Trying to bring to British viewers the rationale behind the recent spate of Unionist rioting, ITN decided to interview Michael Stone.
Michael Stone is a sectarian bigot who snuffed out the lives of innocent Catholics without compunction – often with the co-operation and collusion of the forces of the state – and who contributed absolutely nothing of a positive nature to life in the North of Ireland, Stone played no role in the development of politics here, or the Peace Process.
I was in Milltown Cemetery the day he attacked the Gibraltar funeral and consider myself fortunate to have escaped unscathed.
Further, Michael Stone was the reason why the two corporals were attacked at Caoimhín Mac Brádaigh's funeral and he must therefore bear the burden of responsibility for all the misery that arose as a result of that tragic episode.
I believe that if there had never been a day's trouble in all the history of the Six Counties, or if he had been born and raised in England, Michael Stone would still have finished up in jail as a murderer. None of this matters to Michael Stone.
As a convicted loyalist paramilitary, Michael Stone was entitled to get out of jail when the amnesty came along and the gates of Long Kesh flung open. Some time before that I asked the wife of one of his murdered victims what she thought of the prospect of the loyalists being released as part of the Peace Process and, just before she broke down in tears once again even though it was about ten years since Stone had murdered her husband, she said she could accept it if it helped bring about peace, and if he was the last to get out. Her compassion and dignity remains in stark contrast to the bug-eyed, strung-out, drug-ridden horror of Stone's subsequent welcome home reception in the Ulster Hall.
Incredibly, Michael Stone is held up as some kind of a hero within certain sections of the Unionist community, especially some of the young people. Perhaps that, in itself, is a commentary on the lack of vision, idealism and feel for the future that permeates the Unionist underclass. It is certainly why the television crew decided to ask Stone why the young people of his community were rioting across the city.
His reply was, ask them and listen to them. Listen to the Unionist working class.
The problem is that the Unionist working class – or however the instigators and the perpetrators of the recent rioting and sectarian onslaught may be described – is unwilling, or unable, to articulate what it is they want.
The BBC sent radio reporters scouring the Shankill to try and report what people were saying so that they could be listened to, only to be told that the Nationalists are getting everything because they rioted for years, so now the Unionists are going to do the same thing. One woman said that "it's all going to start all over again", presumably implying that streets will soon be razed to the ground again.
One man justified the use of petrol bombs following the re-routing of the march by saying that the Nationalists would definitely have thrown petrol bombs had the march not been re-routed.
No-one said what it was the Unionists rioters and sectarian attackers wanted.
We know Catholics are still suffering from levels of unemployment that are twice as high as that within the Protestant community. We know that millions of pounds have been made available for community re-generative projects in Protestant areas in the east and north of the city.
We know that Protestant, Ulster and Unionist culture is still as strong in the Six Counties as ever. So what is it all about?
Change, perhaps. Change that brings about a society in which both Unionism and Nationalism can live check by jowl, co-exist and allow for mutual development and co-operation. Personally, I don't believe that level of co-existence between the two main political traditions is possible within the Six County state and maybe, beneath it all, Unionism understands that, too.
Nationalism has had to come to terms with the fact that the long-cherished Republican ideal was not going to come about and that compromise was necessary to end the conflict and facilitate a resolution. Unionism has made no compromise, and only grudgingly accepted changes that were forced upon it. The original loyalist ceasefire of 11 years ago was announced only with the stipulation that it depended upon no change being made to the constitutional status of Northern Ireland.
Despite the ugly scenes, the violence, the intimidation and the sectarian onslaught of recent weeks, the blind men and women can see – and the dogs in the street know – that change is inevitable.
With the marching season now, presumably, out of the way for another six months or so, politicians can direct their energies to moving the Peace Process into a higher gear. Sinn Féin leaders have expressed confidence that the DUP will, eventually, sit down and do business; but if they don't will the British government be strong enough to work with Nationalists and any Unionists who are prepared to do so in order to achieve a just and equitable society?
Was the real purpose of the rioting and the sectarian attacks against Catholics to indicate the level of violence likely to occur should that route be taken?
We know from the experience of the years of conflict that the term 'mindless violence' doesn't really have any meaning.
Are we heading towards the situation where the forces of law and order will regularly be called upon to face down loyalist violence so that society can progress?
