Current Affairs History Politics

More Allegations In The Boston Tapes Controversy

Boston College Touts? Eh. no..!
Boston College Touts? Eh. no..!

The “Boston Tapes” controversy just grows murkier by the day. I’m not saying I fall on the side of the conspiracy theorists, by no means, but it’s hard to escape the conclusion that the inspiration for the whole project seems to have arisen from the confluence of several disparate elements, both academic and political (or indeed ideological). Journalist and author Paul Larkin has some more interesting articles over on Cic Saor: “Lord Paul Bew tries in vain to whitewash his Boston tapes…” and the follow-up “In February 2001 Lord Paul Bew signed an employment contract between Ed Moloney, Anthony McIntyre and Boston College…”. Meanwhile Anthony McIntyre’s website features two guest posts which make some very fair points though some of the conspiratorial assertions don’t stand up to close scrutiny: “THE WAR OF THE WORDS” and “THE DIRTY WAR IS FOUGHT ON MANY FRONTS”. As always try to read all the claims and counter-claims in order to make up your own mind.

From my own personal view I can say that what is needed is a cooling of the rhetoric being employed by all the interested parties. This applies first and foremost to Republicans of all strands who need to put their opinions faoi smacht. Former comrades taking bites out of each other serves no one but the common enemy of both. That’s your real conspiracy.

8 comments on “More Allegations In The Boston Tapes Controversy

  1. Sinéad Rohan

    Read about those details yesterday Sionnach on guardian and had suspicions about Bew, although perhaps this is part of “consensus politics” and deeply flawed “peace process”: academic greed (publishing industry led by financial gain) instead of historical research as legacy

    http://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2014/may/13/queensuniversitybelfast-northernireland

    Like

    • More from Ed Moloney “Boston College – The Truth-Telling Is On Its Way“. Personally I think he over-eggs some points (the Irish media isn’t and never was afraid of or sympathetic with SF or Republicans of any hue. The anti-Republican hostility was always in your face. This I know from personal experience). It is a mess isn’t it?

      Like

      • Sinéad Rohan

        A mess, alright. Wider population should educate themselves against Independent News & Media and the free state-revisionists within the main the Redmondite/European Unionist parties.

        http://www.amazon.co.uk/1916-History-Myth-Blood-Sacrifice/dp/1872993052

        Like

        • Watty Cox

          “Wider population should educate themselves against Independent News & Media and the free state-revisionists within the main the Redmondite/European Unionist parties.”

          Damn straight- but’s it’s laughable that the fossiled work of C. Desmond Greaves would
          have anything worthwhile to say in combating our pro-British elite.

          I suggest instead familiarising yourself with the invaluable output of Athol books –

          “The Irish Times: Past And Present” by John Martin,
          “Ireland’s Great War On Turkey, 1914 – 24” by Pat Walsh,
          “The Dublin/Monaghan Bombings, 1974, a military analysis”, by John Morgan, Lt. Col (Retd.).

          and of course, everything by Jack Lane and our greatest living historian,
          Brendan Clifford.

          Do not even THINK about commentating about Irish history
          without first making yourself intimately familiar with all Clifford’s superb publications.

          Like

  2. I agree with your sentiment Sionnach. Republicans are that busy biting each other they have become distracted as to who the enemy is and what their objectives are.

    Like

    • @WT, true. I agree with some points made by the 32CSM and the 1916 Societies, etc. but some of the rhetoric and accusations are ridiculous. All this “Shame Fein” nonsense does nothing to persuade people. One can accuse Gerry Adams of many things but being a British agent? C’mon! It just makes you roll your eyes. Likewise SF’s paranoia is completely OTT and reflects the party’s “Stalinist” tendencies.

      Personally if there was a centre-left, social-democratic Progressive Republican party pursuing a middle course between the two extremes it would have my support – and vote.

      Like

      • Ta cinnte. I have a soft spot for the 1916 societies but if they are to evolve they must take the blinkers off and focus on what they can offer not what others dont offer. There is a middle ground of republicans out there crying out for an alternative, but neither of the republican camps appeals greatly to these people. I personally wouldnt want me or mine to become embroiled in a slagging match with former comrades who have an alternative view of how to create unification.
        The republican opponents of Sinn fein fail to realise that by participating in the kicking of the shinners they are in effect kicking themselves. By all means criticise but remember who their real venom should be directed at ie the british who have engineered this state. Me personally i like to direct my anger at the people who want to crush irish republicanism full stop. As for republicans who i dont agree with, its best to just not speak to them…..a good old huff! ; )
        As for Adams? Older republicans fail to remember that Gerry was always a politician. Ask any soldier they will tell you they distrust their politicians. Because they tend to make decisions that soldiers dont like, sin e.

        Like

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: