One Race But Three Victors

Well its all over bar the shouting (or gnashing of teeth) and three clear victors have emerged from the election for the next President of Ireland. First and foremost of course is Labour’s Michael D. Higgins who managed to expand on his party’s core vote to almost certainly win through to the Áras. From RTÉ’s report yesterday evening:

“2115 National FIRST COUNT: Higgins 39.6% (701,101), Gallagher 28.5% (504,964); McGuinness 13.7% (243,030); Mitchell 6.4% (113,321); Norris 6.2% (109,469); Scallon 2.9% (51,220); Davis 2.7% (48,657).”

With the elimination of the also-rans Davis and Scallon their votes were distributed to the other candidates with a second count result coming in early this morning:

“Higgins: 730,480 votes (+29,379); Gallagher 529,401 (+24,437); McGuinness 252,611 (+9,581); Mitchell 127,357 (+14,036); Norris 116,526 (+7,057)

The quota is 885,882.”

Since none of the candidates met the quota requirement to be elected outright counting will resume this morning with the strong presumption that Higgins will eventually hoover up enough preferences from a third or fourth count to be elected (the votes coming from Mitchell and Norris). As well as a personal achievement for the former TD from Galway it is also a good result for the Labour Party, especially after its repeated drubbing in recent polls (the latest placing it in third place behind Sinn Féin). However, many in Labour are well aware that the vote for Michael D. Higgins was very much a personal one in an election dogged with controversy and that they have in no small part the dramatic intervention by Martin McGuinness on RTÉ’s Frontline Debate to thank for a significant chunk of their 39.6% vote. Remove the “outing” of Seán Gallagher as an unofficial Fianna Fáil candidate rather than the Independent nominee that he presented to the general public and we might have a very different story here today.

It also remains to be seen just how much of that nearly 40% support Labour might retain in any future election. Though they are having a good week electorally (including yesterday’s by-election victory in Dublin) there is little doubt that in real terms their national vote is nearer to 20%, and perhaps lower still. This may be the best Labour vote ever but it is also a very much an exceptional one.

Despite the criticisms of Seán Gallagher in the last week of the race and the controversy that whipped up around him he still managed to accrue a good 28.5%, clearly indicating that the supposed demise of Fianna Fáil as a political entity has been grossly exaggerated. While its doubtful that the party itself could capture such a high vote in a general election at this moment in time (part of the Gallagher vote is clearly of the “floating” variety and the FF “brand” remains faintly odious to many) who can say what will happen five years from now. If a week is a long time in politics five years is a lifetime. The party will also be buoyed by their healthy showing in the Dublin by-election referred to above where they took a respectable second place. Talk of Fianna Fáil renaming and rebranding itself is just that: talk. Talk of Fianna Fáil repackaging itself with Seán Gallagher somewhere near or at the top is a lot more realistic.

For Sinn Féin and Martin McGuinness that 13.7% is a good, if not spectacular, result. While some in the Commentariat were focusing on some wilder polling predictions (McGuinness at 19% for instance) few in SF believed it likely. Their aim was 13-15% of the vote and they have more or less hit that target. 15% would have been nice but nearly 14% leaves them set up for future groundwork in constituencies across the country. That they managed to achieve this despite a ferocious storm of criticism from the political and media establishment in Ireland says much for where SF is right now, in electoral terms. While there is, and will be, no Sinn Féin “revolution” at the ballot box in this part of the country we are clearly seeing the benefts of the party’s slow and steady strategy. Just as SF gradually built up its electoral base in the northern part of Ireland so too are they doing the same here. While critics may try and focus on McGuinness’ high standing within the party and spin the story into a Sinn Féin loss or rejection by the southern electorate that is to completely misunderstand the situation and what SF hoped to achieve. Or rather what they have achieved.

If there is any real loser in this election then surely it must be Fine Gael’s Gay Mitchell. A 6.4% result is beyond terrible. However for the party itself, riding high and nearly unassailable in the polls, the principal fallout will be internal recriminations. We are unlikely to see much of knock-on effect in the polls for FG. At least until the worsening economic situation becomes apparent to voters.

About these ads

Enter Bagman

The damage delivered to Seán Gallagher’s presidential ambitions as a result of the revelations on RTÉ’s Frontline Presidential Debate is continuing to send disruptive ripples across the media and bloggosphere but it remains to be seen if the outcome will prove fatal. Gallagher was accused by Martin McGuinness of personally receiving a five thousand euro cheque from a local businessman in County Armagh for a Fianna Fáil fund-raising drive. Despite several opportunities to confirm the accusation Gallagher denied everything until in a series of increasingly desperate about-faces he admitted the substance of the charges.

Slugger O’Toole carries a transcript of the latter exchanges between the two candidates:

Gallagher: You’ve described me also as a businessman, yes and I’m proud of that, and I’m proud that I created jobs. With regard to the fundraising, the fundraising event in particular, was set up by Fianna Fáil headquarters, I was asking as a local businessman to inform those in the community that might wish to attend, I suggested and invited perhaps three or four… There were not thirty… There were not thirty people there, Pat….

Kenny: Can I ask you for… for a clarification by the way… Seán have you been to Cairde Fáil dinners, have you bought tables at Cairde Fáil dinners.

Gallagher: I was, I believe at about two Cairde Fáil dinners over the last twenty years.

McGuinness: Pat… Pat I actually spoke to a gentleman who attended that fundraiser in Dundalk in the Crown Plaza Hotel, two hours before I came to this studio.

Kenny: When was that fundraiser?

McGuinness: It was two years ago.

Gallagher: It was 2008 I believe.

McGuinness: It was two years ago according to my information. This gentleman told me there was between 30 and 35 people in the room, he also told me that after the event, that Seán called around to his house, and took a cheque for five thousand euro.

Gallagher: Not true.

McGuinness: Seán didn’t even address in the course of [Interrupted] his, in the course of his commentary,

Gallagher: I’m just finishing…

McGuinness: He says it’s not true, he’s begging… he’s begging for someone to come forward, and say that it was true, and I would caution you Seán at this stage, that you’re on [Sic] very murky waters, because one thing is for absolutely certain…

Gallagher: Perhaps you….

McGuinness: If I’m elected president of Ireland, I will stand against croneyism, I will stand against greed and self- [Inaudible]. [Audience applause] …and I will stand against, I will stand against the brown envelope culture that effectively destroyed our economy.

Gallagher: I have never been involved in that culture let me explain to you. Let me ask Martin, perhaps he might identify the name and background of the individual he’s referring to. I can tell you quite clearly, that I invited perhaps 2-3 people to that event, at the event, people were asked would they like a photograph as is normal at these functions. I personally delivered, if that’s the case then I don’t remember it, delivered a photograph… I can tell you…

McGuinness: But that confirms what the gentleman told me, he also said that when you arrived at his house you took away a cheque for 5,000 euro…

Gallagher: That is not correct…

McGuinness: That is not correct?

Gallagher: Absolutely not…

McGuinness: Alright then… I have to say I think you’re in deep, deep trouble.

Kenny: I want to try and move on but I think we can clarify some of the….

[Programme break]

Kenny: A development which I want to put to Seán Gallagher, on the Martin McGuinness for President Twitter account, Sinn Féin are saying they are going to produce the man who gave you the check for 5,000. Do you want to change what you said or are you still saying that it just simply didn’t happen. Are they up to dirty tricks or what?

Gallagher: “Well, you know I’ve always tried to stay above any negative campaigning and I understand from a query during the week in one of the newspapers and when my campaign team sent back the information on the said character, I don’t want to cast any aspersions on him….”

Kenny: “So you know who he is?”

Gallagher: “He’s a convicted criminal, a fuel smuggler, investigated by the Criminal Assets Bureau and rented the office out to Gerry Adams, Martin’s colleague, in the last general election. I don’t want to get involved in this, I don’t believe….”

[Audience noise]

Kenny: “Can we put this to rest now. Did you get a cheque from this guy or not?”

Gallagher: “I have no recollection of getting a cheque from this guy…”

[Audience boo and hiss – someone shouts “Liar!”]

Gallagher: “I can tell you, let me explain this very simply.”

McGuinness: “The man said you went to his house Sean.”

Gallagher: “I explained that they’re were two or three people that I asked….invited, I don’t know the man very well that’s in question…”

Kenny: “Hang on a second, you’re saying you went around to a fuel smuggler and all sorts of things and invited him to a Fianna Fáil do?”

Gallagher: “I’ll tell you quite simply Pat, I was asked…”

Kenny: “No, You labelled him one thing and yet you invited him, so which is it? Or are you happy with both?”

Gallagher: “I wasn’t aware at the time 3 years ago. I’m just making the point that I was asked to pass the information on to local business communities which I did. I want to say one thing. This is not what the presidential election should be about.”
[Audience clap – someone says “absolutely”]

Kenny: “Martin McGuinness, do you want to…..? Briefly?”

McGuinness: I think Seán should answer the question. And the question is, did he go to a man’s house, a man who spoke to me on the telephone several hours ago, and collect a cheque for €5,000 euro?”

Gallagher: “What Martin has said is that I drove to the man’s house to deliver a photograph of the event and that he gave me a cheque. I may well have delivered the photograph if he gave me an envelope… I…”

[Audience laughs]

Gallagher: “The point is, if he gave me the cheque, it was made out to Fianna
Fáil headquarters and it was delivered, and that was that. It had nothing to do with me.”

McGuinness: “That’s a clear admission of what I said earlier.”
[Audience claps]

Kenny: Michael D Higgins, do you want to say anything on this, Michael D
Higgins?

Michael D Higgins: “I think that it’s very important that there be absolutely full and total disclosure and resolution of this and as quickly as possible. You know, what you say when you take the office of President… I dedicate my abilities to the welfare ofthe people of Ireland… That’s all of the people of Ireland and it’s far beyond any of this kind of thing, quite frankly, and I do think we should, in a way if we can, I think these matters should be clarified, they’re quite urgent…”

Kenny: “Hang on a second Michael, it’s all very well to be pious and all the rest of it.”

Higgins: “No, it’s not pious, it’s a man being straight.”

Kenny: “No, hang on, you want to be judged on your record. If there are things that we need to know about all the 7 candidates, about their record, we need to know it. So, you want to walk away from this particular controversy…”

Higgins: “No, I don’t at all. Could I have said more clearly that the matter needs to be clarified? And as a matter of urgency and immediately. And I think that’s very… that’s what the public want, you know in the end it isn’t about us seven here, it’s about what’s good for Ireland and what’s good for the Irish people.”

Since the dramatic revelations in the debate the Gallagher campaign, and the candidate himself, have been desperately spinning their PR machine trying to deflect the storm of criticism while rounding on McGuinness and anyone else with the temerity to question the new Golden Boy of Irish politics (who is actually looking very much like just another Old Boy).

However Hugh Morgan, the businessman it is claimed gave Gallagher the cheque for Fianna Fáil, has issued his own detailed statement:

“I wish to clarify and set the record straight in relation to the dealings I had with Sean Gallagher which resulted in my attendance at a Fianna Fail fundraiser in the Crown Plaza Hotel, Dundalk, on the 1st July 2008.

Sean Gallagher , who I had never met previous to this, contacted me by phone. He first phoned me on the 6th June 2008 and invited me to attend the above fundraiser. In the course of the call he requested a donation of €5,000.00 for Fianna Fail. He advised me that this type of fundraising would replace the annual Galway Tent Fundraiser. In return for the €5,000.00 donation I was promised a private audience with the Taoiseach and I would get a photograph taken with him.

He told me that the Taoiseach would give an up-date on the economy in the South which in his words was ‘beginning to wobble’

On the 9th June he again phoned me to confirm my attendance . I confirmed that I would attend and was prepared to give the donation he requested. He left two mobile phone numbers for me to contact him on.

On the 27th June Sean Gallagher visited my business premises at Killean, County Armagh. I wrote a cheque for €5,000.00 and gave it to him personally. I still have the stub of the cheque , This payment is declared in my Company accounts and was cleared through my bank on the 1st July 2008.

I then attended the fundraiser which was also attended by other businessmen from South Armagh, North Louth and across the Northeast. Sean Gallagher greeted the guests on arrival and directed us to the room at the top of the Hotel where the fundraiser was held.

Brian Cowen gave a speech on the economy and predicted a soft landing. At the end of the night Sean Gallagher introduced me to Brian Cowen and facilitated a photograph to be taken of myself and him. Approximately one week later Sean Gallagher called back to my business and gave me the photograph.

It is a fact that approximately fourteen years ago I was convicted of tax evasion in relation to fuel smuggling in Northern Ireland. As a consequence to that, I have repaid the Exchequer and paid a substantial fine. I was never investigated by CAB or any other agency in the Republic.

Since that time I have developed a successful international business known as Morgan Fuels.

I employ over eighty people in Ireland ,both North and South. I have business interests in Ireland , Britan and Europe and the Morgan Fuel card can be used up to 4,000 service stations in fourteen countries across Europe.I am also the official sponsor of the Armagh County teams of the GAA.”

Meanwhile the Irish Independent reports further on Seán Gallagher’s particular ways of earning a wage which are very far from the entrepreneurial image he likes to project:

“PRESIDENTIAL frontrunnerSean Gallagher charged GAA clubs in his home county of Louth as much as €5,000 to help out with applications for sports grants, the Irish Independent has learned.

Mr Gallagher charged the fees for as little as 20 hours’ work in order to help the clubs get funding from state agencies, such as theNational Lottery, when Fianna Fail led-governments had enough money to hand out the cash.

Local sources last night told the Irish Independent: “He was inside with Fianna Fail and the ministers and (he had) the inside track, he had been (Dr Rory) O’Hanlon’s secretary. Once you got him to do it, you were going to get the grant.

“We weren’t going to him looking for ham sandwiches, you know. There was unspoken word.”

Mr Gallagher charged the fees to clubs seeking to expand around 2002, near the time he was setting up his ‘Smarthomes’ business.”

Is this the end of Seán Gallagher’s presidential hopes? Judging by some online commentators and activists a significant number of people seem unconcerned by the many, many questions hanging over the nominally Independent candidate. What this says about the citizenry of Ireland, and the morality of our society corrupted as it was by the Celtic Tiger years, is open to question.

Only the election day will tell us whether the Irish people are prepared to turn their back on the squalid crony politics of the last three decades or whether they are willingly prepared to be hoodwinked yet again.

Irish Pigs In The Daily Mail

British journo Ian Birrell carries a lengthy rant against Martin McGuinness in the “Right Minds” section of the Daily Mail, a suitably right-wing British newspaper. It is replete with plenty of hackneyed phrases and stock stereotypes from the “Big British Book Of War In Ireland” (which is also popular reading amongst the Irish media establishment) but the most fun is to be derived from the Comments section underneath the article.

Amongst the choice descriptions of Martin McGuinness MP MLA, Deputy First Minister of the North of Ireland and candidate for the office of the President of Ireland, is one from the not-so-wordy “Rob”, with Britain’s ever-fashionable:

“Irish PIG.”

Or how about,

“This despicable piece of human waste has blood on his hands that can never be washed off. In the real world both he and his master would have been executed for their crimes years ago.”?

That’s from someome who signs himself ”Blue, White & Proud”. That’s Tory blue and er… Well, I’m sure you can work the rest out for yourself.

Ah, the Daily Express. Its just like the Irish Independent but without, y’know, the “Irish” bit. Actually, now that I think about it, so is the Irish Independent…

From The People Who Brought You The IMF And The ECB – President Gallagher

Well, we’re in the final stretch of the race for Áras in Uachtaráin and it is claimed that the great Irish public, or at least a sizeable minority of it, may have decided to plump for the “Independent” candidate Seán Gallagher. No amount of revelations about his decades old allegiance to Fianna Fáil, his receipt of government largesse through investments in his companies or membership of cushy quango boards, his less than inspiring business record, his somewhat unorthodox accounting methods, his unapologetic loyalty to the Anglo-American form of exploitative capitalism and cultural narcissism that all but destroyed our nation, indeed his contempt for the history of our nation full stop with his wish to dump our national anthem born of a democratic Revolution, none of these things will deter those eager to repeat the mistakes of the past.

Will this report from today’s Irish Independent outlining Gallagher’s career in the political party that sold away the sovereign independence of our Republic, carry any weight? Or are we really, as a people, so far gone that we are beyond even saving ourselves?

“In a newly obtained letter, Mr Gallagher instead gave countless examples of his work for Fianna Fail at the highest levels.

“I have a long record of involvement and commitment to Fianna Fail over the past 30 years,” he said.

The two-page letter, complete with Mr Gallagher’s personal mobile number and email address, was sent just two years ago to the heads of Fianna Fail branches (cumainn) in Louth. At the time, Mr Gallagher was seeking their votes ahead of the party’s Ard Fheis that year to get elected on to the party’s national executive as one of the Louth representatives.

Mr Gallagher pointed out his service with former Health Minister Rory O’Hanlon as a full-time political secretary and his work with Charlie Haughey.

In his letter, Mr Gallagher also wrote freely about his fund-raising work for Fianna Fail.

“I later worked full time for the party in Fianna Fail headquarters, supporting members like yourself in raising much needed funds for the work of the party,” he said.

Last week, Mr Gallagher admitted he had invited guests to a secret corporate Fianna Fail fundraiser attended by then Taoiseach Brian Cowen in the Crowne Plaza Hotel in Dundalk in 2008 — but strongly denied that he had asked them for any money.

In his letter Mr Gallagher talked about his role in helping Fianna Fail’s Seamus Kirk retain his seat in the 2007 general election by acting as his director of elections.”

I’ve highlighted much of this before and in detail, has have many others, but one fears that the message isn’t getting through. It may be a cliché but it is one that applies here: “If you are not part of the solution you are part of the problem”. Seán Gallagher, and the party and organisation he was associated with for decades, were not just part of the problem – they were the problem. He, and they, are most assuredly not part of any solution we need to find.

A vote for Gallagher is a retrospective mandate for those who brought us the excesses of the Celtic Tiger years, those who poisoned and disfigured the moral and cultural soul of our nation. This isn’t just about a seven-year term for a president. This is about how we view ourselves as a people and how we wish to go forward into the future. To vote for Seán Gallagher is to take a step back into a past that we wish to leave behind, an era that fed on the worse impulses in men and women and not the best, an era that transformed us from an Irish nation into a crude American and British clone. Urged on by an establishment elite we abandoned our own sense of ourselves and took upon us a distorted image of Ireland and Irishness derived from the views of others. We defined what we were not by our own history, or culture or language, but by what we saw on British and American television shows, read in British and American newspapers and magazines, and what we imagined they wanted us to be.

We became the wage-slaves of others, of international corporations and an unregulated global market. Our indigenous businesses, our indigenous entrepreneurs, were abandoned in the beggarly pursuance of their foreign counterparts lured here by glorified bribes. We kowtowed to their every wish and whim and in the process became their prisoners, as our own people were rendered nothing more than tradable commodities, assets and numbers on a balance sheet.

That is the Ireland we created in the Celtic Tiger age, and that is why, when we ran out of barterable means, or others offered greater prizes than we could compete with, the international businesses we enrichened by coming here abandoned us with such alacrity and ease. Cosseted corruption at the top, cosseted corruption in the middle, while those at the lowest paid for all of it.

If you think of Seán Gallagher think of the IMF, think of the ECB. Think of voodoo economics and property busts, think of ghost estates and boarded-up shop windows. Think of factory closures and crying parents and their offspring in our airports. Think of motorways through Tara, or demolished monuments in Moore Street. Think of crippling taxes and slashed budgets. Think of young men taking their lives and young mothers seeking refuge in hostels away from broken partners. Think of rising crime, rising alcoholism, a rising black tide of despair that seems ready to engulf us all.

Then remember. Remember those who brought us to this place. And then go out and cast your vote.

Seán Gallagher And Health Rights USA

I wrote a substantial piece earlier dealing with the Fianna Fáil background of the “Independent” presidential candidate Seán Gallagher, a background which dates to the early 1980s. However in my researches some weeks ago I came across some information that I have been debating whether or not to discuss. Firstly it is (as far as I can tell) a strictly personal matter for Mr. Gallagher and therefore should be off-limits. Politics I do, people’s private lives, whatever area they work in, are their own concern. Unless (yes, a caveat) those private affairs effect their public work. In this case the information I’m going to write about is not a secret but is in the public domain, available on the internet (and on other media), and may be of some concern to the candidate. Especially should he succeed in his campaign and be elected to Áras an Uachtaráin.

In August 2007 Gallagher took a trip to Israel, staying at the Lot Spa Hotel. While there he apparently met one Matthew A. Katz, who later went on to found Health Rights USA, one of those very American medical outfits that claim a not-for-profit status, mixing a “wonder diet” with trips to the Dead Sea health resort mentioned above. According to a November 2007 blog posting by Katz:

“If you are suffering from psoriasis then you know how this can complicate your life. However, this need not be lifelong affliction. In fact, if you take a look at this video of my own recovery, you will see the results. Meanwhile, I came across this remarkable video on YouTube about a group of young people whose parents paid for their treatment overseas. They, too, saw their psoriasis clear up in record time.

The mission of this blog is to invite Jewish and Christian philanthropists to lend their support to assist as many people as we can to experience the same benefits rather than suffer. It is known that many cannot afford this treatment because it is not covered by health care plans in the United States, Canada, England, and Ireland. Contact us for more information regarding giving to this worthy cause at…”

He also posted in November 2007:

“Sean Gallagher from Ireland and Matthew Katz from New Haven, CT landed in Tel Aviv early this past August on a sweltering 110 degree day. Both were bound to the Lot Hotel spa and clinic on the Dead Sea the. Neither man knew the other nor what was about to happen in the next 21 days. Each experienced nearly 100% remission.

Each man had left home with an extreme case of psoriasis which they had lived with for more than 2 decades and within 21-days they were clear of most lesions!

As remarkable as this may sound, it’s common place at the Dead Sea clinic where Dr. Harari and his team has been working to help cure patients for over 15 years. It is a popularly accepted cure in Israel and in some European countries where healthcare pays for nearly 100% of this full-month stay at the hotel and spa/clinic. It can run as high as $3,500 for room, board and medical care, plus airfare. So, you can imagine how Mr. Gallagher and Mr. Katz felt shelling out this many “sheckles” in Israeli dollars with no guarantee of success and without any medical reimbursements in either Ireland or the U.S.A.

But, with the effort they made, they were rewarded with a clean bill of health and there is no price that they can put on this.

Returning to their homelands, Mr. Katz and Mr. Gallagher have remained close friends and each are encouraging everyone they meet who has either psoriasis or arthritis and rheumatism conditions to make the journey to the Dead Sea clinic.

Mr. Katz is even returning with a group next summer. For information about his treatment plan before and after for more information about this healing or to order the booklet please contact Mr. Katz at…”

Since then Katz has moved on to a business website (which repeats the description of the meeting with Seán Gallagher, who is pictured) with a more professional look, offering a means to reverse psoriasis, arthritis and type 2 diabetes, and treatments for $11,995.

“We will train you in 21 days how to “Eat Right” – “Exercise Properly” and “Reduce Stress.”

The Dead Sea and sun are known for positive effects on skin and joints. Look at this YouTube to see families around the world who go for their skin clearing.

HealthRightUSA, Inc. also includes a five-year follow-up by board certified family physician, Dr. Joel Fuhrman to commit to keeping you on track with continued wellness. This is our commitment to you! You need to be as committed to your success in order to remain clear-skinned and strong.

This 5 year program begins with a 21-day Dead Sea spa vacation and tours of historic sites plus includes:

  • All doctor fees, weekly checkups and prescribed creams.
  • Dead Sea and sun solarium treatments daily.
  • Hotel room rental fees and taxes.
  • All Meals (Kosher “vegan” prepared for autoimmune diseases).
  • Educational programs (each evening lectures after daily sun/sea treatments).
  • Access to exhibit hall during meals for questions with professionals.
  • Discount on all products (ie: books, CD’s, vitamins, water filters, juicers)
  • Free daily classes (yoga, guided meditation, group discussions, funny movies!).
  • Hiking and outdoor educational programs designed for fitness, stamina and confidence building.
  • Vegan food preparation and cooking lessons.
  • Site-seeing included to historic Israeli sites.

“ALL INCLUSIVE 5 year Wellness and Health Support Vacation Program” with a 3-week stay at our Dead Sea clinic is $11,995 per person. ONLY $995 extra per spouse/partner* Airfare is NOT included due to multiple departure locations. Group rates are available via our airline company.”

All of which profit-making for a non-profit organisation seems to have caused trouble with Google, as this appeal by Katz in 2010 makes clear:

“Dear Team,
We are a new non-profit with Google Grant acceptance #994-225-6178.

We would like to go through an appeal process with staff person at Google who knows about IRS 501c3 criterion for accepting us as a non-profit. We have been highly scrutinized by the IRS and they have checked our mission (see this link please). It’s a treatment approved for decades by Dermatologist around the world and doctors at the Dead Sea in Israel along with our Medical team in the U.S. has 30 years of documented success with diet for Psoriasis, Arthritis and related issues.

But GoogleAds system will not allow us to use the keywords such as “Psoriasis” in our ads. They don’t understand our “scholarship” program and alternative treatment choice. This is the right of patients to choose their own type of treatment. They kicked out our proposed keywords as “medical claims for miracle cures.” This rejection of direct advertising terms like Psoriasis or Eczema Treatment forces us to come up with other ways to promote our treatment, such as our books on diet, etc.

Why can’t GoogleAds allow us to do our mission? See our 501c3 letter on our “Why Donate” page, which demonstrates that we don’t make claims of cures, but we are providing a service to those interested in alternative treatment. Please give us a reasonable way to promote our safe treatment program using keywords that get patients to learn exactly what we offer.

All that we have worked with you for months is to get help to give FREE scholarships to those who cannot afford care.

I greatly appreciate your support.

Matthew A. Katz
http://www.HealthRightUSA.org
203-508-2423

makatz54@yahoo.com”

The free scholarships referred to above are explained here:

“Your tax-deductible donations go to scholarships and spreading the word about our mission for general wellness and a natural, non-drug Psoriasis treatment.

Many cannot afford this treatment because it is not covered by health care plans countries like the United States, Canada, England, and Ireland. Our mission is to invite individual givers as well as large philanthropies to lend their support.Our initial goal is $1.4 million to cover the costs of a full year of program planning, professional fundraising and advertising. Any amount that brings us closer to this is greatly appreciated. This goal includes 50 patient scholarships per month. ALL DONATIONS ARE TAX-DEDUCTIBLE. (see our 501c3 certificate below the Donate button).

Would you be able to give:
$18, $36, $72, $100, $150, $200, $250,
$500
$5,000
…or another amount?

Every scholarship patient must have income less than $45,000 per person, $75,000 per couple, $85,000 per family. Each individual at this program costs $8,995 and any partner or spouse costs $995 which includes hotel, food, and all program fees for a full 21-day stay. Airfare is not included. This is what your scholarship dollars support.”

I’m presuming the donations (via a payment through a Chipin login, a somewhat unusual method) help with running the organisation in addition to the payments made by patients themselves though I find the arrangement somewhat puzzling. Maybe that is just a cultural thing as the organisation – and its functioning – is very American as can be seen elsewhere on the business website:

“Qualified College Students Can Apply for Internship Experience from anywhere around the World who speak these languages!

Seeking qualified college students who speak multiple languages (Chinese, Indian, Japanese, Russian, Spanish, French, Italian, Greek, Slavish & English) to assist in blogging, social networking and contacting other nutritionists who can refer chronic psoriasis patients for treatment tours to the Dead Sea.

Demographic studies show that there are 125 million in India, China, Japan and in Europe which includes 7.5 million alone in the U.S.

To discuss Internship options, please fill-out the form on the right and we will email you a “getting started” package.

Once trained, you may also qualify for our “Payment Plan” by becoming a Tour Marketing Salesperson.

HealthRightUSA, Inc. pays Intern/Salespeople $200 per patient referred who registers for at our Dead Sea clinic for one of these sessions. An additional $50 if the partner/spouse joins them at the clinic.”

The website also includes links to several videos on YouTube where diet books and other materials available for sale from Health Right USA are discussed. In fact the diet part of these offers seem to be based (or linked) to the much-debated American nutritionist Dr. Joel Fuhrman as the site makes clear:

“We offer FULL SCHOLARSHIPS* for Psoriasis, Eczema, Psoriatic Arthritis and type-2 Diabetes patients programs to help them heal at the Dead Sea in Israel. We use natural methods of sun treatments, special sea mineral baths and physicain supervised healthy vegan diets.

We teach them “healthy living” through proper vegetarian style diet, exercise,meditation and attitudes that will help them maintain their general health and maintain clear skin for years to come.

We have in place ”Five Year Wellnes Program” to enhance long-term remission and further document the value of Dr. Fuhrman’s natural treatment program

*Scholarships are based on the economy and our fundraising efforts currently underway. Please give generously to help others receive this treatment!”

Okay. I’m not questioning the validity or otherwise of the treatments or programs offered by the American-based organisation, HRUSA, Inc. Nor do I question the ways by which it raises donations or earns revenues. It states that it is registered in the United States as a “501(c) organization”, that is a tax-exempt, nonprofit corporation so presumably it has been examined in some way by US federal authorities to see if it qualifies for that status (there is a letter of confirmation from the Internal Revenue Service, though it  is addressed to the organisation via one Sandra L. Cox and a PO Box number rather than a company address).

My only question centres on the very public association of a man wanting to be the next President of Ireland with this group and the need for this relationship to be clarified. It does not touch upon whatever private medical condition or treatment that Seán Gallagher may have had in the past (or currently still does). That is no ones business but his own, and rightly so. We all have private lives, even politicians, and not everything needs to be known.

However, what does need to be known is how Seán Gallagher is linked to Health Rights USA, Inc. and why does it use his name and image in its promotion? Are there no links? If so should he not request that they alter their website to remove his name and photographs? This is not a “muck raking” exercise since, as far as one can tell, there is no muck to rake. It is a simple matter of clarification and the need for someone who may hold the highest office in this nation to be above reproach. It may well be (and I presume it is) that Mr. Gallagher is unaware of the unusual prominence he is given on the Health Rights USA site. Or perhaps he is a donor and wishes this philanthropy to remain private (a laudable stance, if so, and I apologise for raising it)? Whatever the case a speedy answer will put this question to rest.

Seán Gallagher – A Fianna Fáil Sockpuppet?

If one were to believe the polls (and some commentators) the “Independent” candidate for the presidency, Seán Gallagher, may be a serious contender for becoming the next Uachtarán na hÉireann. We are told that he is well-ahead of his nearest rival, Labour’s Michael D. Higgins; so much so that the Higgins’ campaign came up with a rather slick trick to downgrade the other runners in the hopes of siphoning off some of their votes (or at least transfers). However, just how independent is this particular Independent? In fact, as we shall see, he is anything but.

In 2009 Seán Gallagher, as a Louth member of Fianna Fáil’s Ard Comhairle (the party leadership), appeared at the Ógra Fianna Fáil National Youth Conference in Bundoran. His account of the event was posted on Fianna Fáil’s website and I include it in full so there can be no doubts about where he stands:

“Last night I had the honour of speaking at the Ógra Fianna Fáil National Youth Conference in Bundoran. It was a fun night, full of excitement as we watched the Ireland match unfold and as always with these occasions there was plenty of cheer and goodwill as the Ógra members celebrated another successful conference.

This wasn’t the first time I had attended a Fianna Fáil Youth Conference, back in the 1980s I was also a member of Ógra Fianna Fáil and served on the National Youth Committee. I think it’s fair to say that a lot of the lessons I learnt back then have stood to me over the years and have certainly helped me in my business career.

The thing about Ógra Fianna Fáil, and about politics in general, is that it teaches you all about people. It gives you great experience in meeting new people, making contacts and forming friendships. Any businessman, salesman or manager will tell you just how important those skills are. People are the foundations upon which any successful business operation is built and it is the relationships you form and how you foster them that will determine whether your business lives or dies.

I was also reminded of the other ways that my Ógra involvement has helped shape my career. It obviously thought me the fundamentals of public speaking, a skill that will stand to anyone who has to make presentations or pitches. You learn how to address an audience and to get your message across. That’s a skill that a lot of businesspeople I encounter still haven’t mastered – you only have to take a look at some of the presentations on the Dragon’s Den to see that.

There certainly was no shortage of dynamic young talent at the Ógra Fianna Fáil Conference. I came across so many impressive, confident and intelligent young men and women, busting with ideas. I was greatly encouraged that the political and business leaders of the future will certainly help move this country forward.”

So, how politically “independent” does that sound to you?

In 2010 the Irish Independent reported that Gallagher was the favourite to stand for Fianna Fáil in the Louth constituency, and just how integral he was to the party machine there:

“The businessman is considering seeking the Fianna Fail nomination in Louth following Mr Ahern’s announcement of his retirement.

Mr Gallagher masterminded the vote management strategy at the last general election in the constituency, which saw Mr Ahern’s vote kept down to ensure Fianna Fail TD Seamus Kirk got elected.

Despite Mr Ahern’s high profile, Mr Kirk actually finished ahead of him on the first count in 2007.

Mr Ahern claimed credit for the plan working, but Mr Gallagher is attributed as the real brains behind it. Fianna Fail sources say there is little love lost between the pair.

Local party activists said they were “not sure” Mr Ahern would back Mr Gallagher’s candidacy.

Mr Gallagher is regarded in Fianna Fail as potentially part of a new wave of politicians. He has experience from county enterprise boards, youth work, disabilities and north-south bodies, so there’s a broad mix of enterprise and community involvement.

The 48-year-old was also appointed to the new board of FAS earlier this year.”

Seán Gallagher was more than just a Fianna Fáil appointee to FÁS. In fact they lauded him with several cushy quango positions including the Drogheda Port Company and Intertrade Ireland, augmenting his (debatable) business interests. Unfortunately that last one has got him into a wee bit of trouble as the Irish Independent has detailed:

“ONE of Independent candidate Sean Gallagher’s firms got cash from a state enterprise quango he served on.

He was appointed to the board of North-South body Intertrade Ireland at the end of 2007 — and annual accounts for that year reveal they gave €41,970 to his Smart Homes company.

Yesterday, Mr Gallagher became impatient and declined to answer the question when asked if getting the funding was a conflict of interest, and said to speak to Intertrade Ireland.

He also became irate when asked why he had missed so many of the board meetings.

“I have been working for the last four years,” he told the Irish Independent.

“Did you ask about the subcommittees, the equity network and the work that I do to help fund small businesses?

“Give me the dates and come back and ask me for specific reasons and I’ll give you the dates that I was probably doing stuff.

“I would love if you guys would go and do positive stuff.

“Do you have any other understanding of the amount of schools I have spoken to, the enterprise agencies I have spoken to, of the universities I have spoken to, of all the small companies I have helped, and these are the questions you want to ask me?” he added.

Intertrade Ireland said the grant from its technology transfer fund was approved before Mr Gallagher joined the board in December that year — and denied there was a conflict of interest.

But it also emerged that he managed to miss half of all Intertrade Ireland board meetings over the past two-and-a-half years — despite getting €30,000 in fees.”

And Gallagher didn’t just mastermind the campaign of FF Louth TD Seamus Kirk in 2007. He also stood shoulder-to-shoulder with FF Mayo TD Dara Calleary during his re-election run earlier this year, as examined by the Herald:

“HE INSISTS he’s no longer a member of Fianna Fail, but that didn’t stop Sean Gallagher from claiming that it was the only party to get the country back on track.

Launching the election campaign of Dara Calleary, Gallagher stood shoulder to shoulder with the Fianna Fail TD and announced that he was the ‘face of change’ that would fix the future.

Speaking at the time to hundreds of party faithful, Gallagher showered praise on the Fianna Fail politician.

“I believe that Dara is the face of change in the political environment,” he said.

“What we have had up to now to get us here, will not work to get us to the future. But it can change, and with people like Dara it will happen and it will work again.”

The Dragon’s Den star went on to describe the outgoing Minister of State as “a fabulous, outstanding debater and communicator at all levels”, during the official campaign launch held in Downhill House Hotel in February.”

Such was Seán Gallagher’s long involvement with the Fianna Fáil party that he virtually became synonymous with it. If there was a Fianna Fáil opening of an envelope Gallagher was there to hold it (though no brown envelopes, I should add). This perhaps explains his inability to condemn Fianna Fáil’s deplorable record in government on RTÉ’s now infamous Primetime Debate while his campaign PR staff went into hysterics (or so I’ve been informed). But he was soon back into voter-friendly mode after some late night, erm, discussions, as the Irish Times outlined:

“INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE Seán Gallagher has moved to distance himself from Fianna Fáil’s performance in government over the last four years after appearing to equivocate on the issue when questioned on the RTÉ Prime Time debate.

Mr Gallagher said yesterday that he “abhorred” the decisions made by the previous FF-led administration and said he was disillusioned with the party’s loss of contact with its grassroots when he resigned from Fianna Fáil earlier this year.

Asked by Miriam O’Callaghan if he felt Fianna Fáil had let the country down, Mr Gallagher said that he couldn’t answer for the party.

He said the reason he was seen to hesitate when asked the question was that he was seeking to distinguish between Fianna Fáil ministers in cabinet and its ordinary rank and file members.

“I was asked to condemn Fianna Fáil and the first thing that came into my mind was the thousands of ordinary decent men and women who are the grassroots of Fianna Fáil . . . and I didn’t want to condemn them because they weren’t in government, they weren’t in cabinet.””

Hmm…

Another Gallagher problem as been his memory (not the first Fianna Fáil member to have that problem, of course). He has been somewhat confused about when exactly he quit the party. Gallagher’s campaign had initially claimed that he had quit FF in March 2010. Except he hadn’t. He had in fact quit in January 2011. The Journal reports that:

“SEÁN GALLAGHER HAS clarified the timing of his departure from Fianna Fáil – insisting that in practice he left the party 18 months ago.

The Independent presidential candidate acknowledged that he resigned in writing only in January of this year. But he said this was merely a formality and he effectively left his local cumann in March 2010.

Speaking to RTÉ News, Gallagher said: “I left officially on March 1 2010. That was my last meeting when I stepped down at a meeting of my local cumann.” He added that he had “officially resigned in writing earlier this year because my position [on the national executive] hadn’t been filled and I thought it prudent to tidy that up.”

Questioned about his role on the party’s national executive, Gallagher insisted it was merely an organisational role and “doesn’t deal with issues or policies”.”

Okay. First things first. Seán Gallagher “officially” left his cumann (local branch) of Fianna Fáil in March 2010. He then “officially” left Fianna Fáil’s Ard Comhairle (national leadership) in January 2011. Yet he was campaigning for Fianna Fáil candidates in Mayo (the FF TD Dara Calleary mentioned above), Donegal (FF’s nominee Charlie McConalogue) and Monaghan (FF candidate Margaret Conlons) in February 2011. A year after he left the party?

No surprise then that Celia Larkin should pen an impassioned public defence of Gallagher and Fianna Fáil, calling for both to take on their opponents.  Or that in return Bruce Arnold (!) can point out the many holes in the claims of the ”Independent” candidate Seán Gallagher, as he details in an article for the Irish Independent:

“Sean Gallagher’s picture of himself and Fianna Fail is now being amended in the light of facts previously muddied. He says on his campaign website — or did until this weekend — that he was ‘a sporadic’ party member.

Yet his Fianna Fail career was full-on and privileged. It lasted much longer than he says; it was anything but sporadic.

He says he “got involved in the 1980s”. This was with Ogra Fianna Fail, which he headed, in Cavan, “for a year”. This would be difficult without becoming a party member. He does not tell us about that or when it happened. He gives the impression that he drifted away, coming back to help in the government’s ‘alcohol education programme’ and to work with Rory O’Hanlon and Seamus Kirk.

He claims he left Fianna Fail “in terms of being a member of the party, or being active, back in 2009″. And he gives the reason: “The party had moved away from its grassroots, the ordinary people who were struggling.”

Yet in January 2011, he was still a member of its National Executive, which is not possible without being a party member. When he ‘resigned’, on January 5, 2011, by letter to the Fianna Fail Party Secretary Sean Dorgan, it was simply as “a constituency delegate” to the National Executive.

He concluded: “I want, however, to express my continued support to you and your colleagues in this challenging period for the party.”

Fianna Fail was then in political freefall, facing an annihilation it richly deserved and got. Yet Gallagher remained a member, sympathetic to the senior leadership. He helped senior figures in the following general election.

His campaign team has so far been unable to establish whether he has resigned from the party, and if so, when. None of the above has anything whatsoever to do with the reasons he gave on October 3 for the parting of the ways in 2009. What he said about that did not in fact happen.

Moreover, he has rejected all political parties because their fight is “about who was going to be in power”. Yet he went on being heavily involved for a further two years in Fianna Fail — both as a National Executive member and still longer as a party member.

In July of this year… he told Pat Kenny yet another, quite different, story about his Fianna Fail membership.

He joined “to advance the introduction of important legislation”. So there were now two completely different and distinct reasons, the first being the legislation, the second representing Louth.

“Let me explain about Fianna Fail,” he told Kenny. He then gave yet another reason for his Fianna Fail membership: the need for youth services.

What he did not tell Kenny was the story of his close and continuing relationship with Fianna Fail throughout the whole period of his presidential challenge.

This was because the party held the key to his gaining the councils on which his nomination depended. In some of them, the Fianna Fail party whip was imposed in his favour.

Gallagher represents Fianna Fail. He is their default candidate. He has made little of close ties with the party.

He cannot tell us, through his campaign team, when he left Fianna Fail, suggesting he has not left.

Fianna Fail is also being coy. Last Saturday night, the party said it would not comment on whether Gallagher was still a member of the party, saying it was up to him and his campaign team to deal with this issue.

The team is silent on this.”

Well they might be silent for they know the answer as well as we do. Based upon the evidence above most readers would conclude that Seán Gallagher is nothing more than a Fianna Fáil sockpuppet. This campaign is not about the election of a head of state. It is about the re-launch of the Fianna Fáil brand, repackaged for the old party grassroots and the newer converts. It is about reinvigorating the party locally and giving an electoral dry-run to a person who, if he doesn’t succeed this time, will undoubtedly run for Dáil Éireann in the near future. Seán Gallagher, next president of Ireland? Or Seán Gallagher, next president of Fianna Fáil?

Michael D. Higgins: “Hamas Is More Advanced Than The IRA”

What a week it’s been in the race for the Áras. We’ve had a mystery whodunit (Dana), a shocking televised trial (McGuinness), an uncomfortable tragicomedy (Norris), a disturbing authoritarian drama (Mitchell), some touchie-feelie fuzziness (Higgins), an Irish version of The Hills-meets-The Kardashians (Davis), and a really bad memory act (Seán Gallagher).

Indeed it is to the latter candidate that I turn as we look at how the Fianna Fáil Independent nominee has fared in recent days. If we are to believe the news media establishment (which has grown rather fond of Gallagher as their Anyone-But-McGuinness campaign has faltered) he seems to be a winner. We are told that he is now the favourite. At least that is what the Irish Independent is claiming in a report that should take the reward for the best spun article of the election (so far):

“The fight to be the ninth President of Ireland is now a two-horse race between Labour’s Michael D Higgins and Dragons’ Den star Sean Gallagher, according to the latest Sunday Independent/ Quantum Research nationwide poll.

Several candidates including Mary Davis, Dana Rosemary Scallon and Senator David Norris have all seen large drops in support, while Martin McGuinness remains well behind the leaders.

… Mr Higgins remains the front-runner on 36 per cent, up nine points on the previous poll.

But close behind him is Mr Gallagher, who has seen his support rise spectacularly from 9 per cent in mid-September to 29 per cent this weekend. His support almost doubled last week alone.

The bad news continues for Fine Gael’s Gay Mitchell. Despite having the Fine Gael party machine behind him, his support has dwindled further, dropping from 10 per cent to 6 per cent.

Mary Davis fares the worst. In our last poll, her first-preference share stood at 12 per cent but now her support base is down to 4 per cent.

Dana Rosemary Scallon’s support is also in meltdown; her vote has gone from 7 per cent to just 2 per cent.

Former front runner, Senator David Norris, has also seen his support decimated, down from 20 per cent last time round to 10 per cent now.

Sinn Fein candidate Martin McGuinness has seen a marginal rise in his support from 11 per cent to 13 per cent, but it would seem he has far too much ground to make up between now and polling day.”

From reading the above piece, and the placing of the reporting of McGuinness’ polling numbers behind all the other candidates, it would be hard to credit that McGuinness is actually in third place and his support has gone up; and that despite a week of terrible reporting and some undoubted PR setbacks (the survey was conducted on Friday by Independent Newspapers controversial in-house polling group).

However RTÉ is reporting that:

“Independent candidate Seán Gallagher has moved into the lead in the Presidential election, according to a Red C poll for the Sunday Business Post…

The poll suggests that Seán Gallagher has jumped 18 points since the last Red C poll nine days ago, and is leading on 39%.

The Red C poll shows Michael D Higgins is in second place with 27%.

Martin McGuinness is down three points to 13%.

Gay Mitchell is down two points to 8%.

David Norris is down seven to 7%.

Mary Davis has lost five points to 4%.

Dana Rosemary Scallon is down three points to 2%.

The poll was taken on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday, before the RTÉ Prime Time debate was held.”

Ah, statistics, damned statistics and lies. Anyone have a coin to flip?

Given the media establishment’s long-term love affair with a certain political party (until an unceremonious – and rather timely – dumping of the latter) it is no wonder that some newspapers and journalists have started to row in behind Gallagher. A strong showing in the Presidential election will set him up nicely for a run at Dáil Éireann in a few years time and then the leadership of a certain political party.

And people thought that certain party was foolish not to field an official candidate? Sinn Féin isn’t the only organisation in Ireland adept at pulling deft political strokes. Or planning for the future.

The most important part of the RTÉ article is the fact that the poll took place before the controversial Prime Time debate which has sparked so much criticism amongst the online chattering classes (not too mention the old school phone-in radio shows). It will be interesting to see how Martin McGuinness’ numbers change in reaction to the hostile grilling he got from presenter Miriam O’Callaghan and the negative reaction it drew from many viewers. Despite several attempts to turn the story against the Sinn Féin candidate by some Establishment journos many believe there will be something of a sympathy vote added to McGuinness’ core support.

Talking of support, the Labour candidate Michael D. Higgins, that well-known supporter of non-Irish terrorists international freedom-fighters, from Latin America to the Middle East,  has spoken out via the Irish Independent about his concerns that Martin McGuinness’ election would give a retrospective mandate to the Irish Republican Army’s thirty-year armed struggle:

“Michael D Higgins, the Labour candidate, has raised concern that Martin McGuinness is using the presidential election to “rationalise” and “endorse” the Provisional IRA campaign of terrorism.

In a strategic intervention, Mr Higgins – one of the two clear frontrunners – has also told the Sunday Independent that it would be “quite wrong” for Sinn Fein to “claim ownership” of the peace process for “electoral purposes”.

He said there was a “clear conflict” between accounts given by Mr McGuinness of his “paramilitary career” and information available to successive Governments.

“Irish people want a President who will be honest and open… I believe it would be helpful if the conflict over different accounts was faced up to and answers given,” he said.

Mr Higgins said that he, personally, was “absolutely and unequivocally opposed to the campaign of violence carried out by the IRA” and highlighted his “political opposition” and “personal revulsion” at that violence.

On the IRA campaign of violence, he said: “I would be particularly concerned if this presidential election campaign was to be used to seek some sort of rationalisation of or endorsement for that campaign.”

In what was last night interpreted as vindication of the strategy to highlight the terrorist past of Mr McGuinness, the former Labour minister added that he expected the electorate would “want to consider not just the recent record of Martin McGuinness but also his record overall”.”

Oh-ho. Is that so, Michael D? Well, let’s have a look at your record shall we? Hmmm, where to begin…? Why not with your 2004 statement following the death of the Palestinian terrorist guerrilla freedom-fighter Yasser Arafat, which is still sitting proud on the Labour Party’s website:

“Responding to the death of Yasser Arafat, Labour Foreign Affairs Spokesman Michael D Higgins TD said his historic achievement will be to have held together a disparate coalition of groups under the umbrella of the PLO and to have transformed that group into a recognised political entity.

After the 1967 War, his achievement in organising a demoralised Palestinian people had as its crowning moment his address to the United Nations General Assembly in 1974. From that moment on, the struggle of the Palestinian people had international recognition.

Later, as many different countries came to recognise the PLO, it became clear that Yasser Arafat would be recognised as the symbol of the Palestinian people’s struggle.

In later years he has been a virtual prisoner in Ramallah, spending most of his time under house arrest. The refusal of Ariel Sharon, supported by President George Bush, to negotiate with Yasser Arafat as the representative of the Palestinian people had the effect of stalling the peace process and led to international condemnation.

The contradiction of Arafat’s being kept under house arrest, being deprived of resources, and yet at the same time being required to exercise control over disparate militant groups involved in attacks on Israeli civilians, was not lost on the international community.

His critics will stress his slowness to deal with the findings as to corruption among elements of the Palestinian Authority, and his alleged autocratic style of leadership. Nevertheless, he will be seen as the uniting figure of Palestinians in their struggle, the iconic figure around whom different groups organised, the person who established the Palestinian struggle internationally, and undoubtedly the major founding figure of a viable, independent and sovereign Palestinian state”, he added.”

Umm. Did Michael D. Higgins just excuse Yasser Arafat for any responsibility in the killing of Israeli civilians by Palestinian “militant groups” during the latter part of his leadership of the PLO? Actually he has a point there, albeit a narrow one. But when did the killers of civilian men, women and children become militants not terrorists? Or is such neutral language only reserved for exponents of political violence outside of Ireland?

At the same time Michael D. Higgins, then an opposition spokesperson for Labour, turned out in Galway for a candle-lit vigil in Arafat’s honour with some, um, interesting folk:

“The Islamic community of Galway marked the death of the Lion of Ramallah with a candlelit vigil in Shop Street last night, organised by the noted anti-war activist, Nuria Mustafa Dunne. Co-religionists from Egypt, Palestine, Iraq and Pakistan met in solidarity, with activists from the Ireland-Palestine Solidarity Campaign, a representative from Amnesty International… the Irish Centre For Human Rights in NUI Galway along with Michael D Higgins, Mary Kelly and Green Party City Councillor Niall Ó Brollachain to bear witness to the fallen scourge of Zionism.”

So, Arab terrorist-turned-statesman good; Irish terrorist-turned-statesman bad? Interesting world view Michael D.

You were also pretty unhappy about Hamas, the Palestinian political party, being added to the European Union’s list of terrorist-supporting organisations in 2007, as this Oireachtas Report makes clear:

Deputy Michael D. Higgins: Several questions immediately arise from the Minister of State’s response. …Does he agree that the credibility of the European Union is badly damaged by, in the first instance, the clearing house decision that added Hamas to a proscribed list, with no accountability to this Parliament or any parliament in Europe, and, following that, its failure to recognise the result of the election, which was acknowledged as free and fair by several international bodies, including the Carter Centre? All we had from the EU was a mealy-mouthed statement expressing gratitude that no lives had been lost in the course of the election. It is absolutely absurd to suggest it is dealing with all the parties. What contact has the EU with Hamas?

The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Dermot Ahern, suggested in a previous reply to a question on this issue that he had made the Irish position known. However, we do not know what the Irish position is. Is it our position not to recognise the results of the election? Is it our position not to have any contact with Hamas? Is it our position never to remind Israel that as an occupying force, it is in breach of international law by cutting off vital structures for Gaza?”

You go for it, Deputy Higgins. Free Occupied Palestine! But don’t mention Occupied Ireland. Oh, you sort of did.

Deputy Michael D. Higgins: Hamas is more advanced than the IRA.”

You what now?

Okay. Deep breadth.

In fairness, I find little to disagree with when it comes to the political, social and economic views of Michael D. Higgins. However the absolute obsession of many on the Irish Left with Palestine I don’t get. I find my sympathies lie more with Israel as I see in that state (or perhaps I should say people?) something much more empathic to an Irish person given our similar histories and nature. Admittedly those sympathies are harder to sustain when one see’s the deplorable treatment of the people of Occupied Palestine under Israeli rule and the failure of Israel to engage in any meaningful process towards making peace with their most immediate Arab neighbours. But that is a discussion for another day.

What irritates me is the utter hypocrisy of many on the Irish Left (and some on the Right) who will gnash their teeth and cry tears of blood for a foreign people under an occupation in a foreign land. But Irish people living under an occupation in Ireland? Eh, no thanks. We’re not into that sort of thing.

Yes, Higgins facilitated the scrapping of Section 31 in 1993, the piece of Irish government media censorship that banned Sinn Féin from the airwaves (and which probably added another decade and a few thousand more casualties on to the Northern conflict as Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael and Labour protected their own electoral backs). But the removal of that anti-democratic law was a necessary part of the unfolding Peace Process, not some selfless benevolent act on behalf of the political establishment.

Sorry, but when all is said and done, hearing Michael D. Higgins question others on legitimizing acts of political violence is more than even I can stomach. To paraphrase the late, great Carl Sagan:

“If we like them, they’re freedom fighters… If we don’t like them, they’re terrorists. In the unlikely case we can’t make up our minds, they’re temporarily only guerrillas.”

Gay Mitchell: Blue Shirts And Blue Bloods

Way back in the 1960s a question was famously asked: “Is Fine Gael really Irish?”

It has subsequently become a part of the lexicon of Irish politics and looking at the latest headlines one wonders if it needs to be asked again. From a report in the Irish Independent:

“FINE Gael last night moved to limit the fallout from Gay Mitchell’s latest gaffe when he suggested the country join the Commonwealth in return for a united Ireland.

The party stressed such a decision would be a matter for the Government, rather than the president.

Mr Mitchell said he would be “positively disposed” towards the idea if it came in return for a united Ireland.

“If it was the price of a United Ireland I would be disposed towards the idea,” he said during Today FM’s presidential debate.”

Okay. If the Gay Mitchell fan club at the Indo group is reporting this story it must be bad. And it is. Ireland Online is awash with commentary and opinions, most of it entirely negative. If Mitchell’s PR handlers were looking for headlines and an internet buzz they’ve got it. Just the wrong kind.

However, for those of us who’ve studied Gay Mitchell’s politics this latest revelation is anything but. In fact I wrote about Mitchell’s fondness for eccentric, crypto-Unionist opinions some time ago. In 2006 at the Fine Gael Collins-Griffith Memorial at Glasnevin Cemetery he called for a “long overdue” discussion on the role of the British monarch in Ireland and stated his willingness to envisage the British head of state becoming the Irish head of state in the event of a Reunited Ireland (Fine Gael have now removed this report from their website. I wonder why?). This view was repeated again but this time altered to the slightly more palatable context of an All-Ireland state joining the British Commonwealth, with Ireland accepting the role of the British head of state as the head of the Commonwealth (which means we wouldn’t cease to be a constitutional republic which is what he originally seemed to advocate).

This year, 2011, Mitchell talked about the Irish and British head of states becoming joint heads of state of “Northern Ireland” in a BBC interview reported in the Irish Times.

All this talk of monarchs, queens and aristocrats is no real surprise from the Fine Gael candidate. The “champagne and cappuccino” circles Gay Mitchell moves in while being a member of the European Parliament have made him familiar with the nobility of “Old Europe”. After all he is a member of the secretive Roman Catholic lay organisation, the Dignitatis Humanae Institute, whose patron was the late Archduke Otto von Hapsburg, the former Astro-Hungarian sovereign, whose titles included:

“By the Grace of God Emperor of Austria; King of Hungary and Bohemia, Dalmatia, Croatia, Slavonia, Galicia and Lodomeria; King of Jerusalem etc.; Archduke of Austria; Grand Duke of Tuscany and Cracow; Duke of Lorraine, Salzburg, Styria, Carinthia, Carniola and Bukowina; Grand Prince of Transylvania, Margrave of Moravia; Duke of Silesia, Modena, Parma, Piacenza, Guastalla, Auschwitz and Zator, Teschen, Friuli, Dubrovnik andZadar; Princely Count of Habsburg and Tyrol, of Kyburg, Gorizia and Gradisca; Prince of Trent and Brixen; Margrave of Upper and Lower Lusatia and Istria; Count of Hohenems, Feldkirch, Bregenz, Sonnenburg etc.; Lord of Trieste, Kotor and the Windic March, Grand Voivod of the Voivodeship of Serbia etc. etc”

Hmm, no wonder the idea of mixing with the Blue Bloods looks so attractive (and familiar) to this particular Blue Shirt.

Meanwhile it seems only one candidate in the race for Áras an Uachtaráin is actually prepared to be an All-Ireland head of state, without the input or permission of foreign royalty. According to the Irish Times:

“SINN FÉIN’S Martin McGuinness has said he wants to be the president of “all of Ireland’s 32 counties”.

Speaking during a presidential debate hosted by Today FM and The Last Word presenter Matt Cooper, he said it was wrong as an Irish citizen that he did not have a vote in the presidential election.

He cited the example of Tyrone captain Peter Canavan, who is supporting his candidacy, who said that none of the players who took part in the 2003 All-Ireland final between Tyrone and Armagh had a vote in the presidential election.

Mr McGuinness said he did not subscribe to the “partitionist-type mentality” when asked by Cooper what he would change about the southern Irish character. As a republican, he would represent all of Ireland.”

However not everyone agrees with that:

“Independent candidate David Norris said as a result of changes to articles 2 and 3 of the Constitution, it was not possible for the president to be president of all of Ireland. He said he would be the president of the 26 counties, but he would, like President Mary McAleese, build bridges with the people in the North.”

Oh dear. Norris, come on. What has happened to you? Or were you always like this and our liberal views just blinded us to the reality of your opinions?

Meanwhile Gay Mitchell gets his facts wrong again:

“Fine Gael candidate Gay Mitchell said the Constitution was clear that the president was the president of the State which is the Republic of Ireland.”

Actually, Gay, I think you’ll find that there is no such place as the ”Republic of Ireland”. This state is Éire, in the Irish language, or Ireland, in the English language. Its legal status is that of a republic. Only the British call us the “Republic of Ireland” to deny us the status of the nation of Ireland.

Ahh. Sorry. Now I understand you, Gay. I truly do.

Liberal Britain, Or Don’t Mention The War. The Irish One, That Is.

The British left and the issue of Britain’s continued colonial presence in Ireland. A natural match you may think? Er, think again. In fact Britain’s liberal and socialist groupings (and voters) have been just as virulently nationalistic when it came to the issue of Ireland as any on the right. Introduce the word “Irish” into a conversation with even the most ardent left-wing, Palestinian-loving, class conscious, wrap the red flag around me politico in Britain and you’re liable to be given a lengthy rant on the justifications for British rule in Ireland. Oh, it will be well qualified, with lots of talk about “past mistakes” and “old grievances”, yet one just has to wait for that inevitable magic word: “but…”.

So to the Guardian newspaper and a Ronán Bennett article that seems to have caused outrage amongst the liberal readership of that most liberal of British press institutions.

“Martin McGuinness was one of the bogeymen, one of the so-called men of violence. There was a time when there could be no talks with the men of violence. …In the pre-ceasefire mental arrangement, McGuinness had a special standing: he was raptor-in-chief in an organisation of blooded hawks. Even if Gerry Adams might like to talk, McGuinness would not.

In times of war it’s understandable, though rarely useful, to attribute to your enemy all the qualities of the beast. But we have come a long way since then. The IRA campaign is over. Sinn Féin is firmly established in Northern Ireland as the second largest party, behind Peter Robinson’sDUP. In the Irish Republic, the latest Irish Times-Ipsos MRBI poll now also puts Sinn Féin second. McGuinness has been elected three times to Westminster and five times as an assembly member. In 2007 he was nominated deputy first minister in the Northern Ireland assembly. He is now running for president of Ireland.

The Fine Gael environment minister, Phil Hogan, said recently that putting McGuinness in charge of the state “would leave us looking like a banana republic”. Ireland, he continued ominously, would be “denuded of serious levels of corporate investment within 24 months”. His panicky warning coincided with the return of McGuinness and Robinson from the US with further promises of investment for the North. Far from having investors running for cover, McGuinness is well regarded in New York and Washington.

As president, McGuinness knows he would be the representative of all the republic’s interests, even those to which he may be adverse. But he long ago absorbed the need for political inclusiveness. Even at the height of the Troubles he said he would talk to anyone at any time without preconditions in order to find a way to bring the conflict to a close. When negotiators eventually agreed to meet, they found him affable, straight-talking and easy to get along with. They were impressed. Against all expectation, they even liked him.

With arch republican foe Ian Paisley, McGuinness formed a close and apparently warm working relationship.

Principled and effective, McGuinness’s popularity with his supporters comes from a mix of integrity, straight dealing, and a refusal to be compromised by the trappings of success. Born into a large, poor Derry family, he has avoided airs and graces. Nor does he share the Cherie Blair fear of descending again into poverty that she has tried to use as a licence for her and her husband to milk it while they can. Like all Sinn Féin’s elected representatives, McGuinness gives his public salary to the party and takes an average wage in return. His nose remains firmly out of the trough.

The violence in Ireland was appalling. McGuinness has already said that much of it was unjustifiable. But it was not the work of killers addicted to killing. What happened in McGuinness’s home town of Derry in the summer of 1969 was an Irish spring, a spontaneous rebellion against a regime that discriminated and excluded from power a majority of its own citizens. Many reached for the gun in those strange, paranoid, idealistic and angry days. Martin McGuinness was one of them. But he put the gun down and he persuaded the British government to address the issues that sparked the conflict. The North is a better place because of him. The republic can be too.”

Cue outrage. In Ireland most believe the Long War is over. In Britain they are still fighting it – even the liberals.

Eoghan Harris, Free Speech And The Art Of Dissemblance

So, the Anglomedia’s “Anyone But McGuinness” campaign has taken a bit of a twist with claims that ex-Workers Party apparatchik and Sindo columnist Eoghan Harris has been threatened in an anonymous phone call to the Independent News and Media offices. According to the report from the organisation:

“A caller to Independent News and Media, purporting to be a supporter of Sinn Fein’s Martin McGuinness, referred to an article Mr Harris wrote entitled ‘Ten Reasons not to vote for Martin McGuinness’.

“Eoghan Harris should be shot for what he is writing about Martin McGuinness and I think I am the man to do it,” said the caller. The article was carried in last Thursday’s edition of the Dubliner magazine, which comes out with the Evening Herald.

Security staff at Independent newspapers said the caller had asked to speak to Mr Harris but made the threat when the writer was unavailable. The call was reported to Store Street Garda station and investigating officers said they were taking the matter very seriously.”

Hmm. Judging by the Comments left by readers underneath the article the Gardaí seem to be the only ones taking it seriously. Aside from Harris himself. Scepticism mixed with derision seems to be the overwhelming view.

Of course any threat to any journalist is to be condemned. The person who made this alleged call is an idiot. If it happened it was wrong. As wrong, in fact, as a media establishment which speaks with one voice and one opinion, and where a plurality of political views is simply denied. Ironically enough, as we will see, Eoghan Harris’ former associates in the Workers Party (many of whom are now in the Labour Party) were experts at denying free speech to those they disagreed with. The Sunday Times examined this in 2009 in a lengthy extract from “The Lost Revolution: The Story of the Official IRA and Workers’ Party”, a detailed history of Ireland’s would-be communist revolutionaries:

“In the summer of 1977, Paddy Woodworth, a member of Sinn Fein the Workers’ Party (SFWP), was waiting for a bus in Ballsbridge when Eoghan Harris and his wife Anne pulled up in a car and offered him a lift. During the drive to Bray, Harris disclosed to Woodworth his concerns about some members of the party leadership.

Woodworth recalls Harris explaining that the party’s primary problem was that there were “green people [ie nationalists] still in charge”, including Tomás Mac Giolla, Seán Ó Cionnaith and Tony Heffernan, and until “we get rid of these people we will never make it as a communist party”.

Already sceptical of Harris’s influence,Woodworth was amazed at what he was hearing. Such an attempt to influence a party member against figures in the leadership clearly contradicted the party’s tenets of democratic centralism. Woodworth recalls feeling “really outraged, because we took the thing about being in a Leninist party very strongly, meaning if you were in a branch in Galway and I was in a branch in Clare I would not tell you about my views about Mac Giolla . . . otherwise you were factionalising”.

On arrival in Bray, Woodworth discussed Harris’s comments with John McManus, a GP and former Labour party member, who had joined Sinn Fein in Galway, where his wife Liz was a party activist. A few days later, Mick Ryan called to see Woodworth at the Project Theatre,where he worked. He was questioned about the allegations and, aware of Ryan’s seniority within both the Official IRA and the workers’ party, stressed that Harris had not meant “eliminate” when he had spoken of getting “rid of” the three men.

A letter requesting that Harris explain his accusations of members of the leadership being opposed to the “further development of our policies” resulted in two replies. In the first Harris, claimed that he was not a member of SFWP (an associate explained to the party’s ruling body “that the denial of membership was to protect his job” at RTE).

In a second communication, Harris denied making the remarks, attributing them to a “third party”.

A leadership delegation was authorised to inform him that any “recurrence would lead to him being disciplined”.

The fact that Harris was only reprimanded for a contravention that would normally have been cause for expulsion was a sign of his influence, but the incident also aided those opposed to him. Woodworth was later scolded by an RTE producer and SFWP member for having “single-handedly put a stop to political progress in the party for two years”.

SFWP had several secret branches including the Ned Stapleton cumann, named after a communist activist who had died in January 1973. Its members included Harris and Oliver Donohue, another RTE employee. Cynics dubbed it the Led Zeppelin cumann. There was a strong macho tendency among members, and several were involved in the martial arts.

The penchant for secrecy and conspiracy alarmed Woodworth. “It was very creepy. I frankly found . . . the Harris faction a far more frightening phenomenon than the IRA itself,” he said. The branch was active within RTE, with Harris as its central figure. Secrecy was essential because in the 1960s, concerns within RTE about the left-wing tone of some of its programmes led the station’s director-general to introduce strict restrictions on political involvement by the station’s employees.

Harris’s winning charm and sharp polemic gained him many admirers, and a nickname: “the thin blue flame”. However, even among fellow adherents there was some amusement at the leather jacket-wearing Harris’s regular declarations that he was a “Stalinist”.

While some found such dramatics ridiculous, for others Harris was the “driving force in the party”.

Despite a tougher government line, RTE continued to attract such radicals as employees, several of them with backgrounds in the official republican movement. Among those joining the station in 1974 were Patrick Kinsella, a former Dublin Comhairle Ceantair member, and Charlie Bird,who was told about a research job with Seven Days by Harris.

Former SFWP-aligned student activists, including former USI News editor Joe Little, were also gaining employment at the station. Harris had been on the interview board that had hired Gerry Gregg, a 22-year-old University College Dublin graduate who became enthusiastic about SFWP politics. “[I] wouldn’t have jumped until I went into RTE and the battle was joined; you were either Stick or Anti-Stick,” Gregg said.

Other graduates were less susceptible to the party’s charms. Fintan Cronin joined the station in 1980, and recalls being approached shortly afterwards in Madigans pub in Donnybrook by Harris and asked if he would become involved with SFWP. Cronin was “suspicious of the Official IRA” but “not unsympathetic to their ideology”. When he informed Harris that he was somewhat “cynical about what they were at” he recalls the blunt response: “We need cynics like we need a hole in the head.”

The Ned Stapleton members had an influence on RTE’s output that belied their relatively small numbers. Producers Caden and Murray were also attached to the SFWP structures in a workplace that did not officially allow party political activity.

A number of SFWP members and supporters were active in the NUJ, including Padraig Yeates, Gerry Flynn and Woodworth, and there was mutual suspicion between them and what were termed the “Harrisites” concentrated in the Workers’ Union of Ireland (WUI).

Within RTE, the NUJ branch also contained a number of people formerly close to the Stickies, such as journalists Bird, Kinsella and Rodney Rice.

Today Tonight would become the station’s current affairs flagship, marked by a campaigning style of investigative journalism.

From its inception the show was associated with people seen as sympathetic to SFWP, among them producer Tish Barry, and programme editor Joe Mulholland from Donegal, a Francophile who had a keen interest in Marxist politics and knew some of the SFWP leadership, including Garland.

Although Mulholland never committed himself to movement discipline, he did recruit a number of young reporters and journalists to the programme who were closely aligned with the Ned Stapleton cumann. These included Gregg, who joined Today Tonight in October 1980, Barry O’Halloran, Joe Little, David Blake Knox and later Una Claffey.

Although a wide variety of views and strong personalities were represented within the programme staff, which also included Brian Farrell, Mary McAleese and Olivia O’Leary, cynics christened the programme Stickyline, in reference to the show it was replacing, Frontline.

SFWP influence within RTE was not confined to Today Tonight, and indeed Harris and other party members never worked directly on the programme. But critics complained that SFWP members were regularly interviewed on Today Tonight without their party affiliation being revealed. With SFWP members also involved in the production of RTE’s most popular programme, The Late Late Show, it was not unusual for activists to make appearances as members of the studio audience there as well. The H-Block hunger-strike issue led to bitter conflict. There were major arguments among the team that worked on Today Tonight about the prominence the issue should be given. SFWP members were quite clear that “some force had to stand up against the tom-tom drums” of nationalism, and that those politicians who opposed the strike, such as Gerry Fitt, should be given prominence.

During the first hunger strike a non-SFWP-aligned team — Forbes McFaul, Paul Loughlin and Fintan Cronin — had produced a programme that included hunger striker Leo Green along with victims of IRA violence. Belfast native Mary McAleese was a reporter on Today Tonight during this period and felt that her efforts to discuss the mood within Northern nationalism were ignored.

McAleese already knew and was hostile to the Officials, having met many of them while working in the Long Bar on Leeson Street, which had been owned by her father. Her cousin John Pickering was a Provisional IRA prisoner in Long Kesh and eventually joined the hunger strike himself. Though McAleese was not sympathetic to her cousin’s politics, she felt that any debate on the issue was dismissed as propaganda for the Provos.

The SFWP faction, who thought the coverage of the first hunger strike had been too sympathetic to the H-Block campaign, were unhappy with some of the coverage of Bobby Sands’ death. After these reports, McFaul and Cronin were taken off the story, and a team made up of Una Claffey, Joe Little and Tish Barry sent to Belfast in their place. In June 1981, Little and Barry produced Victims of Violence, which concentrated on the results of Provo and INLA paramilitary activity and was eventually nominated for an Emmy award. After that the attention given to the hunger strikes by Today Tonight declined notably.

Cronin contended that “the coverage was determined by a Workers’ Party line, it was as simple as that”. Other critics of the party nicknamed the show “Today Tonight: the Workers’ Programme”.

IN late 1985, Labour minister Ruairi Quinn told Hot Press that he believed that the Official IRA existed and that its army council had an influence over the leadership of [what was by then called] the Workers’ party. Worse was to come in March 1986, when a Today Tonight special examined the funding of paramilitary organisations in the north. The first segment of the 90-minute programme dealt with the Provisional IRA, INLA and loyalist groups. The second concentrated on the Official IRA’s connections to racketeering in the building industry, forgery and fraud.

RUC Chief Superintendent Bertie McCaffrey stated that it was the OIRA that had “started off” paramilitary involvement in racketeering and that they were “still very, very active in that sphere”. McCaffrey added that he believed some of this revenue was going “towards the political end of things”.

Brian Feeney, an SDLP politician, charged that “the Official IRA is engaged in the same activities as the Bolsheviks were before 1917, when Stalin was in charge of raising money for them . . . it was considered perfectly legitimate, before 1917, to stage robberies; [they] were called revolutionary expropriations”.

As no Southern WP figure was prepared to take part, Seamus Lynch appeared at short notice on a link from Belfast to respond to the allegations. A visibly nervous and annoyed Lynch alleged that the programme was the result of internal RTE politics. He stated that Pat Cox, the programme’s presenter, was on the verge of joining the newly formed Progressive Democrats, producer Mick McCarthy was a “republican sympathiser” and researcher Cronin had been seen in the company of “known” Provos in Belfast. Lynch denied any knowledge of the Official IRA and said anyone with evidence of illegality should contact the police.

When Cox was appointed general secretary of the Progressive Democrats shortly afterwards, Eamon Gilmore asked: “If RTE allows the general secretary of the Progressive Democrats to make a programme about the Workers’ Party, will they now accord the same opportunity to Sean Garland to make a programme on the Progressive Democrats?”

The Today Tonight programme had been conceived in early 1985 by a group of RTE staff who argued that a Workers’ party “freemasonry” had stilted programming and silenced opponents “through an orchestrated campaign of gossip and innuendo”. The programme was initially to focus solely on Official IRA racketeering; but in the interest of balance, a concern of Mulholland’s, it was decided that other paramilitary groups’ activities would also be examined.

The project provoked interest outside RTE, with government representatives assuring the journalists of their full backing and the Department of Justice offering them armed protection during their research. McAleese, by now a former Today Tonight journalist, organised a meeting between Cronin and Charles Haughey, the Fianna Fail leader, who expressed pleasure and surprise that the programme was emerging from a “nest of Sticky vipers”.

In the north, assistance came from an eclectic range of sources, including the SDLP, sections of the RUC and the Provos. While the WP’s enemies were adamant that the Officials’ activities should be exposed, particularly relishing the fact that this was to be done on a programme strongly associated with the party, leading WP members made polite inquiries with Mulholland as to why he was allowing such a programme.

Less politely, Cronin’s files in RTE were rifled through and his bank statements stolen; threatening calls were made to his home and to his mother, and RTE received bomb threats. As a precaution, very little of the programme’s research material was kept at RTE. The researchers were also followed, Cronin recalls: “At one stage Pat Cox and myself were in Buswells [hotel] and they had a guy walking up and down outside and [he] was identified to me as a member of the Official IRA. Another time a guy with a big bushy beard came up to us and feigned to pull out a gun.”

The team was also harassed while in Belfast: phone calls were made late at night to the reporters’ hotel rooms and files were stolen from producer Mick McCarthy’s room. On one occasion the research team hastily travelled back across the border after the RUC informed them they had intelligence that their lives were in immediate danger. The pressure had an effect, Cronin recalls: “We did think they would shoot us.”

The day before the programme went out, Cronin found himself face to face in the RTE canteen with a number of men whom he knew to be members of the Official IRA. The group had obviously been invited to lunch by sympathisers among the station’s staff. The same day Cronin’s wife’s workplace received a bomb threat.

The RUC was helpful to the programme makers, although one high-ranking officer informed them that a superior had instructed him that his interview — in which he accepted that much criminal activity previously attributed to the INLA had in fact been carried out by the Officials — could not be broadcast. The claim of an “unspoken RUC policy not to embarrass the Officials” by not naming people as members in court, was broadcast, but other claims, including one that armed OIRA men were sometimes allowed through RUC roadblocks, were not.

Cronin developed the view that the OIRA was “a protected species” in Belfast and that “their criminality was often overlooked by the NIO [Northern Ireland Office] and RUC”.”

Eoghan Harris, a champion of press freedom.

Gay Mitchell And The Ukrainian Businessman

Politico reveals Gay Mitchell’s representations to the EU on behalf of a Ukrainian military dealer.

“Presidential candidate Gay Mitchell made a representation to the EU Commission in 2009 on behalf of a controversial Ukrainian aviation businessman who supplied Congolese armed forces with military aircraft. The businessman is attempting to reclaim planes confiscated by Ukraine’s government in 2001.

Of 76 submissions made by Mr. Mitchell to the EU Commission and Council since 2009, this is the only one made on behalf of an active private company. While no suggestion arises that Mr. Mitchell acted improperly in making the submission, perhaps unwittingly, Mr. Mitchell advocated on behalf of a Ukrainian citizen implicated in transfers of military equipment to African war zones. Mr Mitchell has not replied to questions on the matter put by Politico several weeks ago.

East/West Alliance, the ”Dublin-based” company to which Mr. Mitchell refers, is a brass-plate company with no staff in Ireland. The company has no office at the Ranelagh address to which it is registered. The company’s listed bank account is an offshore account in Parex Bank in Riga, Latvia.

Hugh Griffiths, an arms trafficking and aviation expert at Stockholm International Peace Research Institute said in an interview: “It is deeply ironic that European officials are pressuring the Ukraine to return cargo planes to someone involved in transfers of conflict-sensitive materials to African war zones. The planes, if released to Liovin by Ukraine, would seem destined to be used by, or sold to, actors in African conflicts with poor human rights records.””

David Norris – One Revelation Too Many?

The sheen has certainly gone off Senator David Norris, someone I used to have enormous respect and admiration for (even if his bonhomie demeanour and scattershot approach to politics did at times did grate on one’s nerves). We’ve had the scandal over his much debated opinions on paedophilia, pederasty and the age of consent expressed in a 2002 Magill magazine interview a number of years ago which came back to haunt him with the announcement of his candidacy for the presidency.

Then there was the revelation of a 1997 letter containing a plea of clemency for his Israeli former partner, Ezra Nawi, who was convicted by a court in Israel of committing statutory rape on a teenage Arab-Israeli boy (though there seems to be some dispute over when exactly Nawi became a “former” partner). That has been followed by the news that there were in fact several letters, none of which Norris is prepared to make public (due to “legal advice”), despite repeated demands to do so.

Fast on the heels of that shock came another blow with the uncovering of Norris’ extraordinary attempts to get an Irish passport for his then lover, the Algerian-born Tevfik Akin. Akin’s application for citizenship was turned down in 2006 but Senator Norris’ repeated lobbying led to him gaining Irish nationality.

We’ve had the somewhat less surprising claim from Victoria Freedman, the biographer of David Norris, that he had a six-month affair with one of his students in Trinity College, an as yet anonymous twenty year old American man.

And during the campaign itself we’ve had several accusations from politicians and journalists of intimidation and threats being made by the staff members of the Norris campaign towards those they view as enemies or insufficiently pro-Norris (which the candidate himself has disavowed).

Now we have the latest furore to envelop the Joycean scholar, as the Irish Independent claims that he was in receipt of a disability allowance for 16 years despite being a full-time (and fully salaried and expenses paid) member of Seanad Éireann. According to the story, published via the Belfast Telegraph:

“Independent presidential candidate David Norris received a disability payment for 16 years while out of work as a Trinity College lecturer — even though he was a “full-time” senator for the entire period.

Mr Norris confirmed to the Irish Independent last night he received the payment, but could not specify exactly how much it was worth.

He also refused to say what his disability is.

The 67-year-old Joycean scholar worked as a tutor and lecturer in Trinity between 1968 and 1994, when he took the disability payment and stopped working in the college.

The payment began in 1994 and ended in July of last year, when he reached pension age. He has since received a pension from the college, worth around €2,500 a month.

Mr Norris… also receives a senator’s salary of €61,073.

He also said he spent his annual leader’s allowance — the €23,383 Independent senators receive in unvouched expenses every year — on his Seanad work.“

It’s hard to see where Senator Norris can go after this. With anyone else, and this amount of troublesome revelations, a simple retirement from the public eye would have happened long ago. Unfortunately the Senator is not simply anyone. At least, perhaps, in his own view of himself. To see a basically decent and honest man brought down by his own overweening ambition and hubris is chastening indeed.

There but for the grace of God…

McGuinness Won The Audience But Did He Win The Debate?

The audience poll results are in from Vincent Brown’s Presidential Debate on TV3, and though entirely unscientific, they show Martin McGuinness way out in front, leaving the rest as also-rans. It remains to be seen whether the same will be true at the ballot box in a few weeks time but undoubtedly some optimistic news for a candidate receiving saturation opposition from the political and media establishment in Ireland.

As for the debate itself, Brown did sterling work marshalling what was at times a chaotic spectacle, with the candidates eager to get their points across. His quizzing of the candidates, particularly McGuinness, Norris, Davis and Mitchell, was well done and an exercise in the sort of informed journalism that we have come to expect from him. If you missed the broadcast watch it here.

Gay Mitchell. Handbags And Tantrums

In the debate between presidential candidates Gay Mitchell and Martin McGuinness featured on Newstalk’s Dunphy Show, the jury seems to have come down firmly on the side of McGuinness. On several occasions a hyper-aggressive Mitchell was caught out with factual errors and repeatedly tried to spin the debate, at one point bizarrely claiming that he was not “afraid” of Martin McGuinness. In fact the only person who should have been afraid was perhaps the presenter Eamon Dunphy as Mitchell took several opportunities to attack him, including threats of reporting him to the Broadcasting Commission for alleged bias.

The most telling moment of the debate was probably the reaction of the Fine Gael candidate on the live video feed from the studio, when he was confronted by the tweet directed towards McGuinness by Paul Kehoe, the Fine Gael government chief whip: “Why would you need your salary when you have the proceeds of the northern bank at your disposal.”

Mitchell put his head into hands in a gesture of despair.

It seems that the Eurocrat lifestyle of champagne and cappuccinos has hasn’t left him entirely forgetful of what can happen in a democracy. But then he was never particularly in favour of that either. Not for the “important” decisions, anyway.

Gay Mitchell. The man who put Martin McGuinness in Áras an Uachtaráin?

Fine Gael: The Terrorists We Embrace And The Ones We Don’t

Fine Gael minister Phil Hogan has declared that there is no place for terrorists in Áras an Uachtaráin. According to the Irish Independent:

“Environment Minister Phil Hogan has said that US multinational companies would be “appalled” if Martin McGuinness of Sinn Fein was President and that Ireland’s competitors for foreign direct investment would “not be slow to whisper about a terrorist in the Park”.

Mr Hogan has told the Sunday Independent: “Putting Mr McGuinness in charge of this State would leave us looking like a Banana Republic… (which) could denude Ireland of serious levels of corporate investment within 24 months.”

In a trenchant attack, the Fine Gael minister has also expressed concern that a “constitutional crisis” could arise, should further information in relation to the “murky” past of Mr McGuinness emerge while the former Provisional IRA leader was President.

He said: “The absence of an impeachment process within the Irish Constitution means that we could be heading for an unprecedented stand-off — where both Houses of the Oireachtas would vote ‘no confidence’ in Mr McGuinness but he would refuse to resign.”

The spotlight will now turn to the Taoiseach, Enda Kenny, and to the Fine Gael candidate, Gay Mitchell, to establish whether they support the views of the Environment Minister.”

Wow. Some intervention there, Phil (even if one detects a note of panic in it). No terrorists in the Áras, hey?

So here is a picture of President McAleese, President of Ireland, whose official residence is Áras an Uachtaráin, with the British terrorist leader Jackie McDonald. McDonald is senior member of the UDA (aka UFF), a British Unionist terrorist organisation in Ireland which killed or wounded up to a thousand Irish men, women and children between 1971 and 2007. Of this number at least 80% were non-combatant civilians.

And here is another picture, this time it’s President McAleese’s husband, Martin, also with McDonald. Boy, he does get around.

Hmm. Maybe when career politician Phil Hogan (close friend of disgraced former FG TD Michael Lowry) said no terrorists in Áras an Uachtaráin he meant no Irish terrorists? The British ones presumably being not so bad?

Ah, Fine Gorm. You old incorrigibles. Still hankering back for the old days of forelock pulling inside the Big House. “Paddy” works in the kitchens as his master’s servant, not like them rebellious natives out in the bogs.

So here, out of interest, is Jackie McDonald’s recently expressed view on Martin McGuinness’ candidacy for president, via the BBC:

“Jackie McDonald has forged a relationship with the current president Mary McAleese and her husband Martin.

He said that unionists who accept Mr McGuinness as deputy first minister would be wrong to oppose him being a candidate.

He said he thought that Mr McGuinness had “massaged the truth” about his IRA past but was now “a man of peace”.

Mr McDonald is the leader of an organisation which murdered hundreds of people during the Northern Ireland Troubles.

However during the peace process, he has been a regular visitor to Áras an Uachtaráin, the home of the president and her husband.

Speaking to the Good Morning Ulster programme, Mr McDonald said that, while he understood well the concerns of victims, such demands were misguided and it would be impractical for Mr McGuinness to “tell the truth” in isolation.

He added: “If they are talking about telling the truth, will the British government tell the truth? Will everybody tell the truth?””

Will Fine Gael tell the truth? The truth surrounding the cover-up of the 1974 mass murder by British state-sponsored terrorist of Irish citizens on the streets of Dublin and Monaghan? Or is that one truth too far, Phil?

From Saor Doire To Saor Éire

Martin McGuinness, who is looking more presidential with every photo op (have you seen Michael D. Higgins lately, not to mention poor David Norris?), was given a rapturous rally in his hometown of Derry on Thursday as he embarked on four weeks of arduous campaigning. According to the Irish Times:

“The Sinn Féin candidate, under election posters proclaiming “Martin McGuinness 1 – The People’s President – Uachtarán na nDaoine”, was given a rapturous send-off by hundreds of supporters in the Bogside area of Derry.

One of the speakers at Mr McGuinness’s send-off was Rev David Latimer.

The minister of the First Derry Presbyterian Church overlooking the Bogside, Rev Latimer has in recent years become a close personal friend of Mr McGuinness and he spoke in praise of the presidential candidate at the Sinn Féin ardfheis in Belfast earlier this month.

Others who attended yesterday evening’s Bogside rally included Waterside parish priest Fr Michael Canny, members of the Bloody Sunday families and the manager of Derry City Football Club, Stephen Kenny.

A promotional video for Mr McGuinness’s presidential campaign was broadcast on a big screen at Free Derry Corner…

Clips were shown of the Sinn Féin politician meeting national and international dignitaries and conducting media interviews.”

Last night’s Late Late Show debate will be the real test of the candidates. More of this anon.

Martin McGuinness. The People’s Choice?

Irish journalist and media lecturer Harry Browne writes in CounterPunch on the presidential election, the panic gripping the Irish elites, and the reasons why Martin McGuinness may become the people’s president:

“Last Monday, the Irish state paid €1.465 billion (about $2 billion) to senior unsecured boldholders in Bank of Ireland, as part of its obligation under the blanket guarantee of Irish banks issued by the government three years ago this week. This was, according to the Bondwatchwebsite that is keeping a grim tally of these things, part of a total of €4.3 billion paid this month by a government that continues to impose crippling austerity measures on its people.

That’s a lot of bread being taken from our mouths and fed to international financiers. You’d think we’d be up in arms about it. But Ireland’s chattering classes love, above all other things, an election, and next month’s presidential election in the Republic is offering one hell of a circus to distract us from the beggaring of the people by the state, in partnership with the unholy troika of the EU, IMF and European Central Bank. The story of how we are bleeding into the coffers of the bondholders barely merits a mention.

The three frontrunners, according to bookies’ odds, all come, broadly, from the Left. Poet and politician Michael D. Higgins has been holding up the left wing of the Irish Labour Party almost single-handedly for many years — so many years that his age, 70, is seen as his chief vulnerability. No one calls him “Higgins”: he is always, mostly affectionately, “Michael D.” Left-wing campaigns have usually been able to count on his support even when his party leadership was not so sure; the slight downside, from campaigners’ point of view, was the passionate but long and rambling speech he was sure to make at your event. Few who were there will ever forget the night in 1989 when hundreds of solidarity activists filled the National Concert Hall to welcome Nicaraguan president Daniel Ortega. Michael D. seemed like he would burst with emotion as he made the main welcoming address, but it was anyone’s bet when it would finish so that Ortega could speak. (When Ortega did speak he was so dull that we were instantly nostalgic for the interminable passion of Michael D. — only the sight of Ortega’s beautiful wife Rosario Murillo sitting on stage in her spectacular blood-red dress kept our eyes from shutting.) As a government minister looking after the arts and communications for a few short years in the 1990s, Michael D. achieved real popularity with the constituencies who benefited from his department’s largesse.

Senator David Norris has never achieved even that degree of actual political power — the senate here being largely an irrelevant talking shop. A witty, entertaining lecturer on Anglo-Irish literature in Trinity College — I can recall him literally dancing across classrooms when I attended his lectures on Joyce in 1985 — his fame and popularity came about because he is gay. Back in those days it was often remarked that if you asked most Irish people what they thought about homosexuality, the reply would be: “Oh, I like that David Norris, he’s lovely.” Norris was more than lovely, he was important: he took the legal case to Europe that struck down Ireland’s anti-gay legislation, and despite his British colonial background (he was born in what was then Leopoldville in the Belgian Congo) and previous status as a leading “Irish friend of Israel”, he has moved steadily to the left over the last two decades, especially on international issues. He might even be counted as a friend of CounterPunch, having launched my book about activists who bashed US planes at Shannon Airport, Hammered by the Irish, not long after he launched my wife Catherine’s poetry collection, A Bone in My Throat — and must be one of only a handful of people who would and could do both those launches exceptionally well. Like Michael D., he might be accused of liking the sound of his own voice, but in Norris’s case there may also be an addiction to the gales of laughter that often interrupt it.

Norris would, it is claimed, be the world’s first openly gay head of state, and much of the independent left has supported him. But as an independent he has had to chase nominations from members of the parliament and from county councils, and in the midst of his efforts over the summer, controversy erupted. First, an old interview surfaced in which he appeared to favour, at least in principle, the ancient-Greek idea of a young man being sexually initiated by an older one. Then there emerged letters that he wrote in 1997 pleading for clemency for an ex-partner who was convicted in Israel of statutory rape of a 15-year-old boy. The revelations in recent years about the Catholic Church have made many Irish liberals very illiberal indeed when it comes to sex with minors: there is no room, it seems, to consider the facts of a particular case, no room for debate about the principle and age of consent. In this context it is quite extraordinary that Norris has nonetheless, and just barely, got himself nominated in time for this Wednesday’s deadline, and that he generally leads in the opinion polls; but it could yet get ugly. And it would appear that his campaign’s revival at the last moment was at least in part inspired by the desire of some right-wing and anti-republican elements to support a candidate who could block the real political giant in this contest, the late-emerging Sinn Féiner Martin McGuinness, the race’s second Derry candidate, who has stepped down as deputy first minister in Northern Ireland so he can run for president in the Republic.

There is no doubt that the austere, largely teetotal McGuinness was a hugely important member of the ‘republican movement’, the formulation that takes in both the IRA and the Sinn Fein political party. When I first saw him speak in the late 1980s he was a compelling voice for an understanding of the Irish nationalist struggle in terms that were more broadly anti-imperialist, and revolutionary-socialist. Since those days he has clearly stood beside Gerry Adams in guiding the ‘peace process’ — veteran journalist Ed Moloney, in a definitive Irish Times article, recalls IRA hardliners who could say with confidence, “If Martin is for it, then so am I.” His own personal peace process progressed to the astonishing point where in recent years he formed a warm governing double-act, dubbed “the Chuckle Brothers”, with the Protestant bigot Ian Paisley. His candidacy has been endorsed by many of the sort of people the IRA tried to kill during the Troubles.

But since the Southern media is allergic to the realities of Northern politics, and given that the office of president isn’t a policy-making one anyway, the focus of the campaign will clearly be on unpicking McGuinness’s past, all the better to revive the partitionism and distaste for Northern nationalists that tend to dominate Dublin’s middle class. This revival is by no means sure to discredit and defeat him, since the distaste is far less prevalent among the population at large. The outgoing president, Mary McAleese, came from a Northern nationalist background. When she ran for the office in 1997, an influential newspaper columnist described her as a “tribal time bomb”, but this did not stop her from being easily elected then, and returned unopposed in 2004, all the time working to strengthen relations between her alleged tribe and the opposing one of Ulster unionism.

There is nonetheless a big difference between McAleese, previously a lawyer and academic, and McGuinness, who is seen, rightly or wrongly, as a leader almost without parallel of the Provos’ quarter-century armed campaign. To elect him, so that he would be president at the centenary of the Easter Rising in 2016, would be arguably to accept the proposition that his journey from insurrection to the corridors of power is directly analogous to that of the generation of Irish freedom-fighters whose struggle led to the establishment of the State. He and his supporters spend a lot of time mentioning Eamon De Valera and Nelson Mandela, ‘terrorists’ who became the very embodiment of their nations. The assertion sticks in the craw of a middle-aged Dublin establishment who, while they have grown accustomed to Sinn Fein’s rise, have never liked it. After all, if there was even a little legitimacy to the Provisional IRA’s struggle on behalf of Northern nationalists against an oppressive British-backed state, then our children might well ask us what exactly we did during the war.

On the other hand, those of us who did nothing may gain some small measure of satisfaction, a sense of striking our first blow for the Republic, by voting for Martin McGuinness. The discomfort McGuinness brings to the political and media elites could, in these ugly days of crushing orthodoxy, be all the more satisfying. For all his good qualities, Michael D. Higgins, after all, represents one of the parties in the awful Dublin government. David Norris may be a noble friend of CounterPunch as well as a friend of Dorothy, but in this election — politics indeed making strange bedfellows — he is also on intimate terms with the reactionary Sunday Independent, where commentators who cheered the invasion of Iraq will tell us that McGuinness is an unacceptable man of violence.”

That promise of a “measure of satisfaction” may be one that many voters find hard to resist come election day.

Panic Grips The Sycophants Of The Golden Circle

Ah, the fun of watching a terrified media establishment in Ireland working itself up into a panic at the prospect of Martin McGuinness being elected to Áras an Uachtaráin by the Irish people (the ignorant, lazy and mentally unstable Irish people, according to John Waters – who probably shouldn’t have a vote in the first place, hmmm, John?).

As the defenders of the Golden Circle have grown increasingly hoarse so too have their stories grown increasingly desperate. The latest, from the Herald, is a work of such tortured logic that it almost defies belief.

“MARY McAleese’s bridges with the Orange Order will be burnt if Martin McGuinness makes it to the Aras, a liberal Orangeman has warned.”

Okay, when you’ve stopped sniggering at the use of the phrase “liberal Orangemen” read on.

“John Laird said all the good work the outgoing President had done in building links with the Orange Order and other Protestant institutions in the north would be in jeopardy under a McGuinness presidency.

“He has never apologised for the past crimes of the IRA, he has not sought atonement for the murder of Orangemen during the Troubles,” Mr Laird said.

“In the past I had some trouble with Mary McAleese especially when she appeared to compare Protestants to Nazis and Catholics as Jews in Hitler’s Germany. That caused a great deal of hurt in our community. But to be fair President McAleese reached out to the Orange tradition, she invited our bretheren to Aras an Uachtarain, she visited an Orange hall near the border. There is no doubt that she tried to understand and respect our culture.”

Asked about the possibility of Martin McGuinness as president, Mr Laird said: “Those bridges Mary McAleese sought to build will be burnt. Even someone who holds liberal views within the Orange Order like myself could not bring myself in taking up any visit by a President McGuinness.”

So… According to the media establishment here, the pampered sycophants and buffoons of the Golden Circle elites, Martin McGuinness is not suitable for the office of Uachtarán na hÉireann because he is not from Ireland (i.e. the Republic), he is a foreigner, a nationalist, a member of Sinn Féin, a former Volunteer of the Irish Republican Army, a sectarian bigot, an unwanted reminder of the past, and generally just everything the Establishment hates and rejects.

On the other hand, members of the British separatist minority in Ireland, British Unionists, who through violence and the threat of violence have thwarted the democratic wishes of the vast majority of people living on the island of Ireland for the last century are welcome in the Áras? Even members of an avowedly sectarian and racist organisation, an anti-Irish organisation, like the Orange Order? Seriously?

Sometimes reading an Irish newspaper is like reading some fantastical work of magic realism where things are not quite as they should be. An Ireland that you know, that you are familiar with, but somehow different. Somehow wrong.

Which really does make one ask: where do the men and women of the Irish journalistic classes come from? And how on earth did they arrive at the attitudes they have? Is it simply a case of our news media being made up of the same folk who control our political classes: the same families, the same schools, the same clubs – the same Golden Circle?

Democracy in the Saorstát? Maybe, for some: but most of us live in a Daorstát. Under-payed, over-taxed, struggling to survive, and dictated to by those who have reduced our nation to its sorry condition through their sheer bloody greed and venality.

So how will you vote? For the Golden Circle? Or against the Golden Circle? The choice is yours.

The Sunday Independent – The Real Threat To Irish Democracy

Today’s Sunday Independent newspaper makes for incredible reading. There is one subject and one subject only; Martin McGuinness. And one clear strategy: keeping him out of Áras an Uachtaráin by any means necessary.

The vitriol directed towards McGuinness is simply astonishing. I don’t think I’ve ever read anything quite like it before, at least outside the pages of a right wing British tabloid newspaper. Almost every page, every news report, every commentary focuses or touches upon opposition to the Sinn Féin nominee in one way or another.

It’s as if the newspaper has become one single organism with one single purpose: destroying the McGuinness campaign for president. Everything is devoted towards that end. More astonishing still, outside of any legitimate concerns or questions about Martin McGuinness’ past history (political or military), is the almost pathological hatred for the man that the writers display. It’s like some strange atavistic switch has been thrown which has allowed the very worst instincts of the Irish media establishment, the incestuous club of journalists and opinion makers, to be given free reign.

This is Old Ireland, the Ireland of Partition and the Free State, the Ireland of the monster that was the Celtic Tiger, given full voice and expression. And it is terrifying to behold.

So, is this the Ireland we want? A nation of Regressives, holding us back, keeping us in servitude to our alleged “betters”? Are the hacks and cronies of the Sunday Independent to become the arbiters of our democracy the ones who will decide where our nation begins – and where it ends? Will we allow these mountebanks and charlatans, these pornographers of mediocrity and shallowness, to be the ones who will decide who is and isn’t Irish: who is and isn’t entitled to be of our Republic?

The choice is ours, not theirs. So let us choose for ourselves. And send a message to the Establishment elite who bartered away our nation’s sovereignty and independence to save their own worthless necks. You may have stolen our state: but you shall not steal our votes.

British Journalist Lectures The Irish People On “Democracy”. Laugh Now Or Laugh Later?

One presidential candidate, two journalists and two conflicting opinions.

The first journalist is Nick Cohen, a regular contributor to various centre-left publications in Britain, including the Guardian and Spectator. In a lengthy article for today’s Observer he writes:

“All the countries the euro crisis is ravaging can recall a time of dictatorial rule and revolutionary violence. Franco’s fascistic regime clung on until 1975, late in the day even by the lax standards of the 20th century. Portugal’s 1974 revolution against the Salazar dictatorship was a glorious moment of civil disobedience, but the carnage the revolution accelerated in the old Portuguese colonies of Mozambique, Angola and East Timor continued for decades. Assassination attempts and naval mutinies preceded Greece’s revolution against the military junta in 1974 and terrorist groups carried on operating in Greece into the 21st century, as they did in Spain.

The first example of the “new politics” emerging from the wreckage of the eurozone is the campaign for the Irish presidency by Martin McGuinness, the butcher’s boy who became head of the IRA’s northern command. Ireland wasn’t a dictatorship in the 1970s, although the gerrymandered Protestant statelet in the north and the Catholic conservative republic in the south were not democratic models anyone else wanted to follow. The violence in Ireland was worse than anything southern Europe saw, however. Between 1968 and the signing of the Good Friday Agreement in 1998, more than 3,600 were killed, around 2,000 of them by McGuinness’s IRA.”

Ah yes. Nothing like having a British journo lecturing Irish people on our history or our democratic institutions. Because Ireland’s democracy was (is, Nick?) so much more inferior to Britain’s. Oh, hold on. That “gerrymandered Protestant statelet in the north”? Now, whose creation was that again? Erm. Let me think. It begins with a “B”. Big place. Near Ireland. Never very good at recognising other peoples’ rights or freedoms. Oh, it’ll come to me eventually.

Well, anyway, back to young Nicky.

“… the early polls say that far from viewing McGuinness as the candidate from the psychopathic edge of the lunatic fringe, Irish voters are taking him seriously. A scandal about his views on underage sex has stymied the chances of the best of his rivals, David Norris, who did more for Ireland than the IRA ever managed when he overturned the anti-homosexuality laws. Whatever virtues the rest possess, the failure of the economic system has discredited them, as it has discredited democratic politicians across the west.

One should no more go to men who once bombed businesses for an economic policy than seek the advice of the Taliban on the emancipation of women, but when the untutored and forgetful listen to Sinn Féin they hear plausible critiques of the European Union’s unbearable demands for debt repayment.”

Poor wee Nick, where has he been these last twenty years? He does realise that Martin McGuinness is the democratically elected Deputy First Minister of the North of Ireland and has been for quite a while? Actually, Nick’s a British journalist discussing Ireland, so the answer is probably no. But he has more pearls of ignorance wisdom to impart

“Too many Dublin journalists don’t demand answers but repeat the conventional wisdom that McGuinness and Gerry Adams deserve praise for becoming men of peace. Praise would indeed be due if the IRA’s leaders faced the past truthfully.

Their war was futile because the power sharing and cross-border institutions the IRA settled for in 1998 had been on offer since 1974. Sometimes, it seems as if the only person stating the obvious is the Guardian and Observer’s Ireland correspondent Henry McDonald, but his point needs repeating: the ranks of the IRA were filled with the world’s slowest-learning murderers. It took them a generation to realise their dream of uniting Ireland by violence was a malign fantasy.

As the remnants of the IRA rise in Ireland and nationalist anti-immigrant parties rise across Europe, we may be about to learn that recessions rarely bring anything but change for the worse.”

Really? So the last remnants of the British colony in Ireland would have democratized itself without the armed struggle of the Irish Republican Army? But it had decades to do so without an armed struggle by the IRA and it simply never happened: in fact things got progressively worse. Can you explain that, Nicholas? As for “Sunningdale for slow learners” (which is what Nicky means), sorry, but who brought down the 1974 Sunningdale Agreement? Why, none other than the British Unionist minority in Ireland with the connivance of right-wing British nationalists in the British government and military and Intelligence services.

Someone, get this man a history book, please.

By the by, would this be the same Nick Cohen, British journo and commentator who signed and vigorously promoted the Euston Manifesto? The same document described as a “Pro-Imperial Left Manifesto” and condemned by many liberal and centre-left writers and thinkers? By the hokey, I do believe it is! Yon Nicholas Cohen, he who supported the war in Iraq and numerous other “Western” escapades that involved lots and lots of, well, killing. But all in pursuit of political aims Nick agreed with. So that’s okay then.

Our second journalistic opinion is from Duncan Hamilton in the Scotsman and thankfully this time it is free of self-righteous hypocrisy:

“THE decision of Martin McGuinness to seek election as the next president of Ireland deserves to be recognised as a big moment in the history of modern Ireland.

Can a man who was second in command of the Provisional IRA in Derry at the age of 21, now seriously expect to be elected as president under a constitution he opposed as legitimate?

The answer to that lies in the hands of Irish voters. What is already apparent, however, is that the early predictions that McGuinness had no chance have given way to a sense that he just might pull it off. An RTE poll this week had him winning, and his early odds at the bookmakers of 33-1 have been slashed to 3-1, making him second favourite. More than that, his advantages in this campaign are real – he is the only real opposition anti-establishment candidate given that the others have close links to parties which are viewed with contempt by many Irish voters. In the wake of the banking crisis and amidst claims of political corruption, that matters. Interestingly, because Sinn Fein has only 17 TDs (Members of the Dail) and Senators, McGuinness needed the support of three more independent TD’s even to get on to the ballot. Having now reached the threshold of 20 with support from out with his own party, he can legitimately claim to be a candidate capable of reaching across party boundaries.

First, let me declare something of a bias. I have met McGuinness a few times – both in Boston when I was studying and more recently in Belfast as part of a Scottish Government delegation in 2007. I was hugely impressed by him. He is intelligent, engaging, funny, positive and politically astute.

The truth is that the people of Northern Ireland have accepted McGuinness as their deputy first minister for the last four years and before that as minister for education for the best part of a decade. That doesn’t mean everyone has forgiven and forgotten, but it does mean that he has a legitimacy of a democratic mandate and a track record of exclusively political leadership. He is now described by people like Jackie McDonald, the leader of the UDA, as “a man of peace”.

Critics also claim his election would send out a negative message to the international community. But this is a man praised by President Obama for his “outstanding leadership”. Do you see any other candidates in the race with that endorsement? McGuinness cites the fact that he has been invited to the White House by three US presidents and to South Africa by Nelson Mandela. Does that sound like a man the international community can’t deal with?

Yes, the role of president is largely symbolic and ceremonial. But that is exactly why the election of McGuinness might be a vital next step for Ireland. The Sinn Fein agenda and policy mix has always been viewed with suspicion. Electing McGuinness would be to embrace his positive and vital role in the peace process without adopting the full Sinn Fein agenda.

Ultimately, it may be a step too far for Irish voters. That is a matter rightly and entirely for them. But to the outside world, the feral reaction of some in the Republic to this candidacy serves only to present a country still not at ease with its past. If men like Ian Paisley and Peter Robinson can accept the conversion of McGuinness, maybe it is time that the people in the south did so too.”

Is anyone in our national media establishment listening? Probably not. They’re too busy reading the hysterical ravings of Nick Cohen who they’ll no doubt be quoting at length and soon in a newspaper near you.