Monday, April 24, 2006
Republicans fail to implement cross-community deal
Ballymena Loyalists have said the cross-community deal that saw the removal of a UDA mural opposite a Roman Catholic chapel is off. Republicans have failed to deliver on their promised reciprocation of removing Irish tricolours.
Fair Deal @ 11:25 AM
Idiots. They have no conception of claiming the moral high-ground. Harryville was looking better for this replacement mural, but nothing like cheapening your own area to get back at the taigs.
Posted by on Apr 24, 2006 @ 01:06 PMI fail to see how they are idiots. They made an agreement, the other side have not stuck to it and they are rightly annoyed. What would you have them do?
And presumably you don’t feel tricolours hanging on every street corner is “cheapening” your respective area?
This was an opportunity missed. And knowing some of the people in Ballymena it will not be offered again. Rightly so in my opinion.
Posted by on Apr 24, 2006 @ 01:15 PMSo ‘officials’ say that a UDA mural could be reinstated. What sort of ‘officials’ are in a position to place murals in public in support of an illegal terrorist group, and why are murals like these permitted.
Posted by on Apr 24, 2006 @ 01:16 PMAre they really comparing a mural of a sectarian murder-gang opposite a church with the flying of the national flag symbolising peace and unity?
Posted by on Apr 24, 2006 @ 01:28 PMThe comparison was agreed in the deal
Posted by on Apr 24, 2006 @ 01:30 PM“I fail to see how they are idiots. They made an agreement, the other side have not stuck to it and they are rightly annoyed. What would you have them do?
And presumably you don’t feel tricolours hanging on every street corner is “cheapening” your respective area?
This was an opportunity missed. And knowing some of the people in Ballymena it will not be offered again. Rightly so in my opinion.”
Clearly they should re-erect a disgusting paramilitary mural once again. That’ll teach the republican residents of Dunclug or Fisherwick a real lesson.
Whether republicans choose to fly flags or not has little to do with paramilitarism in Harryville and a tricolour or two elsewhere in the town doesn’t make it more excusable.
Posted by on Apr 24, 2006 @ 01:32 PMThese loyalist ‘officials’ are obviously proud of their Ulster-Scots heritage. So much so that they want to paint over it with a UDA mural. Just to annoy taigs. Priceless!
Posted by on Apr 24, 2006 @ 01:35 PMColm: “So ‘officials’ say that a UDA mural could be reinstated. What sort of ‘officials’ are in a position to place murals in public in support of an illegal terrorist group, and why are murals like these permitted. “
What sort of officials? Take your pick—scared/intimidated ones or sectarian ones.
They are permitted because the artist’s patrons have a propensity for registering their displeasure in a fashion somewhat more dangerous than simple harsh language.
Posted by on Apr 24, 2006 @ 01:37 PMZiznivy - good point
Dunclug and the Cushendall road don’t need or want these flags (Dunclug does have a significant Nationalist / Republican community but these flags have been put up by dissident republicans) In no way am I in favour of cheapening the irish flag like loyalists by flying it on a stick from a lamppost. That said Loyalists did have the ability to claim the moral high ground here but through their own stupidity they let it slip. Regardless of the deal, Harryville was better off without these murals why can’t they see that.Posted by on Apr 24, 2006 @ 01:39 PMThat’s right Ziznivy, flying flags has nothing to do with the issue. Oh wait, it was part of an agreement. Let’s not worry about that though, agreements are made to be broken right? Amazing. Truly amazing. And the lemmings on the forum wonder why Unionists are reticent about going in to deals with Sinn Fein.
Posted by on Apr 24, 2006 @ 01:41 PMIt’s ridiculous that the agreement had to be made in the first place, as the only tricolours I’ve seen in Ballymena are in catholic/republican areas. Why are the loyalists in Harryville bothered about a piece of fabric on a lamp post well over a mile away?
Posted by on Apr 24, 2006 @ 01:45 PMAs ridiculous as it may seem it was at least a small step in the right direction and presumably was seen as a ‘confidence’ building measure in the run up to the ‘oh so contentious because we want it to be’ marching season. In the real world of course it means diddly squat but there you go. Think UPRG representatives and other Loyalists will try this again in the area? Me thinks not.
Posted by on Apr 24, 2006 @ 01:58 PMI’m certainly not supportive of the flying of tricolours anywhere in Northern Ireland, although I’m realistic enough to recognise that it isn’t a major issue. I’m also not particularly supportive of hanging the Union Flag like a rag from a lamp-post.
But as for acting preciously over an agreement between dissident republicans and loyalist paramilitaries ....... Christ on a bike! The mural shouldn’t have been there in the first place. The fact that a culturally significant replacement was erected was enriching to the entire unionist community in Harryville and Ballymena. To take a step backwards from something positive because “themmuns never took their flags down” is utterly pathetic!
Posted by on Apr 24, 2006 @ 01:59 PMI still have trouble with the words ‘Ballymena’ and ‘republican area’ in the same sentence. Then again I haven’t spent a lot of time in the ‘City of Seven Towers’, its reputation as the buckle of Ulster’s Bible Belt being enough to deter me.
Obviously Ian Paisley’s ‘assiduous constituency work’ on behalf of north Antrim Catholics is reaping rewards.
Posted by on Apr 24, 2006 @ 01:59 PMLoftholdingswood: “Think UPRG representatives and other Loyalists will try this again in the area?”
Being honest I was surprised that the Neanderthals behind the Harryville Church Protests where capable of this deal to begin with. Loyalists have only reverted to type and risen to the equally stupid actions of dissident republicans in Dunclug and Fisherwick. I only hope that Loyalists and in particular the moonlighters at WrightBus don’t want to come up to Dunclug again and take down the flags.
Posted by on Apr 24, 2006 @ 02:09 PMIncredible to see how many posts are focusing on the notion that the mural might be replaced,and completely ignoring or dismissing the fact that the flags are still there.
I guess what loyalists might do is always more important than what republicans are doing.
Posted by on Apr 24, 2006 @ 02:12 PMTAFKABO,
Reverse the scanario. Loyalists put up some Union Jacks in a mainly unionist area. So in revenge, republicans paint an IRA mural outside a Protestant church, painting over a mural commemorating the famine in the process.
I agree, the flag stuff is unnecessary - I wish unonists would take a tough stance against the hideous and threatening flags which disfigure our streets - but the ‘retaliation’ defies logic.
Posted by on Apr 24, 2006 @ 02:24 PMTAFKABO: “Incredible to see how many posts are focusing on the notion that the mural might be replaced,and completely ignoring or dismissing the fact that the flags are still there.
I guess what loyalists might do is always more important than what republicans are doing. “
Not for nothing, but the flags do not glorify an illegal organization. The mural did.
That said, if it was a quid pro quo, then its an open question what *ought* to happen.
Then again, can you enforce a contract between illegal organizations?
Of course, in the true spirit of local bureaucracy, wouldn’t it be grand if the “local officials” had the spine to actually A) paint over the offending mural and B) take down the likely unpermitted banners and just be done with it. But then, it would be grand if the yahoos on both sides of the divide didn’t provide their rebuttals in the form of violence…
Posted by on Apr 24, 2006 @ 02:26 PMYesterday on the radio, the Republicans Version was: Flags were put up for an Apprentice Boys march. Loyalists stated that the weren’t UDA flags, so it was okay. Republicans said the deal was all or nothing and put the flags back up. Now the mural is coming back.
So it could be just as well “Loyalist fail to implement cross community deal”, and that is a misleading title. It should be “Everyone needs to wise up and just get rid of the things”.
Posted by on Apr 24, 2006 @ 02:36 PMNot for nothing, but the flags do not glorify an illegal organization. The mural did.
Leaving aside the fact that we both know exactly what the flags signify, a deal was supposedly struck.
Given that so many are so knowledgeable about the Loyalists and loyalism, what does it say for anyone who would deliberately antagonise them in this way?
Let’s be absolutely clear, I think the Loyalists are ultimately responsible for whatever the Loyalists do, but can we at least admit that republicans have acted in bad faith here and needlessly excacerbated the situation?Rather than wait until the Loyalists repaint the mural, why don’t they just live up to their part of the deal as soon as possible?
Posted by on Apr 24, 2006 @ 02:36 PMWhat is so offensive about a UDA mural in a protestant town anyway ???. If they dont like it move the chapel to somewhere it is wanted. The church should not build Contentious chapels where they are clearly not wanted in a protestant area stirring up tensions.
Posted by on Apr 24, 2006 @ 02:37 PMncm
“It’s ridiculous that the agreement had to be made in the first place, as the only tricolours I’ve seen in Ballymena are in catholic/republican areas. Why are the loyalists in Harryville bothered about a piece of fabric on a lamp post well over a mile away?”It may well be ridiculous that an agreement had to be made in the first place. But an agreement was made and therefore shouldn’t it be implemented by the two sides equally?
The only place that tricolours may be flying are nationalist areas, but the only place that the UDA mural is/was is Harryville, an area that despite having a chapel is probably 100% prod/unionist. The issue of why the chapel is there is one for another day.
There was an agreement made by which they would make a move which would be reciprocated by republicans. I seem to remember numerous plaudits being heaped on them at the time for this - surely they are allowed to be p*ssed off that it has been broken - however, immediately moving to replace the offending mural is probably still not the best way forward.
Posted by on Apr 24, 2006 @ 02:43 PMconfused on Apr 24, 2006 @ 04:37 PM
The ugly face of unionism.
Posted by on Apr 24, 2006 @ 02:45 PMkensei
“Yesterday on the radio, the Republicans Version was: Flags were put up for an Apprentice Boys march. Loyalists stated that the weren’t UDA flags, so it was okay.”Surely it all turns on what the detail of the deal was. The deal that I seen reported was that Tricolours would be removed after the UDA mural - no mention of any other issues. Maybe there was an agreement on the wider flying of flags. But if not then republicans seem to be moving the goalposts and demanding more and more…... ironic innit!!!
Posted by on Apr 24, 2006 @ 02:46 PMIn my opinion the salient point is being glossed over here. Who are these people to be making “deals” on behalf of their communities? Where does their mandate come from?
There is only one councillor who represents a party with paramilitary connections in Ballymena and she is from neither of the wards concerned.
The fact that scum from either side can muscle their way to having any input in what is displayed in their areas is disgusting.
Posted by on Apr 24, 2006 @ 02:52 PM
