath.

Unionists Beginning To Recognise The Benefits Of A United Ireland?

Former Ulster Unionist councillor Harvey Bicker has joined Fianna Fáil. The ex-British soldier has not been active in frontline politics for several years. Whether or not one is a supporter of Fianna Fáil, it's certainly good news that those who formerly pledged allegiance to the British Crown are beginning to turn to the Irish Harp!

A telling story

During the 20th John Hewitt International Summer School, which finished in Armagh at the end of July 2007, the journalist Fintan O’Toole was introduced to the audience as being a “national treasure” for his writings. One wonders what description would best suit Malachi O’Doherty?

Over the years, he has offered a forensic analysis of violence in Northern Ireland – The Trouble With Guns – and he is identified with this small corner of the world, a corner that bears the labels “the province”, “the six occupied counties”, “Northern Ireland”, “the North”, “the North of Ireland”, “Ulster” and, the most recent addition, “here”. So does that make O’Doherty a national or regional or provincial treasure? A treasure of some sort without doubt.

His latest book, The Telling Year: Belfast 1972 (Gill&Macmillan), is a memoir, an examination, a meditation, a reflection and a story about the Belfast of his youth. He looks at journalism and its role in the Troubles; he looks at himself; he looks at those around him and he writes simply and honestly of what he thought about those events, how they moulded him and how he reacted to them. While no longer adhering to the Catholic faith, O’Doherty’s examination of conscience and subsequent ‘confession’ is one that any Catholic – lapsed or practising – will recognise.

On a personal level, he writes about the beginning of his career in journalism. Born and raised in west Belfast – subsequently a place that became West Belfast, the upper case “W” denoting not just a geographic entity but offering also an ideological statement – O’Doherty finds himself writing for a paper in the city centre, The Sunday News, with a mixed staff. The old certitudes of home are challenged simply by meeting people of a different persuasion. O’Doherty finds himself being pulled in different directions – a feeling that many nationalists will recognise.

However, the IRA members in his home of Riverdale are busy reducing issues of identity to a simpler level: “them or us”. It is a sentiment that attracts and repels O’Doherty. He wants to be part of the gang; he wants to be a hard man and even tries to warn locals at one stage that the British army are around by blowing a whistle. Yet, the price he pays for that simple and silly act is one which distresses him. He is roughed up by soldiers for his trouble and begins to question himself as to what made him do it in the first place.

It is this self-critique that makes O’Doherty’s book so interesting. While many republicans let their hearts rule their heads and allow anger to direct them, O’Doherty tries to balance the needs and emotions of both heart and head. Ironically, given his subsequent disavowal of Catholicism in I Was A Teenage Catholic, O’Doherty’s salvation lies in the Scholastic Philosophy of the Catholic Church. He grasps, intuitively, the Socratic principle of “Know thyself” while his contemporaries prefer not to.

The ‘why’ of things fascinate him. Why did he endanger everyone around him by blowing a whistle? Why do his contemporaries join the IRA and take pot-shots at helicopters and let themselves become little more than cannon fodder for their leaders? Why do the British army and police provoke nationalists with such glee? Why do unionists not understand nationalist anger?

Allied to that are other emotions. There is anger, frustration and passion. There is the hopelessness of being caught between competing armed factions – army, police, paramilitary – and the frustration of simply trying to make your way in the world, in a place where pronunciation and postcode mark you down as belonging to ‘the other side’. Then there is the passion, not the desiccated passion of bookworm, but the sort that O’Doherty feels for women; that deep, dark urge to rut the first woman available, any woman at all, an urge that is denied time and again. One ‘sure thing’ is scuppered by a petty official, determined to stop O’Doherty having sex even while Belfast burns.

That old 1960s slogan of “Make love, not war” seems most suitable for O’Doherty. There is love here, love of common man. He fashions his own morality. While IRA men fondle the cold metal of weapons, O’Doherty yearns to caress warm, welcoming female flesh. It is a telling commentary on the values of the time – Mass-going, Rosary-reciting republicans eschewing sex while happily mangling blood and bone with bullets and bombs.

A good book. Another good book.

This review appeared previously in The Blanket

Ahern 'frustrated' with British over Finucane case

More questions for the British government and its agencies about their activities during the dark days. The murder, in 1989, of Belfast solicitor, Pat Finucane, was debated in the Dáil yesterday. Today’s Irish Times carries a report from Mark Hennessy in which Ahern talks of his frustration that the British have not been quicker to co-operate with him on this matter. Ahern says: “I believe a file exists on the Finucane murder.”

Ahern raised the demand that a public inquiry be held into Finucane’s murder with British prime minister, Gordon Brown, two weeks ago and will meet with former Canadian judge, Peter Cory, who recommended that inquiry. Ahern’s comments on the British approach to this case are unusually blunt: “As of now, I do not get any sense from the British authorities that they are willing to meet the Finucane family’s needs.”

And: “Most of the departmental records, as we know them, and other records have been given. What have not been, and are unlikely to be, given are the files – if any – in the possession of MI5 and MI6, which have a strange system to say the least.

“I have dealt with many ministers and secretaries of state regarding how that system operates but I came across a number of Chinese walls. I do not believe we will obtain a great deal from these sources.”

Time to get ‘rail’ about Irish

Interesting piece in this week’s Irish-language weekly, Foinse, about the on-going row caused by Aer Lingus dropping their traditional greeting in Irish from their Belfast flights in case they might offend some northern Irish passengers. The decision was criticised in the Republic’s Senate last week and the leader of the Senate, Donie Cassidy, is to speak with Aer Lingus’ chief executive, Dermot Mannion, about the matter.

Foinse have some interviews with three people about the issue: director of the Belfast-based cross-community language group, ULTACH Trust, Aodán Mac Póilin; journalist and unionist, Ian Malcolm and director of The Ulster Society, Gordon Lucy. Mac Póilin and Malcolm are of the opinion that hostility towards Irish is not as great as it was amongst unionists though Lucy believes that Aer Lingus showed “understanding” by doing what they did. Mac Póilin thinks Aer Lingus’ decision is a very good example of “cultural cringe” while Malcolm, from a Protestant background, believes that people in his own area no longer assume an interest in Irish equates with republican inclinations.

Not being a regular flyer, it is not something that is going to affect me much. I would rather that Aer Lingus kept the greeting in Irish as dropping it is senseless. There is little enough Irish in the public domain as it is. Of more interest by far is Regional Development minister Conor Murphy’s intention to put up a limited number of bilingual road signs. That has already brought about some negative comment from some unionist politicians.

I wonder though if there is an even better litmus test for linguistic tolerance and a more practical way of defusing the whole issue and promoting the language – rather than putting up bilingual road signs, would it not be better to put up some bilingual railway signs? As a regular rail traveller – my grandfather was a train driver for GNR – I would love to see the station names rendered into Irish with an English translation.

The ones on the Newry-Belfast line are fascinating, to mention but a few: Scarva/Scarbhach/Place of the Shallow Ford; Moira/Maigh Rath/The Plain of the Wheels (how fitting!); Derryaghy/Doire Achaidh/Oak Wood of the Field; Finaghy/An Fionnachadh/The White Field* and, em, Hilden. (Certainly, new signs would add a little colour and culture and freshen up the network. It should give those holiday makers and day trippers from Dublin something extra to talk about on their trips and give the North a more distinctive tourist brand.)

Given that many stops are in areas that are predominately unionist, it would be interesting to see what reception they got. I wonder if ordinary people from a unionist background would be as hostile to them as some of their politicians seem to think? Many rail users might be fascinated to find out that their rather hum-drum halt had, in fact, a story of its own to tell. (I have noticed too that many councils are now restoring townland names on their road signs – and people of all political persuasions are happy to see them back. It is nice to see but not enough; the original Irish-language version should accompany them, again with a literal translation in English.)

Are Irish-language train signs a pipe-dream? I hope not. It is time to get ‘rail’ about Irish!

* The translations are taken from Patrick McKay’s masterful, A Dictionary of Ulster-Place Names (Institute of Irish Studies). If you do not have a copy, go out and buy one now!

So Telling The Truth Is 'Politically Motivated'? Sorry Caitríona, That's Democracy

Today's Irish News published details of how highly sensitive information on school pupils and their families was found lying about in Camlough, Co. Armagh. The revelation was made by SDLP Newry and Armagh MLA Dominic Bradley, who had been passed the information.

The highly sensitive material contained information on 120 people who were pupils quite a few years ago and included details about threadbare clothing on unwashed children and derogatory descriptions of parents. The files included details of of doctors' examinations, information on admissions to a psychiatric institution and prosecutions for non-attendance at school.

One parent was described as a 'n'er do well'. Nice.

However, rather than accept Mr Bradley's right as a democratically elected politician- nay, a citizen- to publicise this massive faux pas, Sinn Féin Education Minister Caitríona Ruane described his decision to highlight it as "politically motivated".

What exactly is wrong with him putting this in the public domain? This is an extremely serious issue and I think the public has a right to know. Is Ruane suggesting that Mr Bradley should have kept this quiet? That's not exactly the hallmark of open government. Methinks she's just slightly unhappy at the authorities being embarrassed by a security breach of the highest order. Apart from that, it's both irrelevant and none of her business what Dominic Bradley's motivation was- the fact is that he highlighted a serious mistake by the authorities, and that's all that matters. I really can't see what political gain he stands to acquire as a result of this.

However, to be fair to Ruane, she did add: "I accept that there is a problem."

Understatement of the year.

Dominic Bradley insisted that he had acted in the public interest and told the Ruane not to shoot the messenger. The Assembly was informed by the Education Minister that a full investigation had begun, with Ruane adding that she wanted: "...to say to the adults who were children then we are going to be contacting them and we will totally protect their confidentiality and their identity." I'm sure they'll be reassured by that...

Salmond the Brave

The visit of Scotland’s First Minister, Alex Salmond, to Dublin for a meeting of the British-Irish Council produced a number of headlines about his desire to build a “Celtic lion” economy in Scotland to match the Republic’s ‘Celtic Tiger’. He certainly put much emphasis in his speech, “Shaping Scotland’s Future” on Tuesday night in Trinity College, Dublin, on economic matters, noting that there was an “Arc of Prosperity around us. Ireland, Iceland, Norway, Finland and Denmark. All small independent nations. All stable, secure and prosperous. Of all these nations, no example is more impressive and inspiring than Ireland. And none is more relevant to the decisions that Scotland faces today”.

Not surprisingly when Salmond referred to “Ireland” he was talking about the Republic and he holds them in some esteem for their achievements and regards much of what they have done – social partnership, for example – as being the sort of initiative that Scotland must follow. He warned that: “Political independence of itself does not guarantee success; it is what you do with that independence which matters.” He also said that “there are no limits to the success of a nation united by a common purpose”. (Which raises questions about what will happen in the North, given that it is neither a nation nor united by a common purpose.)

The cultural side of Salmond’s talk was less emphatic but still interesting. He spoke of the number of Americans who claim Scottish ancestry and of the number of US presidents who are of Scots-Irish descent. That in its turn could actually undermine the DUP’s notion of the Ulster-Scots, a fairly shabby notion in their hands, to be honest. Scots-Irish will have a greater appeal in the US and opens up the possibility of all kinds of economic and cultural co-operation between Edinburgh and Dublin in the United States.

Salmond also quoted CS Parnell: “And to this day, Parnell’s words resonate strongly with the movement of Scottish nationalism. “No man has the right to fix the boundary of a nation. No man has the right to say to his country: “Thus far shalt thou go and no further.” Again, this is not the sort of quote one is likely to hear from either the First or Deputy First Minister anytime soon, for very obvious reasons. They may be many things but neither Paisley nor McGuinness can claim Parnell as part of their political heritage.

So what about the North? What about the march of this corner of the Arc of Prosperity and its boundary? Are the political and economic institutions here strong enough to do for this region what Salmond expects Scottish ones to do for Scotland? Can the Assembly – as opposed to our Assembly? – respond “quickly or accurately to the needs of business”; can it provide the education and skills that Salmond identifies as being central to the Republic’s success. He boasts that free education was a Scottish invention. Can local government and business co-operate to ensure success in the global market, as Salmond expects them to do in Scotland?

He finished by saying: “The story of Ireland - one of the greatest success stories of the last century, and of this century - is a testament to what the people of Scotland can achieve. If we are prepared to learn your lessons. If we are prepared to trust ourselves. If we doubt ourselves we cannot succeed. If we trust ourselves we cannot fail.”

And in the North? Do we trust or doubt ourselves? The latter, I think.

Salmond’s full speech is at www.scotland.gov.uk

McGuinness ‘appalled’

Martin McGuinness is fast becoming a local version of Mary Whitehouse – a sort of Marty Waterside – and thank goodness that he is now in a position to give us all a moral lead. Speaking at the British-Irish Council gathering in Dublin, the Deputy First Minister said how worried he was that so many scenes on ITV’s Coronation Street and the BBC’s Eastenders were set in the Rovers Return and the Queen Vic. The emphasis on drinking sets a bad example, McGuinness believes. He thinks it is “irresponsible broadcasting” and he is “absolutely appalled”.

Isn’t it just typical of a Sinn Féiner to add to the cultural cringe by mentioning only British soaps? McGuinness has a patriotic duty to support Irish drama in his critique of the drink culture. Afterall, the cast of RTÉ’s Fair City are rarely out of the pub and the teach tábhairne, Tigh Thaidhg, in TG4’s Ros na Rún has seen more than its fair share of dirty doings over the years. But, oh no, the great republican ignores the hard-work of Irish dramatists to plug Corry and Albert Square.

What is this fascination with all things British? It can only be a matter of time before McGuinness starts talking about ‘the mainland’ and the issue of television violence. Terrible thing violence; irresponsible and appalling.

Ulster Unionists Win Dromore Bye-Election

In a shock result, the Ulster Unionist Party has retained its seat on Banbridge District Council after a bye-election in the Dromore area. The DUP, which had forced the bye-election following the resignation of UUP councillor and former rugby player Tyrone Howe, thought it would be a walk in the park. But they hadn't budgeted for the arrival of Jim Allister's Traditional Unionists on the scene.

I was on the ground in the area last night during polling. A lot of people were of the opinion that TUV transfers would go back to the DUP and see them over the finishing post in first place. However, the animosity between the DUP and the two smaller Unionist parties was palpable, and I must admit I had a strong suspicion that the TUV would extract enough support from erstwhile DUP voters for the Ulster Unionists to slip up the middle and win. And that's what happened, with the TUV dislike of the DUP being reflected in their transfers, which benefited the UUP more than many would have assumed.

Although bye-elections aren't the most important in the electoral calendar, they are interesting for the purposes of giving a snapshot at a given time. Given that not a lot was at stake in Dromore, it's clear that many of those who would have traditionally supported the DUP opted to support the TUV in this election to send out a message to Paisley over his Chuckle Brothers routine. It may not be a bloody nose, but it'll certainly sting.

The question now is whether Jim Allister can build momentum for his movement. Certainly there were reports last night of DUP election workers being barracked at polling stations over their decision to abandon everything they had stood for for decades to go into government with Sinn Féin. Certainly this result, which saw the TUV put in a respectable showing, has leant some credibility to Allister's new party. If the Dromore results are reflected in future Assembly elections in other DUP strongholds, then the Paisleyites will be in trouble.

Perhaps this threat to the DUP will come to nothing, but it'll certainly be interesting to watch.

Why was Chris Harte killed?

The provisional movement’s response to the news that another one of their number, Roy McShane, was an agent for MI5 for 20 or so years was predictable; the line was that he had been under suspicion, had not been in any position of responsibility and had been gradually moved aside. “Nothing to see here. Move along,” in other words. The allegation that McShane may have been linked to Stakeknife and may have been involved in the IRA’s infamous ‘nutting squad’ was all but ignored by Sinn Féin.

Given that that murderous section of the IRA seems to have totally compromised by British intelligent services – be they RUC Special Branch or by Spooks from across the water – you can understand Sinn Féin’s need to play down McShane’s past or importance. The embarrassment for Sinn Féin’s leadership – which contains so many of the IRA’s former officer class – is that their political careers could be tarnished by this latest revelation.

Yet it is impossible to hear mention of Stakeknife and this unit without feeling total and utter revulsion for what they did to their own members. I knew one person killed by them; his name was Chris Harte. The IRA said he was one of their members and killed him for allegedly being an informant. Over a quarter of a century ago when I was in my mid-teens, O’Donnell’s GAC had handball practice in Beechmount Leisure Centre on a Saturday afternoon. It was an open house and they happily let anyone who turned up play. I was with Saint Theresa’s at the time and regularly took advantage of their hospitality; Chris Harte played for Gort na Móna and was also a Saturday regular. We did not socialise outside the sport. I met him on the court in the following years as I moved on to play for other clubs but he always remained a Gort na Móna player.

In 1993 when Harte was killed by the IRA, I was teaching Irish in BIFHE’s Whiterock campus to mature students. One of the female students was a Sinn Féin member; she was a neighbour of Harte’s and was shocked when he was killed. She was a lovely woman, married, and keen to learn Irish. She spoke of how Harte had seemed frightened in the days that laid up to his kidnapping and death. (For the record, he was shot, with his hands tied behind his back and dumped.) Her distress at what happened to him was real. How her career in the party developed after that, I do not know.

I have never been able to fathom the brutality of Harte’s killing or its rationale. He was obviously not a senior member of the IRA and could not have known that much – even if he were an informant. (Indeed, we now know that the IRA leadership had established contact with the British government by 1993 and that Hume-Adams dialogue was under way.) What Harte did in the IRA, I do not know. Would he have killed for them if given the chance? Possibly. He had been arrested for gathering information on a police officer and charged with conspiracy to murder. That charge was dropped and he was released. Perhaps being released was what cast suspicion on him. Whatever about speculation, the horror of his murder was only too real. (I should mention too there is a discreet memorial to him. I will not say where in case it causes trouble for those who remember him.)

Who killed Chris Harte? Members of the IRA who are unknown to us but may well be known to those in the intelligence agencies who recruited and protect ‘assets’ in the IRA. Why was he killed? Now, there is a question that Sinn Féin cannot ask but one which everyone else cannot ask often enough.

The American Way

This week we learned that the US has issued 169 charges against Guantánamo Bay detainees, including Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, in relation to the terrorist atrocities of September 11th 2001. These charges include conspiracy, murder, attacking civilians and terrorism and prosecutors have announced they will seek the death penalty. There is only one problem; the detainees will not be given a fair trial.

The US will use the controversial system of military tribunals set up by the Bush administration after 9/11 to try the men. The administration have labelled the men 'enemy combatants' in a war which means they are not afforded the rights granted by the Geneva Convention. One burning question is how on earth can a nation 'at war' with the defendants offer them a fair trial on a secretive system in which even the judges are military personnel? Common sense says that they cannot.

To further complicate things, the director of the CIA, Michael Hayden, last week admitted that at least one of the detainees was subject to the 'waterboarding' torture technique. This, together with the conditions and isolation imposed on the men in Guantánamo Bay, would surely lead one to say anything if it meant an easier existence. There is no way 'evidence' gained from torture could be used in a civilian court so the men are being hauled in front of a kangaroo court in the style of Franz Kafka's 'The Trial' to achieve the desired outcome. All this with the possibility of the death penalty at the end. The US homeland security secretary, Michael Chertoff, when asked if evidence extracted from torture will be used, replied: "The judges will decide what's reasonably admissible and what's not admissible." Yep, those aforesaid military judges.

Clive Stafford Smith, the director of Reprieve has said, "Military commissions in Guantánamo Bay are not about justice, they are about politics. The proceedings these men would face are deeply flawed. Someone could be put to death based on secret or third or fourth-hand evidence. That is not the American way." He argues too that in executing the men, the US will expose the "hypocrisy of espousing human rights, then trampling on them," and that "the most effective counter-terrorism strategy is the enforcement of human rights."

In setting up a Kafkaesque show trial the US will seemingly confirm to the world that human right are negotiable and are for some people but not for others. But human rights are NOT negotiable and nor are they for some; they are for everyone. It need not even be said that the attacks of 9/11 were among the most evil and heinous crimes ever seen but they were not just an attack on New York nor even on America. The 9/11 attacks were an attack on liberal democracy and the principles that progressives the world over hold dear; liberty, human rights and all that these ideals entail. To deny due process to these men is to make a mockery of all we proclaim to stand for and all we lecture others on, it is to fatally undermine any moral authority America claims to have on the so-called 'Global War on Terror' and it will create martyrs of the men on trial. In Ireland it was not the Easter Rising that awakened the consciousness of the Irish people but the retribution that followed. Many moderate Muslims and people living in the Middle East and in Europe who did not support the attacks on 9/11 may feel equally sickened by the hypocrisy on display in Guantánamo Bay and the possible executions of 6 of the men detained there without habeas corpus.

The 'War on Terror' should not be a war fought by arms but by ideas. For too long America has been too keen on arms and not keen enough on the ideas, but they are by far our strongest weapon. If America goes through with charade she will further damage her claim to be the standard-bearer of the liberal ideal. In short, she will be her own worst enemy.

Shortlisted!

I was delighted to hear that El Blogador has been shortlisted for two awards at the 2008 Irish Blog Awards- Best Political Blog and Best Blog Post for my November 2007 article 'Truth And Justice For Paul Quinn'.

Given the competition in both categories, there's little chance of actually winning, but it's certainly an honour to be adjudged good enough to appear alongside some of Ireland's best blogs.

The actual awards ceremony takes place on Saturday, 1st March at 7.30pm at the Alexander Hotel in Dublin.

Fingers crossed!

Teen Deterrent

The campaign to have the Mosquito 'teen deterrent' banned has received another boost with the intervention of England's Children’s Commissioner, Al Aynsley-Green, who has launched a campaign calling for businesses to abandon the use of such devices.

While we are all in sympathy with the shopkeeper who feels threatened by gangs of 'hoodies' outside his business, it is unfair to target everyone with a hearing-range under 20,000Hz, law-abiding or not. Putting aside the fact that the freedom to assemble on public property is a civil liberty dating back centuries, there have been no studies on how long-term exposure to the high-pitched whine can affect one's hearing and there are worries especially with regard to young children.

Liberty director Shami Chakrabarti has said, 'This device could affect a babe in arms as well as a teenager. Imagine such a device applied to people of one race or gender and ask what position they would take,' and she has a very good point. This 'degrading and indiscriminate' weapon has the effect of victimising the vast majority of law-abiding teenagers and is not the right approach to tackling 'anti-social behaviour.'

What the Mosquito device does, as well as causing great annoyance to all who can hear it, is it moves people from outside of a shop to somewhere else where they are equally likely to do something untoward. What it fails to do is to address the key question; why do young people feel the need to hang around outside Spar on a Friday night?

One reason is simple. In many areas the provisions for young people are appalling or non-existent. For those young people between the age when one is happy to hang around in a friend's house and the age when one can gain entry to a bar there is very little else to do. It is therefore inevitable that they choose to wander the streets and can sometimes, without being aware of it, prove to be a threatening presence to older people. If given an alternative I bet many would take it; anything is better craic than Spar.

Anti-Yob Or Just Plain Snob?

I often find it interesting when I read the pages of such quality newspapers as the 'Daily Mail' or listen to pontificating politicans only to hear repeated outrage at how cheap booze is. Invariably, such complaints are accompanied by condemnation of the supermarket chains responsible for offering deals on alcohol, backed-up with various unsavoury accounts of drink-fuelled thuggery.

However, while drink doubtlessly plays a major role in street violence and other criminality, it's a red herring to suggest that bumping up the price of booze will solve the problem. It's also interesting that those commentators usually found making such calls wouldn't find it a problem forking out quite a few quid on a quality wine- presumably it's only the well-to-do who should have the right to get hammered.

The fact is that demand for alcohol, like that for most other addictive pleasures such as tobacco, is inelastic- in other words, the effect of price changes on demand is less than proportional. If people want to get drunk, they'll get drunk.

There is a strong drinking culture on these islands, but it isn't caused by 25p cans of bland, watery beer from Sainsbury's. Pushing up the price won't stop those who want to binge-drink from doing so- it will serve, however, to eat further into the limited cash reserves of many of those people who find themselves in a poverty-drinking-depression cycle, which will make the situation worse. Let's face facts- it's low-income drinkers about whom the aforementioned commentators are talking when they condemn the sale of cheap booze- that's why such 'moral guardians' focus in on the issue of price, because they think that by increasing the cost of low-grade alcohol in the supermarkets, it can be priced out of the range of such people, making everything fine and dandy.

However, if this issue is to be dealt with responsibly and effectively, then education needs to take place. People need to learn of the dangers of alcohol from a young age. Efforts also need to be made to reduce the glamourous appeal of drinking- the fact that it's seen as something that only adults can do is the very thing that stimulates many teenagers into getting into the binge-drinking swing of things in the first place. Meanwhile, in continental Europe there is a lot less of a problem with regard to alcohol abuse, arguably due to the presence of wine around the dinner table as a matter of course. I'm not advocating feeding vodka to toddlers, but it's the forbidden fruit element of drinking that draws youngsters towards its charms in the first place.

Alcohol is also a lot cheaper to buy abroad, which contradicts the idea that there is a strong link between price and over-consumption.

It's all too easy to complain about low-price grog in the supermarkets, but aside from the fact that such rants are discriminatory against those who can't afford to dish out cash on fine beverages, it ignores the real problem of overdrinking that affects all sections of our society.

Instead of making scapegoats of the supermarkets (who, after all, are only meeting the demand of adult consumers) or assuming that anti-social behaviour is caused by allowing 'poor' people to access alcohol by making it cheap, it is the responsibility of society as a whole to look at ways of encouraging responsibile drinking. Drink-driving has become taboo in recent years, so there's always room to change opinions and behaviour in relation to the more general issue of alcohol consumption.

Moderate McCain??

Maverick Republican Senator and GOP frontrunner in the race to the White House is almost certainly going to capture his party's nomination following Mitt Romney's decision to drop out this week. Interestingly his candidacy has provoked the ire of right-wing Republicans (are there any other sort?) and talkshow pundits such as Rush Limbaugh who slam the Vietnam veteran for so-called 'pinko liberal' views on issues like immigration. McCain may be a maverick as he often takes views not in line with GOP thinking such as his promotion of campaign finance reform in the 90s but is he moderate?

The evidence would suggest otherwise and is in stark contrast to the image of McCain presented to us in the last few weeks by the media. On most of the issues McCain is pretty conservative which makes some of the opposition to him from within his own party seem almost self-indulgent and Limbaugh's claim that he would rather vote Democrat somewhat bizarre. If McCain is liberal then Franco was in the Alliance Party. Let's look first at his Senate voting record;

On 31 December 2006 Jeff Lewis and Keith Poole published the 109th Senate Rank Ordering using an algorithm to assess the ideological positions of Senators (which amongst other things allowed them to measure the degree of polarization between the parties) and, sure enough, McCain came second in terms of a conservative voting record. He supports capital punishment (in April 1996 he even voted to limit death penalty appeals), has called for stricter sentencing, opposed moving federal funds gained from closing corporate tax loopholes to education, supports overthrowing so-called 'rogue governments' to 'keep America safe', voted to cap foreign aid, opposed background checks at gunshows, voted to extend the Patriot Act's wiretapping provisions and as late as December 2007 he voted no on requiring the CIA to keep reports on interrogation methods. The list goes on.

If positions and divisions like the above are what constitute moderation in the American politics (and I don't believe for a second that they do) then the centre of gravity has shifted, in the eyes of extreme Republicans anyway, far to the right. A hawkish foreign policy, further assaults on civil liberties and no action to combat poverty or to restrain corporate America are what should be expected from a McCain presidency. Independents tempted by claims that he is moderate or impressed by his independent mindset should be very careful when they go to the polls in November.

Breaking News: 'Republican' Collusion Uncovered. Again.

Yet again we find that provisional republicans and the British Crown Forces have been working hand-in-hand. The latest 'outting' has revealed that a person who drove senior Sinn Féin members- believed to be Roy McShane- left Ireland this morning and has been taken into protective custody by MI5 after it was revealed he was an informer.

Of course, this comes as no surprise. The provisional movement is riddled with informers and British agents. This chap was a mere minnow. If you look at the history of Sinn Féin and the IRA since the early 1970s, they've gone from being a staunch and violent anti-British guerilla organisation to group of besuited bureaucrats administering British rule alongside Paisley et al. Pure coincidence?

What the public now need to know is the extent to which provisional Sinn Féin and its military wing were and are infiltrated by the security forces. Countless people have died as the result of loyalist and republican collusion- the veil of secrecy needs to be lifted so people know what exactly went on. And as for those strongest supporters of the provisional movement, well they need to be told how many of their friends and family members who 'volunteered' and died violently were killed as a result of the collusion of the very organisation who perfidiously venerates said 'martyrs' to this day.

Collusion is indeed no illusion.

Well Done Australia

It's not often in this age of international arselicking diplomacy that a nation has the balls to stand up for what is right, especially when it would mean irritating a 'friendly' foreign government. However, Australia's newly elected Labor government has done just that by releasing footage showing the slaughter of whales by Japanese whalers. For years, the Japanese government has done everything in its power to fly against international opinion and continue to permit the killing of whales. The Australian government says it is collecting evidence on Japanese whaling with a view to taking them to court for breaching international law.

This is a refreshing change from the normal smiles and handshakes we see between international leaders- how often have we watched on as prime ministers and presidents posed for the cameras alongside counterparts who have frankly shameful records on issues such as human rights? Money talks. However, when it comes to the issue of Japanese whaling, Australia has made the right call. Keep up the good work.

Whither America?

For those hoping that Super Tuesday would provide some clear blue or red water between the candidates in the Democratic and Republican nomination races respectively, the events of this week will have proved somewhat of a disappointment.

On the Democratic side, things are closer than ever. I must admit that when I saw Hillary Clinton's fortunes reverse towards the positive in New Hampshire after the Iowa hiccup, I thought the 'Billary' machine had cranked up enough momentum to leap ahead of the the rookie Senator Barack Obama. As it turned out, Clinton bagged eight states on Super Tuesday, including California and New York, with Obama winning in 13. At the moment, the results mean that Hillary has 845 delegates and Barack sits with 765- the goal is 2,025 to be sure of nomination.

In the Republican field, John McCain has stretched out a lead over his more right-wing rivals. However, it's still too early for the Vietnam veteran to ascertain the number of his proverbial poultry before they have exited their shelled homes of infancy. That said, he now has an estimated 613 delegates for the Republican convention compared with Mitt Romney's 269 and Mike Huckabee's 190- each is aiming for 1,191 delegates to secure nomination as the Republican candidate for the White House race. Huckabee is refusing to rule himself out of the running, having won a number of southern states on Super Tuesday, meaning his ongoing involvement is arguably causing a split in the conservative vote, allowing the more centrist McCain to sail past.

The Republicans' 'winner takes all' approach has also helped McCain- for instance he won all of New York's 101 delegates when he topped the poll in the Empire State- whereas the Democrats favour a more proportionally representative system, making it more difficult for contenders to establish clear leads.

In the event that neither Clinton nor Obama can establish a clear lead over their rival, it may rest with the unpledged delegates at the Democrats' convention, i.e. those who are free to choose who to support such as senior party officials and state governors, to decide who should run. In that case, who is picked to be the Democratic nominee will come down to who the hierarchy believe is most likely win the national presidential election.

Super Tuesday? Hardly.

Update: Mitt Romney, who bankrolled his own campaign with millions of dollars to become President, has pulled out of the race, effectively leaving the way clear for McCain to be the Republican nominee.

Post-Catholic Ireland?

The term “post-Catholic Ireland” is one that is frequently used to describe the death of Catholicism. It would seem though that the epitaph may have been written too soon. Attending Mass this morning to mark Ash Wednesday, I could not help but be struck by the numbers in attendance. There was not even standing room.

Any Catholics reading this site will be familiar with the 'turkey-and-ham' Catholics who turn up for Mass on Christmas Day and are never seen again until the following year. Christmas Mass is part of the festive season. What struck me most about Ash Wednesday is that it is entirely voluntary; people allow themselves to be marked with ashes and humbled by the line: “Remember you are dust and on to dust you shall return.” This morning’s demonstration of faith had nothing to do with bishops or parish priests beating people into the chapel.

The problems of declining vocations and falling attendances have been well rehearsed in the media over the years. All I can say is that I saw a cross-section of people this morning who would be an advertising man’s dream: children; young mothers; middle-aged couples; senior citizens; unemployed; professional; disabled; locals; Poles and travellers. How well any of them – any of us – live up to a Lent of prayer, fast and alms giving remains to be seen. However, there was no lack of people who were prepared to try.

On a lighter note, I have been struck too about how many people make the Sign of Peace during Mass. People used to be fairly diffident and restrained in the Sign of Peace. Now, it is handshakes and smiles all around, rather like being in Clones when your county win – though I have not, as yet, seen any high-fives.

Joyous Catholicism. Whatever is the world coming to?

A Showing In The Irish Blog Awards

I was pleased to see that El Blogador has popped up in a number of nomination categories in the Irish Blog Awards- Best Blog, Best Group Blog, Best Blog Post and Best Politics Blog.

Of course, we all know El Blogador by rights should come first in each of those categories, but I won't be holding my breath ;)

This year it appears that a group of judges will decide on the winner in each category- in some ways this is good, as it means that 'big' blogs will be less likely to win than were the decision to be made by popular vote. Of course, the downside is that it reduces the role of democracy in the process. Nonetheless, even if this is as far as it gets for El Blogador in the process, I'd like to thank anyone who nominated us and express my appreciation for your continued support.

As an aside, I'm currently dosed with the cold so please forgive my ongoing lack of blogging.

It could have happened...

The International Hotel, Belfast, 1967: Jerry A, a young man in a hurry, attends the founding meeting of the Civil Rights Association. Republicans, trade unionists, socialists and others of a social democratic nature address the meeting. Finally, he manages to get the microphone; he likes the microphone and is delighted with the opportunity to talk:

“A chairde, my name is Jerry A and I am a performance poet. I came here with some pretty bad vibes but I have to say that I am now high on the what this civil rights thing is all about. It is mind-expanding, man. I love all this shit about the dignity of peaceful protest and about taking on the Man through non-violent means. It is just groovy and I am with it. That Martin Luther King guy is just so far out. Violence is wrong; bombing is a bummer. Make love, not war. Yeah, baby. That is such a cool concept. And you are right. I mean, look at Vietnam where they are incinerating men, women and children and destroying whole villages to save the villages. It is horrible, man.

“Who wants to be part of a movement that kills men, women and children and flattens whole villages for political gain? Hell no! I won’t go! And as for the Soviet Union. No way, man, do I want to be part of that set-up. Look what those dudes did to the Hungarians. Let us say slán to Stalin and all that centralised, do what you are told, when you are told, shit. No way, man, am I taking orders from anyone. I want to thank you all for showing me the path of true enlightenment. Peace to the people!”

With that Jerry A leaves the building. Unfortunately, while performing his poem, Sonnet Against the Special Powers Act, outside Belfast City Hall he is assaulted by a born-again B Special who takes exception to Jerry A’s advocacy of free love. The doctors at the Royal manage to patch up Jerry A’s head but his bodhrán is beyond salvation. Thus is the history of Ireland changed, changed utterly…

Oppie and the atom

Just finished Kai Bird and Martin J. Sherwin’s American Prometheus: the triumph and tragedy of J. Robert Oppenheimer (Atlantic Books), a biography of Oppenheimer – or Oppie as his friends knew him – the ‘father of the bomb’. He was the man who lead the United States to develop the atomic bomb during the second world war, a bomb which was intended to be used against the Nazis but was, as we all know, dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki after the Nazis had surrendered and, as it now seems, just before the Japanese did likewise.

Oppenheimer’s name is familiar even to non-science readers like myself and the authors have pitched this book just perfectly to a non-science constituency – they explain the politics of the science debate but do not expect the reader to be au fait with the actual science. The BBC made a drama series about the development of the bomb many years ago. I do not remember the title but remember being fascinated by the story of the Manhattan Project and this biography gives a very detailed and enlightening account of those war time years.

The amazing thing is that Oppenheimer and the team he brought together achieved their aim in such a short time. They certainly believed themselves to be racing against a Nazi bomb – a threat that subsequently was found to be less dire than they had imagined. Still, that they developed the bomb in the space of a few years was an astonishing feat and one which the authors believe would not have been possible as quickly without Oppenheimer’s charismatic leadership.

The authors give a very detailed account of Oppenheimer’s life: his family background; his schooling and undergraduate years; his gradual success in physics; his marriage and affairs; his war years and then the post-world war two era when he became an advocate for nuclear control and a target during the McCarthy era because of his left-wing politics. The chapters on how this American hero was hunted by high-ranking politicians and rich industrialists – the word is not too strong – for his pre-war political affiliations makes for very chilly reading indeed. The FBI emerge from it with little credit either – it is a far sight removed from Jimmy Stewart and The FBI Story.

Oppenheimer was certainly a complicated man: vain; compassionate; guileless; intuitive; callous and generous. All these traits are explored in this book. What struck me most after having read it – other than Oppenheimer’s story itself – was how little debate there now exists in the West over nuclear weapons control. Yes, the United States’ anger over Iraq’s nuclear programme is there but the fact that there are still so many functional nuclear weapons in existence does not excite the same debate it used to. The protests of Greenham common seem a life-time away and Britain’s nuclear deterrent is discussed in terms of monetary cost and not morality. Similarly, the fact that China, Russia, the US, France, Israel, India and Pakistan still maintain their arsenals is no longer a pressing issue in public discourse. Of that Oppenheimer would not approve.

One note of housekeeping, this book is only available in hardback at the moment and at £25 is dear. However, I ordered mine on Amazon for under £9 (not including p&p). Very good value indeed for a 600 page hardback.

If it is February...

If it is February, it must be time for the National Football League. I am a blow-in to Armagh and usually make every effort to attend league and championship games. That said, I am happy to admit that it is very unlikely that this Summer Soldier will travel to Crossmaglen this Sunday for the opening game. Sorry but the McKenna Cup game did for me. It is just too cold, I am not getting any younger and the prospect of standing for an hour and a half in Arctic conditions does not appeal. The sooner the Athletic Grounds are opened, the better! (Hopefully, my direct debit to the Friends of Armagh will guarantee me a heated seat or, at the very least, a blanket.)

Which is not to say that I don’t wish the boys in Orange well. Having worn the county jersey in, ahem, a novice handball competition many years ago, I know the pride that Armagh GAA supporters take in their team. (Unfortunately, I did not cover myself in glory – though I did put out the Down player which counts for a lot, even for a blow-in!)

It would not be inaccurate to say that Armagh supporters have fairly low expectations at the moment. Everyone is hoping that Peter McDonnell will soon have his first win and that he and the team enjoy a good league campaign and a good Championship.

There was a great line in the Irish News which sums up Armagh perfectly this year: “Don’t write them off but don’t write them up.” That is spot on. Armagh still have the players to be competitive, a new manager with a fresh approach and the lack of expectation could work to their benefit. I think they have enough in the tank to gain promotion and who knows what a fully-fit team might achieve in the summer.

Of the Ulster teams, Tyrone, Donegal, Monaghan and Derry should all do well – though I was very surprised that Derry lost to Down in the McKenna Cup final. The last couple of times I saw Derry in action, they were very impressive. I was very disappointed that they did not beat Dublin last year in the championship because I think they could have gone all the way had they done so. It will be a big campaign for Tyrone, Donegal and Monaghan. Tyrone need to put down a marker that they are to be feared again; Donegal need to keep the momentum going and Monaghan need to build on last year. Down seem to be on the up; Cavan seem to be rudderless; Fermanagh will always be a danger at home and Antrim, well, Antrim would just break your heart.

Still, go n-éirí an bóthar leat if you are one of the hardy Gaels travelling this weekend and not a Summer Soldier like me. Wrap up warm. And good luck to Antrim’s hurlers in the final of the Walsh Cup against Offaly at Casement. I would love to go but did I mention it was cold? Chonálfadh sé na corra, as my people say. Sofa here I come!