The Sunday World.... why else would you read it, except to keep up to speed on Loyalist gossip.

its NIs "HEAT" mag for the shaved headed & brainless.

it seems a bit daft however to try & censor it in the very areas, where even the mad dogs on the street know what themums are up to.

mind..... i suppose if you can impose the Shankill Mirror world view ...then they may see that as a victory......

Interesting. The word we get in the States is that the UDA are being nice, well-behaved nutcases who have the full approval of Whitehall.

Thanks, Slugger, for keeping those of us on the other side of the Pond who care informed.

Jackie McDonald meets Mary McAleese gets a handshake and a kiss. No one says anything. Robert Saulters stands on the same dockside as him to launch a peaceful political initiative (if ill-concieved and flawed), no handshake or kiss and he gets attacked from one end of the country by nationalist parties. Hmmmm.

To be fair, Fair-Deal, the Daily Ireland ran with a fairly hostile front page story about Mary McAleese and Jackie McDonald, the piece hinged on a quote from Kathleen McCaughey so it wasn't exactly a case of 'no one says anything'.
Maybe the reason for the comments is the double standards of the OO which refuses to 'talk to people with terrorist links' (unless they are loyalists, in which case, chat away!)

Deaglan

Thanks for that. I missed the Daily Ireland piece (not usually stocked round my way) and hadn't spotted it on Nuzhound. Did any of the nationalist parties issue any press statements about it like they did with the Love Ulster launch?

As far as I could see from the press coverage and film footage he didn't talk to him at the launch he simply turned up at the same event.

Fair-Deal, Thank-you for the cordial reply.

I cannot speak for either nationalist party but I would imagine the reason for the opposition to 'Love Ulster' is that it is an ongoing campaign which is supported by the OO (and tacitly, loyalist paramilitaries) whereas, the meeting of the President and Mr McDonald was a one-off meeting conducted fully in the public eye.

I would be prepared to acccept that Mr Saulters did not speak with Mr McDonald in Larne. It's the OO's ongoing participation in forums/boards in Belfast that also contain loyalist paramilitaries that I personally find hard to stomach. They, rightly, deplore the violence. They harbour a genuine sense of grievance yet fail to see that tying themselves so visibly to figures such as Mr McDonald makes their objections to meeting with Residents Groups look like sectarian hypocrisy.

Returning to the original point of the thread, I think the Presidents meeting with Mr McDonald was nauseating and ill-timed. Much the same way I assume you would feel about Gerry Adams meetings with Messrs Blair or Clinton.

Deaglan

The original point of the thread, as the title would suggest, is the campaign of intimidation and terror by the UDA against retailers and distributors of the Sunday World paper.

Bob Waters,

The word we get in the States is that the UDA are being nice, well-behaved nutcases who have the full approval of Whitehall.

As a fellow American, I'm just curious about where you got your US-based information on the UDA? For example, I don't remember any friendly coverage in the Irish Echo, or any coverage of any sort in the Main Stream Media.

"Thank-you for the cordial reply"

Civility costs nothing and usually makes for a better debate on here.

"the meeting of the President and Mr McDonald was a one-off meeting conducted fully in the public eye. "

This may have been the first public meeting but there have been a series of meetings between them with her husband acting as the link person.

Peterb

It was more I who diverted the thread from its core topic not Deaglan.

The Sunday World is a questionable publication if you ever keep a series of copies over consecutive sundays you will see just how much it contradicts itself with different claims about the same events. Some of what it prints is true some of it is complete garbage and lies but they know the libel laws mean anyone with a criminal conviction can't sue so they print it regardless.

The excesses of free speech are a much better price to pay than restrictions on it. The campaign against it should stop.

PeteB,
I apologise if if I engaged in thread drift. As you say, the point of the thread was UDA intimidation of Sunday World journalists. I wanted to repond to a point by Fair Deal. Apologies again.

Fair Deal
I was not aware of other meetings between Mrs McAleese and the 'brigadier'. One has to wonder what the point of these meetings has been. If it is damage limitation for the 'Nazi's' remark she's chosen a poor mouthpiece. If it is to challenge the UDA orchestrated intimidation/violence, she seems to have been wasting her time.