Charging Kneecap with terrorism offences brings out the inner republican in us
My mind went back to Thatcherism and Nicky Kelly and even Bobby Sands. I finally reeled myself in when I got to the Penal Laws and 800 years of oppression.
I'm not even a fan of Kneecap. I think they're sad panto nationalists, glorifying terrorism in tricolour balaclavas, from the safe position of not being directly affected by it. They do one thing on stage and say another off it, so to me, their authenticity is in question. They're the Wolfe Tones in tracksuits, as the punk poet Jinx Lennon said.
But my defensive reaction to Kneecap's Liam Og O hAnnaidh being charged with terrorism offences for waving a Hezbollah flag was probably natural for someone who grew up in a republican house in the fraught 1980s and 1990s.
I'm also a strong supporter of free speech and expression, even when I find that speech or expression deeply wrong - which I definitely do, in O hAnnaidh's case.
Police said he's accused of displaying the flag 'in such a way or such circumstances to arouse reasonable suspicion he is a supporter of a proscribed organisation."
Charging a young fella with serious terrorist offences in a situation like this is excessive heavy-handedness. Granted, there's a certain revolutionary cachet to it, for the rapper. But the reality is, he won't get into the USA if he has a terrorism conviction. That would be the end of Kneecap's American ambitions.
However, that's their law, as anyone thinking of doing something like this in front of a crowd of thousands in Britain should know. Their courts will decide next month.
Anyway, the whole case is an overall part of the culture battle around the Israel Gaza war that I find excruciating. It all seems petty palavar compared to the nightmarish realities of what's happening there on the ground.
The tinfoil-hat theory that Israel rigged the Eurovision voting is more such nonsense. Some can't fathom how Israel came first in the public vote, so it must be a conspiracy. This is despite the fact the EBU says the voting system is one of the most advanced in the world, independently checked and verified by a huge team of people.
RTE has requested a breakdown in voting numbers from the EBU and TD Paul Murphy urged the national broadcaster to review the votes. Why would Israel bother, and to what end? The more obvious explanation is voters liked Yuval Raphael's entry. She's a survivor of the October 7 attacks, who sounded like Celine Dion singing a Bond theme.
The aim ultimately is to ban Israel from the contest over its military action in Gaza.
It all seems so silly, but dark events this week put a new complexion on the cultural conversation around it. First of all, the world watched in horror as thousands in Gaza were brought to the brink of death by Israel's refusal to lift its 11-week blockade.
Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu said he only bowed to pressure to ease it as allies 'could not tolerate images of mass famine.'
Then on Wednesday night, two staff members of the Israeli embassy in Washington DC were shot and killed while leaving an event at a Jewish museum.
The victims, Yaron Lischinsky and Sarah Milgrim, were a couple in their 20s due to be married. They were leaving an event in the Capital Jewish Museum when the suspect opened fire. He yelled: 'Free, free Palestine' when arrested.
We're at a dangerous point in the world. The reality is we're all going to have to tread carefully when it comes to discussing this most contentious issue of our time.
Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest news from the Irish Mirror direct to your inbox: Sign up here.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Daily Mirror
an hour ago
- Irish Daily Mirror
Trump's deal with Europe sucks for Ireland and what the EU is importing
Europe is poised to embrace a surge of American vehicles and energy following Brussels securing an eleventh-hour trade agreement with Donald Trump, barely averting a transatlantic trade war. The pact, revealed on Sunday, means the European Union will now encounter a uniform 15 per cent levy on exports to the United States—cutting in half the 30 per cent rate previously threatened by the former president. In return, Mr Trump stated the EU had consented to eliminate tariffs completely on US goods entering the bloc. Nevertheless, in stark contrast to the EU's negotiations with the UK over Brexit, where complex matters such as implementing trade obstacles across the Irish Sea arose, this time Ireland's interests appear to have been relegated to the lower end of the bloc's priorities. How significant is Trump's agreement with Europe? Under the arrangement, the EU will purchase $750bn (£558bn) of energy from the United States and pledge an additional $600bn in investments into the world's largest economy. "We are agreeing that the tariff straight across for automobiles and everything else will be a tariff of 15pc," said Mr Trump, who has consistently advocated for Europe to purchase more American oil and gas. "We have the opening up of all the European countries, which were essentially closed. You were not exactly taking our autos, you weren't exactly taking our agriculture. Now it is open. "It is open for our companies to go in and do a good job." Europe is set to welcome a wave of American cars and energy after Brussels clinched a deal (Image: Getty) Mr Trump stated the agreement would provide Europeans with enhanced access to US pickup trucks and SUVs, with commerce between the two economies now poised to grow. "They [Europe] are going to make a lot of money with this," he said. "I think everybody is. And it is going to bring a lot of unity and friendship." Financial markets have been rattled in recent months by Mr Trump's fluctuating trade policies, with the tariff standoff generating uncertainty for global investors and governments. What does Trump hope to achieve with his Europe trade deal? Ms von der Leyen said the objective of the agreement was to "rebalance" trade flows between the two sides. "The starting point was an imbalance, a surplus on our side and a deficit on the US side, and we wanted to rebalance that," she said. "We wanted to do it in a way that trade goes on between the two of us, across the Atlantic. "The two biggest economies should have good trade flowing: rebalance, but enable trade on both sides, which means good jobs on both sides of the Atlantic, which means prosperity on both sides of the Atlantic. That was important to us." The agreement excludes steel and aluminium, which will still face higher tariffs of 50 per cent when exported to the US. British exports of the same materials face a reduced tariff of 25 per cent. Bad for Ireland: drugs firms left out of deal This exclusion could prove a major blow to Ireland, which depends heavily on its pharmaceutical exports. "We have to have them made in the US," Mr Trump declared. "We want them made in the US. Pharmaceuticals are very special. "We can't be in a position where we are relying on other countries. Europe is going to make pharmaceuticals, drugs and everything else for us too, a lot, but we are going to make our own." The Irish government has voiced concerns that looming US tariffs could deal a major blow to the country's pharmaceutical sector, which employs around 45,000 people. Ministers are particularly worried about the impact on multinational drug companies based in Ireland, following signals from Washington that the pharmaceutical industry may be the next target in a broader trade clampdown. While the EU's new trade agreement with Donald Trump excluded pharmaceuticals from immediate tariff hikes, the US has made clear that it still plans to address the sector in separate talks. Claus Vistesen, from Pantheon Macroeconomics, stated that the agreed 15 per cent tariff was less severe than many feared, and unlikely to alarm financial markets-but he warned it would still dent both the EU and US economies. "Trump is finding a middle ground," Mr Vistesen commented. "He is still shooting himself in the foot. US consumers will pay higher prices, and growth in trading partners will be lower than it would have otherwise been."
Irish Examiner
3 hours ago
- Irish Examiner
Irish Examiner view: This may be the dawn of the clean energy era
Even five years ago, we might have looked at the head of the UN saying 'the sun is rising on a clean energy age' with the shining hope it deserved. It wasn't blind hyperbole last week. Some 90% of renewable energy projects are now cheaper than their fossil-fuel equivalents. A surge in solar adoption has been important, and the huge focus on low-carbon manufacturing from China has played a significant role. This should probably be seen as dovetailing with the country's policies around control of the materials vital for green energy. And yet, in the face of the continuing rise in global temperatures, the struggle to encourage accelerated adoption of EVs (bearing in mind the vast number of petrol and diesel vehicles still on the roads), and a US administration that is turning the clock back on renewable energy, one might almost see António Guterres's statement as a pyrrhic victory. Still, we could look at this in five years and comment on a remarkable turnaround. Guterres is right to point out that a great deal of energy insecurity revolves around fossil fuels, and so they are susceptible to the price shocks that accompany wars, invasions, and other geopolitical events. He said: 'There are no price spikes for sunlight,' he said. 'No embargoes for wind.' Let us look on his speech last week with the positivity it deserves. When it comes to hope, like the Irish phrase says: 'Níl sé marbh fós.' It isn't dead yet, even if it is a faded shade of what it once was. Real battles are for resources History might, to adapt Jacob Field, seem like one bloody thing after another, but it seems to have been an endless resource grab. For example, the ceaseless scramble for raw materials led to the carving up of Africa by European imperial powers in the 19th century and the same of the Americas from the 15th century on. Water is likely to be a future issue, but right now the flashpoints centre around things like rare earths (vital for semiconductors) and minerals that are essential for modern technology and green energy. The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), subjected to what we would now class as crimes against humanity by Belgian interests in the 19th century, is as important to minerals as Saudia Arabia has been to oil. The EU has been working to secure contracts there. America, however, has been improving its position, attempting to capitalise on ongoing violence sponsored by DRC's neighbouring countries such as Rwanda. This as Donald Trump still harbours ambitions of annexing the mineral-rich Canada and Greenland, as well as securing a treaty with Ukraine that allows for US exploitation of its mineral wealth. All that, though, still leaves every country trailing well behind China. China, having spent the last few years greatly expanding its influence through its belt and road initiative, has extensive footholds in Africa now, between mining contracts and loans to fund infrastructure. It has mining operations around the world, and some 60%-80% of minerals — including cobalt (batteries) and uranium — are within its orbit. This has been seen as a security threat by some Western powers, and the thought is not without merit (even if some Western countries would do the same if they could). What if China simply cut off Western access to the minerals under its control? Or hiked all the prices? How long would existing supplies for advanced and everyday technology last? China has typically taken the long — some would say very long — view when it comes to economics. It may well be the manufacturing hub of the world, but that doesn't mean it couldn't simply outwait the countries that have outsourced their manufacturing industries to its cities. We live in a globalised world, despite the best efforts of some, and the phone in your hand or pocket with the cobalt in its battery serves as a reminder of just how delicate it is and how interconnected we all are. What's your view on this issue? You can tell us here Making dreams come true When it comes to connections, despite our own travails at home, it is good that we, as a country, still remember that there are those with greater needs than our own. As reported by Imasha Costa in today's edition, there are now six children's homes in Sri Lanka that have been funded by Irish people. All are named after the towns that support them. Initially founded by Wicklow-Wexford TD Brian Brennan, these began in the aftermath of the 2004 tsunami that devastated swathes of Asia. They have since grown in number. While Sri Lanka itself has its dangers — Costa notes in a first-person piece that emigration is common, extreme poverty is endemic, and she herself was injured in an attempted robbery there in 2023 — it is something of a balm to know that there are oases of calm for children. The country faces significant economic and political challenges, yet some of the boys and girls who have spent time at the homes have gone on to bigger and better things. They are described as 'exceptionally talented … they have incredibly massive dreams'. Mol an óige agus tiocfaidh sí. Read More Letters to the Editor: Blurred line between right and wrong
RTÉ News
4 hours ago
- RTÉ News
Tariffs aren't good news but it could have been much worse
While the crucial US EU trade deal announced this weekend does bring certainty for businesses, there are significant drawbacks. Fundamentally, tariffs are negative for trade. The US is a significant export market for Ireland, and many sectors now face duties of 15% which did not exist last year. The biggest issue is pharmaceuticals, which are the largest Irish export to the US, valued at €44bn in 2024. In recent months US President Donald Trump had threatened enormous duties on drugs imported by America. He had ordered a national security investigation of the pharmaceutical sector. Last night, Tánaiste Simon Harris said his understanding was that after the investigation concludes the maximum tariff which could be imposed would be 15%. So, while the threat of more damaging duties is averted, pharmaceuticals made in Ireland may well face 15% tariffs in future, up from zero at present. Another key sector for Ireland is the manufacture of computer chips. Like pharmaceuticals it has been subject to a separate investigation by the Trump administration and faced the possibility of punitive tariffs, but it too could face a 15% tariff after the investigation ends. Last night, European Commission President Ursula Von Der Leyen said there was no decision yet regarding spirits exported to the US. This is critically important to Ireland's whiskey industry which has already seen several recent closures. There had been speculation that sector could have been part of a zero-for-zero tariff arrangement, but that is not yet agreed. Another important area for Ireland is aircraft leasing. Ms Von Der Leyen said last night that aviation would be part of a tariff-free arrangement. For other EU countries the massive duty of 27.5% which was imposed on European cars now falls to 15%. Some existing tariffs will be folded into that baseline 15%, meaning it would be an all-in tariff. For example, it is expected to include the existing "most favoured nation" duties of 4.8% which exist currently under World Trade Organization rules. The fact there is a deal at all avoids the threat of a prolonged tit-for-tat trade war. It means businesses can plan, investments can be made, and job-creating projects can proceed. But exporters are already seeking Government support as they navigate the new reality of the Trump administration's tariffs. The EU-US agreement is not a trade deal in the usual sense. Normally these pacts are negotiated over years and culminate in a document running to hundreds of pages. What was announced yesterday was the framework of a deal with much detail yet to be finalised. Yesterday wasn't the end of the negotiations, but it was a milestone.
