NO ATONEMENT DAY....
Monday, May 19, 2008 at 09:29AM 
Some people think that having a self-confessed IRA terrorist in the hideous form of Martin McGuinness as Deputy First Minister here in Northern Ireland is a sign of our political maturity and an indication we have moved on from the past. Total nonsense. McGuinness is a moral obscenity as is the administration in which he sits and I was pleased to read this article in the Sunday Independent which says what I have been repeating for years now..
"The weasel words of Martin McGuinness following the car bomb attack on an off-duty policeman were troubling. His first response to the murder attempt was to describe the attack as "spiteful and selfish". On cursory examination, his reaction to this chilling attack, blamed on dissident republicans, smacked of weakness and vacillation. Even taken at face value, the soft words would do little to inspire confidence among members of the PSNI who have now been told to check under their cars for booby trap bombs. But anyone with an ear for the double-think that is at the heart of the Sinn Fein lexicon could easily decipher the code locked within McGuinness's marshmallow response.
He said of the bomb attack near Castlederg: "It was conducted by people who have no mandate. They certainly have no strategy whatsoever and clearly represent no-one."
It fell short of a total condemnation but, worse than that, the response amounted to an attempted justification for republican paramilitary violence during the troubles when McGuinness was at the heart of the action.What McGuinness really said was: "When the IRA, supported by Sinn Fein, were blowing up policemen in the Seventies, Eighties and Nineties, we did have a mandate, we did have a strategy and we did represent the nationalist people."
And so it seems Mr McGuinness is, by extension, still supportive of the concept of paramilitarism, even the deliberate targeting of innocent people by the bomb, if such actions can be justified by the numbers perceived to be supporting it. So there is still no atonement in the heart of Sinn Fein IRA, no acceptance of the immorality of terrorism or of the fact that killing people for political ends can never be justified."
CORRECT. Of course McGuinness and his ilk still support terrorism, it's what they ARE! All the contrived press statements, the staged photo-op's, the honeyed media interviews will not obscure the central reality that the man who holds the highest political office in Northern Ireland is a self-confessed terrorist who is alleged to have PERSONALLY killed over a dozen people himself. Naturally this bloody truth is sanitised these days as the price of peace is paid by a political class which has no concept of common decency. But left to his own devices, McGuinness will hang himself. The tragedy is that the State didn't beat him to it.
View Printer Friendly Version
Reader Comments (28)
what's Wolfie Smith doing in that pic?
The journalist appears to have taken one sentence and put the most malign interpretation of it he can think of. He failed to mention that McGuinness went to visit the injured officer in hospital.
I don't think any serious person believes that Sinn Fein support dissident attacks on the police in any way shape or form.
Wilfull disingenuous-ness (sp?) on behalf of the Sunday Independent.
Even though he condemns the murder attempt, he may as well have shouted "up the ra- yeah!" in the eyes of this moron (ie Reilly)
What the article does show is that there will always bepeople ready to distort something to fit their own agenda.
David you are correct of course in saying McGuinness had a bloody past, but that is news to no-one at this stage.
David,
He could have used the old Unionist disingenuous mantra: "I condemn all terrorist attacks."
McGuinness said the attack was "particularly selfish and spiteful, and carried out by people who represent no one." He and other senior Sinn Fein officials called on Catholics to tell police about the dissidents in their midst and to testify against them in court if required.
I don't see any ambiguity in that.
This is the typcical hysterical nonsense you get if you read the SINDO.
"He could have used the old Unionist disingenuous mantra: "I condemn all terrorist attacks." "
I don't see how that is disingenuous.
Ross,
If you'd heard the radio interviews in the wake of a Loyalist outrage you'd understand. The journo would ask a Unionist politico or councillor whether he condemned that particular outrage, and receive that response. When asked the same question again and again the Unionist would repeat: "I condemn all terrorist attacks."
The honest answer would have been "Yes, I do." Evidently this wouldn't have been toeing the party line.
Oh I see.
Dawkins,
The point is that the putative Unionist politician would not be a murdering terrorist.
David,
No, the point is that McGuinness condemned the car bomb.
Dawlins,
Read the article - he caveated it. Also when it comes to car bombs and McGuinness I have one word to say - Claudy. He is a monster, a killer, and I note the failure of many on this thread to acknowledge this. Oh well, run from the truth and pray to god that it never finds you...
David
We all know where Martin McGuinness came from and his membership of the IRA is on the record. The question arising from the article concerns the sincerity of his condemnation of dissident violence.
Maybe you'd to suggest a formula of words or actions that would be enough to convince you of his sincerity about the attack.
I wonder if his sincerity or lack of sincerity is besides the point. What steps, if any, is he taking to insure the culprits are brought to justice?
Mahons
He and other senior Sinn Fein officials called on Catholics to tell police about the dissidents in their midst and to testify against them in court if required. What else would you have him do? I would not hesitate for a second before giving the police any information I had about the dissidents. The more of them behind bars the better.
Mahons,
His sincerity would be besttested if he shared with us the names of the savages who carried out the atrocious bombing of Claudy village, resulting in all those innocent deaths, Protestant and Catholic. Who COULD have authorised it?
David,
Keep banging the drum. The thread concerns an article in the Sunday Independent, whose author erroneously accuses Martin McGuinness of not condemning a dissident Republican attack. I and others here pointed out your and his mistake. Time to move on.
David - I doubt you will ever see anything regarding Claudy. I refer to his sincerity from this point foward. Since he is already suspect in many people's minds for his past, if he wants to reduce the suspicion going foward he has to demonstrate that he is, in fact, moving foward.
Henry94 - Did the information gathering structure that was available to SF prior to the peace process dry up? Isn't Martin in a position to do more than encourage cooperation?
Dawkins
If you think we are going to forget what McGuinness and his mates did over the last few decades you are sadly mistaken.We want justice and an enquiry into his activities for example at Enniskillen and Tollyhommon were the naked sectarianism of Republicanism was exposed.To attempt the mass murder of children in the name of the armed struggle told us all what sort of fascists Republicans are.
We will not be moving anywhere with sectarian mass murderers.
While I do accept that Republican politicians can be and are entitled to hold political office in NOrthern Ireland I cana lso understand David's argument that some thing are never worth forgiving. If Mr McGuinness was responsible for Claudy or had personally and cold bloodedly murdered individuals then it isn't good enough to just say "well he's changed now let's move on". He would need to have faced justice , conviction and genuine imprisoned punishment before being considered if at all, suitable for public rehabilitation.
Nigel,
Thanks for your support.
Dawkins,
Justice does not have a sell-by date. No moving on until justice is done and that means the butcher boy PAYING for his crimes.
Colm - I agree with that, but we know he won't be. In a perfect world it should result in people not voting for him at all, yet they have. Since they have, the practical issue becomes can he do the job he has been elected to do. If he can't or won't, then that is the opportunity to get rid of him.
David,
I agree: justice should be done. But this thread was not the place to highlight M McG's past sins. The Sindo journalist got it wrong, full stop.
Why not take a civil action against the Deputy First Minister.
Colm
If Mr McGuinness was responsible for Claudy or had personally and cold bloodedly murdered individuals then it isn't good enough to just say "well he's changed now let's move on". He would need to have faced justice , conviction and genuine imprisoned punishment before being considered if at all, suitable for public rehabilitation.
As he has faced none of those things he is entitled to the presumption of innocence.
Mahons
Henry94 - Did the information gathering structure that was available to SF prior to the peace process dry up? Isn't Martin in a position to do more than encourage cooperation?
I have no idea about that but if he has any information he obviously should pass it to the PSNI. I hope that the dissidnts are well enough infiltrated that the police know who was responsible and are building a case as we speak.
Henry,
Very true. Perhaps there are those on ATW who wish to change the law of the land. If there are those who feel McGuinness is guilty of murder then let them go to law as it stands.
Or perhaps they'd rather convert Rathlin Island into an Irish Guantánamo, a place beyond the reach of the law.
It shows how much the republican movement have progressed in recent years that they are being condemned - not for being associated with terrorist attacks, not for a lack of decommissioning, not for a lack of condemnation of/requests for police assistance re dissident attacks - but rather for the fact that they are condemning dissident attacks and asking people to inform the police but just not doing so "strongly" enough (allegedly).
As always, the Sindo is way behind the game. I've never heard of Jerome Reilly but he could be one of any number of journalists who have worked for that paper in the last 15 years. They trot out the same reactionary line year after year - and, thankfully, no-one listens.
Reg,
Not true. David listens.
Er, yes. Good point, Dawkins!
I should reword that to "...thankfully, very few people listen."