hold on, wasnt it the hatred , intolerance and bigotry of her co-religionists that made them wage war on innocent protestants over the last 40 years.
It was catholic bigotry that caused more suffering here during that period than anything else

"Throughout her career she had continually tried to transcend the barriers of sectarianism."

Yeah, she has, thats why the comments were so unexpected and horrific.

Her comments were never intended to single out the Protestant people of Northern Ireland

But they did. I can't believe she's not apologising. Has she lost the run of herself?

Just a few years after Holy Cross and unionists complain that nobody loves them. What's next? The old 'No more Mr. Nice Guy! last used by Hitler in 1946.

"It was catholic bigotry that caused more suffering here during that period than anything else"

In my best brogue, catch yerself on jonty.


Rebecca
"Throughout her career she had continually tried to transcend the barriers of sectarianism."
"Yeah, she has, thats why the comments were so unexpected and horrific."

But therefore, shouldnt't people be trying to understand what she probably meant and that the comment was more to do with a dreadful choice of words rather than an actual attempt to insult protestants?

'hold on, wasnt it the hatred , intolerance and bigotry of her co-religionists that made them wage war on innocent protestants over the last 40 years.
It was catholic bigotry that caused more suffering here during that period than anything else'

Nothing like a bit of whataboutery and revisionism there jonty.

The only problems with Mc Aleese's comments were the fact that she used a commemoration day that remembered the slaughter of the Jews to make a rather parochial point and the fact that she was not more specific.

maca and pat
Look at the figures of murders from Catholic Ira,
they butchered protestants at every opportunity. Anti-Protestantism and Anti British sentiments were beyond words in the catholic community into a full anti protestant war.

If these catholics had there way there would be no protestants alive in NI today

Jonty,

'Look at the figures of murders from Catholic Ira,
they butchered protestants at every opportunity'

thats patently not true, for god sake don't lose the run of yourself

Pat
what? Catholics didnt murder thousands of protestants. I suppose you dont beleive in the Holocaust either

Maca, she compared protestants to nazis!! Its hard to let that by.

Its even more insulting given the amount of time she has spent talking to unionists and the pro-British minority in the republic. For her to come out with that was appalling. And it was aimed at Protestants, she said people were teaching their children to hate catholics, I assume she wasn't trying to make out that catholic parents are teaching hatred towards catholics??

And what about the mass intimidation of protestants in the republic during the 1920s which resulted in a massive population shift of protestants having to flee their homes? It could be described as ethnic cleansing.

Get a grip jonty.

Similar remarks to Macaleese couldve been made 70 years ago by a german politician, telling their people about those terrible jews who teach their children to hate innocent germans.

these remarks are fascist,full of bitterness and show the true hatred of protestant people that hide under the surface in the free state (and probaly in catholic areas of NI)

Ah maca, so the catholics didnt murder thousands of protestans?

Rebecca

"Yes she has,and that's why her comments were so unexpected and horrific."

Horrific?!Dont be such a drama queen,Rebecca!

What about Trimble's comments when he said "Take away anti-Britishness and Catholicism and the state(Irish Republic) has no reason to exist."

Where was the condemnation of these remarks?Trimble was singling out a whole country with these comments!

What about that great beacon of Protestantism,James Craig and his comments about "A protestant state for a protestnat people"?

You unionists have very selective memories.
McAleese was correct in her comments as clearly protestants did pass on anti-catholic attitudes.
A look at comments from "jonty" clearly show this!
Let's not go overboard,people.

I suppose maca and pat have a point, after all the catholic IRA are not criminals. and the abuction and murder of jean mcconville was not a crime either.

Very revealing into the psyche of catholics.

Maca,

A close reading of her words, as you suggest, may be less insulting, but

All political statements are coded, and this one can only mean one thing when you know her and her background- she chose to give the example of anti-Catholic bigotry in a situation where she is a leader in one group, and that tribe uses the accusation of 'anti-catholic bigotry' in a wide and general way to attack the other group.

I personally am very insulted and disappointed in her. I would have thought more of her.

She could have said 'some people in NI' and she really ought to have given an example from her own group because self-reflection rather than attacking your traditional enemies is much more appropiate in these situations.

Her attempt at clarification is not convincing.

(note for Nationalist what-abouters, suggest this is a bit like Trimbles Mono-ethnic clanger?)

Jonty & Rebecca,

the slide into whataboutery demeans the both of you.Would you be more comfortable talking about the Northern.

young irelander, why are you and you fellow catholics in denial about the murders your people carried out over th elast 40 years on innocent protestants. why cant you admit to the anti-protestant sentiments that drive your people to do these horrible things

Rebecca
Surely giving her work trying to "build bridges" you should be trying to understand what she actually meant. It seems to me no-one is even considering any other side to it that she was deliberatly trying to insult protestants.
I don't believe she was actually comparing protestants to nazis, she was demonstrating how hatred and sectarianism are passed on to the next generation and she unfortunatly used a dreadfully bad way to express that.

"And what about the mass intimidation of protestants in the republic during the 1920s"

And what about it? What does it have to do with this? What about catholics burned out of their homes in the North? What about this, what about that?

"McAleese was correct in her comments as clearly protestants did pass on anti-catholic attitudes."

Yes, but it does work both ways Young Irelander, there are some catholics brought up to hate prods, just as there are some prods brought up to hate catholics. Both sides are as bad as each other.

However Mary McAleese is in a position of influence and she has spoken very throughtlessly. Its unexpected because usually Mary McAleese is never usually partisan. I think the whole unionist community are just very disappointed in her.

Jonty, your comments aren't even worth reading at this stage.

IDM
I agree with you. But I am simply asking people to understand, considering the work she has done, that perhaps her insults were not intentional and that it simply was a dreadful choice of words rather than any deliberate attack.

She said "some" children in Northern Ireland were taught to hate Catholics in the same way Nazis despised Jews.

Ah Rebecca

The old hoary chestnut: "both sides are as bad as each other".
If that's the case perhaps you could remind me about the time Catholics tried to prevent protestant schoolgirls from going to school through intimidation or the time a local Catholic community picketed an isolated Protestant church for months on end or the time a Catholic priest was run out of his own chapel by his own parishioners because he dared to attend a religous service in the local COI church.

jonty I don't define people based on religious grounds.It was the Nazis that did that.

Rebecca,I feel people are seeing things that just aren't there.
If she had said that Jewish people had suffered terribly in Nazi Germany would the gay rights groups in NI be on her case accusing her of homophobia for neglecting to mention them?

Fair enough to criticise someone for the things they say but it's farcical to criticise someone for the things they DON'T say.

Jonty.

How do you feel about Catholics? In a word.

Rebecca

``there are some catholics brought up to hate prods''

- Right.

``just as there are some prods brought up to hate catholics''

- Right.

``Both sides are as bad as each other.

- Wrong. Hatred is the most uglifying of all human emotions. Read the Scarlet Letter some time, there's a very good exploration of how hatred and an obsessive quest for vindication physically overtakes old Roger Chillingworth and makes him a hateful sight. He actually is entitled to his hate and his vindication, but it still sucks all the light from his bearing. Right or wrong, it is he who looks evil.

Then ask yourself why, right or wrong, the outside world regards unionism as the baddies here. Why nobody cares for your suffering and pain. Why unionists are so universally unpopular. (And try to eschew self-serving reasoning.)

Look in the mirror.

Did anyone hear Alex Maskey on talkback. I dont understand how an ex IRA member can call anyone else secterian. kettle, pot, black

Both sides are as bad as each other.

however maybe more time should be spent on finding a solution rather than shifting the blame

secterianism and racism come part and parcel, the thugs behind these crimes do not understand either Unionism or Nationalism, they have no cause, only hatred

Jonty,

I was born into a protestant family in the south, and have lived my life here for the past 35 years. I've never encountered a single moment, or even hint, of prejudice - religion simply isn't an issue. Though I'm certain that nothing will ever change your view, can I at least encourage you to spend some time south of the border, maybe even speak to a "free stater" or two? You might find that they actually don't hate protestants, don't burn the union jack at the weekends, and most of them no longer have horns on their head or hooves for feet.

James

I thought Durkan hit the nail on the head by pointing out that Unionist politicans were much slower to reach to actual sectarianism (Holy Cross, Harryville) than the observation of same.

Anyway, why do you care what a foreign president says? ;-)

My dad often tells a story that during a pairs golf match on one occasion he took a penalty drop without informing the opposition (as is required in the rules). They came across and queried why he had done so, whereupon my dad's partner in the match simply said 'OK, your hole', lifted his ball and went to the next tee.

Needless to say the opposition, originally making the most of a minor technicality, was completely put off by this act of 'uber-generosity', and lost the next three holes and the match.

The moral? If you make a mistake, don't engage in whataboutery, don't try to 'clarify', just apologize sincerely and move on. People will think far more of you and, indeed, your mistake may be turned to your advantage.

You can take the mick out of west belfast but not west belfast out of the mick. what do you expect from a pig but a grunt.

Incidentally she is the president of the REPUBLIC of Ireland not the Island of Ireland she is certainlyNOT the president of the protestant people on the island of ireland

Boycott her

Unmasked

Did anyone hear Alex Maskey on talkback. I dont understand how an ex IRA member can call anyone else secterian.

When did he leave?

Perhaps Mary McAleese's time would have been better served apologising for her country's shameful neutrality during WW2, and the revolting actions of her predecessor who send his condolences on hearing of Herr Hitler's demise in the Berlin bunker.

Revolting comments from a revolting woman.

Billy Pilgrim

"Then ask yourself why, right or wrong, the outside world regards unionism as the baddies here. Why nobody cares for your suffering and pain. Why unionists are so universally unpopular"

Not any more they aren't. The whole world can see who is to blame for the political imapsse, and it aint the Unionist community.

Perhaps Christopher Stalford's time would be better spent reading up a history book.

Stupid comments from a stupid man.

Bordering on racism there barnshee.

Maybe when she was using the commemoration of Auschwitz to propagate her own brand of hatred, she could have told the representatives gathered why the Republic of Ireland government proudly maintains a statue of a Nazi-sympathiser? BTW, hurrah for those who decapatated it.

Young Irelander

I've read plenty of history books, given that I hold a degree in Politics and Modern History. So that's irrelevant.

What other staement is inaccurate?

If unionists weren't brought up to hate Catholics what excuse do they have?

Christopher, revolting because she's Catholic or because she's Irish? No need to respond, I know the answer.

lib

My parents never brought me up to hate anyone.

The difference between the Unionist community and the mimority population of Northern Ireland is of course that a majority of the minority are prepared to cast their ballot for people who murder on the basis of religion. That sounds like hatred to me.

From early on I was quite impressed at the number of Nationalists who openly stated that what Mary McAleese was at the very least insensitive.

It's somewhat disappointing for the debate now to have moved onto pointing out past episodes of bigotry, such as holy cross, etc.

Can we not simply agree that bigotry exists on both sides and that no side is "better" than the other?

Anyway, why do you care what a foreign president says? ;-)

Posted by: carlosblancos at January 28, 2005 02:57 PM

...because she's a british subject? :0)

Maca.

Neither, because she's a Provo-sympathiser who's view is utterly baseless. Of course several generations of the Roman Catholic population where, and still are, reared in an education system which teaches them that their's is the one true church, but of course that's all right.

Sorry, lest out said...

From early on I was quite impressed at the number of Nationalists who openly stated that what Mary McAleese said was at the very least insensitive.

It's somewhat disappointing for the debate now to have moved onto pointing out past episodes of bigotry, such as holy cross, etc.

Can we not simply agree that bigotry exists on both sides and that no side is "better" than the other?

The Republic of Ireland - so good that British Ulster has to provide it with it's head of state!

;-p

Christopher
"Neither..."
Somehow I don't believe you.

Christopher Stalford

If you think Ireland's neutrality during WW2 was "shameful" then I feel your knowledge of history leaves alot to be desired.

I despise people who take this viewpoint and I made my feelings on this quite clear to Andrew McCann over at A Tangled Web.

UPDATE: Unionists are still angry, following the clarification from the President, while the Orange Order has cancelled a visit to Áras an Uachtaráin in March.

Talkback apparently had record numbers of callers!

It's been truly amazing what a guilty conscience and an innocent remark has dragged out of unionists of all varieties. I don't pretend not to have found all the pompous indignation absolutely hilarious but there is a serious point - unionists obviously know what the verdict of history will be on their stewartship here.

All the woman said was that it was wrong to bring up children to hate Catholics. Do unionists feel that they have the right to deny the experience of someone brought up a Catholic in Northern Ireland? One, moreover whose family home had been burnt out because of their religion?

On a vaguely related note about unionism and fascism, anyone remember the Prince Harry Nazi uniform fancy dress storm?

You'll love/hate this then.

Hat tip to ATW.

'All the woman said was that it was wrong to bring up children to hate Catholics.'

No she didn't. She said that prtestants instilled in their children a hatred of catholics, in the same way that nazis instilled the hatred of jews in theirs.

Do try to keep up.

I think her comments are unfair and wrong as they were directed towards one side of the community. If this was something the British government said all hell would break lose.

Catholics were brought up to hate the state and oppose British rule.

In the 'Bloody Sunday Centre' in Londonderry (Yes, I've been there!) they have displayed old posters, one with the picture of a dead child (who I note must be a catholic with the way the child is dressed) in a white dress and coffin with a gun shot wound through the head. The heading on the poster is "THEY KILL/MURDER CHILDREN" - this is absolutely sickening! It ofcourse makes reference to the British Army. What effect does that have on young Nationalists, in particular those from a catholic background as the poster singles them out.

It was wrong of her to say this as it singles out protestants and with making reference to them as Nazi's is in no way appropriate.

She should apologise.

Ricardo, Andrew
Most of the papers have actually misquoted her

"No she didn't. She said that prtestants instilled in their children a hatred of catholics, in the same way that nazis instilled the hatred of jews in theirs"

No she didn't. She said people in Northern Ireland "transmitted to their children an irrational hatred. For example, of protestants."
Her point applies to both protestant AND catholic. Her mistake was including the example.

Oops that shopuld have been "For example, of catholics." Apologies

I was born into a protestant family in the south, and have lived my life here for the past 35 years. I've never encountered a single moment, or even hint, of prejudice - religion simply isn't an issue.

Graham Norton tells a very different story.

We're still very close to Drumcree, Harryville and Holy Cross and unionists feel hurt because our President (home burnt out in her youth because of her religion, remember!) makes the very unobjectionable remark that there are children brought up to hate Catholics in NI.

Obviously nationalism has been far too kind to unionists in the past. Your intolerance and bigotry is a byword right around the world and you want an apology? Try for forgiveness and you might be in the right area.

Is this the Norn Ireland version of 'Don't mention the War'? Are unionists really so ashamed of their record that it shouldn't even be referred to?

Unfair comment lib2016. Is there an innocent side in Northern Ireland? Each side has it's fair share of bigots.

lib2016, if you're that blinkered, you have my pity.

Nice editting of her remarks lib.

What she actually said was very different. And let's be absolutely straight about this. This wasn't a heat of the moment remark let slip under pressure by an ill-educated person unused to the media.

This was an interview by an educated and intelligent woman, a Lawyer who is trained in subtlety of language and who is very used to media attention.

Let's not play games with Harryville and Holy Cross. My side of TDF can raise issues that shame your community - how many west Belfast catholics turned out to pay their repects to Jean McConville at her funeral ? Let's stick with the point of the thread.

Maca, good point. Her mistake might have been the example, altho I bet Talkback wouldn't have been as busy if she had said 'For example, of protestants'

And anyway, I don't think Mary said that all Protestants transmit hatred of Catholics to their children, just SOME. Just like no-one says that ALL Germans translated hatred of Jews to their chilren.

And Mrs McAleese's title is 'Uachtarain na hEireann' which means President of Ireland, NOT President of the Republic of Ireland

ps...i think i spelt the Irish for President incorrectly.

The only thing wrong with the Mc Aleese comments were the timing and her not being specific enough. If she clarifies her position she should name the organisations, parties and individuals who we all know she is getting at.
The contrived anger from a lot of the bigots on this thread is very amusing.

Lets get it straight she was wrong to label all the unionist community as using the tactic of sectarian indoctrination. If she changes 'all' to 'most' then that should suffice.

Davros - 'Let's not play games......'

My point exactly, though I do try to make it in a slightly different way! (;-)

Last week we had the future of the country thrown in doubt by a bankrobbery which may be v. nasty and all that but fergawdsake - nobody was hurt and it was a bloody bank!

This week its a statement by the President that it's wrong to bring children up to hate Catholics and we have unionists playing the game 'themmuns have one so we need one'.

You appreciate that the President is v. sophisticated in her use of the words and the media so just think about what the unionist reaction is proving.

One word in defence of what even unionists admit was a people suffering in 'a cold place' and we see this complete feeding frenzy, again.

From the Prez's website:

"I think you're absolutely right. And that's a very important point worth remembering. The Nazis didn't invent anti-Semitism, they used anti-Semitism, they built on anti-Semitism but they didn't invent it.
It was, for generations, for centuries, an element of the lived lives of many people who, on the surface, lived very good lives, I mean many of
them would have regarded themselves, for example, as very good Christians.
But they gave to their children an irrational hatred of Jews, in the same way that people in Northern Ireland transmit it to their children, an
irrational outrageous hatred, for example, of Catholics, in the same way that people give to their children, an irrational outrageous hatred of
those who have different colour, and all of those thing, all of those hatreds in the wrong circumstance, on a street in Dublin, they can outcrop as I have seen and heard, of a little child from Somalia being pelted with rotten eggs. They can outcrop in a knife being taken in a fight and someone from Eastern Europe being knifed to death. It's a toxin you see, it's a poison, and it can be in weak and diluted form, but even in that
weak and diluted form, it's still capable of surviving long enough for a Nazi-type era to come along, and to force it into concentrated form, and in concentrated form you get Auschwitz, you get Birkenau, you get Darfur, you get Rwanda. That's what you get when you don't stop the toxin."

Billy: while we're on the subjext of "self-serving reasoning", we don't have to look far for an example: "...right or wrong, the outside world regards unionism as the baddies here". On what, pray, do you base this confident assertion??!

Carlos - you are incorrect. She said that my community gave their children in the same way as the Nazis. The Nazis actively and formally gave their children a hatred of jews in the home and out of the home - at school.

Bernadette Devlin wrote very perceptively of religious bigotry in her community in her book (The Price Of My Soul by Bernadette Devlin ©1969, Pan Books ) page 57

The ordinary Catholic doesn't match the Protestant in strength of feeling, but has a kind of smug attitude: 'We're all Christians, but we are the one true church, and they are poor deluded brethren who will maybe know better some day. Sure the good Lord will let them into heaven if we pray for them.' But they have all forgotten the basic fundamentals of Christianity. 'Love your enemy?' - not at all! They rationalize it by saying the people they disapprove of are the enemies of God and so they justify their hatred of people who never did them any harm.

(Italics hers, bold mine)

Hatred exists on both sides of the community here.

This week its a statement by the President that it's wrong to bring children up to hate Catholics.

That is a shameful misrepresentation of what she said.

Lets get it straight she was wrong to label all the unionist community as using the tactic of sectarian indoctrination. If she changes 'all' to 'most' then that should suffice.

That's offensive pat. I hope it was tongue in cheek.

President McAleese's comments were untimely and unhelpful but calls for her resignation can only be taken seriously if those making the calls are also prepared to admit that David Trimble should have resigned for calling Ireland a pathetic mono cultural secterian state and that Ian Paisley should have resigned years ago for his numerous secterian outbursts.

Davros I agree that hatred exists on both sides of the community.

However, I think what she said was that, historically, there were people who were anti-Semitic and imparted to their children a hatred of Jews, just as some Protestants impart hatred of Catholics to their children.

I do not deny that there are Catholics who impart similar hatred of Protestants to their children, and neither would the President.

Finally, Bernadette's views on what Catholics think of Protestants should be put in the dustbin along with the rest of her opinions. I profess my Catholic faith and would be the first to admit its weaknesses as well as the strengths of various genres of Protestantism. And President McAlesse has many occasions contradicted Catholic doctrine where she finds it inappropriate.

Catholics are actually the most unOrthodox in their faith, and what Bernadette failed to point out was that many (most) ignore Canon law if they feel it too dogmatic. This doesn't take away from the strength of their faith

maca

Wrong.

She said: "They (the Nazis) gave to their children an irrational hatred of Jews in the same way that people in Northern Ireland transmitted to their children an irrational hatred of Catholics, in the same way that people give to their children an outrageous and irrational hatred of those who are of different colour and all of those things."

There was no "for example". Now who's misquoting?!

:o)

If it's any consolation to unionists, she spoke in the past tense. However, the problem is the use of "people". Clearly, she wasn't referring to Catholics, so the rational might conclude she is making a sweeping generalisation about Prods.

I don't think she meant to, but I imagine she will clarify her remarks more carefully and in person (rather than through a spokesperson) when she gets back to Dublin. At least one of the people leading the kneejerk charge against McAleese should really look to his own family circumstances before slinging mud.

Generalisation is a mistake (often intentional up here though) that politicians make regularly. By failing to qualify their statements properly, they leave themselves open to accusations of prejudice.

It's a real shame, because there was the potential for a real debate if McAleese's remarks had been worded more carefully. I'm not suggesting she should be PC or overly sensitive, just accurate, because many children here ARE brought up to hate or mistrust the 'other' side, to be suspicious of them, refuse to associate with them, and so on.

Not all. But quite a few. Including me, I think it's fair to say. Some of the above certainly applied to me when I was young, though attitudes in our family have changed remarkably - though not totally, which is frustrating personally.

I was probably an insufferable wee Friday night bigot until I went to secondary school - sectarianism was simply never challenged. I had no Catholic friends until then. I don't think I had even knowingly met one, until I found out the guy behind me in English class was Catholic. We became mates, and that was the start of a journey.

There was never outright hatred of Catholics in our quite religious and traditional family, but a certain degree of suspicion and mistrust was always just below the surface, which even now can emerge in a subtle way. "What school did they go to?" is rarely an inquiry into educational achievement, I suspect.

Thankfully, these days politics is something to be debated, fought over and argued about, rather than accepted and regurgitated. Sometimes, I think children can teach their parents a thing or two. I'm quite proud of the fact that our family has changed and become much less sectarian over time.

Kids will believe anything, and if they've never met any of 'themmuns' in their life, the myths they hear at home will be reinforced and expanded upon by their peers.

Anyone remember that survey last year where kids as young as two or three were capable of identifying symbols (flags etc) as either 'theirs' or belong to the 'other side'?

That doesn't just happen. It has to be learned somewhere, whether in the home, in school or on the streets.

Instead, of dealing with that, we'll all just end up attacking McAleese or defending her. The point will be missed.

Hopefully, once the columnists and commentators get to work, the debate will mature!

Lib,

*It's been truly amazing what a guilty conscience and an innocent remark has dragged out of unionists of all varieties.*

Bingo! That's the set! I've now been called a guilty prod by both sides.

As for Mary McAleese - a minion clarifying the situation won't do. As I said before, it's sackcloth and ashes time.

Is this some kind of compensation for having an admitted religious fundamentalist as their political leader? Why are unionists so determined to be upset by the truism that it's wrong to bring children up to hate Catholics?

Well, I'm sorry but it is wrong and it happens and Mary McAleese was quite right to condemn it.

You are making yourself ridiculous. Was Martin Luther King wrong to condemn anti-black discrimination? Were the Jewish leaders wrong to condemn anti-Jewish discrimination? Should they have included, always and everytime. an injunction against anti-German discrimination? Should Mary McAleese have done so or is it just Catholic prejudice she should warn against?

She made her point. It was a valid point.

Gonzo

"Wrong.
She said: ...
There was no "for example". Now who's misquoting?!"

Not only did I actually listen to it online but I also copied and pasted the whole quotation from the Presidents website. See my 06:37 above.
Who is misquoting?? ;)

"But they gave to their children an irrational hatred of Jews, in the same way that people in Northern Ireland transmit it to their children, an
irrational outrageous hatred, for example, of Catholics, in the same way that people give to their children, an irrational outrageous hatred of
those who have different colour, and all of those thing, all of those hatreds in the wrong circumstance, on a street in Dublin, they can outcrop as I have seen and heard, of a little child from Somalia being pelted with rotten eggs."

Belfast Gonzo..interesting...and you're totally right about kids teaching their parents a thing or two. I consider myself farily lucky in that I had a lot of Protestant friends thru my teens.

I remember an incident which showed me how bigoted people from my own community could be. When I was aged 19, my gf was from France and I took her to a county on the Western seaboard on a holiday where some of my mates from NI were staying. She looked quite 'foreign' and after introductions one of my friends asked her 'whats ur name in English?'. I did a double take before realising why he was asking it....to work out what religion she was. Disgusting.

The Nazis gassed there victims then burned the bodies. Unionist terrorists burned the Quinn children alive. Does that make one better than the other?

For gods sake barney. take it elsewhere.

Did you ever wonder how those people who threw piss at the Holy Cross school children came to be that way?

maca

That's interesting. We're being fed two different versions of the quote by the media. The Aras quote has spelling and grammatical mistakes, which I think means it's just a straight, unedited transcription of her interview.

Can of of the Hansard crew reading clarify?!

The statement I copied and pasted appears to have been edited. The tense of 'transmit' and the use of 'for example' actually change the meaning of the statement in quite significant ways.

If the former had been in the past tense, it would have implied the teaching of hatred to children was in the past. If the 'for example' had been included, it would have suggested that there were others who were also guilty of doing so.

So neither of us is misquoting anyone deliberately. Someone else did it, but at least we've identified one contribution of the controversy - lack of accuracy!

"The Nazis gassed there victims then burned the bodies. Unionist terrorists burned the Quinn children alive. Does that make one better than the other?"

The IRA burned people alive in the La Mon bomb, the IRA also killed an unborn baby at Omagh. Don't start this, both sides ARE as bad as eachother. We could probably sit here all night quoting examples at eachother. The point I made above was that both sides are as bad as eachother. We have plenty of reason to despise the other side.

"Then ask yourself why, right or wrong, the outside world regards unionism as the baddies here. Why nobody cares for your suffering and pain. Why unionists are so universally unpopular. (And try to eschew self-serving reasoning."

Quite simply because republicans have always been far better at generating propaganda than the unionists. But that is starting to change, already in the USA there are now pro-union groups as well as pro-republican groups. Sept 11th also changed peoples attitudes towards terrorism, the IRA get much less sympathy in the US than before because of these factors.

"If that's the case perhaps you could remind me about the time Catholics tried to prevent protestant schoolgirls from going to school through intimidation
"

Well actually Dec, you really ought to read "The History of the IRA" by Richard English, he puts alot of this victim status to rest. You asked about a school, I believe there was a school in Belfast called Everton Primary that protestant children were prevented from going to by the IRA.

Make you wonder how many Sluggerites actually heard the interview. Not that the truth would actually change many people's minds of course.

"Christopher, revolting because she's Catholic or because she's Irish? No need to respond, I know the answer."

Its not often I'd feel moved to defend Christopher, but I think Christopher was calling McAleese's sectarianism and slur on the whole unionist community disgusting not her.

That's great Rebecca. It just that I was wondering... if the Quinn's had been given the choice would they have opted for the gas? We'll never know now, will we?

I heard it. I thought she said transmited, not transmit it. *For example* was also there.

Gonzo, she definitly said "for example" and I DO think this changes it a lot. It applies the point to all the people of the North. But giving any example was a mistake.
If you have Realplayer you can hear it for yourself.

It appears that most papers have misquoted her and added to the problem.

Barney, are you completely blinkered, do you not recognise there has been as many atrocities committed by republicans as by loyalists?

The fate of the Quinn children was repulsive, as was La Mon, as was Omagh etc etc

The Nazis killed 6million jews within 3 years, is that anything like the scale of Northern Irelands terrorism by BOTH sides of the community? Of course not!

Davros, I find your line on this very misleading and bordering on rather reckless sectarianism. The reason why any person goes and sets up an alternative Christian church - or for that matter, a reason why a person might decide to stick with an existing church is invariably because he thinks that the choice he is making is closer to Christ (or whatever) compared with the available alternatives. What would be the point in setting up a church which *did not* believe that it was the true voice of Christianity ? Would a church ever tell it's followers that it was not the true voice ?

That "how many Catholics went to Jean McConville's funeral" line is low. Is there a better way to attract the IRA's attention than to pay respects to someone it killed ? It sounds awful like you're trying to tar anyone who you perceive as Catholic with the same agenda.

I still think that McAleese's comments have been taken well out of proportion. She highlighted bigotry against Catholics but there is nothing in what she said that suggests she is attempting to sideline what happened to Protestants. Unionists have plenty of opportunities to condemn or distance themselves from sectarianism but failed to take advantage of them. It seems to be a question of which bigots are on your own side.

What upsets me most about this whole debate is how it shows how far we've really come in this country, which isn't far at all. People are still dividing themselves up along religious lines with Paisley telling us how insulted Protestants are as though he speaks for all of them, and the people on this thread attacking silly details about opposing religions as though they are at all relevant.

Rebecca.
"I think Christopher was calling McAleese's sectarianism and slur on the whole unionist community disgusting not her."

>> "Revolting comments from a revolting woman."

I just happen to think that gas is more humane. Please keep that in mind if you are thinking of torching my house. Also, it's under-insured.

The statement by President McAleese was an error, but it is factually correct.

There are "people" in Northen Ireland that have transmitted to their children an irrational hatred, for example, of Catholics, in the same way that people give to their children an outrageous and irrational hatred of those who are of different colour and all of those things.

Her error was to omit "people" doing the same for example , "of Protestants".

However to suggest that she was indicting "the protestant community" as some have suggested is inaccurate, and those that claim that such a well defined unit exists, are by definition "sectarian".

A simple reading of this thread is enough to know that sectarianism is alive and well. Give us all a little hope for the next generation ... don't teach it to your children.

That was the Presidents' point and a very good one at that.

likewise barney, when you lot start the second wave of burning prods out of the republic.

maca

I still think he's referring to her sectarianism, really, I don't have much sympathy for Stalford, if I thought he was being sectarian I wouldn't defend him.

Shay,
she said "people"

Rebecca,
I respect your opinion but I disagree.

righto maca

Well, I best be off, need to secure the flat from Barney trying to burn me out later ;)

What's got my goat is the zero-sum mindset of so many people who I suspect have been damaged by their exposure to everyday ordinary life in Northern Ireland. The president gave an example of what 'some' people have done. Her crime appears to be that she didn't give the obligatory second example. No wonder I react to the northern accent as if it is a device for transmitting some social disease. Oh!... I meant BOTH northern accents!!!

That "how many Catholics went to Jean McConville's funeral" line is low

That was why I used it, to show that neither side here can claim any superiority Roger.

Not likely Rebecca. I might be living upstairs
:)

However to suggest that she was indicting "the protestant community" as some have suggested is inaccurate

That is wrong Shay. A direct comparison was made between how it was done against Jews in Germany and Catholics here. In Germany it was done in Schools.
Here it wasn't.In Germany Jews were made to wear yellow stars by the state. There was nothing like that enforced by the majority here.

maca

I know she said "people" I was highlighting that fact.

Her error was not to give the same example for each side.

It was an error, her text highlights her dissociation from all things sectarian - only sectarians will not see that.

I subscribed to the analysis that the source of conflict in NI was down to political differences borne of which country people wanted to be a part of. I'm not religious myself, so I never really gave the religious thing much credence.

I'm frankly amazed and saddened at how quickly this whole thing has broken down along predictably rigid sectarian lines.

Davros

She didn't say "protestant community" that sectarian term has been inserted by yourself, she said "people".

She didn't even say protestant.

You are once again factually incorrect.

ShayPaul

Nevertheless, there's no doubt about who the 'people' are.

In 1997 Eoghan Harris described McAlesse as a "tribal time bomb". We can see how right he was. However nobody could imagine she had a eight year fuse. McAleese isn't a stupid woman prone to slips of the tongue. This was a deliberate attempt to cause trouble and perhaps to take media attention from the current difficulties of her old pal Gerry Adams. It has misguided and has gone badly wrong, and she I'm afraid that we now have a very tarnished President. Presidents have resigned for less.

"She didn't say "protestant community" that sectarian term has been inserted by yourself, she said "people".

She didn't even say protestant.

You are once again factually incorrect."

Sorry Shay, this is what I wrote :

"That is wrong Shay. A direct comparison was made between how it was done against Jews in Germany and Catholics here. In Germany it was done in Schools.
Here it wasn't.In Germany Jews were made to wear yellow stars by the state. There was nothing like that enforced by the majority here."

Now Shay , like it or not, when she compared what she claims happened here with what happened in Germany she WAS indicting an entire community OTHERWISE her comparison would be pointless. In Germany it was the STATE and the vast majority of people .

Keith, you don't actually believe what you wrote there do ya??

The president did not say 'potestant' she said 'people'. Also, she did not compare those 'people' with the Nazis. She compared them with the otherwise fine upstanding Christians who pre-dated the Nazis by hundreds of years but who allowed anti-semitism to become socially accaptable. Her point was that the Nazis did not invent Europe's hatred for Jews, that job had already been done for them by the educated, well off middle classees - the right thinking people of their day. All the Nazis had to do was finish the job others had started.
Today's 'right thinking people' of Northern Ireland should have a reflect on what she said instead of whinging about what she didn't say.

Davros

She said what she said, not what you think she said.

Your twisted interpretation is a consequence of your own sectarian prism.

I repeat :

The statement by President McAleese was an error, but it is factually correct.

There are "people" in Northen Ireland that have transmitted to their children an irrational hatred, for example, of Catholics, in the same way that people give to their children an outrageous and irrational hatred of those who are of different colour and all of those things.

Her error was to omit "people" doing the same for example , "of Protestants".

However to suggest that she was indicting "the protestant community" as some have suggested is inaccurate, and those that claim that such a well defined unit exists, are by definition "sectarian".

A simple reading of this thread is enough to know that sectarianism is alive and well. Give us all a little hope for the next generation ... don't teach it to your children.

That was the Presidents' point and a very good one at that.

On RTE radio today (Five Seven Live) the President clarified and apologised. The "for example" changed the nature of the remarks but it was, in her own word, "clumsy". I think it's fair to say that the message she conveyed was certainly not what she intended to convey. I hope the apology is made clear and public in the north and I hope it is believed and accepted.

Belfast Gonzo

Only if you are sectarian in nature.

Maca, McAleese is a person for whom religeon plays a very important part of her life. This is all well and good, and in fact I think a strong moral stance based on religeous beliefs can be an asset in politics. This is one of the reasons I admire both Blair and Bush. However there is a risk that sectarian (in the dictionary sense rather than common usage) views coming from religeous beliefs can cloud a persons judgement of what is "the common good".

This is not the first time McAleese has misjudged an issue and used religeon to stir up controversy. There was also the issue of her taking communion with the Church of Ireland. Yesterday's statement is I believe another deliberate act as McAleese is not accident prone.

Apparently tonight McAleese has come out and apologised saying her words were "clumbsy". This is not enough. She needs to state;
1; Her comments do not apply to the Protestant community as a whole.
2; The same hatred comes from a minority of Catholics in N.I. to their Protestant neighbours.
3; Her comments only applied to Northern Ireland and not the country for which she is the head of state.

If she does this I'm prepared to accept McAleese simply made a mistake. If not, then I believe she should resign. There is a prcedent in this country for misguided words causing the resignation of the President, as McAleese knows.

Henry,
That's bull! I listened to the same program and there was no apology of any kind. There was a comment from An Aras but it was not an apology and it did not add 'for example', that was there all along.

"President Mary McAleese has expressed her devastation at the controversy surrounding the remarks she made about Northern Protestants.

The President has incensed the Unionist community after comparing Nazi prejudice towards Jews to the hatred of Catholics by Protestants in Northern Ireland.

The Orange Order has cancelled a planned meeting at Aras an Uachtarain in the wake of the row.

Speaking tonight Ms McAleese has said that she is deeply sorry and that her point was clumsily made.

She went on to say that there was sectarianism on both sides of the community and that she should have included the hatred of Protestants by Catholics in the example she used.

An Orange Order spokeswoman welcomed the apology, but said it was too early to reconsider a decision to cancel a meeting with the President.

The organisation was due to meet her on March 8 to discuss the concerns of its members in the Republic of Ireland.

“We are glad that she has responded so quickly. At our headquarters we have had more calls on this than most other things over the last few years. Her comments have pushed a lot of buttons in the north,” the spokeswoman said.

“Mary McAleese has done a lot to build bridges but just one thing can do a lot to destroy that. We welcome that so quickly she came out and apologised.”

The spokeswoman added that the Order was not interested in knee jerk reactions to the apology."

"The Nazis didn't invent anti-Semitism,
theu used anti-Semitism, they built on anti-Semitism but they didn't invent it. It was, for generations, for centuries, an element of the lived lives of many people who, on the surface, lived very good lives, I mean many of them would have regarded themselves, for example, as very good Christians. But they gave to their children an irrational hatred of Jews, in the same way that people in Northern Ireland transmit it to their children, an irrational outrageous hatred, for example, of Catholics, "

As the discussion was about Nazis we can summarise
her comment -

But The Nazis gave to their children an irrational hatred of Jews, in the same way that people in Northern Ireland transmit it to their children, an irrational outrageous hatred, for example, of Catholics, "

So, she's saying that people in NI transmitted hatred of Catholics to their children in the same way as the Nazi's did. Actively and through schools. Which is nonsense.

The sectarian prism is all yours Shay, as I don't for one second believe that if Ian Paisley had said - But The Nazis gave to their children an irrational hatred of Jews, in the same
way that people in Northern Ireland transmit it to their children, anirrational outrageous hatred, for example, of Protestants, " that you would not be similarily outraged.

The President did not say

in Northern Ireland that have transmitted to their children an irrational hatred, for example, of Catholics...

The President did not say

in Northern Ireland that have transmitted to their children an irrational hatred, for example, of Catholics

Those that assume she was attacking the "protestant community" or "protestants" have missed the point.

The President would not describe anyone who has base sectarian hatred for catholics as a protestant, she has too much respect for that church and its members to allow such a label to be misused by a sectarian bigot, regardless of that individuals self-proclaimed religion.

The sectarian comments made by Mr Paisley in response reveal that he does not have the same education, something which should be a surprise to no-one.

It was he who mentioned "protestant" and the "protestant community" which no doubt are his idea of the "people".

Keith, I don't for a second believe it was deliberate. It was a clumsy remark, simple as that.

Repost :

Sorry first lines of each phrase lost when formatting :

The President did not say

"The protestant community" in Northern Ireland that have transmitted to their children an irrational hatred, for example, of Catholics...

The President did not say

"Protestants" in Northern Ireland that have transmitted to their children an irrational hatred, for example, of Catholics

Those that assume she was attacking the "protestant community" or "protestants" have missed the point.

The President would not describe anyone who has base sectarian hatred for catholics as a protestant, she has too much respect for that church and its members to allow such a label to be misused by a sectarian bigot, regardless of that individuals self-proclaimed religion.

The sectarian comments made by Mr Paisley in response reveal that he does not have the same education, something which should be a surprise to no-one.

It was he who mentioned "protestant" and the "protestant community" which no doubt are his idea of the "people".

I think my posts on this matter have been vindicated by the Presidents apology, which I am not surprised, restates the position I suggested earlier.

Gosh Shay, pat yourself on the back, why don't you LOL

ShayPaul

I see what you mean, but in the context of a statement about how a religious group - Catholics - were treated on the basis of their religion, the average punter might reasonably reach the conclusion that she was referring to the group of people blamed for the treatment.

I accept your point, but understand that the clumsy nature of the President's statement made it particularly susceptible to misinterpretation.

She's apologised. I'm putting it behind me. Will anyone else though?!

Davros

May I suggest that you read the thread again, and try to identify sectarianism, then think about the next generation and try to contribute constructively for them.

In the meantime don't overfeed the mushrooms, or your children.

Belfast Gonzo

Very honorable of you.

I think the answer to your question is very important, and a very reliable indicator as to where we are in this process.

Let's see how many will take your position.

Shay - the next minority generation will grow up with one heck of a large chip on their shoulders if thet swallow your mushroom food.

Davros

What makes you think I'm in a minority, or is that another sectarian remark ?

Davros

"So, she's saying that people in NI transmitted hatred of Catholics to their children in the same way as the Nazi's did. Actively and through schools. Which is nonsense."

I can understand your outrage. I actually regret that Mary McAleese made these remarks at the wrong time and the wrong place.

However, some of this needed to be said. The context in which she said it and the comparison she made may have been wrong but lets try and examine the core issue:

I do not know where you were raised or have lived. But where I have lived, in a town dominated by Protestant neighbours, I might have a different experience than you.

Now let me tell you that I have many Protestant friends, some very close ones. But unfortunately many of my neighbours, those who would normally bid you the time of day, treat you differently come June and July. They hang out their flags and bunting, and UVF banners. They bring their children to the 12th night bonfires where the pope is burned. They burn the Pope, Irish flags, Sinn Féin posters, and they enjoy this and teach their children to enjoy this great 'party' and 'celebration of their culture'.

They teach their children songs that speak of "smashing in Fenian skulls" and sing about being "up to our necks in Fenian blood". All the children know the words of these Billy Boy songs. It is not just extreme Loyalists that do this! It is ordinary Protestant people. Now I would not claim for a moment that all Protestants are like this - but the majority are, they go with the flow in their communities. For it takes a brave person not to.

Now I have said this in another thread here, and have often challenged my Unionist friends on this, but can anybody name me one Irish republican rebel song that sings of doing any harm whatsoever to protestants? No. Republican songs sing of British repression, never of hatred of protestants. There are no such songs. It is not what we teach our children.

However, the Unionist/Loyalist tradition is unfortunately all about anti-Catholic and anti-Irish hatred.

It exists. It is very real. There is no point in turning a blind eye to it. Mary McAleese also has very real personal experience of this - she would not have invented it!

If she has apologised then I am sorry that she has felt that she needed to be politically correct at the expense of the honesty that she spoke with yesterday.

I am sorry that her remarks, set in that context, have made mature discussion of this social reality, impossible for now.

The problem for Liam is that while republicans see unionists as suffering from false consciousness ("They only think they're British, they're really Irish"), unionists see themselves as "the British presence in Ireland" (a Billy Hutchinson misquote, IIRC), rather than just HMG's institutions.

Whether intentional or not, when those rebel songs go on about kicking the Brits out of Ireland, unionists interpret that as meaning themselves. They identify themselves as the British, who are being asked to leave.

Republicans are supposed to recognise the right to self-determination. Shouldn't they acknowledge that unionists can identify themselves any way they like, and possibly respect that?

What makes you think I'm in a minority, or is that another sectarian remark ?

LOL Shay - is there no limit to how far you will stretch things to play the victim....

I wrote :

Shay - the next minority generation will grow up with one heck of a large chip on their shoulders if thet swallow your mushroom food.

There's nothing in that referring to YOUR status.

Gonzo

Are you making an excuse for those sectarian songs of hatred aimed at the Catholic community, rather than recognising the reality of what message that gives to protestant children?

When we sing of the Brits - we are talking about the British army/British govt, not our neighbours. There are no sectarian rebel songs.

But face the issue and face the reality of the songs that you were taught while a child. You know that they impact on a childs mindset. Don't just minimise or ignore this very real fact.

I can understand your outrage. I actually regret that Mary McAleese made these remarks at the wrong time and the wrong place.

Thanks Liam. It's a difficult issue for me as this is approaching an anniversary, the anniversary of my father's death. A man who came back from WWII weighing 5 stone and whose prison camp papers are stamped with Swastikas. Among other jobs he had was helping to chisel living Russian POWs out of freight Cars in transit Camps in then Eastern Germany. That people would suggest that he would
have anything in common with the Nazis pushes me to the limits of civility.

Couple of points ... Billy Boys ? Not from Ireland, sorry. It's about a Greenock Fascist, Billy Fullerton, who terrorised Scottish Catholics and supported Mosley's Blackshirts.

Secondly - Never heard that republican Ballad beloved of Celtic supporters ?
"Roamin' in the gloamin' with a shamrock in my hand"

Liam

I am well aware of the sectarian nature of loyalist party tunes. Some of them are bigotted nonsense. I am excusing nothing, just seeking to explain a point to you.

I was trying to deal with how republican rebel tunes are perceived as sectarian by unionists.

They define themselves as British. Republicans deny them their Britishness. That seems to contradict the professed central republican belief that peoples have a right to self-determination - you either allow a people to define themselves or not.

Republicans don't allow unionists to define themselves as British.

Imposing an identity on another group is something that republicans say they struggled against - yet here they are doing exactly what was done to them.

To unionists, when republicans slag off the 'Brits', it is as insulting as you being called a 'Taig' by a unionist. Obviously you disagree, but that's how it is.

Hot diggity dang, a touch of culture as last!! You guys never let on you were Kurosawa fans!!!

It's been one hellofa Rashomon moment on Slugger Central today.

Arigato gozaimasu Sluggie-sans.

Party on.

Well that was a fun day anyway. Hopefully some other public figure will screw up and give us another good aul row on Slugger. It livens things up a bit. I was getting right sick of those bank raid discussions.

Ahh will ye twisht!
Always remember
The eye looking over ye
is the eye looking afer ye.

I'm on my way home
soft thee a while .....

Davros

Squirm all you like on the end of the hook.

Your term "next minority generation" is a profoundly sectarian remark, that you do not admit it, or even see it, can only underline how deep it goes.

The President would have been inside rather than outside on this one.

Your term "next minority generation" is a profoundly sectarian remark

Pathetic of you Shay. The reality is that we will still be in a double minority situation. I never mentioned your status.

If Northern Protestants were not reared on anti-catholic bigotry then the existence of discrimination, gerrymandering and repression in Northern Ireland from 1921-69 makes absolutely no sense at all. Even more inexplicable is the Protestant reaction to the civil rights movement, the impact of which lit the paper for 25 years of war.

But northern Protestants are not alone in their behaviour, similar sentiments exist in settler societies where the natives outnumbered the settlers. These settlers share a remarkable affinity in having exactly the same views of the natives, views which were encouraged and given official sanction by their benefactors, namely the British government. It's called DIVIDE and RULE, unless of course its natural for Protestants and Catholics to hate each other.

If Protestants are not taught to hate Catholics then how do you explain the Orange Order, 12 July, 11th night bonfires, loyalist song books exalting Protestants to shoot taigs and wade through fenain blood etc etc. The twin strands of Orangeism are anti-Catholicism and anti-Irishness. Orange 'culture' in its present form could not survive without the existence of Irish Catholics. And a culture that is predicated on the denegration of an entire people is doomed to wither and die.

...and any argument based on facile generalisms is doomed to appear on Slugger.

Millie (Tant)

LOL (in every sense)!!!

If Northern Protestants were not reared on anti-catholic bigotry then the existence of discrimination, gerrymandering and repression in Northern Ireland from 1921-69 makes absolutely no sense at all.

That's one way of looking at it. But then again I could as easily argue that if RCs weren't raised on anti-protestant bigotry Northern protestants wouldn't have had a siege mentality.

Like it or not it wasn't just that protestants were/are bigotted. It was a complex multi-factorial interaction that happens in many other societies without significant numbers of protestants.

Two points:

1. The nature of 'bigotry' is different on the two 'sides' - generally one side is brought up 'anti-Catholic' and the other is 'anti-Brit', with the differences that in turn leads to. Both of course deny it - the former 'rationalizes' its view of Catholics through a false pretence that in fact they 'love (Roman) Catholics' just 'loathe (Roman) Catholicism', the latter 'rationalizes' its view of 'the British' by denying point-blank that most Protestants are British. (Of course, hating people who move to Ireland from Great Britain would be quite acceptable, presumably...?!)

2. Our old friend Howard used to point out that it is foolish to attack the 'other side's' bigotry. He was always right. We may hold views on the 'other side's' bigotry, but it'd make more sense to take responsibility for our own. President McAleese has categorically failed to do this, but that only places her in line with most politicians on this island.

IJP

I can agree with everything, but the last line. The Presidents clarification and apology indicates that she does not see sectarianism through a one sided prism.

It is of course foolish as Howard pointed out, to attack the "other sides" bigotry, that would be a sectarian approach in itself.

I would contest that it is very foolish "not" to attack sectarianism in all its forms, and we should start, of course, with ourselves each morning.

The President was, rather clumsily, taking the opportunity to point out the danger of acquiescing or participating passively to sectarianism.

In that she was right.

It is revealing and not surprising for me, that extremists do not like this type of debate.

I would like to contrast the gaffe by the President, accused by some of "hidden sectarian tendencies", with this passage from Dr NO, father of the offended Mr Paisley, so outraged by the Presidents communication :

" The night before the 1998 Drumcree parade

Paisley stood forward. ‘I’m delighted to be here this evening to celebrate the anniversary here in the famous battleground of the Diamond,’ he began. He raised his voice. ‘And of course the same battle has to be fought today as in the eighteenth century.’ The voice rose again. ‘The same enemy still would take our liberty. The same traitors are amongst us who would betray us and sell us out to popery.’ Popery was a shout full of contempt. He crushed the word as he uttered it, then let it fall to the ground. It was his thirty-third year to address this rally.

His preaching voice swung upwards. ‘We .have set over us a quango ...‘ he said, the new word hanging incongrously in the biblical cadence. He warned of great trouble if the men were not let down the road. He suggested that Stormont minister Adam Ingram should be given ‘another ride of the goat before he goes’. The reference was to an initiation ritual in the loyal Orders, described as ‘the most daunting of all the Orange ceremonies’ (Haddick-Flynn p. 437).

Then the thunder was back. There would be complete anarchy. We were living under a fascist administration. ‘Now they want to set the constabulary at the throats of the Protestant people,’ he roared. Mowlam was a republican; Blair was near enough a Catholic.

Paisley was screaming now. ‘You’d better let the Orangemen up the hill at Drumcree and down again. If you don’t, you’ll rue it. You’ll reap what you sow.’ His words hit the earth on the sloping orchards like missiles, their echoes springing back. It was the DUP’s favourite biblical threat. Paisley had warned Terence O’Neill in the sixties that he would reap the whirlwind. In 1997 the Reverend Willie McCrea had warned the voters of mid-Ulster that they would reap a bitter harvest, after they elected Sinn Féin’s Martin McGuinness to Westminster instead of him.

Paisley boomed on: Trimble would go, Mowlam would go, Blair would go. ‘But the Ulster people will not be going. We will still be here to fight the baffles and fly the flag ... What is the root of Ulster’s trouble? How did this province which was dreaded by its traditional enemies lose its strength? How was it robbed of its defiance? The blame lies in one place. The ecumenical movement. It was Milton who said, when God is going to destroy a nation for its sins it starts its leprosy in the churches.’ There were ‘papists’ and ‘apists’. Church of Ireland Archbishop Robin Eames was, he said, the latter. ‘If he loves Papa, he should go and join him,’ he sneered. ‘The ecumenical movement is out to tear the heart out of our Protestant faith ... the Bible says Rome is the mother of harlots and the abomination of the earth. The book says the Pope is the Antichrist,’ he boomed, and again the words ricocheted back from the hillsides. ‘I don’t believe any of these rascal priests. These paedophile priests are as rotten as hell itself.’

He spoke of the Protestant enclave at the end of the Garvaghy Road. They put it into the rebel area,’ he said. ‘They locked them up with the rebels ... Mr McKenna the IRA terrorist will have to be put in his place. It is time that terrorists realise that we as Protestants and law-abiding citizens will not stand for it. There will be a price to be paid.’ I looked at Andy. He was gazing at his leader, mesmerised. He turned to me smiling, whistled in admiration at the speech. ‘He’s good, isn’t he?’ he said.

There was more. Trimble had shaken the hand of Seamus Mallon, ‘the reviler of the UDR’. This was an insult to the memory of ‘those who gave their lives that Ulster might be free’. ‘There is a time of terrible need. There is a time of terrible catastrophe. There is a time of imminent disaster for our country,’ he roared. ‘But thank God’ - his voice sank to a theatrical whisper - ‘we can pray.’ He prayed that God would ‘cut out the cancer of ecumenism’ and ‘send us a great revival’. "

No clarification or apology was forthcoming, or is awaited from the now "First Minister elect" of the Northern Ireland State-let, but then I'm sure the experts on double standards will find eloquent explication for the hypocrisy.

I suppose Mr Stalford will add :

"Revolting comments from a revolting man" ?

Shay - I'm amused you accord Paisley the same Stature as the President of the R.O.I.

I don't that