[continued from Part I published here yesterday]
(3.1) And IRA violence – this time just the threat of it – is working again.
(3.2.1) The so-called ‘backstop’ was introduced to make certain there will not be a border – sometimes called a Hard Border – between Northern Ireland and the Republic.
(3.2.2) The 1998 Good Friday Agreement removed security checkpoints from the Irish border. This was a de facto uniting of the regions of the island of Ireland. Thus, it was a de facto concession to the IRA’s demand for Irish unity. Distinct countries do not have internal “hard” borders.
(3.2.3) The implicit threat is that a return to that Hard Border would reignite IRA violence.
(3.2.4) To all intents and purposes, a British government threatened its electorate with renewed IRA violence if the UK left the EU; and of necessity set up a border between the Republic and the North.
(3.2.5) And to add insult to injury, a smirking Leo Varadkar (who represents less than 16% of the Southern Irish electorate) and a smirking Michelle O’Neill (who represents less than 19% of the Northern Irish electorate) kindly assented to act as proxies for the PM/MP/IRA communiqué. Holding their metaphorically fizzing bombs in their hands, they insinuate: ‘If you don’t do what we want, you know what’ll happen.’
(3.3) So much for the lies about not giving in to violence.
(3.4) And everyone ignores the fact that the naked emperor’s knob is dangling in front of their noses.
(4.1) And violence is working for another group. It can’t be seen to work quickly, but, little by little, concessions and appeasements and allowances are being made.
(4.1.1) On 22nd of March 2017, Khalid Masood drove a car into pedestrians on Westminster Bridge. The attack killed four. More than 50 were injured. A police officer was stabbed to death attempting to protect MPs.
(4.1.2) On 22nd of May 2017, the Manchester Arena was bombed. 24 people were killed, 139 were wounded. More than half were children. The bomber was Salman Ramadan Abedi, a 22-year-old of Libyan ancestry.
(4.1.3) The 3rd of June 2017 saw the London Bridge terrorist attack. Eight people were killed and 48 were injured.
(4.1.4) In the usual faux sombre address outside Number 10, Theresa May gave the usual rhapsodising about enough being enough, and claimed that there had been “far too much tolerance of extremism” in the UK, and promised to step up the fight against Islamist terrorism.
(18.104.22.168) She proclaimed: “Everybody needs to go about their lives as they normally would. Our society should continue to function in accordance with our values. But when it comes to taking on extremism and terrorism, things need to change.”
(4.2) On 21st of March 2017, one day before the attack on Parliament in which a police officer was stabbed to death attempting to defend the place, Prime Minister Theresa May, in a gushing elegy on the death of Martin McGuinness, Passionato-ed:
‘Throughout his life, Martin [!] showed great determination, dignity and humility and it was no different during his short illness.
‘He was a passionate republican who worked tirelessly for peace and reconciliation and for the re-unification of his country.
‘But, above all, he loved his family and the people of Derry (sic) and he was immensely proud of both.’
This about a man, an IRA leader, who was responsible for the deaths of hundreds if not thousands.
(4.2.1) So much for taking on terrorism in order to defend “our” values. It was clear to anyone who had listened to her Martin McGuinness speech that her “Enough is Enough” rhetoric was as empty as Thatcher’s denunciation of the IRA.
(4.2.2) The Prime MinIster heroically proclaimed that the ideology of Khalid Masood, Salman Abedi and the London Bridge attackers “… is one of the great challenges of our time. But it cannot be defeated through military intervention alone.”
(4.3) It soon became clear that her annexes to military intervention were to be the usual concessions and appeasements and allowances. Little by little. It’s the old Prior-Thatcher-Major doctrine. The violence cannot be seen to work quickly, but the outcome is the outcome.
(4.3.1) In July 2016 Sayed Javid was appointed Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government – A couple of months after Sadiq Khan became London Mayor.
(4.3.2) On 30th of April 2018 – the year following Westminster, London Bridge, and Manchester – Javid was appointed Home Secretary.
(4.4) In The Lost World of the Suffragettes, broadcast on 11th February 2012 on BBC Radio 4, Historian Elizabeth Crawford said she ‘can’t help but sympathise’ with the suffragettes, but believed their methods were ‘… a rather dangerous way of going about things … We tend to underestimate the amount of damage that was done. At the time they wouldn’t have used the term terrorism, but with our experience of terrorism now, if one group is trying to coerce the state, I think we might view it rather differently.’
(5.1) I think I’ve made my point. Jim Prior made it for me.
(5.2) But where do we go from here?
[Ed: This essay comes in four parts. Part I was published here yesterday; Parts III and IV will be published on Monday and Tuesday.]