“Like Ian Paisley they have accomplished their mission.”

Sinn Féin have stated that Connolly House in west Belfast has been attacked three times in the past 2 weeks – One of their Londonderry offices has also been targeted. Meanwhile, in the NewsLetter, Liam Clark identifies the Real IRA strategy, “if it can be called one”, and points to some of those legacy issues for Sinn Féin. From the NewsLetter.

Their strategy – if it can be called one –is to force a re-militarisation of society and bring troops back onto the streets. They aim to plunge society into chaos and draw in the loyalists in the vague expectation that they may somehow be able to capitalise on the fear and anger that would follow. The problem for Sinn Fein leaders like Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness is that they lack the moral authority to counter such sick arguments. They have been around too long; the roots of their power and authority lie in the 1970s when the Provisional IRA, like today’s dissidents, had only contempt for democratic political struggle. Its policy was, like RIRA’s today, to destabilise existing forms of government in the hope that its demand of British withdrawal would eventually emerge as the only option left. It didn’t work for the Provos and it won’t work for RIRA, a much smaller group, either. Adams and McGuinness saw that the IRA campaign would fail and moved republicans towards power sharing, but they accumulated a lot of baggage in the process. Like Ian Paisley they have accomplished their mission. They should now have the sense to step aside and let someone with a less complicated history take charge.

, , , ,

  • Paul

    the biggest problem with his analasys is that here was no legitimate political struggle or even semi legitimate government in the 70’s. The conditions for nationalists or republicans today bear no relationship to what PIRA faced when it was formed

  • kennyboy

    Surely the point was that the Big Man was going ga-ga. Like it or not it Gerry, Marty, Peter, Nigel et al that will run things for the next decade or more. None of them are going away you know

  • alan56

    Just watched the easter celebrations in west belfast online, a post from SF twitter. Seemed a bit lack lustre and boring. They should team up with OO and have an Orange and Green Fest. Now that would be fun!

  • fin

    same old same old, NI was always the land of milk and honey, everyone had group hugs and the Orange Order use to hand out sweets to lil’ nationalist kids every 12th of July. Or possibly it wasn’t and it gave birth to the ‘troubles’

    Or possibly Adams and Co reached a point where they saw more could be achieved from a political ‘phase’ than a military one.

    Or possibly you are correct Pete and the DUP out of kindness and love and respect for the political views of others offered to go into a powersharing government with the beaten republicans.

  • jimmy

    A lot of parallels in Clarkes piece with regards to our own well seasoned reporters…

  • Scaramoosh

    Let’s really piss them off by from now on only referring to them as the Surreal IRA.

  • Itwas SammyMcNally whatdoneit

    ” The problem for Sinn Fein leaders like Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness is that they lack the moral authority to counter such sick arguments. ”

    Eh. No – the British cut a deal with Provos – it is called the GFA – and the Irish people North and South approved it – thats pretty big moral authority.

  • Pancho’s Horse

    Sammy, the residents of the Free state didn’t vote on the GFA, did they?

  • While the GFA was a deal between all parties and two governments sanctioned by the Irish electorate, North & South.

    The St. Andrews Agreement was only endorsed by S/F and the DUP which was outside the GFA Agreement and was not supported by any electorate.

    It seems this is what gives anti-GFA Republicans the excuse to pursue an armed strategy and the only people to blame for that is S/F!

  • Comrade Stalin

    Sammy, the residents of the Free state didn’t vote on the GFA, did they?

    I wish I got a quid every time someone repeated this myth. The citizens of the RoI voted on a series of amendments to the Irish constitution including an amendment which permitted the Government to be bound by the GFA. Obviously people would only want the Government to be bound by the GFA if they agreed with the text of the GFA so this was a referendum on the GFA’s text as well as the amendments to the constitution provided therein.

    The common misconception is that the vote only permitted modifications to Articles 2+3 – this is not true.

    Details here.

    Ardoyne Republican :

    It seems this is what gives anti-GFA Republicans the excuse to pursue an armed strategy and the only people to blame for that is S/F!

    Can you explain that a bit more for the dunces among us, like me ? The fact that the StAA was not endorsed by the Irish people provides republicans who opposed the GFA with an excuse to pursue an armed strategy ? It sounds like a massive pile of hissing shite to me, given that the Omagh bombing took place after the overwhelming vote in favour of the GFA and before the StAA exists. The Sunday Tribune article showed that the RIRA don’t give a damn about popular support, indeed they appear to actively embrace their unpopularity, drawing parallels with the 1916 rebels.

  • McGrath

    “The problem for Sinn Fein leaders like Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness is that they lack the moral authority to counter such sick arguments”.

    There’s that hangup with morality again. I would support the morality argument if it had prospects of achieving anything, but as far as NI is concerned it never has and isn’t likely to in the future. Morality has always been waived about like a trophy, i.e. we are moral and you are not, with the net result being a general absence of the same all around, with RIP looking the most hypocritical about it.

    GA / MM don’t need moral authority, they have been using a logical authority has has been working. At some point republicans decided violence wasn’t working, I’m certain they didn’t stop being violent because they felt bad about it. The RIRA / CIRA have neither moral or logical authority, their is little chance that appeals to morality will ever work, any message that will enlighten then as to the fact that violence will not get them what they want needs to be supported. Hopefully they will figure that out soon, unless unadulterated violence is their only objective (which I suspect it is).

  • fin

    Ardoyne

    “The St. Andrews Agreement was only endorsed by S/F and the DUP which was outside the GFA Agreement and was not supported by any electorate.”

    apart from the electorate that returned the DUP and SF as the largest parties in the Assembly election 6 months later.

    Anyway the StA agreement was the figleaf to let DUP save face going into powersharing (apart from the vital opportunity it afforded some people ensure planning permission for a ‘constituent’and other important items.

    Or are dissidents annoyed over the much heralded unionist veto which to date has only been used by er SF.

    The GFA has been good to nationalism/republicanism, NI is a different place today and North and South are blending together nicely.

    Although speaking of the electorate returning SF as the largest nationalist and second largest party in NI overall I would imagine that that is where their moral authority comes from to confront dissidents, SF MLAs hardly hide their past military careers under a bushell nor use the language of war in Stormont. Ex volunteers who are now MLA’s have on many occassions detailed why they are doing what they are doing, most recently on Easter Sunday

  • Dev

    Following on from McGrath’s point re: moral authority, I doubt if there are very many people who have been involved in NI poltics over the past few decades who can claim any moral authority on any subject whatsoever.

  • Greenflag

    comrade stalin

    ‘indeed they appear to actively embrace their unpopularity, drawing parallels with the 1916 rebels.’

    Within a few weeks the 1916 ‘rebels’ became national icons and the 1918 general election showed that they had majority support on this island .

    The ‘dissidents’ have little or no support and there would be no shortage of volunteers for a firing squad if they were dragged out to be shot following summary trial and conviction .

    2009 is not 1916 nor is it 1969 . The ‘war’ such that it was is over.

  • Scaramoosh

    The Surreal IRA have issued the following statement.

    “The Army Council of the Surreal IRA, after a long and heated debate, which took place in a derelict caravan, in a field, somehwere outside the town of Ballygobackwards, are pleased to announce that they have finally come up with a formal title for their military strategy –

    “Brits In.”

    A spokesperson for the group said;

    “We chose something that we knew would wrankle with that fella McGuinness and his supporters, who have spent the last thirty years trying to get the Brits Out.”

  • Comrade Stalin

    Greenflag,

    I agree but I think you missed my point. The dissidents see themselves as the 1916 rebels in that earlier point where everyone hated them, they more or less said so in the Tribune. It follows that their goal is a British backlash which will, they hope, cause everyone to realize that they were right all along.

    It’s all bullshit and is highly unlikely. I think it would have been equally unlikely in 1916 had home rule gotten off the ground earlier.

  • hey you

    They are/were all dicks. Adams and co. murdered people for 30 years. Now a different order of the same want their go at it as they see the job as unfinished.

    The prod dicks are gone. Gone as in gone away you know.

    The corrupt/collusionist peelers (depending on who you listen to) are running about in their dozens trying to look and appear like three times their number but still doing the same job.

    No mission has been accomplished.

  • redhugh78

    “Just watched the easter celebrations in west belfast online, a post from SF twitter. Seemed a bit lack lustre and boring. They should team up with OO and have an Orange and Green Fest. Now that would be fun”

    Alan56,
    First point, it was a commemoration not a celebration.
    You obviously did’nt watch the same commemoration as me then, the one I watched was a mixture of young and old,full of colour with the bands. pikemen, cumman na mban, colour parties, pictures,na fianna,and period costumes.
    Not to mention the thousands in attendance.

  • George

    I wish I got a quid every time someone repeated this myth. The citizens of the RoI voted on a series of amendments to the Irish constitution including an amendment which permitted the Government to be bound by the GFA. Obviously people would only want the Government to be bound by the GFA if they agreed with the text of the GFA so this was a referendum on the GFA’s text as well as the amendments to the constitution provided therein.

    The common misconception is that the vote only permitted modifications to Articles 2+3 – this is not true.

    Details here.

    Comrade,
    strictly speaking, we voted on the British-Irish Agreement, not the GFA, so you wouldn’t be cashing in any bets.

    http://www.british-irishcouncil.org/welcome/text.htm

  • George

    I should also add that being a dualist State (like the UK), Ireland is not bound by any international treaty it signs unless it passes it into law via its own legislature so in the strictest sense of the meaning of the word “bound” the country is only legally bound by the provisions of this:

    The British-Irish Agreement Act 1999

    http://www.oireachtas.ie/documents/bills28/acts/1999/a199.pdf

  • Comrade Stalin

    George:

    strictly speaking, we voted on the British-Irish Agreement, not the GFA, so you wouldn’t be cashing in any bets.

    D’agh, confounded again. I thought the British-Irish agreement was the GFA.

    But I’m still OK, because that document talks about the two governments agreeing to implement the multi-party agreement (GFA). So whilst there are a couple of levels of indirection, the referendum in Ireland ultimately confirmed the Irish government’s right to implement the agreement.

    I should also add that being a dualist State (like the UK), Ireland is not bound by any international treaty it signs unless it passes it into law via its own legislature so in the strictest sense of the meaning of the word “bound” the country is only legally bound by the provisions of this:

    The argument is not about what the Irish government is bound by; it’s about whether or not the Irish people voted for or against the Agreement. If the Irish people opposed the Agreement, then they would have used the referendum vote to deny the government the right to implement it.

    In practical terms, rather than technical terms, the poll was a referendum on the GFA and it’s silly for people to try to pretend that it was not.

  • latcheeco

    Scaramouche,
    Speaking of surreal. Do you think poor old Dr. Joe thinks its surreal of the chucks to complain about their constituency offices being vandalised?

  • latcheeco

    Scaramoose,
    Speaking of surreal. Do you think poor old Dr. Joe thinks its surreal of the chucks to complain about their constituency offices being vandalised?

  • latcheeco

    Apologies, Scaramoosh third time lucky

  • dunreavynomore

    Latcheeco

    Do I detect that somehow you are not downright dismayed that the offices of such democrats are being splattered with paint? Dr Joe, Mr Fitt?? sure they deserved whatever they got,it was DIFFERENT then, don’t you see or so Gerry A says.

    At that time we oppressed people had the right to do whatever we thought fit including shooting m.p.s. Throwing paint on one of our offices, however, especially when it’s thrown by a micro group with no support, is a blatant attack on this state of which we are proud to be a part, the good old u.k. which we now know has our best interests at heart but they didn’t used to and we had to shoot them and bomb them and burn them the bastards but don’t throw paint at us you anti democratic nut cases.

  • Greenflag

    comrade stalin,

    ‘I think it would have been equally unlikely in 1916 had home rule gotten off the ground earlier.’

    Indeed. Most people on this island would have accepted Home Rule in 1911 even Liberal Unionists. The UVF 1912 arms smuggling from the Kaiser and the Ulster Covenant not to mention WW1, and the Tory House of Lords all ‘conspired’ to defeat the democratic will of the vast majority of people on this island .

    The 1916 Rebels moved effectively into the political space provided them by ‘British’ neglect and ignorance . As always in Irish history -British intervention was always too late – one sided – and seemingly designed to turn the majority of people on this island against Britain .

    How to not win friends and turn a majority of the population against you seems to be a recurring British achievement in Ireland through the ages .

    It would be in Britains direct interest to just pack up and leave -however the NI patient has been on intravenous feed for so long now that such a course would result in the demise of the patient with unpleasant social and economic consequences . And the plate is already full of the latter at the present time .

  • Red Diesel Republican

    Dunreavynomore, it’s really very simple. The struggle is entering a new phase. Now repeat after me; old bullets good, new bullets bad. Old bombs good, new bombs bad. Old paint-bombs good, new paintbombs bad … and so on.

  • Comrade Stalin

    The chuckies never forgave Dr Joe for beating Gerry Adams in West Belfast. They were sore about it for years.

  • halfer

    As always, these debates always swing back to the GFA.

    No matter if you paint the (SU)RIRA’s actions and statments as morally or strategically or authoratively questionable, they are a symptom of a failed entity and a failed blueprint to remedy it.

    It doesn’t matter a squat how many voted for or against the GFA (and let’s be honest….that was not a normal referendum) it has failed to address the democratic contradiction that the NI entity presents.

    So surely its time for a new approach that isn’t hamstrung by unionist or british preconditions nor vetoes.

    This doesn’t mean Brits out tomorrow, but a national debate in a 32 county context on what is best for the people of this island and then hopefully a constitutional reconstruction mandated by referendum may be the outcome.

  • Dread Cthulhu

    halfer: “No matter if you paint the (SU)RIRA’s actions and statments as morally or strategically or authoratively questionable, they are a symptom of a failed entity and a failed blueprint to remedy it.”

    Contrariwise, it may be that they are simply a symptom of the fact y’all can’t please everyone and that there is always going to be some shmuck who doesn’t get the memo.

    halfer: “This doesn’t mean Brits out tomorrow, but a national debate in a 32 county context on what is best for the people of this island and then hopefully a constitutional reconstruction mandated by referendum may be the outcome. ”

    That train has likely past, back when Ireland and the UK punted on the border in the years following the establishment of the free state.

    Besides, what makes you so all-fired sure that the RoI even really wants the six counties and the headache they represent?

  • Comrade Stalin

    No matter if you paint the (SU)RIRA’s actions and statments as morally or strategically or authoratively questionable, they are a symptom of a failed entity and a failed blueprint to remedy it.

    So any time a random group of spides and handbag snatchers manage to kill a few people, it’s somebody else’s fault ?

    It doesn’t matter a squat how many voted for or against the GFA (and let’s be honest….that was not a normal referendum) it has failed to address the democratic contradiction that the NI entity presents.

    Nobody cares about this bullshit anymore. When are you going to learn that ?

  • latcheeco

    “Spides and handbag snatchers”
    Do I detect a hint of middle class snobbery in the analysis of the good Comrade?

    Comrade the Stoops were getting decorated well before that (Aren’t you the one always accusing others of not doing their homework?)

  • Mayoman

    Dread, didn’t a fairly recent poll still indicate that a UI is still very much favoured by those south (and north

    “A 2006 Sunday Business Post survey reported that almost 80% of voters in the Republic favour a united Ireland: 22% believe that “achieving a united Ireland should be the first priority of the government” while 55% say they “would like to see a united Ireland, but not as the first priority of government.” Of the remainder 10% said no efforts should be made to bring about a united Ireland and 13% had no opinion.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Ireland#Republic_of_Ireland

  • Mayoman

    Starting line of that should have read …..(and north, as in Donegal ;))

  • Comrade Stalin

    Do I detect a hint of middle class snobbery in the analysis of the good Comrade?

    No.

    Comrade the Stoops were getting decorated well before that (Aren’t you the one always accusing others of not doing their homework?)

    What are you waffling about now ?

  • Dread Cthulhu

    Mayoman: “Dread, didn’t a fairly recent poll still indicate that a UI is still very much favoured by those south (and north, as in Donegal).

    And how many of the realities were included with the poll questions, Mayoman. A UI is a nice notion, but the devil is in the details — costs, bureaucratic changes, the various alphabet soup gangs, etc. What would the answer be in the case of full disclosure?

    Besides, it is easy to answer in the affirmative when the reality of the merger is nowhere on the horizon. Likewise, halfer’s “it’snot *really* their fault, gun’nor — their a symptom of a failed process” isn’t even dry kibble.

    The RoI accepted the partition, full stop. They had the forum and the opportunity to argue their case and opted not to. They have issued the political equivalent of a quit-claim deed. They have made it clear they’re not seeking the place, so what makes you think this collection of hoods and thugs can force it on them?

    Romantic notions aside, what gives this collection of bitter-clingers and dead-enders any sort of political legitimacy? Halfer would seem to suggest that society needs to be re-ordered to make the knuckle-draggers happy, lest they shoot someone else. Do you concur?

  • Itwas SammyMcNally whatdoneit

    Dread Cthulhu,

    “The RoI accepted the partition, full stop”

    Eh. No – the ROI gave up its territorial claim in return for the British legislating for it (ie it is for the people of Ireland alone to decide its constitutional future) and the architecture of the GFA allows for the further erosion of partition.

  • latcheeco

    Comrade,
    You suggested Dr. Joe was given a hard time subsequent to winning WB. My point was that their constituency offices (Mulholland Terrace etc.)were getting brightened up long before that happened.

  • Mayoman

    Dread, the poll says what it says — you are right, it hasn’t asked the question with a metaphorical pistol held against the respondent’s head. That would be a little strange, don’t you concur? (Tell me sir, do you favour a UI. Now, imagine that at this very second you are about to be shot by a loony loyalist. Do you NOW favour a UI?)

    It is true, however, that the threat of unionist violence is a very big factor in repressing the latent republicanism that the poll results suggest. To me, its a massive pity that the province of NI has little more of substance with which to argue its raison d’etre to those south/north of the border. So we have reached the position where RoI pushes little for unification because of fear of the knuckle draggers of unionism. So, yes, I do concur that the knucke draggers of both tribes prevent progression towards the best (of course, just my opinion) result.

  • Dread Cthulhu

    Sammy: “the ROI gave up its territorial claim in return for the British legislating for it (ie it is for the people of Ireland alone to decide its constitutional future) and the architecture of the GFA allows for the further erosion of partition.”

    Sorry, Sammy — I was referring to a far earlier event, when both sides more or less punted on the border in negotiation, which amounted to de facto acceptance, if not de jure.

    That said, that the GFA permits the eventual erosion of the border is neither here nor there. It does not change that the RoI. In short, the RoI surrendered their claim (the political equivalent of a quit-claim deed). I really can’t see a successful plebiscite on reunification in the immediate, near or even medium turn. In fact, I really can’t imagine SF pushing too hard on that front… Oh, SF may talk a good game, but what do they get out of re-unification? A ticket to the back of the political bus.

  • Dread Cthulhu

    Mayoman: “Dread, the poll says what it says—you are right, it hasn’t asked the question with a metaphorical pistol held against the respondent’s head. That would be a little strange, don’t you concur? (Tell me sir, do you favour a UI. Now, imagine that at this very second you are about to be shot by a loony loyalist. Do you NOW favour a UI?)”

    I was primarily thinking of far more pedestrian concerns — rates, taxes, differences in service, etc. The alphabet soup gangs were, what, my third consideration.

    Mayoman: “So we have reached the position where RoI pushes little for unification because of fear of the knuckle draggers of unionism.”

    Well, that and they surrendered their territorial claim.

  • Mayoman

    As unionists have surrendered their claim to an eternal (6-county) “Ulster”. I meant to ask this question before: is there another example of a claim to an agreed sovereignty so fragile that a simple small change in demographics ends that said sovereignty? Is, in fact, Dread, your best hope that, if things swing in a nationalist way, RoI says ‘no’?

  • Dread Cthulhu

    Mayoman: “As unionists have surrendered their claim to an eternal (6-county) “Ulster”. I meant to ask this question before: is there another example of a claim to an agreed sovereignty so fragile that a simple small change in demographics ends that said sovereignty?”

    Usually it doesn’t get that far… the example of Cyprus comes to mind.

    Mayoman: “Is, in fact, Dread, your best hope that, if things swing in a nationalist way, RoI says ‘no’? ”

    Hardly. Like I said before, unification is a nice notion. But, seriously, Mayoman, what benefit does the RoI gain by accepting delivery of a the economic and political basket-case commonly referred to as Northern Ireland / Ulster?

  • Mayoman

    Maybe I believe that unleashing an artificial province from its hospital drip and allowing it to stand within its natural environment may release a potential heretofore deeply hidden! 🙂

  • Dread Cthulhu

    Mayoman: “Maybe I believe that unleashing an artificial province from its hospital drip and allowing it to stand within its natural environment may release a potential heretofore deeply hidden!”

    Another nice thought, but one I put right up there with a winged unicorn dropping off a pizza come break-time…

  • halfer

    Glad to see the debate on this matter. It appears that people do care about it.

    However noone has given me a seingular reason as to why the constituional position of this “basket case” should not be revisited given the recent manifestation of armed violence and the continuing sectarian division in our society. The GFA blueprint simply perpetuates both.

    It is a failed strategy to contain the National question within the 6 and this has been shown.

    Constitutional reform would be designed to adjust the an all ireland economy to adjust to the population expansion with a greater spread of the national wealth. So the reintegration holds some potential for a fairer Ireland for those in the South.

    It’s not enough to simply opine that RoI doesn’t want the north without backing this up with empirical evidence.

  • Comrade Stalin

    Dread,

    Agreed, I don’t think a (dual) referendum on the border is likely to yield a result for ending partition any time soon. The nationalist vote isn’t likely to push beyond 45% for a couple of decades, IMHO. And it’ll get harder to read, since I suspect SF are going to have a lot of difficulty getting their vote out in the next election.

    halfer,

    It’s probably correct to point out that the GFA doesn’t address the problems of sectarianism and division. It makes a small contribution but not a huge one. However, I don’t think a revolutionary change is going to come overnight, and meddling with the constitutional position won’t accelerate that process.

    Constitutional reform would be designed to adjust the an all ireland economy to adjust to the population expansion with a greater spread of the national wealth. So the reintegration holds some potential for a fairer Ireland for those in the South.

    OK, I think it’s safe to conclude that you’re living in some sort of a weird fantasy world. Here on planet reality, the NI economy is a basketcase and is likely to remain that way. Reunification will require financial support coming into the Six; we don’t have any wealth up here to spread around. We sink about £13bn/year in public spending.

  • Dread Cthulhu

    halfer: “However noone has given me a seingular reason as to why the constituional position of this “basket case” should not be revisited given the recent manifestation of armed violence and the continuing sectarian division in our society.”

    Mayhap because it is such a ludicrous notion that we re-order the whole of a society because a couple of hoods who were previously hoods have decided they want to continue being hoods. You are imputing mountainous importance to what is essentially mole-hills. That the dregs of one side’s paramilitary organizations can’t move on from playing “cowboy and indians” is no reason to kow-tow to their desires.

    halfer: “Constitutional reform would be designed to adjust the an all ireland economy to adjust to the population expansion with a greater spread of the national wealth. So the reintegration holds some potential for a fairer Ireland for those in the South.”

    Again, you want the majority to bow to the demands of a minority of the minority. Populations in democratic societies don’t operate on that basis.

    halfer: “It’s not enough to simply opine that RoI doesn’t want the north without backing this up with empirical evidence. ”

    What, as opposed to the fantasy that you’ve spun?

    Mine at least has a rational basis — the price-tag, the bureaucratic integration and the alphabet soup gangs. Your “oop, the whack-jobs don’t wanna play nice, so it is time for everyone to kow-tow to the whack-jobs” is pure fantasy.

  • halfer

    No i think we reorder soceity because it is the only way to resolve a democratic contradiction that has resulted in many waves of armed actions.

    That is the rationale of my arguement. The “few hoods argument” is puerile. The few hoods argument was blown outof the water at massareene and an armed group have shown that they have the capability and resolve to destabilise the failed state. Now I don’t want nor condone politics at the end of a barrel but thats the reality not fantasy.

    The question I am asking is, how do we deal with the future of the failed state?

    your responses haven’t dealt with that. You have slipped into an easy position of negation not based on any evidence based position like mayoman did and garnished your argument with an arrogant tone.

    The truth of the matter is the GFA is a failed blueprint that rewards sectarianism. Given that, how can you expect it to deliver more than sustained sectarianism and waves of bloody violent resistance?

    Furthermore, the arguement that there is no money is folly. There is untapped mineral wealth ripe for nationaisation on the west coast.

    If 90 million euro of toxic debts can be transferred onto the public through taxation as well as the newly formed NAMA ghosting 20 billion from the public to guarantee large depositors. The sole beneficiaries are/were very rich individual and corporate elites here and abroad.

    There is no return on this for the Irish tax payer.

  • Dread Cthulhu

    halfer: “No i think we reorder soceity because it is the only way to resolve a democratic contradiction that has resulted in many waves of armed actions.

    That is the rationale of my arguement”

    Already done. Got the T-shirt. It is the ragged fringe that are still acting thuggish. Your “rationale” isn’t rational.

    halfer: “The “few hoods argument” is puerile. The few hoods argument was blown outof the water at massareene and an armed group have shown that they have the capability and resolve to destabilise the failed state.”

    Feh — a couple of dead-enders got lucky, no more, no less. A couple of back-shooting punks ambush a couple of soldiers and we have to re-arrange the political furniture to suit the fringers, because you try to shoe-horn Belfast into the same category as Somalia. Your proposed “solution” is little more than appeasement of the worst sort — give the alphabet soup gangs what they want. Your suggestion will merely send things back to skittles, since bowing to the Republican dead-enders will merely encourage the Loyalist ones.

    halfer: “The truth of the matter is the GFA is a failed blueprint that rewards sectarianism.”

    No, it is a democratic solution that, like all democracies, isn’t fast, is messy and requires cooperation, not bowing to the thugs. To appease these hoods is just the political form of Danegeld — by giving once, you insure a repeat performance. Likewise, these hoods don’t want a unified Ireland, since the first rational thing a unified Ireland would do is to put the boot down on these gun-toting thugs.

  • Dave

    “In practical terms, rather than technical terms, the poll was a referendum on the GFA and it’s silly for people to try to pretend that it was not.” – Comrade Stalin

    Stop telling lies. Nobody in the south for the GFA. The British-Irish Agreement is a totally separate agreement. The only reason that the British-Irish Agreement was mentioned in the 19th amendment poll at was because of its cross-border sovereignty provisions in Article 2, with the Crotty judgement requiring the people to approve those specific provisions under the Irish constitution, and it had nothing to do with the south agreeing to the GFA.

    In regard to the main substance of 19th amendment, that was removing the Ireland’s territorial claim to Northern Ireland. In other words, declaring that its citizens are born with British nationality and not Irish nationality but instead have the right to self-nominate themselves as members of the Irish nation. It formally declares that Northern Ireland is a foreign state.

  • Dave

    Typo: “Nobody in the south [b]voted[/b] for the GFA.”

  • Dave

    By the way, what difference would it have made if the citizens of Ireland did vote for the GFA instead on the 19th amendment? Bugger all, since the GFA would still have been implemented if the citizens of Northern Ireland voted for it and the citizens of Ireland rejected it. Ergo, the citizens of Ireland are a complete irrelevance to the citizens of Northern Ireland and their entirely seperate claim to self-determination, which is why they did not vote on the GFA. The GFA is the agreement that governs their British state, and not the Irish state.

  • Dave

    Just to hammer home to Mr Stalin a point that those who have not been inoculated with the applicable propaganda would immediately appreciate: the point of a referendum is for the people to either reject or accept a proposal. If the reject it, then the proposal is not implemented. If they accept it, it is. So, what would have happened if Ireland did vote on the GFA and duly rejected it? The GFA would have been rejected in Ireland but it would still be implemented if it was accepted in Northern Ireland. Therefore it is utterly asinine to declare that the people of Ireland had any reason to vote on a proposal where the implementation would not be determined by the outcome of their vote. Again, for slow learners, nobody in Ireland voted for the GFA.

  • Comrade Stalin

    Dave,

    Stop telling lies. Nobody in the south for the GFA. The British-Irish Agreement is a totally separate agreement.

    Yes, an agreement within which the governments stipulate that they will support the GFA. I don’t see the point in making the distinction.

    It’s not possible to make the case that the Irish people opposed the GFA if they voted in favour of a constitutional amendment where the government could choose to agree to implement it.

    By the way, what difference would it have made if the citizens of Ireland did vote for the GFA instead on the 19th amendment? Bugger all, since the GFA would still have been implemented if the citizens of Northern Ireland voted for it and the citizens of Ireland rejected it.

    I don’t agree. It would have been more difficult to implement Strand 2 wouldn’t it ? All the stuff about cross-border bodies ? And the unionists though that the part about cancelling the Anglo-Irish Agreement was very important.

    Further, a vote against that agreement would make it very difficult for the government to introduce legislation and provide support in public for the GFA.

    Like I said, technically the referendum was not about the GFA. In practice, it was.

  • halfer

    wether or not the GFA was voted for by the south or not i think the point that the North as it exists is a failed state is being ignored.

    It is economically unviable ,

    Sectarianism will flourish as long as it exists,

    Self Determination has no place on the Agenda within the GFA framework. And because of this violent responses will arise.

    The GFA was a proosed solution accepted under dubious democratic circumstances but it has failed.

    The few hoods, hangers ons, knuckle dragger argument has been used since 71. Wrong, vaccuous and unproductive then. Likewise now.

  • latcheeco

    Halfer,
    It’s been used by Home Rulers (they find the term unionist offensive) for longer than that.

  • Comrade Stalin

    halfer,

    You’re entitled to your opinion. I think you’re wrong, and so does almost everyone else. I don’t think anyone called the GFA a “solution”.

    latcheeco, a home ruler is not a unionist. Read some history.

  • latcheeco

    Comrade,
    Beg to differ. The distinction is just by degrees.
    But I do plan to follow your kind advice once I get done with Fluff and Nip. Cheers 🙂

  • Dave

    “Yes, an agreement within which the governments stipulate that they will support the GFA. I don’t see the point in making the distinction.”

    Well, if you don’t see the point, why change the point? The point being that “the poll was a referendum on the GFA” when it was no such thing. Indeed, the British-Irish Agreement is a treaty, so it is between two governments, not determined by plebiscite, by definition.

    The people of Ireland didn’t endorse the GFA because the GFA (or, rather, the Act that implemented it) is a matter to be determined by the people it governs (the Northern Irish) via their seperate expression of self-determination.

    You cannot have an act of self-determination that doesn’t determine anything, can you? Their act of self-determination determined whether or not they would implement the GFA, and our seperate act of self-determination determined whether or not we would diminish our national sovereignty by allowing Her Majesty’s government to determine our affairs in respect of the provisions of Article 2 of the British-Irish Agreement (British-Irish Council, Waterways Agency, Food Authority, etc). That was required because the Grotty judgement in the Supreme Court declares that the people must give their consent to degradations of their sovereignty. If that provision wasn’t there, then there would have been no mention at all of the British-Irish Agreement in the 19 Amendment. It is, of course, spun by the Shinners that Ireland gained specific sovereignty over Northern Ireland via these provisions but it is also true that the United Kingdom gained sovereignty over Ireland by the same provisions. If the Republic did not give its own sovereignty away to Her Majesty, it would not have required the consent of the people to do so.

    That cannot be interpreted as an endorsement of the GFA by the people of Ireland or as a statement that the people agree that the Irish state should be bound by any agreement under than the British-Irish Agreement (separate from the GFA). Under the GFA, the former northern nationalists (now constitutional unionists) agreed to renounce their right to national self-determination as members of the Irish nation in exchange for a right to self-determination as members of the Northern Irish nation (some odd mix of British, Irish, Ulster Scots, and wotnot), whereas the citizens of Ireland merely agreed to facilitate the right of the former northern nationalists to renounce that right, but did not agree that they (the citizens of Ireland) should also renounce their right to national self-determination as members of the Irish nation.

    “It’s not possible to make the case that the Irish people opposed the GFA if they voted in favour of a constitutional amendment where the government could choose to agree to implement it.”

    It’s completely irrelevant. They did not vote for the GFA. Nor does it matter whether or not they would have supported it, since even if they did support it, it’s implementation in Northern Ireland did not require their consent. You can’t claim that people supported an agreement because they voted for a separate agreement. What you can claim from the poll result is what was actually determined by the poll result, i.e. that they agree that Northern Ireland is British and that those born there have no birthright to national self-determination as members of the Irish nation, but rather may self-nominate as Irish if that is their fancy. They’re still born British and reside in Her Majesty’s dominion, of course.

    “I don’t agree. It would have been more difficult to implement Strand 2 wouldn’t it ? All the stuff about cross-border bodies ? And the unionists though that the part about cancelling the Anglo-Irish Agreement was very important.”

    It would have been impossible, since that is the part that was determined by Irish self-determination rather than Northern Irish self-determination. You’d just have to leave out those strands, that’s all.

    “Like I said, technically the referendum was not about the GFA. In practice, it was.”

    There is no de facto constitutional law when it is written. It is always de jure. That is the point of writing it down. And, de jure, there is no such thing as an act of self-determination that doesn’t determine anything.