He also, effectively, rules out the possibility of any deal being reached by Friday, a day that had been, in some quarters, predicted as another 'deadline' - again.

Mr Ahern also told the Dáil he could not see an agreement being reached between the parties by Friday.

Unsurprisingly, neither Adams nor Paisley thought it worthwhile mentioning this in their statements to the media earlier in the day.

While it doesn't signal an end to the current round of talks, nor the continuing efforts to seek a deal, it should sound a wake-up call to the general media who, for the most part, have been parroting meaningless soundbites without analysis.

"Not since 1922 has a Sinn Fein leader discussed policing with an official representative of the Northern Ireland state.

"Craig met Collins and a Catholic recruiting committee was set up in Belfast, chaired by Bishop MacRory of Down and Connor to, if you like, select suitable Catholics for the police force. At that time this divided republican opinion in the north and the scheme was eventually blocked by the old unionist minister of home affairs who was in charge of policing, Sir Dawson Bates.

"He set out to disrupt the new scheme on the grounds that it would endanger the Protestant control of the police. Therefore the scheme collapsed in 1922. From 1922 until today there has been no republican engagement with the police authorities on the crucial issues of policing.

"It has taken 82 years to get to a point where a northern republican leader is meeting the head of the PSNI, the reformed police force, to discuss the broad issue of policing/demilitarisation".

And he's sanguine over the chances of a deal being struck:

"You have Sinn Fein recognising the reality that qualified Catholics are prepared to join the new force since Patten.

"You also have the Sinn Fein recognition of the requirement of the two governments that to be in government Sinn Fein must accept the existing police force – that is the bottom line of Blair and Ahern.

"Sinn Fein must be seen to support the law of the land. It is the acceptability of the realpolitik by the new pragmatic leaders of the republican movement".

From the briefings, which Frank Millar reports are coming from SF sources, the view is that there will be no devolved policing powers until 2006 - at the earliest.

Leaving aside the fact that the DUP are arguing that they, ultimately, will have a veto on whether that eventually happens, the prospect of the policing issue being resolved as part of a wider package in the next week is, IMO, unlikely.

Think about it this way - will SF join the Policing Board without their frequently cited demand for 'local politicians in control of policing'? Adams couldn't even admit to discussing policing with Hugh Orde yesterday.

Would the DUP accept SF on the Policing Board while refusing to vote for devolved powers because, presumably, of on-going party-political links to criminal activity?

The benefits for both parties in putting this issue on the 'long finger' is that they can both fight election campaigns pointing to further 'negotiations' still to come.. that's been the card they've successfully played to date and it's unlikely to be dropped out of the hand just yet.

The draw-back for everyone else is that, even if they say 'Aye' - and the schedule for the two governments 'calling it' keeps getting pushed back in the hope that it will be 'Aye' - there will remain at least one issue that will resurface, again and again and again.

There is one additional point to raise on the policing issue - should we actually have any politicians 'in control' of local policing?

The [edited] article reads -

SF insists on local control of policing timetable
Frank Millar, London Editor

© The Irish Times

In particular he hints at the diversity within the party, but the need to agree common policy positions:

"Not being a Sinn Féin member Tommy has no idea what positions people took or what work people did on this issue. He also ignores the fact that at the 2002 Sinn Féin Ard Fheis we agreed a substantial and radical policy, which clarified our opposition to privatisations. A position which is now binding on all the party’s elected representatives".

Anti-sectarianism is a very long word – can we spell it?
Paraphrasing the childhood word game underlines the strangeness of the word and our unfamiliarity with the concept. For me 'anti-sectarianism' is community relations in action – a positive, life affirming concept which promotes the acceptance of diversity in Northern Ireland's divided society. This paper hopes to examine the meaning of anti-sectarianism and attempt definitions of it and of sectarianism and non-sectarianism. In doing so the paper suggests that different levels of sectarianism must be identified and that there is a continuum from sectarianism through to anti-sectarianism.
Sectarian attitudes, behaviour and structures have been a feature of Northern Ireland life – and in cultures and societies far from Northern Ireland - for a considerable time. Writing in the 19th century, William Carleton summed up what he thought was the essence of sectarianism:
"If you hate a man for an obvious and palpable injury, it is likely that when he cancels the injury by an act of subsequent kindness, accompanied by an exhibition of sincere sorrow, you will cease to look upon him as your enemy; but when the hatred is such that while feeling it, you cannot on a sober examination of your heart, account for it, there is little hope that you will ever be able to stifle the enmity which you entertain against him".
That these feelings and these actions are almost endemic within Northern Ireland society, in spite of a respectable veneer at some levels within that society, is almost a truism.
Business and Public Life
Few, if any, parts of Northern Ireland life and society escape from the sectarian attitudes and behaviour which exist in this society between Protestants and Catholics. Many of those involved in business and public life would, however, seek in formal terms to distance themselves and their organisations from these attitudes and behaviour. That these continue to exist rather indicates that this distancing has not been successful against other trends in our society. Many organisations in business and the public sector seem to embrace the concept of 'non-sectarianism'. This document is an attempt to examine whether and how far non-sectarian attitudes and behaviour can be taken a step, or even a stride, forward into something we describe as 'anti-sectarian'.
Sectarianism and Anti-Sectarianism
The definition of what we actually mean by 'anti-sectarianism' rather depends on what we mean by 'sectarianism'. It is not fully possible to entrap the nuances of feelings, passions, intellectual nicety or gut reaction conjured up by a discussion of sectarianism. It is not just the bigotry and prejudice, the de-humanised, emotionless, ruthless cynicism that leads to sectarian murder. It is also the ghost at the feast of much polite society in Northern Ireland. While it can and often is the reality of life in working class housing estates, it is equally present in the leafy and apparently more 'civilised' suburbs. It is ingrained into the fabric of society – but what is it?
Roots of Sectarianism
Clearly, it is not possible to examine the roots of sectarianism in any detail here and what follows may thus seem somewhat superficial. However, the dispute is not, it seems to me, at heart religious. It is rather about allegiances – one community to 'Britain' and 'Britishness' and the other to 'Ireland' and 'Irishness'. Clearly religion is a major part of the identity of the two communities but it is much more important as what has been described at a 'stereotypical cue'. It is a major apparent difference between the two communities and the difference that conveniently labels each one. Religion is important in this context,
'…as a social marker through which conflict is articulated rather than as a source of conflict in its own right.... Sectarianism operates whenever religion is invoked to draw boundaries and to represent or reduce patterns of inequality and social conflict" (Brewer, 1991, p101).
Other stereotypical cues include: residence, name, school, personal displays of cultural symbols as well as beliefs about variations in language and pronunciation, physical appearance, dress and physical features. These cues are only possible because of the social significance that is placed on assumed or real differences in behaviour. In other words, attaching importance to them already constitutes sectarianism. Sectarianism thus depends essentially on a popular culture which invokes religion as a boundary marker between the two communities and hence this perception is itself already sectarian.
It is an almost universal practice in Northern Ireland that when we meet or come across a person for the first time, we want to know what 'side' he or she comes from. So pervasive is it that, even for those of us who believe that it is genuinely a matter of no practical or even theological interest, fall into the practice to some extent.
Crude definitions of 'sectarianism' are one of the signs – the stereotypical cues – of which side a person comes from, what his or her political perspectives are. For those of a unionist/loyalist bent, sectarianism is generally something to do with the personal – one individual Protestant discriminating in practice or in their attitude against individual Catholics. For those of a more nationalist/republican turn of mind, sectarianism is an integral part of state power – in Northern Ireland a Protestant state actively and inevitably discriminating on a sectarian basis against those whose loyalty is suspect. The truth is perhaps more complicated than that.
Sectarianism is not just a matter of economic, social or political consideration; nor is it simply a question of personal attitude or behaviour. It is an historical and cultural phenomenon arising out of religious and political differences and perpetuated by group and self-interests.
Non-sectarianism and Anti-Sectarianism
If sectarianism is a complex phenomenon what about the counters to it? Non-sectarian is the position adopted, usually formally, by most voluntary and community organisations and, more informally by public and private bodies in Northern Ireland.
Something apparently more pro-active has more recently, echoing developments in anti-racism and anti-sexism work, come to the fore – anti-sectarianism. Non-sectarianism is normally taken to be a neutral term referring to a neutral position, reflecting the fact that it is about staying in the middle and not getting involved. It implies that religion and politics should not be discussed in our workplaces and that 'normality' should not be disrupted by any unpleasant talk. We tend in this mode to stick to the things which unite us – and often have no difficulty finding lots of those – and avoid those which divide.
There are, of course, many individuals and organisations who would hold to this view, rather caricatured above, and there are compelling arguments that the sectarian differences which certainly exist in our society should not be allowed to invade every nook and cranny of our lives. There are, however, equally compelling reasons to suggest to us that while talking about different political and religious differences may not make sectarianism go away, not talking about them will certainly ensure that it does not go away.

Behind the Blue Door
In his book, The Glass Curtain, Carlo Gebler examined many aspects of life in the Troubles here. He tells this story which illustrates how, although we know sectarianism and other ills exist in our society, we often find it hard to pin it down or to recognise it in ourselves. He writes about the 'house with the blue door':
"If you believed what you read in the papers", she said. "you'd think civil war was raging everywhere in Northern Ireland. But if you live here, and you think of trouble, you think of it as happening in certain towns. And if you live in those certain towns, you think of it as happening in certain districts. And if you live in those certain districts, you think of it as happening on certain housing estates. And if you live on those certain housing estates, you think of it as happening in certain streets. And if you live in those certain streets, you know that the trouble is being caused by the man at the end of the road in the house with the blue door." (Gebler, 1991, p73)
It is all too easy to attribute the problem of sectarianism to somewhere safely 'elsewhere', behind the blue door. It is, unfortunately, not so easy and sectarianism in all its forms is something we in Northern Ireland – and beyond – must address.

Copyright Community Relations Council 2003

By Danny Morrison

More details have emerged on the proposals to deal with the issue of trust which has bedevilled the peace process from the very outset. Talks sources suggest that by the end of December General John de Chastelain could report that he now has physical proof that the DUP has put all its sectarian bigotry 'beyond use'.

In a secret location Ian Paisley has made or will make a video-recorded act of contrition, witnessed by the General and two other independents nominated by Sinn Fein and the DUP. This would open the door to a shadow Assembly in January. Sources say that under the proposals the video would not be shown immediately.

Sinn Fein is saying no deal will be made without a film of Ian Paisley apologising. The nationalist people need transparency, said Gerry Adams: "Any deal must be fair and must address to my satisfaction and my electorate’s satisfaction all the fundamental issues that have blocked progress for so long. We need acts of completion, proof of the sincerity of the unionists and that they have turned their backs on discrimination and triumphalism forever."

The video of Paisley apologising would be held by the head of the International Commission on Decommissioning until March. Paisley's film would then go on general release and Sinn Fein would agree to a new power-sharing executive with the DUP.

There is a real danger, of course, of the whole choreography being thrown into disarray should the Independent Monitoring Commission report adversely on the Reverend Ian Paisley’s activities. Just two months ago Paisley made an outburst against ‘Romanist journalists’ for not being truly concerned about his health and actually wishing him ill.

In the film Ian Paisley is expected to apologise for his contribution to the conflict, beginning with his threatened march into Divis Street in September 1964 to remove a Tricolour from the windows of Sinn Fein’s election headquarters. That sparked off rioting in which hundreds of nationalists were injured and scores arrested.

He goes on to express regret for his counter-demonstrations against the Civil Rights Movement which also led to violence; his founding of the Ulster Protestant Volunteers; the death of Jimmy Dempsey in September 1969, caused by his supporters trying to invade Iveagh and Broadway; his membership of the Ulster Workers Council's committee which organised the intimidation and bloody violence during the UWC strike against power-sharing (the irony!); his involvement with the UDA which provided paramilitary muscle during the second violent strike in 1977; the Carson Trail rallies and middle-of-the-night demonstrations of loyalist firepower; his establishment of the 'Third Force'; his support for the Ulster Clubs; and his involvement in founding Ulster Resistance, some of whose members imported illegal weapons to kill hundreds of Catholics.

Yes, Paisley says, 'Sorry'.

If only!

If all sides were required to prove their sincerity then the above precondition could be legitimately demanded of Paisley. On the other hand, there are demands which are designed to be impossible or mischievous or designed to stymie political progress whilst laying the blame for failure on one’s opponent.

I can live with unionism being in denial about its contribution to the conflict, either directly or as cheerleaders to state and loyalist paramilitary violence. Patronising as it sounds, unionists need our help, which is why republicans agreed to the amendments of Articles 2 & 3, the Patten Commission, and devolution, among other concessions.

I do not know if the IRA is prepared to allow an act (or acts) of decommissioning to be filmed as transparent proof that the act had actually taken place. I don't believe that this demand from unionists is legitimate, don’t believe that it is or represents actual proof of total decommissioning.

For that matter, I don't believe that it will be the end of unionist demands or that it will settle unionists given that it is the political project of republicanism and the trend towards Irish unity which ultimately unsettles them.

Filmed decommissioning only makes sense from the dispassionate perspective of cold logic – lubricating the stalled negotiations so that a power-sharing executive and all-Ireland bodies can be restored.

If a photo or video is taken it will certainly become public and be used by the DUP for electoral advantage and to lord it over the UUP in terms of, "Look what we got and you didn't!"

Republicans would be even more depressed than Ulster Unionists!

Despite all that Paisley says about not wanting to humiliate anyone, he will parade the photos as the symbol of surrender. However, that satisfaction would be short-lived and a one-off regardless of how many times he hits playback. It would be short-lived against the fresh and daily images of the DUP in a power-sharing executive with Sinn Fein, symbolising and signalling a dramatic betrayal by Paisley of his entire political life, radically changing the political complexion of the North and putting the union on a slippery slope.

But, as I said last week, I cannot see Ian Paisley sitting in government with the SDLP never mind with 'Sinn Fein/IRA'. (Or has the DUP dropped that phraseology in the past week?) The real stumbling block, as I am sick of saying, is not arms but the politics of power sharing: power sharing - the antithesis of the meaning of 'Northern Ireland'.

First published in the Andersonstown News on Monday 29th November 2004

Power and responsibility
There are no more excuses for intransigence in Northern Ireland

After 40 years of violence and an utterly dispiriting sequence of derailed peace initiatives, the odds against a breakthrough in Ulster in a given week will always be slim. Expectations must nonetheless be managed, and Downing Street has been managing them hard of late. This was the Prime Minister’s task yesterday when asked about talks held in London between Hugh Orde, the Northern Ireland police chief, and Gerry Adams, the Sinn Fein president. Tony Blair affected an air of weary detachment and acknowledged that “all the possibilities are there” before insisting: “Whether it happens or not is not up to me.”

“It” would be an historic deal between Northern Ireland’s two largest political parties, encompassing the decommissioning of IRA weapons and the resumption of power sharing along lines set down six years ago in the Good Friday accords. Mr Blair’s weariness may be genuine; his apparent detachment is not, for the prize of such a deal, all bleak precedent apart, is perhaps closer than it has ever been.

For the first time since the elections last year that put the fate of the Province in the hands of the Rev Ian Paisley’s Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) and Sinn Fein, both groups appear willing in principle to make the concessions necessary for an over-arching agreement. At Mr Blair’s request, President Bush has intervened with phone calls to Mr Paisley and Mr Adams over the weekend, urging them to turn their hints into actual compromises.

If they do, there is hope that a deal would hold: it is the defining paradox of recent developments in Northern Ireland that republicans are likely to have more faith in an agreement with their hardline Unionist rivals than one reached with David Trimble’s moderate, and now weakened, Ulster Unionist Party. Meanwhile, at the governmental level, London and Dublin have expressed their willingness to consider a “peace dividend” of as much as £1 billion in public funds to go towards much-needed infrastructure projects that the DUP and Sinn Fein agree have been delayed by sectarian strife. They may have had a hand in the strife, but their agreement on anything is welcome.

Mr Paisley’s willingness to trust potentially unreliable partners is to be lauded. The effect has been instructive. He has conquered a lifetime’s aversion to talks with Dublin, and although the elimination of the IRA as a terrorist organisation remains his — and London’s — chief, non-negotiable goal, he has shown a willingness to contemplate its continued existence as “an old boys’ association”. Mr Adams’s meeting with Mr Orde likewise breaks new ground, but a firm and unambiguous commitment from Sinn Fein to full and transparent decommissioning by the IRA is now long overdue. To demand that weapons destruction be properly recorded, and not just witnessed, is entirely legitimate.

The looming pressures of next year’s election make this window of opportunity for Ulster a narrow one, but a similar chance may not present itself for years. It must be seized.

That report in full -

Primate urges parties to 'grasp opportunity'
Patsy McGarry, Religious Affairs Correspondent

© The Irish Times

Feel free to disagree, but there are too many loose ends still trailing in the mud for a 'perfect solution', whatever that may mean, to be served from the current pressure-cooker. Even if the two parties say 'Aye', expect a couple of items to be delayed.. and delayed.. and delayed.. after all, what would they put in next year's election pamphlets otherwise?

Reading the story, of course, it soon becomes evident that the 'proper home' for the Quiet Man pub, or rather the props and fittings used in the original movie, is in a Hollywood studio -

Pat Cohan's in Cong, Co Mayo, was actually a shop in real life but director John Ford converted it into a bar for the Oscarwinning film starring John Wayne.

Interior pub scenes were cleverly shot in a Hollywood studio and the props and fittings have been lying in a dusty warehouse for over 50 years.[my emphasis]

Not that the "film['s] devotees in The Quiet Man Movie Club in Ireland [who] are transporting the pub [props] back bit by bit and aim have it open for business next year" are going to let that get in the way -

"Tourists who came to visit where the film was shot were always disappointed when they heard the pub didn't actually exist in real life," said Paddy Rock, who runs popular tours of the film's West of Ireland locations.

Hmmm... let's not disappoint those tourists. I mean, next thing you know they'll start thinking it was all a fiction... and then where would we be?

Ulster Unionist spin doctors at party HQ in Belfast's Cunningham House have been working overtime to explain the Lagan Valley association's 'strategy' in dumping the seemingly red-hot certainty for the Westminster nomination, Daphne Trimble, in favour of an unknown businessman who only joined the party a few months ago.

Beaten by a margin of two to one, the wind of change – no, make that a tornado – blowing through Lagan Valley has signaled the start of a fresh onslaught on the Trimble leadership – one that is expected to come to a head by March 2005.

March 2005 is a key time period. Next year sees celebrations to commemorate the centenary of the founding of the Ulster Unionist Council, the UUP governing body. The month has also been earmarked when visible proof of IRA decommissioning will be produced, and the green light given to the kick-starting of the power-sharing Stormont Executive with the DUP and Sinn Fein holding the leading roles.

Even the most enthusiastic of the Trimbleista spin doctors was admitting the rejection of Daphne Trimble as the runner against defector Jeffrey Donaldson has confirmed Ulster Unionism is now in the twilight months of her husband's leadership.

In spite of well-staged photocalls of a smiling David Trimble with the man who beat Daphne, they cannot hide the fact there was a deliberate strategy to dump the leader's wife – the only candidate who had at least a fighting chance of unseating Donaldson.

And even if Daphne didn’t manage to unseat Donaldson, she could at least have severely slashed his handsome Commons majority, in much the same way as the now almost defunct Northern Ireland Tories reduced the late North Down MP Sir James Kilfedder’s 14,000 majority in 1983 to around 5,000 in 1992.

The 93 delegates who voted against Daphne Trimble have to face reality that one of the major consequences of their actions has been to light the fuse for what will prove to be the most concerted leadership coup attempt ever on her husband.

Granted, Trimble has survived leadership coups in the past since the signing of the Good Friday Agreement in 1998. But then, all the plotting was hatched by anti-Agreement dissidents loyal to the so-called Gang of Three – Jeffrey Donaldson, Rev Martin Smyth of South Belfast, and David Burnside of South Antrim.

But with Donaldson jumping ship earlier this year to the DUP, taking with him a number of key dissident activists, the anti-Agreement steam roller in the UUC has all but run out of puff.

This time, the leadership coup will be staged by those who would be classified as pro-Agreement and are feeling this icy wind of change from their grassroots. They believe the only way the party can avoid an electoral meltdown in May’s council and expected General Election is to dump Trimble in favour of Sir Reg Empey.

The UUP's 'strategy' to wrench Lagan Valley from Donaldson is simple (although many would view it as merely simple-minded). Take a newcomer to the party and pitch him against the sitting MP who has held the seat since 1997.

This newcomer will be able to topple Donaldson, in spite of the latter topping the poll in the November 2003 Assembly election with 14,000 first preference votes, and in the 2001 General Election, Donaldson received almost 26,000 votes – the highest figure for all Northern Ireland constituencies.

As well as that, the high-profile Lagan Valley Alliance Party MLA Seamus Close has also been nominated to contest the seat.

There has also been the equally daft suggestion that Lagan Valley unionists selected a newcomer to fight Jeffrey because they privately know Donaldson will wipe the political floor with whatever candidate the UUP selects. It's a case of – better the floor being wiped by an unknown newcomer than the party leader's wife!

However, the painful truth in Lagan Valley, once the safest UUP seat in the North, is that Daphne's demise will condemn the constituency to a generation of DUP rule. Donaldson will be MP for as long as he wants the seat.

Indeed, Lagan Valley may well be a Dail constituency in a European-imposed United Ireland before the Ulster Unionists have a pup’s chance of regaining what was once their jewel in the unionist crown under former party leader Jim Molyneaux.

With not having to worry about another Donaldson/Trimble showdown, Jeffrey can concentrate fully on his campaign to take control of the prestigious Lisburn City Council – the final bastion of UUP power in Lagan Valley.

The UUP will have to find another cockpit constituency in which to promote its battle for the heart and soul of Unionism. Eyes are already heavily focused on East Belfast, the political turf of DUP deputy boss Peter Robinson.

After the November 2003 Assembly elections, the UUP was within a few thousand votes of Robinson. If the UUP’s Reg Empey could lift 'the East', it would guarantee him the party leadership.

But Daphne’s defeat has further fuelled speculation the UUP will be left with two Commons seats in May – her husband in Upper Bann and Sylvia Hermon in North Down.

As for David Burnside in South Antrim, given what happened to dissident William Ross in East Derry in 2001, maybe the time has come for the PR guru to follow the lead of his pal Jeffrey and jump ship to the DUP as the only way to remain in the Commons.

Mar cainteoir Gaeilge na hAlban, biodh an cainiuint aitiuil seo go ana cosuil a cuid teanga fein, no is é sin an mead a duirt uncal do mo chuid agus mé i mo paiste beag, thartfa seacht bliaina d’aois. Cha raibh sé abalta an Gaeilge Atha Cliath den fear an phoist (mar a duirt sé) a thuigbheal chomh maith leis an teanga de iascairi Albanacha a bheas ag cuir isteach leis an cuan ó am go h-am.

Dun nan Gall

Far a bheil a’ Ghàidhlig sgrìobht air na creagan
an sin dh’fhan i,
is pàisdean luideagach ga caitheamh, a stiallan sgaoilte air na rubhachan an iar,
os cionn na mara
far a bheil grian na h-Eireann a’ dol sios,
is grian Ameireagaidh ag èirigh le èigheachd’s caithream

Cha bheathaich feur a chànain seo
chan fhàs i sultmhor an guirt no ‘n iodhlainn;
fòghnaidh dhi beagan coirce ‘s eòrna,
cuirear grad fhuadachachd;
chan iarr i ach, cleas nan gobhar, a bhith spoghail
os cionn muir gorm, air na bideanan biorach

Gus an tog a’ chlann luideagach leoth’ i
air bàta-smùid a Shasainn,
no a Ghlaschu, far a fiagh i bàs,
an achlais a peathar –
Gàidhlig rìoghail na h-Albann ‘s na h-Eireann
‘na h-ìobairt-reite air altair beairteis.

Despite the optimistic comments from Mitchel McLauglin that are also in the report, Adams claims to have promoted the idea of further White House intervention "I told him that we may need help at the White House to deliver".

But, as predicted yesterday by Mark Devenport, certain murals weren't mentioned, although I don't think diplomacy had much to do with their omission.

No mention either of Sinn Féin's recent call for US military planes to be barred from Shannon Airport

I would have thought it was a perfect opportunity to have a chat about that particular Sinn Féin policy.

28/11/2004 - 11:48:01

Outspoken anti-immigration leader Áine Ní Chonaill will debate immigration controls with Councillor Toireasa Ferris of Sinn Féin, the daughter of TD Martin Ferris at University College Cork.

The debate will be through the Irish language and a professional interpreter will be present on the night to provide Gaeilge/Béarla translations, which will be available to members of the audience through headphones.

Ms Ní Chonaill is the leader of the far-right Immigration Control Platform.

The event takes place on Wednesday at 7.30pm.

Gerry Adams: "I think Danny is being a bit cagey, since I don't think he owns a hat".

He goes back to the social activism of the sixties:

"The movements of the 1960s wiped out local injusticises, but they are a global phenomenon, and those local injustices are not why the 1960s happened. Its are not to be sought in ideas but in large social and demographic forces. That is why Marxist historians like Eric Hobsbawm have had better luck than most in explaining the 1960s, even if there is room to differ on which forces predominated (Education? Prosperity? The baby boomers sensing their future electoral might?)"

He quotes French Socialist Mark Baumel:

"The ideological coherence forged in the 1960s and 1970s - anti-liberal on economics and libertarian on social questions - corresponded to a society in which capitalist domination and bourgeois moral order seem to make up a coherent system. This coherence is no longer obviouos because capitalism has adapted itself easily to libertarianism".

Indeed he quotes a columnist from Suddeutsche Zeitung describing the plans of Germany's Social Democrat Chancellor as a "mishmash of McKinsey jargon, leftover inventory from the sociology of 1968, and psuedo-futurist visions".

And he finishes:

"Mr Blair has bet - and France's socialists are about to bet - that Europe's electorate is much more like the American one than many European leftists would like to believe.

During the week a number of short-term solutions to the Holy Lands crisis were proffered, such as the expulsion or suspension of the rowdiest and most violent from university. Others have suggested that the PSNI take a more heavy-handed approach to the nightly scenes of drunkenness, lewd behaviour and disorder. They point out, quite correctly, that if these people were working-class youths they would battered off the streets and demonised throughout society as a gang of worthless Chav scumbags, yet because the students are from nice, respectable middle-class homes in the country they are treated with kid gloves.
The only long-term solution to the blight in the Holy Lands is a cultural one - to discourage parochialism. At the heart of it lies the need to break up the pack mentality, to persuade students from rural Northern Ireland, especially nationalist areas, to think of other options of study beyond the North entirely.
Conversely, the two universities might consider putting a cap on the number of indigenous students they take in and vigorously canvass for more students from Britain, the Republic and further afield.

From The Irish News Article on Friday:

A representative of the Royal British Legion was one of the speakers at an event on remembrance organised by a republican ex-prisoners organisation yesterday.

The conference examined the theme of commemorating the Irish sacrifice in the two World Wars and the reasons why the nationalist tradition has difficulties in identifying with the wearing of the poppy and the traditional Armistice Day ceremonies.

Chris Carson, Northern Ireland chairman of the Royal British Legion, told the conference his group had recently arranged for northern ex-servicemen to attend a ceremony at the war memorial in Drogheda in memory of three hundred local men who died in the Great War.

and

”Sinn Fein councillor Tom Hartley said that in the changed climate of the peace process it was now possible for republicans and nationalists to remember the victims of Flanders and Gallipoli.

The conference at the Linen Hall Library in Belfast was organised by republican ex-prisoners group Coisde na Iarceimi.”

From the Sunday Times article:

“Eamon Phoenix, the historian, told how the support of Irish nationalists for British wars was undermined and transformed into outright opposition to the British link by events such as the treatment of demobbed soldiers after the first world war. Many nationalists who got jobs in the shipyards were violently expelled as disloyal infiltrators by sectarian mobs despite their military service.

That radicalised many but, even so, support for the British armed forces persisted within nationalism for years.Until 1925, for instance, a rally of the Ancient Order of Hibernians was addressed, each Remembrance Day, by Sir James Craig, the unionist prime minister. The tradition ended abruptly when he pushed his luck too far and alienated the avowedly nationalist group by telling them that they must support the principles of unionism.

That was a bridge too far and, as the DUP comes to grips with Sinn Fein, it may care to reflect on Craig’s mistake in pushing nationalist co-operation past what could be delivered. This is not the first time nationalists have been willing to work with unionists to achieve stability. There has always been a willingness to give practical support to the institutions of the state while fully intending to change them by democratic means as soon as they can.”

Also in the Sunday Times article, the moving story of How Roy Garland and Gusty Spence helped Martin Meehan find the grave of his grandfather, Camillus Clarke, who died in Belgium during WWI.

(In Bold A.U.)

the debate was part of the programme at a conference of the institute of healthcare management, and those who took part were paul berry (dup), robert coulter (uup), kieran mccarthy (alliance), carmel hanna (sdlp), john o'dowd (sf)

Based on the premise of a link between salary level and IQ (that's the 'leftist rag' we know and love!) it would probably be best to let that hangover subside first.

Personally, I'm looking for a raise... either that or a new job ;)

Your results

Wow. Your IQ is as far above the average for your salary level as the scale permits. What are you doing with your life?

"In 1998 revisiting that historical wrong, and truthfully rejudging the legal failures of the Widgery tribunal, seemed like a necessary step in the nascent Irish peace process. But six years later, after 16 million words have been spoken, 30 million words in documents, 921 witnesses and £155 million in lawyers’ fees, I am no longer sure".

Perhaps it's something like the rather cold pragmatic argument proffered for the retention of marriage: in a calling to witness of as many as possible so that when the vows are made, the two participant's are more motivated to make the relationship work for richer or poorer, in sickness or in health.

NB: our correpondent brings us a number of factlets: NI has a lower crime rate than Britain, the US Poland and Portugal (bet that's got to be traffic offences - scariest drivers in Europe last time I was there!).

It is believed that both main parties have completed consultations, and will make clear responses in the next day or two. we should know by Monday or Tuesday at the latest whether the party is back on, or off! Meantime we'll do our best to keep you posted....

The first act of Rhapsody in Stephen's Green was among Flann O'Brien's papers owned by the University of Southern Illinois. But no trace until now had been found of acts two and three and a prologue and epilogue.
The play is in the vein of O'Brien's columns under the name Myles na gCopaleen (Myles of the Little Horses) for the Irish Times in the 1950s and 1960s, which played merry hell with his countrymen's pretensions, religious piety, political cant and official ignorance in the use of the English and Irish languages.
The first act deals with the beastly behaviour of bees and act two features avaricious beetles, greedy ducks and dopey crickets with a pronounced Cork accent. Corkmen are traditionally the butt of Dublin jokes.
But it is act three which has fascinating topical resonance. It features a colony of mindlessly driven Orange ants who work themselves into a frenzy against a colony of Green ants until finally their aggression pushes them into suicidal war with Blue ants.
The Orange ants mouth slogans such as: 'The Awnt State will fieght ond the Awnt State wull be rieght!'. They also declare themselves to be 'hord-headed ond ready to fieght for the rieght to keep in stap with the Awnt Empiere'.
The phonetic spelling leaves no doubt that we are dealing with Belfast men. O'Brien, a Catholic, was actually born in Ulster, but spent most of his life in Dublin. His real name was Brian O'Nolan.
Before the Southern audience could become too smug, enter a ludicrous figure known as Deevil, transparently the prime minister Eamon de Valera, who is leader of the Green Ants and ready to march across the border to recover his property, which consists of a dead beetle.
There is no mistaking 33-year-old Brian O'Nolan's bitter disgust with the 1940s world of carnage, greed and cant at home and abroad. But on the literary level the work is rather too parochial and simplistically exuberant to be classed as one of his major works. However it and the context in which it was born - and rapidly snuffed out - gives intriguing insights into neutral Ireland of the 1940s, suffocating in puritanism and insular politics.

An exam paper set for 11-year-olds in Victorian Britain was too difficult for most of today’s A-Level students, campaigners said.

They were aimed at the brightest 11-year-olds of the time.

Dumbing down: the proof

The questions are TOUGH!

eg:

ENGLISH GRAMMAR

1. Write out in your best handwriting:—

‘O Mary, go and call the cattle home,
And call the cattle home,
And call the cattle home,
Across the sands o’ Dee.’
The western wind was wild and dank with foam,
And all alone went she.
The western tide crept up along the sand,
And o’er and o’er the sand,
And round and round the sand,
As far as eye could see.
The rolling mist came down and hid the land —
And never home came she.

2. Parse fully ‘And call the cattle home.’
3. Explain the meaning of o’ Dee, dank with foam, western tide, round and round the sand, the rolling mist.
4. Write out separately the simple sentences in the last two lines of the above passage and analyse them.
5. Write out what you consider to be the meaning of the above passage.

How about these ?

ARITHMETIC

1. Multiply 642035 by 24506.
2. Add together £132 4s. 1d., £243 7s. 2d., £303 16s 2d., and £1.030 5s. 3d.; and divide the sum by 17. (Two answers to be given.)
3. Write out Length Measure, and reduce 217204 inches to miles, &c.
4. Find the G.C.M. of 13621 and 159848.
5. Find, by Practice, the cost of 537 things at £5 3s. 71/2d. each.
6. Subtract 37/16 from 51/4; multiply 63/4 by 5/36; divide 43/8 by 11/6; and find the value of 21/4 of 12/3 of 13/5.
7. Five horses and 28 sheep cost £126 14s., and 16 sheep cost £22 8s.; find the total cost of 2 horses and 10 sheep.
8. Subtract 3.25741 from 3.3; multiply 28.436 by 8.245; and divide .86655 by 26.5.
9. Simplify 183/4 – 22/3 ÷ 11/5 – 31/2 x 4/7.
10. Find the square root of 5.185,440,100.
11. Find the cost of papering the walls of a room 16ft long, 13ft 6in. wide, and 9ft high, with paper 11/2ft wide at 2s. 3d. a piece of 12yds in length.
12. A and B rent a number of fields between them for a year, the rent and other expenses amounting to £108 17s. 6d. A puts in 2 horses, 5 oxen and 10 sheep; and B puts in 4 horses, 1 ox, and 27 sheep. If a horse eats as much as 3 sheep and an ox as much as 2 sheep, how much should A and B each pay?

James Fitzgerald, in the Irish Times, reports that players' personal sponsorship deals with business competitors of the main West Indies cricket sponsor Digicel, owned by Irish businessman Denis O'Brien, has led to the dropping of, arguably, the West Indies best players from their national team.

The leading players in West Indies cricket have been dropped from the national squad over a row involving the telecommunications company of Irish businessman Mr Denis O'Brien.

Last June, when the sponsorship deal was finalised, Mr O'Brien said that Digicel would "add new energy into West Indies cricket".

© The Irish Times

Perhaps the Guardian is still smarting from their own Clark County Fiasco, but a more thorough look at Rather's demise would surely have dwelt on the influence of the blogosphere a little longer.

With references such as "distinguished and often aloof", "grizzled, patrician and often patronising" The Guardian also seems prepared to overlook the accusation that the decision to carry the discredited report on Bush's Texas National Guard service was politically motivated, "Despite all his adventures, all his gravitas, all his pomp, conviction and humanity, the obituary writers gathered around Rather's career had one thing on their minds: George Bush and the Texas national guard." - it refers to the report itself as an "error", an understatement of the actual charged levelled against Rather.

As it is the article does make some good points on "the last hurrah of a television age that is fast disappearing, replaced by a world where viewers are as likely to get their news from the internet and 24-hour rolling cable news channels as they are from the trusted main networks." - Tom Brockaw of NBC news is also stepping down, leaving "66-year-old Peter Jennings [ABC] hanging on, suddenly the only remaining member of the journalistic triumvirate that has shaped America's view of the world and of itself for the past 50 years."

Viewing figures are tumbling for news on the major US networks and the report raises the question of whether the commitment still exists among executives to follow a loss-leading news model of previous decades.

Marty Kaplan of the University of Southern California's Annenberg School for Communication provides the quotes, "The best one can say for the evening news broadcast is that they still have the largest town square in the country. To the degree that there is a common culture left, they command it."

And the lines that will resonate with media watchers here - "Network news is now a subsidiary of entertainment. The people really in the driving seat about whether the evening news will survive are the advertisers. If they decide there are better places to advertise then my guess is that the affiliates will be thrilled to have an extra half hour."

Meanwhile, politicians this side of the Atlantic still rely on Old World methods to pressurise the media. Conserative Party leader, Michael Howard has made an official complaint against his old nemesis Jeremy Paxman - just doesn't seem to carry the same resonance when a politician complains does it?

Not that any of the political parties in our little land would attempt such tactics, would they?

Twenty-five years ago, Shane MacGowan was given six weeks to live. But he's still here, and so are the Pogues - back to their original lineup for a new lease of life. Dave Simpson joins them in Dublin to relive the bad old days

When Stormont was prorogued on 25 March, William Whitelaw, the new Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, had little clear idea of what to do next. The loquacious conspiracy-fan, Cecil King, recorded a meeting with Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, William Whitelaw, three days later:

“I was treated with the greatest friendliness and confidence. The gist of what he had to say was that in the end there had to be a united Ireland. With this in mind one must not say too often that the border is in question … I understood Whitelaw to say that he saw Paisley as the future leader of Northern Ireland.” [The Cecil King Diary 1970 – 1974 (Jonathon Cape, 1975)]

Will that wily old bird be proved right in the next few months ?

Nell McCafferty is quoted -

'Unionists are boring, though I will say this about them - you can throw everything you have at them, and we did, and they're still f****** standing there. It's like that film Zulu. You have to respect them for that. Yep, I salute them, the b******s.'

* The others were reported as Sean Farren (SDLP), Sir Reg empey (UUP) and Sean Neeson (Alliance).

But the alarm bells will be ringing in government, and DUP, circles following the statement by Gerry Adams that, on decommissioning, "he was not in a position to go to the IRA because no final deal had been reached". That's a tacit, and public, claim that the IRA have made no firm commitment yet on decommissioning, which the DUP have placed as their first requirement for any deal.

The prospect of the DUP taking the first step, at least publicly, and making a decision at their meeting tomorrow, in those circumstances, is looking less likely.

"Political campaigning in the modern era requires relentless focus on objective, strategy and tactics, and an ability to know the difference. Objectives are easy. Once you have a clear strategy, tactics are easier than when operating in a strategic vacuum. It is strategy that is hardest of the three, and that is where I analyse Howard as being at his weakest".

Interestingly, (for a man often viewed as the 'evil one of spin') he believes the Tories focus too much on the media and not enough on the real world conditions of the electorate:

"Modern political coverage in the 24-hour media age exposes a disconnection between the day-to-day media swirl and the reality of most people's lives. Howard makes a mistake in focusing too much on the former, with the result that he is not breaking through on the latter. His interventions in the public arena tend to be set not by a strategy of his own, but by the passing controversy of that day’s media. That has to change".

Indeed it is easy to see what the key election winning strategy has been throughout Labour's second term in Britain:

"Ask them [voters] if the education system or the NHS as a whole is improving and they are less certain. We're back to the disconnection. Real world good. Media world bad. But when it comes to deciding how to vote to decide the next election, the real world is the one that matters."

And how did Blair do it:

"One of Blair's great strengths was to highlight problems in the country without giving the sense that he was running it down the whole time".

It's almost certain that individuals within all four of NI's big parties have been watching (and learning) from this modern democracy game 'across the water'. But it's equally as certain that not all their parties have been listening to them.

Thanks to David for the tip.

Not that Feeney mentions this in his Irish News article - blogged here - but then when Feeney asks in that column "What was it [the last 30 years] all for?" he, keeping an eye on his regular audience, isn't asking Gerry Adams.

The line from the Irish Echo report to keep in mind amidst all the spin and speculation is this -

"However, Sinn Fein will not want to lose the inevitable blame game if a deal cannot be struck."

It's also true for the DUP, but that may not be enough to make them both move sufficiently.

It's also interesting that Colgan wheels out Mitchel McLaughlin to deny that SF have agreed the block voting change for the Executive - some bloggers have looked at this issue before.

For those who watch events closely, this would seem as clear an indication as any that a deal of some description is on the cards.

The relatively upbeat assessment by the DUP of the British and Irish Governments' joint paper, the much-changed language of the DUP, the flexibility of Sinn Fein on Executive formation, the 'regret' over the Birmingham bombs (such statements having come before big moves in the past), the statement by Peter Robinson about how the DUP proposals were not outside the fundamental principles of the Agreement, the refusal by the DUP to rule out greater North South co-operation on matters of mutual benefit, the confidence SF have to allow Bairbre de Brun to resign her Assembly seat, the offer of clergymen viewing decommissioned weapons, the friendly DUP visit to Dublin, the common cause of the two parties on negotiating a peace dividend and opposing water charges - are all meaningless on their own. But added together, and with a few more signals besides, they seem to strongly indicate movement towards a deal that is about to be made.

Much baggage has had to be dropped on this journey.

Will we get the Big Deal though, or an interim measure towards full restoration of the institutions? My guess is that we are still talking March/April before a full Assembly will meet (after the next IMC report, but before the May election) and I still think there will be certain issues left unresolved...

Interestingly, Goretti Horgan sees the problems based in the trajectory of economic development policies:

"...the whole concept of a 'renewed Northern Ireland' is based on a low-pay economy. People further up the social ladder have done well out of the peace - the gap between rich and poor is higher than in the rest of Britain, and is widening. The reality is that ordinary people are working for wages much lower than the rest of the UK. Invest Northern Ireland - the body that promotes investment here - even boasts on its website about wages being 25% less than the rest of Europe."

Also worth browsing is the UK Chancellor's Child Poverty Review for this year. It sets out targets to halve relative child poverty by 2010, and eradicate it by 2020.

There's a fascinating graphic in the Annex, which demonstrates some startling facts. For instance, couples in work are less at risk of generating child poverty (13%) than their single