Partitionist Quiet at Provocative March

by The Singing Nun Wed Jul 13, 2005 16:45

Orangemen outline their cultural contribution to society in an attempt to build bridges...

by Singer Wed Jul 13, 2005 16:46

...though marches by trhe strand will undoubtedly cause havoc too...

by Seán Wed Jul 13, 2005 17:07

People down South are nice and cosy in their cotton wool bubble wrapped lives. Why should they interfere in matters that have nothing to do with them? Ignorance is bliss as they say. Until the majority of the electorate have a strong opinion on the unity of Ireland, southern politicians will only pay lip service to the North. Although they could always brainwash people into thinking they care about the Unity of Ireland but at the same time really only care about their own political life. Similar to the way De Valera did!
The Socialist party would need to get their own house in order before trying to solve the problems around the world. If Ireland was to be united into a 32 county Socialist Republic maybe then other peoples of the world would take note and copy our example.

by Barry Wed Jul 13, 2005 17:30

Youd swear from that Photo Gerry was getting stuck into the Ardoyne residents too . Indeed he was shown on tv coming the heavy with a fifteen year old kid defending his area . Its more likely his RUC mates which he and Gerry Kelly were openly laughing and chatting with only minutes earlier doused him with a bit of water in case someone set fire to him . Kellys rescuing of the British paratroopers last year hasnt been forgotten in Ardoyne and this time people were determined to resist the state regardless of Sinn Fein bully boys .

Nationalist and republican youths pulverised the RUC this time and even got a few grenades in amongst them . Dozens of RUC scum were hospitalised . In a few months time Adams and co will be sitting on the policing boards in full collaboration with PSNI/ RUC. Anyone resisting will be carted off to jail just like devalera did .

by The Singing Nun Wed Jul 13, 2005 17:40

If you knew anything about Ardoyne last year then you'd know that a small group of British soldiers were trapped amongst a group of youths and had been given no briefing by the NIO. The Brits had cocked their rifles and, shitting themselves, were about to shoot at the youngfellas. It was the IRA that stepped in and saved both the Brits, from being attacked, but more importantly the youths, from being shot dead.

No doubt there were certain 32 CSM members who became involved by gesticulating from their armchairs and muttering "sellout", but they weren't the ones saving the kids.

In case you've forgotten, Barry, British soldiers shoot to kill when attacked by missiles (even if it's bricks). Maybe the likes of you should take responsibility and be a bit honourable, rather than betraying your fellow republicans so pathetically.

by observer Wed Jul 13, 2005 17:43

Yeah, the people of Ardoyne really punished Kelly in the elections didn't they?

by peaceable Wed Jul 13, 2005 17:52

The comments above cannot go unnoticed for their hypocracy.

when are Sinn Fein going to hand over the murderers of Robert McCartney. It took only a matter of hours for Sinn Fein to condemn the terrorist atrocities in London (I know... don't laugh). It took a damn sight longer for comdemnation of the brutal butchering of Robert McCartney

by New SDLP Wed Jul 13, 2005 18:02

The sooner we get into coalition with the DUP the better. Then we wont have to deal with these terrible orange men any more!

Gerry for First Minister, if not Gerry Ian will do.

On to a united Ireland.

by Barry Wed Jul 13, 2005 19:56

A bit rich that saying the people you refer to as republicans have not only accepted British rule in Ireland but signed away political status for POWS in Maghaberry as part of their GFA deal . My own brother ( who somehow miraculously prized himself out of his comfy 32csm armchair ) was one of those exclusively 32csm aligned prisoners who had to go on dirty protest as a result of that betrayal . Republican prisoners now have basic segregation but an extremely punitive and restrictive regime designed to criminalise them . This current regime stemmed from the Steele report into Maghaberry . The Steele recommendations were heavily influenced by Gerry Adams who basically advised the authorities how to handle the prisoners when he made his submision to the authorities during their political consultation .

Thats not once but twice republican prisoners ,as well as the sacrifice of 10 hungerstrikers have been betrayed by the very same politicians who were policing the youth of Ardoyne and protecting the Brits yesterday .

And as Ive pointed out once this marching season is over theyll be signing up to the very RUC/PSNI they were defending .

I find the very idea of being lectured on betrayal by an apologist for Gerry Adams unbelievable . About as unbelievable as having it pointed out how murderous the capabilities of British soldiers are ( as if I didnt know). Thats one reason why I want those scum out of my country in the first place .

However the Sinn Fein leadership are on record saying they have accepted British rule and partition and are prepared to administer British rule well into the forseeable future . They are also on record calling for people to pass on information on those planning to attack the crown forces . They have even been congratulated by British and Irish ministers for helping foil attacks on crown forces . But its the likes of me betraying republicans ?

by s.reddy - fcto Wed Jul 13, 2005 20:25

does anyone seriously believe adams theatrical acts anymore. the bearded one will be in the ruc headquarters tonight viewing videos with the intentions of grassing up some of the young rioters.
no doubt he will get expenses to top up his british paid salaries.
history always repeats itself. in this case history has saved itself ink by just changing the surnames. exit gerry fitt enter gerry adams and gerry kelly.

by evil southerner Wed Jul 13, 2005 21:53

the people in the south don't like nationalism orange or green, wonder why?
butchering people don't help, and robert mccartney wasn't so long ago

by socialist Wed Jul 13, 2005 21:58

http://www.swp.ie/socialistworker/2005/sw239/socialistworker-239-13.htm

by Dónal Wed Jul 13, 2005 22:02

Though I don't support the CIRA,I think they deserve praise for making their presence felt yesterday in Ardoyne.

And I hope those youths who stood up to the bearded one and Kelly remember yeaterday and who came in and supported them!Lets see the RIRA aswell next time!UP THE RA!

by Southern cissy Wed Jul 13, 2005 22:31

The person who started this thread is quite right to point out the hypocrisy of southern TDs . Sean Crowe , Aenghas OSnodaigh and Marylou McDonald were nowhere to be seen in Ardoyne . The craven cowardly collaborating citizens from the south should have been in Ardoyne getting stuck in. And...hold on a minute . If they had gone to Ardoyne and stood alongside their fellow citizens wouldnt the two Gerrys just take stones and petrol bombs off them and denounce them as outside troublemakers ?

I dont see the logic in this post . First the writer insults people simply for living south of the border , accusing them of having a partitionist mindset into the bargain . Then he applauds Adams and co for protecting the British crown forces from harm . Has the normally slick Sinn Fein PR machine taken a holiday ? I suppose it is the twelfth after all .

by rooster Wed Jul 13, 2005 23:06

Nationalist and republican youths pulverised the RUC this time and even got a few grenades in amongst them . Dozens of RUC scum were hospitalised.

by Rick O'Shea Thu Jul 14, 2005 04:27

Rooster , youd almost swear there was something fundamentally wrong with young Irishmen throwing large rocks , petrol bombs and hand grenades at the PSNI the way youre going on about it .

Youre dangerously close to sounding like a senior Sinn Fein member if youre complaining about it you know .

by Amused Thu Jul 14, 2005 08:46

What a load of hate filled scumbags!! It's high time the six counties was towed out to sea and sunk without trace.

by By Any Means Necessary Thu Jul 14, 2005 12:53 Six Counties

People like yourself have ignored the state sponsored murders of innocents in order to subdue the republican resistance movement.

This thread is important as the parades issue is central to the solution to an end to the n.irish sectarian state, which still exists unfettered in its bigotory and hypocrisy.

North Belfast and Ardoyne in particular is an area which has bourne the brunt of british and unionist aggression.

The events on the 12th must be seen as a reaction to decades of RUC/PSNI militarism, unionist arrogance, loyalist lynch mob mentality and British government collusion in murders or indifference to pogroms and unionist supramacist mentality which underlies all the arguments for "law and order".

Post-GFA the irish citizens of N.Belfast demand protection from the sectarianism inherent in the six county establishment.

by Barry Thu Jul 14, 2005 14:19

it might be more appropriate to wish that fate upon multinational thieves who are stealing your resources rather than your fellow countrymen .

people arent born filled with hate . We are just highly unfortunate to live under foreign rule in our own country .There was an equally vicious civil war in the 26 cos which caused bitter division for generations . Young southern men used to throw grenades at the British crown forces quite regularly as well . In fact there are as many if not more people in jail in the 26 cos for republican paramilitary offences than in the north . Partition and the denial of Irish sovereignty , with all that entails is the root cause of the problem .
Such a statement is as equally nonsensical and partitionist as the ones making generalisations about people south of the border . People are very alike at the end of the day no matter which side of the border they live ..

by Pol Thu Jul 14, 2005 14:29

Surely if the south voted away the north by scrapping articles 2&3 of the constitution, the southern politicians have no real reason to concern themselves about the north. It would be a bit odd for the southerners to vote the six counties out of Ireland and then feel upset when the northern Irish get terrorised by Orangemen. You can't have it both ways. You can't tell the north to fuck off and then feel sorry for what's going on there.
If southern politicians don't pay attention to what's going on in the north it's only because it is now a foreign country, just as the DUP had always maintained it was.

by By Any Means Necessary Thu Jul 14, 2005 14:51

It is hard to take that comment seriously, unless of course you are on a course of irony pills.

The only thing that the irish citizens of the six counties want is national democracy and equality.

Are they foreign concepts ?

by Pol Thu Jul 14, 2005 15:49

No, what i mean is that if the six counties are in the UK, and the south has severed ties with them, surely it ought to be UK politicians who ought to be campaigning for their rights? After all, if the south has cut away the north, it is the UK that now has full jurisdiction over the place and everyone in it.
The original point was that southern politicians didn't condemn orange marches. What I'm saying is that their condemnation means nothing anymore. It is the equivalent to the condemnation of any other country.
The politicians in the north are a weedy crew. They can and do get manipulated by Westminster. Now that Westminster rules alone over the north, why aren't they doing something? After all, it's their property now.

by By Any Means Necessary Thu Jul 14, 2005 16:57

I understand where you're coming from on this matter.

The orange order is an all ireland body with lodges in the 26 and further afield. For at least 100 years it was linked politically with the Ulster Unionist Party until it severed links this year...so for over 70 years N.I apologists were in the order and so did not see these parades as contentious.

As lodge members are irish citizens then the Dublin administration has some responsibility in the way this organisation behaves.

Obviously I disagree that this part of Ireland is foreign..but your argument is one which should be examined critically...

I agree with you on one point Pol, that the british establishment which created and supported the division of Ireland have responsibility in quelling the sectarianism of the Orange / black orders.

Basically however when it comes down to it, have you no sense of justice..an injury to one is an injury to all.

Make n.ireland history

by Dónal Thu Jul 14, 2005 18:00

And I wonder how many people in the Free State know that during the civil war the Free State army used to tie groups of IRA men together and then throw grenades at them,or if caught planting a road mine they were forced at gun point to walk over it and blow themselves up.

Up the 32's!

by rep Thu Jul 14, 2005 20:56

Provisional Sinn Féin have sold out.
Simple as that.

Brownie should remember where he came from, because he's not welcome any more.

Gerry the Tout or just plain RAT.

by internationalist - Make nationalism history Thu Jul 14, 2005 21:09

No one cares about your nationalism, your nation, your patriorism or any such crap.
There is much scope for criticising the SWP, but right wing neo-liberals like SF who still persist in categorising people along the lines of national and/or religious criteria, calling the SWP "reactionary" is macabre beyond belief.
And Joe Higgins has certainly got more important things to do, he is, as always, busy being more effective than all SF TDs together in terms of making a real difference to the lives of working class people irrespective of nationality, race or religion.

by pádraig Thu Jul 14, 2005 22:54

the pompously tiltled 'internationalist' in his previous post stated that Joe Higgins was far too busy upholding the rights of working class people to care about the marching season.
what? are the residents of ardoyne not working class or are they simply not people?
Such pseudo-revolutionary nonsense is typical of the free state trot swp/sp click who prefer to engage in monotonous self-gratifying, and frankly irrelevant debates.
Real revolutionaries do not shirk from any site of struggle even it means standing up to orange bigots and brit imperialists.
if you cant get your politics sorted just go and get a life.

by ghandi - pacifist Thu Jul 14, 2005 23:23

who are the ardoyne road community? Where do they live? what do the believe? Are there any special eating requirements? Do they need help with infrastructure development aid? Do they have good governance?
we can now ask these questions knowing we are in orange alert and as such the self-censorship imposed by the red alert no longer applies. I'll lead the way - Was the partition of india a good idea?

by internationalist - Make nationalism history Fri Jul 15, 2005 00:40

Joe Higgins record speaks for itself. As does Sinn Feins. Most working class people in any part of Ireland would struggle to name most of the SF TDs.
Maybe that'll change when they get into bed with FF and finally get the chance to start cutting the same kind of rotten deals with FF at national level as they have on the councils with pricks like Mark Daly and those wonderful working class fighters in Sligo voting in the water charges. But don't worry, there's always those wealthy Irish Americans to bankroll you're next election campaign, as long as they haven't spent their entire political fund on Bush's re-election.

by Barry Fri Jul 15, 2005 02:53

Surely working class people have every right to prevent a hostile ,facist , racist , bigoted sectarian mob from marching through their area or past their homes ? Especially if members of the Orange order and their coat trailing bands and supporters have been directly responsible for murdering and maiming hundreds of the residents of that area . Ardoyne lost more of its residents to loyalist deathsquads than any other area of the north . The same people who pulled the triggers as well as their cheerleaders make up the mob who attempt to dominate that area every summer .

Literally 1000s of members of that small community have lost close friends and family to orange bullets , bombs and knives . Many were killed in the most gruesome and vicious manner . That does not even include the constant harassment , assaults and intimidation . Residents children had to run the sickening gauntlet at Holy Cross were Orange hatred revealed itself in the vilest manner .

Would Internationalist condemn or ignore a muslim or Afro carribean community in London who tried to prevent BNP/NF members from staging a highly provocative march through their area ? Would they be simply idiotic Pakistani or Jamaican nationalists for taking a stand in opposition ? And remember as distasteful and bigoted as the BNP are they most certainly have not inflicted the murderous onslaught which Ardoynes residents suffered for decades .

Does internationalist believe the best way to stop facist displays on your doorstep is to ignore them in the hope theyll go away ?

by no pasaran? Fri Jul 15, 2005 11:20

Barry raises very interesting points that should be debated on this site. Some questions that have occurred to me as this years marching season has unfolded are.

Is the Orange Order a fascist organization?

If the Orange Order is a fascist organization should there be negotiations with them or should the general positions of ‘no pasaran’ be applied to all marches?

Was it a mistake to reach an agreement in Derry this year?

If we do not take a view of stopping all marches but still say the OO should not be allowed in some areas how do we define those areas, is it on the basis of religion or politics?

What percentage of an areas population needs to be opposed to a march before it is no longer allowed through that area?

by By Any Means Necessary Fri Jul 15, 2005 11:25

Good morning

No need to constantly address the political failure of those who do not acknowledge that the Irish government did not have the courage to stand up to the six county aparthied state.

Any socialist will know that the first stage in gaining political and economic freedom is to get rid of the national oppressor and their domestic allies, any deviation from this course leads to the "left" stagnating because it is not based in working class communities.

And as for west-brit socialism, " the revolution will not happen until after closing time..brigade.." might as well put on a police uniform now..as they are part of the problem.

Solutions not platitudes or intellectual posturing are needed on simple issues such as political unity, national independence and economic democracy.

I understand that there are groups holding on to the spirit of Dail Eireann II, but again, in my opinion this idealism, which I understand, has little resonance in the same working class communities who have stood proudly against inequality in the six, without the physical support of their fellow irish citizens.

Unity is strength and what is needed now is the solidarity of the republican movement, because the enemies of equality in Ireland are organised.

Again make n.irish politics history and remember that an injury to one is an injury to all.

by Internationalist - make nationalism history Fri Jul 15, 2005 12:48

Have a problem with someone? Label them a fascists an hey presto! Everyone has to come on to your side or else they're a fascist too! Handy, isn't it?
You go around tossing out labels and slogans reflecting your idiotic narrow-minded nationality-based outlook and dividing the working class and acuse others of having nothing but platitudes and "being part of the problem".
Light entertainment at its finest.
Let's make a start today - make nationalism, nationalities, nations and nationalists history.

by By Any Means Necessary Fri Jul 15, 2005 13:10

Please answer me, when you've finished laughing... ?

Are you advocating international unity without looking at the fate of small nations or subject people ?

Is your internationalism just a facade, globilisation with a human face ?

Does your internationalist / trot / revisionism just happen to forget the crimes of international capitalism in Ireland.

Act local think global...

by Internationalist Fri Jul 15, 2005 14:39

I'm advocating international unity irrespective of nationality, race, religion etc. The people who are doing the dirty work for international (and national) capitalism are those who continue to divide the working class along national, ethnic or religious lines.
All that in addition to Sinn Fein's sterling work in the interests of capitalism on both sides of the border... Sligo water charges, water charges in the north, hospital closures, school cutbacks etc.
Read the role of honour.....

by By Any Means Necessary Fri Jul 15, 2005 14:50

Q.How would you advise the working class communities of the six to change the imposed division of colonialism in the interest of british capitalism ?

Q. Who have been the most active resisters to British capital in ireland

?

by Internationalist Fri Jul 15, 2005 15:03

"How would you advise the working class communities of the six to change the imposed division of colonialism in the interest of british capitalism"
Organise on a class basis and fight for the common interests of working class people, catholic, protestant or otherwise, such as social cuts, privatisation, water charges etc. People we see very quickly where the battle lines really are and what side SF (and indeed all the other sectarian parties) are on.

"Who have been the most active resisters to British capital in ireland"
When did you stop beating your wife?
There's not just "British capital", there are indigenous class divisions on this Island too. Unfortunately, there have been very few instances of large anti-capitalist movements or struggles, certainly all 4 major parties are very much pursuing the agenda of capitalism, which is to perpetuate sectarian division and foster mistrust between working class communities.

by mayoman Fri Jul 15, 2005 15:06

Who is to the forefront of the campaign to free the Rossport Five?

by Internationalist Fri Jul 15, 2005 15:10

1. How can working class protestants be won for a united movement against capitalism and for the common interests of working class people?
2. How can a party like SF which has time and time again implemented neo-liberal policies and is engaged in entrenching divisions of working class communities along sectarian lines, have any part to play in the struggle for emancipation of working class people of any religion in any part of the world?

by Internationalist - make nationalism history Fri Jul 15, 2005 15:15

Of course, various organisations have got more involved over the last few weeks as the issue gained in prominence, which is fair enough. But the main driving force behind the campaign seem to be concerned local people from the area.

by By Any Means Necessary Fri Jul 15, 2005 15:18

Q: How do you build working class unity in a society politically and religously divided for class interests based on colonial mis- rule.

Do you not go back to basics and end the system of administration which caused the division ?

by hs - sp (per cap) Fri Jul 15, 2005 16:50

For me (admitadly a southern based "west brit???" socialist). the problem on the national question today seems to be primarily with the prodestant people rather than the british, obviously it hasn't always been like this. But today in 2005 it seems the brits would high tail it out of there as quick as they could, if they had the chance. Which therefore begs the question, what about the prodestant people? The republican movment, seemingly, correct me if i'm wrong, maintain that the british are all that stand in the way of a united ireland. From my own reading and watching of the issue (and yes I know i live in the 'free state' but i think i can still have an opinion), it seems that its the prodestant community, who just made the DUP the biggest party in the north. are the greatest obstacle to irish unity.

So in conclusion the point is how do you convince or coerce (in the case of armed conflict) the best part of a million people into a state they do not wish to be part of?

How far does "by any means necessary" go. And incidently why should the unionist mass want to join a united ireland?

by By Any Means Necessary Fri Jul 15, 2005 17:14

a. the DUP have no veto on unity, if anything their policy of smash SF has failed.

b. a debate in the Dail on unity to include "all the children of the nation equally" should be held annually

c. as a stepping stone to unity, nationalist M.P's should be allowed to attend Dail and be given voting rights.

d. building all ireland structures for all administrative functions.

e. intent of withdrawal from Ireland by british military and political influences

f. open up the files of collusion

g. constitutional guarantee for a republic based on equality.

That'll do me for start......!

by hs - sp (per cap) Fri Jul 15, 2005 17:30

what I asked is how do you convince or coerce (if armed conflict is a solution) the sizeable prodestant community (who are generally unionist and recently made the DUP) the biggest party in NI. Your points while being very relevant to the nationalist community don't address the unionist apart from the first. Which is simply "no Veto", but the truth is unless you are able to A: convince the unionist community or B: militarily coerce the unionist community, they infact do have a veto. Its a basic reality.
So again the question, how do you convince or coerce the prodestant community into a united ireland?

by By Any Means Necessary Fri Jul 15, 2005 17:40

NO UNIONIST VETO.

An irish republic guarantees the rights of all of its citizens...and by good government you can convince the former unionist population that their position is stronger in the republic as opposed to the divided society which has not brought unity or peace.

I could of asked you how do you co-erce the Afrikaan community in Azania to accept majority rule..?

by rooster Fri Jul 15, 2005 17:45

The africaaners are happy enough behind their electric fences, control of the economy and easy access to black maids gardeners and drivers, the ANC can change as many names as it wants as it will make little difference.

by Joe Fri Jul 15, 2005 17:52

HS raises some pretty good questions that at this point in time SF republicans if not dissidents have to start taking seriously.

The traditional stuff about 'no veto' works for dissident republicans who can go on about their 'mandate' from the first Dail to bomb a million prods into a republic (This is unfairly crude but not that far from the reality of lobbing blast bombs at an Orange Order parade if not the theory).

But for SF republicans your signed up to and indeed the architects of a 'peace process' that explicitly recognises the veto. The 'peace process' not only assumes the British states willingness to disengage from Ireland it demands that this state play a role in encouraging northern protestants to accept this. This has been the leadership line since the early 90's eg Adams call for a 'protestant DeClerk'

Now OK there is the reactionary 'we'll outbreed them in the next 15 years position' which some hold but for those who see themselves on the left of SF this can't be very attractive. It would also be a recipe for a very unhappy trapped minority and possibly a large scale exodus like that which followed independance down south.

The question for 'left republicans' who support the peace process has to be how to do convince a significant number of northern protestants to vote yes in a future reunification referendum. Isn't that the bottom line of the 'peace process' or have I missed out on something.

by hs - sp (per cap) Fri Jul 15, 2005 17:56

...they don't make up 60% of the population.

And an all ireland government wouldn't have the resources to coerce the unionist minority (in an all ireland basis) into a united ireland.

All the guarentees you promise unionists are promised to nationalists in the northern Irish state, what makes you believe they will accept your guarantees any more than you accept the status quo?

Your point on convincing the unionists by saying they will have more say in a united ireland rather than the uk is a good one. And probably a point you should try making to them. I don't think i've ever seen a campaing by republicans to actually convince people of the merits of a united ireland. Its just been to convince the brits to leave while ignoring more than half the population.

But by attacking what many unionists precieve as there traditions (for good or for bad) probably convinces them they're civil rights won't be respected.
It seems like republicans by attacking the prodestant marches could be shooting themselves in the foot is they want to convince unionists to join a united ireland.
Prodestant alienation to the south seems to be growing and if you want unity this should seriously concern you. Of course if its just about the zero sum game it doesn't matter.

If the unionist veto isn't on paper it is still there because if the best part of a million people choose not to join the republic you will need a hell of a lot of oppression to force them into it. I personally would not support this solution.
But I think we can at least agree that it is the unionist and prodestant community which need to be coinvinced on the merits of a united ireland rather than the brits.

by By Any Means Necessary Fri Jul 15, 2005 17:56

"White supramacists" Afrikaaners are streaming out of Azania, because they cannot cope with the non-racist nature of the new society.

I would dispute that Afrikaaners hold on to to levers of the economy, but hiding behind fences and hiring black workers seems to be a privilige of the rich, worldwide.

In the end what defeated the evil of aparthied was equality...and that will defeat the regime in the six counties.

Have a sectarian free weekend...

by hs - sp (per cap) Fri Jul 15, 2005 18:07

sectarianism cut's both ways "by any means nessecary" and replacing a prodestant ruling class with a catholic one won't do anyone any good. It'll just be catholic police and prodestant "terrorists". remember republicanisms non sectarian roots, it wasn't catholic vs prodestant or prodestant veto, it was about unity. Until you convince the prodestants there will be no united ireland.

by Joe Fri Jul 15, 2005 18:07

I don't find the South African comparison very useful here - the privileges that protestants workers hold in the north in comparision to catholic workers are not even approaching the order of white workers under apartheid. I've been on the Shankill and Sandyrow and in Portadown and I didn't see that many swimming pool equipped houses surrounded by electric fences. There are not that many catholic women working as maids on the Shankill that I'm aware of!

The 'equality agenda' may have moral force behind it but it is not clear how it can win over a significant numbers of protestants. And talk of winning them over post unification only makes sense in the context of an imposed unification which is not going to happen under the 'peace process'.

BTW I wouldn't describe the OO as 'protestant culture' any faster than I'd describe the KKK as 'white culture'. 80%+ northern protestants are not OO members (it could be 90% depending on whose figures you follow).

by hs - sp (per cap) Fri Jul 15, 2005 18:12

no it probably couldn't be described as prodestant culture per se, and without the conflict it probably would have gone the way of the AOH in the south. But when parades are attacked the community does seem to tak eoffence, or at least a sizeable part of it. And although most aren't members a hell of alot attend the parades accross ni and take part in the 12th.

by hs - sp (per cap) Fri Jul 15, 2005 18:37

very quickly, south africas historical handover of power came from universal sufferage, and the black majority easily returning the ANC coalition. In NI everybody already has a vote and sinn fein have already been in power. But nationalists as a minority need to share power with unionists, the IRA agreed to end bombings in return for this coalition (as of yet not forcoming), so the anology doesn't work. With or without the equality agenda there is still one million prodestants in the north who by and large don't want to be a part of a united ireland.

by tom Fri Jul 15, 2005 23:20

Your arguments seem to be based around the view that Britain would like to "hightail it" out of Ireland as quickly as possible . SF have a similar position . Doesn't the history of Britain's involvement in Ireland suggest that that isn't the case?

by tom Sat Jul 16, 2005 00:21

Ireland was given to the English king ,Henry II ,by the then pope ( an Englishman coincidentally) as a penance for murdering Cardinal Thomas A Beckett in Canterbury Cathederal. That was in the twelfth century.
I'm sure that Henry would have been saying the same sort of things : all he wanted to do was knock the paddies' heads together ,stop them fighting amongst themselves and then hightail it out of the place asap.
How Irish people can still be falling for it today is beyond me.

by hs - sp (per cap) Sat Jul 16, 2005 15:13

Historically yes you're right. But in the modern era, ireland is more a part of the empire rather than a possesion. There is nothing that the government of the republic of ireland, in the 26 counties that opposes the british or any of their interests. And there hasn't been since World War Two. From the british ruling classes point of view the republic of ireland is everything they could wish for. Even Sinn Fein don't seem to have any policies that the british government would fundamentally disagree with, and in their stint in power there didn't seem to be much problems beyond the national question.

Ireland and Britain are also both in the EU and there is freedom of travel between both nations. Militarily, in the recent past irish independence hasn't prevented our ports or especially airports from being used for imperialist adventures, (especially in the case of shannon and the modern leaders of impearialism) .

The southern government has always taken the side of the british over the side of northern nationalists, at best they've tried to keep out. They've never helped, apart from the odd speech to get southern votes.

So for the british a happy unified ireland would be no threat at all and if anything would be beneficial to them. And we have even recently joined partnership for peace, NATO for beginners and restructured our entire armed forces to work within NATO command.

On the other hand a civil war in Ireland probably wouldn't suit them at the moment, which isn't to say they may not want to stir one up in the future against a radical government or movement.

Either way why would it at the moment be in british capitals interest to remain in Ireland, when our governments will cheerfully do anything they want anyway? If anything we're ahead of the British as far as neo liberalism goes, which is the mantra of ruling classes the world over.

by Mmmmmm Sat Jul 16, 2005 21:12

I was recently invited to speak against the arms trade in Ireland. The other speaker was an Irish full time organiser from Amnesty International. He gave a very slick, detailed, informative presentation. I was amazed he didn't mention Raytheon-Derry-the FEIC campaign.

I started my speech by saying that I would be talking about all of Ireland and covered Derry, Raytheon & the very impressive nonviolent resistance campaign by the Foyle Ethical investment Community amongst other things.

On reflection the problem seems to be the internalisation of partition by so many in the south (including the left!). The internalisation of a very recent border drawn on a map. Partition may bring us to nuclear war in the Koreas and the Indian/Pakistan subcontinent. It seems to stunt political life on this island. No amount of macho violence is going to make a difference, when the great mass of people in the folks have internalised the whole thang. Yup there is a problem, in need of an exorcism.

by Wendy Woo Sun Jul 17, 2005 01:08

Internationalist said about Sinn Fein: 'those wonderful working class fighters in Sligo voting in the water charges'

He made that remark and repeated it in a later post. Perhaps he might remind us as to what year SF voted for Water Charges in Sligo?


I'm from Sligo and never heard of that happening. I know they voted one year for Refuse Charges but made a hasty retreat from that position after that beacuse of the backlash from within the party locally.

But maybe Internationalist knows when they voted for Water Charges? I await his reply with interest/

by internationalist - Make nationalism history Sun Jul 17, 2005 10:08

Is that the best you can do, Ms Woo?
Surely it's not surprising if from time to time people lose track of what particular issue SF caved in on where and when. The basic pattern is clear: They are an opportunistic, hypocritical, pseudo-left, neo-liberal party of careerists doing the dirty work for the ruling class north and south.

by Wendy Woo Sun Jul 17, 2005 16:31

I'm sorry that you seem to have taken such offence at someone asking for a simple clarification. Read the post again - you'll see it wasnt an attack on you or anyone else.

But surely we should ensure that we keep threads as factual and accurate as possible and clarify and correct them when we can.

I assume by your response that SF did not vote for Water Charges in Sligo as you suggested. Now that wasnt too difficult was it?

by Barry Sun Jul 17, 2005 16:42

While the broad mass of SF activists certainly do have a working class background and a left wing outlook , Internationalist unfortunately sums up their leadership and wannabe leaderships attitude only too well .

The protests against Shell I believe are an honest reaction from SFs grassroots and shouldnt be dismissed by anyone . But theres no way on earth the Adams leadership could ever be trusted to stand up on this or any other issue . A healthy Shell / Statoil donation to Connolly House would result in a directive from on high to stop the protest quicker than you can say " Ray Burke" .

However Internationalist has dodged the issue here just as deftly as any crafty shinner . The question posed directly to him was do working class people such as in Ardoyne have the right to try and prevent facist sectarian displays by sectarian facists through their locality ?

Although today Orangism tries to portray itself as a cultural and religious organisation its true nature is evident from its inception . It was founded very simply as a base sectarian paramilitary organisation . Its founders were at the highest levels of the British military and Anglican clergy who were extremely powerful at the time . Its only purpose was and is to keep "the men of no property" divided and at each others throats , as that is what capitalist British rule depends on . Therefore the analogy with Hitlers brownshirts and SA is valid . Just like them they engaged in terror and state sponsored Kristalnachts for centuries .

Marching in orange ranks past Ardoyne are the remnants of the Shankill Butchers and other notorious killing squads . Men who for decades inflicted the most vicious atrocities against that community's civilian population . Just lately that involved grown men lobbing urine , pornography and even blast bombs at Ardoyne primary school girls on their way to Holy Cross . By dodging this issue we can only assume Internationalist doesnt agree working class Irish people have the right to prevent these displays on their doorsteps . He may even believe the parades are simply cultural .

I am astounded that people are still promoting the myth that the British state would hightail it if they could . Britain has been portraying itself in Kipling - esque terms for almost a century now . Poor England shouldering the white mans burden keeping savage natives from each others throats at great cost to its stiff upper lipped reasonable self . I find this racist and insulting .

The reality is that poor England was in fact deliberately keeping the natives at each others throats for its own narrow interests . Even during the last period of conflict while England was wringing its hands about sectarian atrocities it was they who imported the fucking weaponry for the loyalist killers in the first place . The Brian Nelson scandal proves that it was the British establishment who were actively directing and controlling the loyalist killing machine . Colonel Kerr from the FRU has been well rewarded for his crimes , now ensconced as the military attache to Beijing . He was no rogue operator , he answered personally to Thatcher and John Major . He is a major player in diplomatic circles today .

The GFA has simply institutionalised the sectarianism of the north . It has locked Catholic and Protestants into a permanent round of one uppery and sectarian headcounts . While British rule continues here there is simply no incentive for unionism to address any other issue than remaining in power . Only a British declaration of intent to withdraw can force unionism to address properly the relationship of the protestant population with the rest of the island . Until this happens we will be locked in sectarian stalemate for perpetuity and this is exactly what Britain wants and depends on .

Are we to seriously believe that the British want to leave but are too stupid to come up with a viable exit strategy for a 100 years ? Are we stupid enough to believe that Britain did not foresee the sectarianism which would result from an assembly thats purpose was to institutionalise sectarianism ? The Orange Order has simply outlived its usefulness to the British establishment . The GFA and Stormont now fulfill its age old role much more efficiently and satisfactorily . Irish people will be kept divided under British rule and thats what British rule depends on . In such a political climate socialism stands no chance .

Yet too many on the left will simply condemn republicans such as myself as silly nationalists because we demand a total end to this stinking mess and that the establishment that created it withdraw . While they maintain their aloof posturing on such a crucial issue they will remain as useful as tits on a bull .

Irish people no matter what their religion are more than capable of creating the proper institutions and political policies which can respect identities and ensure no-one is dominated or marginalised . We are totally capable of doing this . The only thing standing in our way is the British establishment and its denial of our national sovereignty . While the left continues to ignore this fact and prattle about nationalism they are about as helpful to ending sectarianism and creating a workers republic as the $inn £ein leadership .

by Mark P - Socialist Party (personal cap) Sun Jul 17, 2005 16:45

Both Wendy Woo and Internationalist appear to be a little confused about the actions of Sinn Fein's councillors in Sligo. God knows it's been discussed here a lot already but to set the record straight:

Sinn Fein councillors in Sligo did not vote on water charges, either for or against, as this has not been an issue in recent years. However they did vote for the bin tax there. Far from "retreating" from this position, they came back later and voted for a large increase in the bin tax. Sinn Fein defended this decision at length in the pages of An Phoblacht and Gerry Adams described it as part of Sinn Fein's "pragmatic" approach when speaking at the Dublin Chamber of Commerce.

by hs - sp (per cap) Sun Jul 17, 2005 18:14

I think you may have misunderstood what I said, I never said the british never wanted to be in Ireland or that the british never had any interests there, and especially anything about "white man's burden". What I did say and will repeat is, it is now in the british ruling claass interests to have a united Ireland which will be a member of nato etc and help rather than hinder the imperialist neo liberal agenda. I then Added that the main obstacle to a united ireland is the prodestant and unionist and loyalist communities. The british state would not have the power to remain in Ireland a minute against both catholic and prodestant communities, obvioulsy for this reason they encouraged sectarianism when it suited them (as I mentioned). Republicanism or nationalism has traditionally made the mistake of ignoring the prodestant communities and concentrateing on the british. And this is mistake as the key to a united ireland is with them. And I don't see how throwing blast bombs at them will do anything to convince them towards a united ireland.

So the question I asked before and repeat is, if you want a united ireland how do you intend to convince or coerce (as in by military means) the mass of the prodestants into a united ireland. Because the truth is even if the brits left N.I. tomorrow, the prodestant community will still be there.

by Wendy Woo Sun Jul 17, 2005 22:58

Corrections.
by Mark P - Socialist Party (personal cap) Sunday, Jul 17 2005, 3:45pm


'Both Wendy Woo and Internationalist appear to be a little confused about the actions of Sinn Fein's councillors in Sligo. God knows it's been discussed here a lot already but to set the record straight:

Sinn Fein councillors in Sligo did not vote on water charges, either for or against, as this has not been an issue in recent years. However they did vote for the bin tax there. Far from "retreating" from this position, they came back later and voted for a large increase in the bin tax. Sinn Fein defended this decision at length in the pages of An Phoblacht and Gerry Adams described it as part of Sinn Fein's "pragmatic" approach when speaking at the Dublin Chamber of Commerce.'

You are actually wrong there. They voted for the charges in 2000. There was a huge backlash within the party locally and by the next estimates they had retreated from that position and voted against the charges. They voted against the charges then until the service was privatised, a move they also voted against.

by Mark P Mon Jul 18, 2005 00:01

As I understand it:

Sinn Fein voted for the charges when they were introduced by the Sinn Fein - Fianna Fail coalition which controlled the Council. It was initially introduced at €100. The same parties then voted to increase it to €148. Nowadays, of course the figure is a multiple of that.

Sinn Fein did not vote for further increases. However, it continues to defend its decision to impose the bin tax in the first place, most notably in Gerry Adams' notorious "pragmatic politics" speech. More recently Adams again defended the decision when questioned on it at the European Social Forum.

The disagreement between us seems to be over whether or not SF voted for that first increase.

by bendy shoo Mon Jul 18, 2005 00:22

Bin charges now more important to this thread than orange supremacy and the denial of Irish sovereignty .

by By Any Means Necessary Mon Jul 18, 2005 12:17

Good Morning

The Orange Order and Black institutions are white supramacist organisations, whose only function is to keep the people policed, giving the illusion of preserving cultural identity while being enforcers for british rule.

Sectarianism does not cut both ways in context of the six counties.

As for the arguements that SF leadership are part of the problem ?

Leadership is there to lead and far from copper fastening partition, the growth of the party has led to difficult questions being asked by the brit establishment and the supramacist administrators here in the six.

Both Mitchell and the GFA are not republican documents, however by linking the most effective resistance movement to British rule to political resistance another avenue of struggle has been opened to us.

In this avenue of struggle the mechanics of the brit establishment and their allies have been just as savage and biased, resorting to state violence, internment ( Free Sean Kelly ) and thought policing.

Is it not time to build the Irish Republic, free from foreign military and political control in the spirit of the 1916 proclamation with a constitution for the 21st century..free from the political and economic corruption that partition has caused both north and south.

by Joe Mon Jul 18, 2005 15:41

"The Orange Order and Black institutions are white supramacist organisations, whose only function is to keep the people policed, giving the illusion of preserving cultural identity while being enforcers for british rule."

Err I don't think the OO is a 'white supramacist organisations' if so its got to be one of the few with black members! Its not really defined around race at all as I understand it.

It also has a life independant of British state manipulation - it has even been banned on a couple of occasions by the British state (a long time ago in the 1800's).

And on the other hand the British state quite clearly promoted it in the 1790's and other times since as a useful 'divide and rule' tool. But its not something the British state can turn on and off like a tap.

"Sectarianism does not cut both ways in context of the six counties."

Mostly but not completly true. Stats show that around 90% of sectarian attackes are on catholics but that still leaves 10%. Sectarian attacks on protestants do happen it does republican no favours to deny this.

"Leadership is there to lead and far from copper fastening partition, the growth of the party has led to difficult questions being asked by the brit establishment and the supramacist administrators here in the six."

This is an argument that the current SF strategy is working. This is arguable but it doesn't get us away from the fact that this strategy is based (and has to be based) on a belief that Britian is both willing and able to leave if voted out.

This is a huge transformation in the traditional republican approach BUT this does not in itself make it wrong. The problem though us that it has led to a strategy that increasingly calls for state intervention against northern protestants. And that also looks to 'leadership' from both the British state and 'a protestant Declerk' as the way forwards rather than a way of winning over working class protestants to something beyond big or little state nationalism.

"Is it not time to build the Irish Republic, free from foreign military and political control in the spirit of the 1916 proclamation with a constitution for the 21st century..free from the political and economic corruption that partition has caused both north and south."

Corruption is cause by partition? That sounds like a lefty characture of republicanism!

But leaving that aside the question today has to be what is the 'republic' and does it need 'Irish' tacked onto it. The republican ideology of 1780-1860's not just in Ireland but across the globe was much much wider than nation building. In Ireland seperatism was adopted as part of a strategy not as the goal of that strategy.

by Eamonn Mc Cann in Belfast Telegraph Mon Jul 18, 2005 15:58

14 July 2005

As the petrol bombs crashed and whooshed in Ardoyne on Tuesday night, David Trimble was explaining to John Humphrys on Radio Four that it had been the republicans' failure to deliver on the Agreement which had done for him in the end.

He'd taken the risk and run with the Agreement, he elaborated in an "On The Ropes" interview, but had been left isolated and exposed when the IRA didn't go away.


The nationalist line is the exact opposite - that his own failure to campaign with conviction for the Agreement was a prime reason progress proved impossible.


The difficulty in deciding who remained true to and who reneged on the deal done in April 1998 is that there's no acknowledged consensus on what the Agreement requires, and therefore no way of saying with finality who's mainly to blame for the fact that, if you tuned into the 10.25 TV news on Tuesday night, you'd have been forgiven for thinking the Beeb was re-broadcasting a bulletin from the bad old days. Riots, injuries, a business burnt out, a man shot dead in a feud, a bomb on a train track, a rape at a bonfire site.


Dear God, it's depressing, murmured the normally chirpy person beside me.


But what's really depressing is the thought that this could be, not a blast from the past, but the shape of things to come.


How can it be that this dark cloud still casts its shadow over all, seven years into an Agreement endorsed by a substantial majority of an electorate which had been promised that it would bring in a bright new day?


I continue to believe that the answer has something to do with the way the Agreement encourages the competitive mobilisation of the two communities. But I am told until the tellers are blue or green in the face that this is wrong, that what's needed is still the Agreement - "implemented fully."


The difficulty is - to complete another weary circuit of the dismal debate - that there's no agreement on what full implementation of the Agreement would entail.


But is the celebrated "creative ambiguity" of the Agreement for real? Or is it more a matter of politicians dodging the clear implications of a deal which they freely made?


The nationalists are right about Trimble. He never spelled out the implications of the Agreement for unionism and asked for support for it on that basis.


But neither of the major nationalist parties, Sinn Fein in particular, came clean in asking their electorates to vote for the Agreement either.


Trimble didn't explain that the deal gave nationalism equal status with unionism within Northern Ireland, that under it nationalists would be entitled to an equal share of power in state institutions, and that this would have obvious implications for - to take a couple of random examples - the structure of the police force and the display of flags and emblems in public places or local government premises. No nonsense about "minimal changes" or silly suggestions that the Agreement preserved the "Britishness" of "Ulster."



The pay-off, Trimble might have gone on to argue, would be the security of the Union: nationalists who voted yes would be accepting that Northern Ireland would remain part of the United Kingdom until such times as a majority here decided otherwise.


Nationalist supporters of the Agreement might have made the parallel pitch that second-class citizenship would be abolished forever, sectarianism in policing made a thing of the past, equal access to office and influence guaranteed - in exchange for putting the aspiration to a united Ireland on hold until a six county majority for unity emerged. No fanciful flights about celebrating the centenary of 1916 in an all-Ireland republic.


Both nationalist parties should acknowledge that they have accepted partition for as far forward as it is possible to see, and pro-Agreement unionists that Northern Ireland is no longer a British space but a shared unionist-nationalist entity within the UK. There is no ambiguity about the fact that this is what the Agreement requires.


This is the solution which Sinn Fein, the SDLP and unionists around Reg Empey refer to when they talk of implementing the Agreement fully. If they are serious, they should begin belatedly to campaign for it, preferably jointly. If they are not serious, it's time they told us what their alternatives are.

by By Any Means Necessary Mon Jul 18, 2005 17:15

This approach to dissecting every word and phrase and then placing your own interpretation on what is said, while ignoring the main challenge of the arguement is amazing.

How do you deal with the legacy of British mis-rule in Ireland?

For the past 30 years the conflict in the north has been ignored or belittled by arm chair "revolutionaries" and assorted lefties as it does not fit in with their interpretation of how change can be initiated.
Armed struggle was people's politics and now that there is an alternative to armed struggle, the same criticism exists.

Tell it as it is...

The Orange Order is well known worldwide for being a white supramacist bigoted organisation...there are African lodges and a Mowhawk lodge..uncle tom's...the 12th celebrations are well documented in attracting WNP C18, KKK, NF and BNP sympathisers to its "celebrations".

There can be no justification for sectarianism, it is a tool for oppression, as long as n.ireland exists so will sectarianism.

by Joe Mon Jul 18, 2005 17:27

I'm actually not all that interested in repeating the normal SF v left row that ends up here all the time. I'm much more interested in unpicking how republicans see the current situation - and in particular the logic of the new view of the role of the British state.

One of the curious things about the last decade is the enormous change in tactics that has emerged without any public statement of what has to be the theoretical basis of that change - this applies not only to the republican movement but also a lot of the far left - particularly in the post Omagh period.

As to the Orange Order - I reckon an argument against it is much stronger if it deals with what it is rather than simply jacking up the emotional content as far as possible. The OO is composed of nasty bigots but their collective bigotary is not defined around skin colour so why pretend it is. That just undermines your argument in the eyes of anyone who is not already a true believer.

by Lower Wack Mon Jul 18, 2005 17:41

"Armed struggle was people's politics and now that there is an alternative to armed struggle, the same criticism exists."

It was SOME peoples politics and within the nationalist community still only a minority of those people.

by Barry Mon Jul 18, 2005 19:00

The Orange Order in the six counties are undoubtedly a supremacist organisation . They clearly stand for the continued dominance of the "ulster protestant people " over their neighbours . The simple fact is that ethnic minorities are a relatively new phenomenon in the 6 counties . There arent any coloured areas for them to march through / over . They are undoubtedly white supremacists , its just they focus on supremacy over other lesser whites . The KKK despise Roman Catholics as well .

But they have for the time being outlived their usefulness . Britain only sponsored them and their UDA/UVF alter egos as the situation demanded . Their purpose was merely to pacify resistance to British rule and keep our communities divided . The GFA does both quite admirably and much more efficiently . I fail to see how anyone can support the GFA which enshrines the legitimacy of the British state and still call for an end to British rule in Ireland . By recognising the right of a minority to determine the future of the entire nation on the grounds of religion ( or the unionist veto as its called) we simply reinforce the same sectarian supremacy the Orange Order has always advocated . That the rights of the minority who wish to see British rule maintained in the final analysis outweigh the majority who wish to see Ireland united . That is the aGFAs bottom line .

It is precisely for this reason that the Orange Order and the loyalist murder campaign which the British government sponsored and directed are no longer useful to them . Irish people by virtue of their elected politicians , including Sinn Fein , have now accepted British rule in Ireland for the forseeable future . All claim there is no alternative . A very satisfactory result from a British point of view .

by hs - sp (per cap) Tue Jul 19, 2005 00:07

Still think we need an answer further than sloganeering and whatabouary, i'm sure a unionist could come on and recount every innocent civilian killed, so:

So the question I asked before and repeat is, if you want a united ireland how do you intend to convince or coerce (as in by military means) the mass of the prodestants into a united ireland. Because the truth is even if the brits left N.I. tomorrow, the prodestant community will still be there.

by By Any Means Necessary Tue Jul 19, 2005 10:58

One million protestants is not the right description of the Irish-British population in Ireland.

For one the religous make up of this "bloc" is made up of over 20 different denominations, making the Catholic poulation in the six counties by far the biggest denomination.

Politically the only link to the U.K is in the representation in the British parliament and the 17k troops stationed in the six.

Emotionally there may be the last vestiages of "empire loyality" and sentimentality to the images and icons of monarchy, but so what...

there exists the ability of any society to accept the history of its population and adapt to their fears but not to their prejudices...the n.irish set up panders to the prejudices of the present and the past....

there now exists no arguement for partition accept the one that says that unionists do not want to...that arguement is not valid as where will they go if they get disenfranchised from the Westminister setup - independent six counties ?

by Joe Tue Jul 19, 2005 12:06

Your argument seems to be that no one really wants the northern protestants anymore including the British state so they'll just have to accept whatever happens.

Looking back in 100 years time this may well turn out to be what happened.

I don't go along with the 'there would be a civil war' hype but it is hardly a progressive outcome in a republican (as opposed to a catholic nationalist) sense never mind a left one. After all the somewhat more generous attitude at the time of the founding of the free state was to see the protestant population of what became the republic plummet and the republic ending up with a confessional catholic nationalist set up.

And again portraying the OO as what it is not is just preaching to the choir. If anything it undermines arguments against Orange marches in the minds of those who do not already agree with you as the OO can simply pull out the photos of some African orangemen and say 'well they are obviously lying about the 'white supreacy' so you should assume that all the rest is lies as well'.

by Barry Tue Jul 19, 2005 16:43

It is not necessary for Britain to withdraw in a week . A specified time frame of 5 or even 10 years from a declaration of intent to withdraw from this country is more than adequate for all relationships to be adressed fully by all the people who have to share this little island . More than adequate for whatever assurances need to be given , systems of good governance devised and trust built up . Only in the event of a Declaration of intent to withdraw will it be in the immediate interests of northern unionists to construct a proper peaceful relationship with those who live here rather than maintaining a sectarian advantage at every opportunity . That is what British rule condemns us all to , permanent one uppery on every side . However it isnt exactly difficult for the rest of the island to accomodate and recognise an Ulster identity . Indeed it is my identity as well .

There are a wide range of options as to how those currently professing unionism can be accomodated in an all Ireland set up . This could include for example something similar to the Eire Nua proposals once promoted by PSF and revived by RSF . Unionists have in the past described them as fair and workable . Indeed it would be interesting to know exactly why Ned Garveys special branch raided the Feakle talks between the SF leadership and the leaders of the Protestant churches in the mid 70s when peace moves like these were being discussed .

There could even just be a nine county Ulster parliament within a unitary state or even a 6 county one , it matters not . What matters is that the divisive British state which is at the root of the problem removes itself from the equation and allows all Irish people to settle their differences , which arent exactly huge when Britains out of the way . A bill of rights and accountable policing are essential as well but 26 co ministers have a major problem with that , as do the guards .

Perhaps a major contribution towards the unionist population being convinced of the merits of unification would be if the Irish people took back what was rightfully theirs . That is if the corrib gas field for example and whatever else may lie off our apparently very lucrative shoreline was returned to the Irish people and used to their benefit . Perhaps it is the thought of living in a banana republic which allows disgraceful scandals like that to happen which doesnt particularly appeal to them . It doesnt particularly appeal to myself come to think of it . A simple extension of the 26 co state will not work as it is patently obvious that that artificially created entity has now failed its citizens utterly . The scandal of the theft of Irelands resources , prosperity and future is not just the work of Ray Burke but the entire set up and system itself . A new start and clean slate is need all over the island . Radical change would be good for us all .

The solution to the national curse of partition and sectarianism involves radical change all over the island . Ireland , very simply , must be run to the benefit of all its people , looking after all their interests , not just a mega rich elite and an envious middle class .

Its the native capitalist class who are probably a bigger stumbling block to unity than northern protestants . But it is the British establishment whose bidding they serve which is the biggest stumbling block of all .

by interesting Tue Jul 19, 2005 17:59

Irish Times obituaries
...are always fascinating for what's left out.

Take Ted Heath, former (Tory) British Prime Minister, who died Sunday night. From his Monday 18th obit. in the IT, we learn such immaterial tidbits as his having been "a musician and a international class yachtsman".

But, nary a word about Bloody Sunday.

Which, you would think, could be assumed to loom rather large in his legacy from an Irish point of view.

more at
http://freestater.blogspot.com/2005/07/irish-times-obituaries.html

by BRENDY Sat Nov 26, 2005 11:15

I'M WITH YOU

by republican - CIRA Thu Mar 02, 2006 20:31

If you thought 2005 twelfth in Ardoyne was bad? If you do you may hold onto your seats for what we have instore for the cops, Army and the orange scum that walk up and down our road every marching season. The onlu reason they get up and down that road is because the cops and the brits errect huge barriers in the passage of the orange scum but it wont stop us this year or atleast not a 9 tonne forklift(JCB) followed by over 100 petrol bombs and a cocktail of blastbombs and acid bombs. Are members will be out on force on the twelfth and there will be no regrets of anything that happen on the day, so if you want your voice heard we will hope to see you on the day

TIOCFAIDH AR LA

CIRA/ARDOYNE ROAD DEFENDERS