Tuesday, 13 June 2017

UK Tories destroying letter & spirit of Good Friday peace deal

It's important to stress from the outset, the vast majority of the Irish nation on the island of Ireland desire good neighbourly relations with the English, Scottish and Welsh nations of the island of Britain. However, we Irish continue to oppose - as we have done for several centuries - the British state's unjust, immoral and unwanted interference in the internal affairs of our island of Ireland native homeland.

It's of equal importance for the reader to remain mindful, the DUP vehemently opposed all proposed peace deals including the 1998 Good Friday Agreement peace deal. In fact, the DUP's anti-democratic refusal to honour full implementation of the GFA is what caused the collapse of the Stormont mandatory power-sharing Assembly.

The UK Tory party are in the process of entering some form of in/formal coalition with the ultra-rightwing Democratic Unionist Party. Irish Nationalist citizens are alarmed by the prospect of some secret sectarian deal between these parties. We believe, the DUP will not represent Northern Ireland's pro-EU vote and that this coalition breaches the terms of our 1998 Belfast Agreement aka Good Friday Agreement peace deal:

(v) affirm that whatever choice is freely exercised by a majority of the people of Northern Ireland, the power of the sovereign government with jurisdiction there shall be exercised with rigorous impartiality on behalf of all the people in the diversity of their identities and traditions and shall be founded on the principles of full respect for, and equality of, civil, political, social and cultural rights, of freedom from discrimination for all citizens, and of parity of esteem and of just and equal treatment for the identity, ethos, and aspirations of both communities

The DUP has sought to rebut the above concerns, arguing its coalition efforts are no different to Sinn Féin achieving its goal to secure a role in governing the southern Ireland state. However, this is a strawman argument. It's based on ignoring the above 'rigorous impartiality' clause imposed on the UK government alone. Also - given the Irish government has no sovereign control over N Ireland, Irish Sinn Féin's endeavour in the Republic of Ireland is not incompatible with the above and is entirely compatible with the below additional provision of our peace agreement:

“(ii) recognise that it is for the people of the island of Ireland alone, by agreement between the two parts respectively and without external impediment, to exercise their right of self-determination...

The United Kingdom's Tory government must not be allowed to ignore or sidestep the above vitally important points of concern. Furthermore, it must oblige the DUP to stop demanding new compromises in order to timetable full implementation of our GFA, SAA and SHA peace deals that were based on compromise positions. If this doesn't happen, SF voters will not continence the pointless restoration of Stormont and instability will invariably increase across Northern Ireland.

Similarly, the Tory government must be obliged to acknowledge the DUP's historical and current links with British Unionist paramilitary terrorist gangs.

During the 1960's and thereafter, founding members of the DUP formed a number of political groups and terrorist gangs: Ulster Protestant Volunteers; Third Force; and Ulster Resistance.

The DUP has consorted with the still active Ulster Defence Association terrorist gang since its creation in 1971. Notably, in 1975 the UDA bombed Biddy Milligan's pub in London. Here in 2017, UDA terrorists are still killing UK citizens with guns supposedly supplied by the Ulster Resistance gang founded by the DUP.

"How have the DUP gotten away with it for so long? What other party and its leadership would get away with founding and supporting paramilitary loyalist armies and continually aligning itself with loyalist gunmen and killers without suffering the kind of rigorous media questioning that Sinn Fein, quite rightly, has faced?" - A Very British Jihad by Paul Larkin

There are other major civil society concerns with the DUP that ought to alarm all decent people. These include not least numerous instances of alleged corruption and discrimination: Brexti dark financing; RHI grants scandal; NAMA millions; Red Sky housing; and sectarian use of state funds funnelled to its supporters in the anti-Catholic Orange Order and often to UDA and UVF terrorist led “community groups” of various hues.

To keep this brief, individually Google the names of DUP members: Gregory Campbell, Nelson McCausland, Paul Girvan; Willie McCrea, adding phrases such as: insulting Irish language; burning Irish Tricolours; Catholic statues on bonfires; housing discrimination against Irish Nationalists; praising terrorist companions; DUP Pastor McConnell and Muslims...

The pro-Orange Order DUP's ethos is that of evangelical creationists and climate deniers who oppose equal UK citizenship. In particular, the DUP opposes gay marriage and gay adoption, and liberal abortion healthcare. Plus, despite a binding agreement between the Irish and UK governments and the UK's UN Treaty obligation on minority native languages, the DUP thumbs its finger at Downing Street and continues to refuse to implement an indigenous Irish language protection Act (even despite the Scottish and Welsh languages enjoy such protection). All of the above is causing neverending turmoil in Northern Ireland and has resulted in the collapse of the Stormont devolved Assembly.

The most infamous of the above terrorist gangs and sub-groups who joined the DUP are: Noel Little (Father of current MP Emma Little-Pengelly), Charles Watson, William McCaughey, Ivan Foster, Frank McCoubrey, George Seawright, Sam White, Tommy Kirkham, Tommy Sandford, John Smyth and many others. Indeed, both former and current UDA members continue to campaign for DUP election candidates.

Ian Richard Kyle Paisley is a founding member of the DUP. He is the Son of a member of the original Ulster Volunteer Force gang of terrorists. In 1913, that illegally armed UVF threatened the UK government and Irish nation with bloody insurrection to halt enactment of the 1912 Home Rule Bill democratically campaigned for by the majority of Ireland.

In 1966, the Ulster Protestant Volunteers was formed by the DUP's founding member Ian Paisley and a Noel Doherty: the latter being a member of Paisley's fundamentalist Free Presbyterian Church in Belfast. In October 1966, Doherty was imprisoned for procurement of explosives for the UPV. In 1968, the UPV bombed various locations in the North and South of Ireland. Paisley and his Ulster Protestant Telegraph newspaper blamed these bombings on the then defunct IRA. During one of these bombings, UPV member Thomas McDowell was terminally injured and the evil Paisley incitement plot was thereby exposed.

Peter Robinson is the second former leader of the DUP and a founding member of the Ulster Resistance gang. He was arrested during an incident whereon a masked mob of Unionists raided the Republic of Ireland and attacked a police station and injured Officers. Peter Robinson is both the mentor of the current DUP leader Arlene Foster aswell as the election manager of current MP Emma Little-Pengelly. As the below videos prove, Peter Robinson refused to condemn the UDA as murdering terrorists. Also, both he, Ian Paisley and Nigel Dodds have attended paramilitary glorification funerals of UDA terrorists, with Robinson even carrying the coffin of a UDA leader – remember UDA terrorists murdered over four hundred citizens and most were innocent Irish Nationalist civilians.

Sammy Wilson MP is a founding member of the Ulster Resistance gang. We know, he reportedly referred to as 'sub-human animals' Irish Nationalists and mocked the murders of others. He also reportedly approved of a 1994 UDA terrorist Dooms Day plot to ethnically cleanse native Irish Nationalist Catholics from Northern Ireland. More recently, he was recorded endorsing a suggestion to expel ethnic minorities from Northern Ireland. Furthermore, Mr Wilson MP reportedly made outrageous derogatory remarks about homosexual citizens and is a very vocal climate denier.

DUP member Charles Watson founded Ulster Resistance along with the DUP's Ian Paisley, Peter Robinson and Sammy Wilson. Amongst other notorious terrorist crimes, Watson was implicated in the sectarian murder of Irish GAA sporting figure Jack Kielty, Father of Irish comedian Paddy Kielty.

Importantly, rifles, handguns, grenades and rocket launchers illegally imported by the DUP's Ulster Resistance gang have never been decommissioned. These weapons were reportedly handed over to the still active UDA terrorist gang. Conveniently, after the existence of these weapons became public knowledge, the DUP then contended it had severed its links with Ulster Resistance. However, there isn't a scintilla of evidence to suggest when this supposed disassociation actually occurred, or why.... why?

Here in 2017, the current DUP leader Arlene Foster has yet to condemn the actions of the Ulster Resistance gang or its founders. Similarly, Mrs Foster has never condemned her mentor Peter Robinson's above refusal to condemn UDA terrorism and his glorification of dead UDA terrorists. Furthermore, amidst murderous and drug gangster UDA activities, the DUP continues to consort with members of the UDA terrorist gang who reportedly received Ulster Resistance guns that are still killing UK citizens.

When today's DUP members and supporters refer to 'terrorists' and 'victims of terrorism', they must be obliged to address the DUP's terrorist antecedents and current connections with still active terrorist gangs.

Finally, what has the United Kingdom's Prime Minister, Theresa May, got to say about the above?

Wednesday, 24 May 2017

Global Terrorism: British Empire -v- ISIS Caliphate

When you look into a mirror, you presumably see what you believe to be a fair-minded and morally righteous human being. However, let's put that to the test to establish whether it's a true reflection...

Did British Empire builders and ISIS Caliphate builders perpetrate the very same crimes? Yes. Did both invade countries and engage in mass murder of civilians? Yes. Did both foreign entities behead, torture, rape and rob native peoples? Yes. Can this plain and accurate comparison be credibly denied? No!!!

'Britain's governments and civil service have been engaged in the greatest identity fraud of all time - the dishonest and manufactured creation of our understanding of the British nation, our history and our culture' – from The History Thieves by Ian Cobain

British state leaders and their forces: the regular British Army; UDR militia; and RUC police, claim they upheld the law in this Northern Ireland colony statelet. They claim, they were protecting civilians from opposing paramilitary groups. However, during our most recent conflict between 1969 and our peace deal agreement of 1998 they killed mostly innocent civilians, not members of paramilitary groups. Furthermore, they colluded with British Unionist terrorists in the murder of hundreds more native Irish Nationalist civilian citizens.

Add to their aforementioned illegal acts, British state forces harassed, dehumanised and beat Irish Nationalists during daily pedestrian and vehicle check-point stops, property searches and sectarian raids into known Irish nationalists districts. They unjustly arrested, tortured and falsely imprisoned thousands of Irish citizens. And contrary to British propaganda, all these many tens of thousands of human rights abuses were not the actions of 'rogue elements' but rather part of the very same British state policies used extensively in its other colonies.

It's time British people acknowledged, the conduct of evil ISIS pales compared to the British Empire which invaded 9 out of 10 of the world's countries and killed an estimated 180-240 million (if one includes deliberate starvation programmes such as in Ireland and India etc). During these endeavours the British state built-up an inglorious legacy of debasing, enslaving, torturing and slaughtering civilians and assassinating political opponents in pursuit of its colonial objectives. This it did across its colonies in Ireland, India, China, America, Africa, through to Egypt, Iraq 1920's, Palestine 1930's, Malaya 1948-60, Cyprus 1950's, Kenya 1950's, Cameroon 1960's, Malaysia 1965-66, Aden 1960's etc.

Today, the British state along with others secretly fund and arm Al-Qaeda offshoot and other terrorist groups in the middle east. In 2005, British state special forces armed with explosives and firearms were caught masquerading as civilians in Iraq. This unit was perpetrating false flag 'counter-gangs' operations similar to those perpetrated in Ireland in the 1970's: plain-clothed British MRF/SAS units shot Irish Nationalist civilians with the aim of stoking internecine conflict with British Unionist citizens.

'If it is necessary sometimes to lie to others, it is always despicable to lie to oneself' - William Maugham.

Finally, using terms such as 'a state legal force' and 'illegal terrorist organisation' provides no answer to the all-important question: is there ample evidence to prove that British colonial state forces in Ireland systematically broke its own laws, murdered mostly civilians, and thereby lost any right to claim the moral highground in our conflict?


P.s The original version of this blog post was published on Jude Collins website on 18th May 2017.

Tuesday, 23 May 2017

Ireland: ethnic cleansing and racism by supremacist British Colonialists

Today, as a deflection tactic, some British Unionists in the Northern Ireland colony statelet mockingly dismiss the native Irish nation's litany of legitimate 'ethnic cleansing' grievances and absurdly claim ownership of this victimhood issue.

Ethnic cleansing of the native Irish nation by foreign British occurred over a period of centuries and was extensive, brutal, and had lasting consequences. Though the British state long ago ended these evil practices, alas, varying degrees of similar tactics continued to be perpetrated by certain elected British Unionist/Colonialist politicians and British terrorist gangs.

Let's have a brief look at our relevant ancient history, our recent past and then what's occurring in the here and now...

Ireland is the only European country that now has a population less than it had in the 1800's. Our once estimated 10 million plus population was by the early 1800's reduced to 8 million. Then, due to various additional ethnic cleansing policies, this already reduced figure was nearly halved by the time the majority of Ireland broke free of foreign British colonial rule in 1921.

At one stage in Ireland's history of occupation, the British state had stolen and gifted to strategically planted foreign British Colonists four-fifths of the land mass of Ireland. During these processes, those native Irish who escaped murder faced various ethnic cleansing policies: forced to live on virtual wasteland hillsides and bogs; forcibly transported to work to death on British Empire plantations in foreign lands; and/or obliged to flee to other countries in “coffin ships” on which many perished. A hint of what was occurring during those dark times can be gleaned from England's 1652 Act of Settlement of Ireland which, in practice, deemed the native Irish nation traitors and deserving of punishment by their foreign colonial occupier:

'Whereas the Parliament of England, after the expense of much blood and treasure for suppression of the horrid rebellion in Ireland, have by the good hand of God upon their undertakings, brought that affair to such an issue, as that a total reducement and settlement of that nation may, with God's blessing, be speedily effected...'

Throughout the 1600's, foreign British Colonists were extensively planted across Ireland's northern province of Ulster. Their raison de'tre was then and remains true to this day: to aid and abet a foreign England's colonial state to suppress and dominate the most independent-minded and resolutely freedom-loving native Irish of Ulster.

In 1791, the British state passed the Roman Catholic Relief Act. This relaxation of penal laws allowed the native Irish nation to purchase land. By 1795, enraged British Colonists in Ulster were alleging they were victims of “ethnic cleansing” due to the native Irish being prepared to pay higher acreage prices. In response, British Colonists such as armed sectarian murdering terrorists Dan Winters and James Sloan et al formed the Orange Order terrorist group. It began murderously perpetrating actual ethnic cleansing of those land-purchasing native Irish of the southern counties of Ulster (this terrorism is still regularly glorified and celebrated by the Orange Order, which also glorifies their 1849 terrorist murder of 80(?) Irish Catholics during the Dollys Brae massacre).

In 1921, the British colonial parliament of Westminster in England imposed partition of Ireland with threats of 'immediate and terrible war.' Thus was craved out of Ireland's 9 county province of Ulster the undemocratic 6 county Northern Ireland colony statelet with its artificial majority of British Unionists/Colonialists.

During the 1920's, the new governing Ulster Unionist Party and Orange Order orchestrated a series of fear-instilling and inducement campaigns aimed at British Colonialist Protestants in the South. They were encouraged to evacuate their families and move their sectarian businesses to help bolster and grow the new Northern Ireland state: this campaign conjured imagines of dire retribution by the native Irish in the South and of salvation in the form of offers of new homes and new jobs in the “new Ulster state” [sic].

During 1920-22, UUP politicians and Orangemen incited a new wave of pogroms against the native Irish citizens of the new Northern Ireland state: hundreds were murdered and thousands injured; thousands had their homes and businesses destroyed; and additional thousands were hounded out of their jobs by British Colonialist mobs.

In 1964, British Colonialist UVF terrorists subjected the native Irish to a new wave of murders and firebombing of their businesses. In a subsequent related Court of Appeal hearing in 1969, the court in Belfast deemed this spate of attacks amounted to ethnic cleansing crimes.

14th August 1969, during the Clonard pogrom, eight citizens were murdered, hundreds were injured and fifteen hundred native Irish citizens homes were destroyed... these events ignited a thirty-year conflict deeply felt by those of us who lived through those terrible times.

In 1994, British Colonialist UDA terrorists devised a Doomsday Plan to ethnic cleanse the NI colony statelet of its native Irish population. A prominent member of the Democratic Unionist Party, Sammy Wilson, reportedly said this evil plan was 'a very valuable return to reality.'

In 2004, British Colonialist UDA terrorists threateningly issued a new ethnic cleansing type warning that it 'had drawn an "orange line" around [British] Protestant areas, beyond which [Irish] Catholics would not be permitted.'

Flash forward to the unfolding year of 2017, the old anti-Irish ethnic cleansing mentality of our supremacist British Colonialists still prevails. That said, it's radically morphed e.g

The Orange Order buys land to block native Irish Catholic purchases.
A DUP Stormont Minister and Orangeman stands accused of anti-Irish/anti-Catholic housing decisions.
A DUP Minister stands accused of suspiciously refusing to approve development of new Irish language schools.
A DUP Minister is lambasted for cutting a tiny Irish language fund, and further refusing funds to other Irish culture groups while massively increasing funds to British Colonialist entities closely associated with anti-Irish and anti-Catholic activities.
A DUP Minister changed the original native Irish name of a state owned boat to a English name.
A DUP Minister praises the burning of Irish symbols.

The above are but a mere sample of the relentless discriminatory and hateful conduct toward all things Irish.

"…there is no nation of people under the sun that doth love equal and indifferent justice better than the Irish..." - Sir John Davies (17th century Attorney General for English King James I).

Sadly, anti-Irish sentiment is not the only moronic and unacceptable trait to be found within certain quarters of the British Unionist/Colonialist community in Ireland. Alas, racism toward our newly arrived ethnic communities is a daily occurrence and all this filthy conduct must end.

Finally, British Unionists/Colonialists in Ireland must come to terms with the reality that the road ahead for them is one of being treated not as superior beings but as equal citizens.


P.s The original version of this blog post of mine was published on Jude Collins website on 32st May 2017.

Monday, 15 May 2017

Linguistic Shenanigans: who politicised the Irish language in Ireland?

Céad míle fáilte (a hundred thousand welcomes).

I was struck by a debate on BBC Talkback on 12th May 2017, with Mark Carruthers interviewing the News Letter’s Editor, Ben Lowry about Acht na Gaeilge… the supremacist and fear-based outpourings during this radio show prompted me to revisit my thoughts on the wider topic of the language.

Firstly, the whole island of Ireland is the native homeland of the Irish nation. Our rich ancient indigenous language, culture and heritage identify us as the unique and distinguishable settled nation we’ve been since long before the English language existed or even a Union of British nations existed.

Secondly, British Unionists must cease framing debates on promotion of Irish identity, culture and heritage as if such were not inalienable native peoples rights but rather privileges to be granted by their colonial masters. In the DUP's supposed “UK of equals” the Scots and Welsh nations have a unique Act to protect their indigenous language. Why, therefore, are British Unionists even asking native Irish citizens to justify insisting on a similar right – the fact they seek to treat Irish differently is what requires robust probing.

Pursuant to its UN and EU Treaty obligations, the UK government has an obligation to enact legalisation to protect the minority native Irish language within its jurisdiction. Secondly, in the Saint Andrews Agreement between the Irish and British governments, the UK committed to enact an Irish language Act. Thirdly, the High Court in Belfast ruled unlawful the refusal by Stormont to provide even just an Irish language strategy.

We all agreed in our 1998 GFA peace deal to build 'parity of esteem ' within the NI state between British and Irish identities. However, British Unionist politicians have since refused to fully implement this way forward. Why? Well, it seems they oppose genuine equality and parity and realise that native Irish citizens are determined to ensure there's a rebalancing of the dominant anglo-centric society imposed upon Ireland by a culture-destroying colonial Westminster parliament in foreign England.

Tá an tír lena dteanga féin tír a anam féin – a country with its own language is a country with its own soul.

In Germany, China, Russia, France, Spain, Italy and Poland etc, their personal names, their place names, roads and streets are in their indigenous language. Their children are educated in the language indigenous to their native homeland and such nurtures in them a unique sense of self and belonging. This becoming a reality in the North of Ireland seems to terrify insecure British Unionist/Colonialist politicians who reject their birthright Irish identity, preferring to instead cling to some imaginary bond with the people of Great Britain who would cut them adrift in a heartbeat if ever given a vote on the issue - maybe the British in Britain will be afforded a chance to vote on a final Brexit deal that draws a border between the island of Britain and island of Ireland and thereby prove this fact.

Like every Irish Nationalist child who attended a Catholic school, I was taught Irish at school but struggled to ever use it in a public sphere controlled by a British Unionist orange supremacist state. Importantly, in those dark repressive days, the UUP and DUP were overtly hostile to all aspects of Irish identity and culture and Sinn Féin were the only party that bothered to promote these in the public sphere. Thankfully, we Irish have arisen off our knees and stand proudly and resolutely with this goal in mind: we will ensure that a brighter and more enriched future awaits all of our children. I repeat: all of our children.

The overwhelming majority of Irish speakers consistently elect Sinn Féin and the Socialist Democratic Labour Party to represent their interests, and those interests are supported by the wider Nationalist community who elect these parties. Prior to the last election, the DUP insisted it would never agree a new Irish language Act and rejected representations on this by Sinn Féin and the SDLP. This was despite the fact that an Act formed part of the Saint Andrew's Agreement the DUP signed. In March 2017, Sinn Féin came within one seat of being the largest party at the Stormont regional election. Alarmed by this, the DUP leader hastily attended an Irish class in a Catholic school in Armagh (the constituency of Sinn Féin MP Mickey Brady and Megan Fearon MLA who is the party’s spokesperson for children) in what the DUP portrayed as some supposed act of outreach to Irish speakers. In reality, this visit was more a case of the DUP acting as the supremacist Gatekeeper showing its own voters that the DUP would decide who it deemed entitled to represent Irish speakers.

A blind man could detect that we Irish remain the victims of a centuries old ongoing cultural war. Today, this war is being fought by the offspring of those planted here to aid and abet British state evil efforts to eradicate what’s Irish in Ireland and supplant it with what’s English/British. It’s time, British Unionists politicians conceded that politicisation of what’s Irish in Ireland was perpetrated by the British in Ireland i.e a non-Irish/foreign state in Ireland: see its 1367 Statute of Kilkenny; 1695 Foreign Education Act; the Justice Act 1737; the 1831 National Education Act outworkings of a Tally Stick/Bata Scoir used to beat school children who spoke Irish; plus recall the 1921 exclusion of the Irish language, uniquely Irish sports and Irish history from the new NI statelet’s curriculum (to ensure state schools were ‘safe for [British Unionist] Protestant children').

Today, British Unionists aren't using draconian penal laws to attack Irish identity, language and culture. Instead, today the DUP and Orange Order et al use "leprechaun language' and "curry my yogurt" insults and demonise even Irish Protestants for learning or promoting Gaeilge. These British Unionists moreover engage in a series of devious tactics to undermine revival of the Irish language and culture. For instance, they absurdly seek parity between the Gaeilge language with their obscure Ulster-Scots dialect whereas the true comparator is their dominant English language: there isn't a single Ulster-Scots school but growing demand for Gaeilge language schools. Also, Unionists refuse to agree to authorise building of new Irish schools, engage in discriminatory funding of existing cultural projects and conjure bogus ‘costs and economy’ excuses to mask their discriminatory actions and attitude. For instance, they falsely suggest the unit cost the state allocates to educating one child in a Irish bunscoil isn’t precisely the same as allocated to a school teaching the state curriculum in English. They further stupidly contend, teaching the curriculum in non-English is detrimental to building a successful economy in modern day Europe. However, this conniving nonsense ignores that not least German industry was built on its indigenous language and it remains thee most successful economy on this our European continent.

Since the undemocratic creation of the N Ireland statelet in 1921, the majority of British Unionists either raged at, shunned, marginalised, mocked and demonised displays of Irish identity, language, culture and history. Consequently, it's unsurprising that during the 1980s it was once said at a Sinn Féin event: 'Every word of Irish spoken is like another bullet being fired in the struggle for Irish freedom.' To this day, British Unionists perversely cite this one-off remark as the cause of the politicisation of the Irish language. This utterly depraved British Unionist tactic of inverting Irish grievance issues to portray themselves as the aggrieved is not uncommon but no less a gross act of political chicanery.

The most scandalously blind British Unionist deflection nonsense I’ve heard in answer to the above is being told in English: you Irish should stop complaining we occupied your country and be thankful we British defeated the Nazis or you would now be speaking German. In my opinion, what motivates these type of insecure and absurd utterances is concern about "losing" their Afrikaner-like British-in-Ireland sense of superiority and becoming equals with the Irish in Ireland.

British Unionist politicians deny they have a fear-based hatred of the Irish language and Irish culture, and are quick to contend: sure Ireland’s Presbyterian community helped preserve the language. That, however, is pure sophistry. It’s true that a few self-identifying Irish Presbyterians belatedly helped save Irish culture from the near death throes of destruction efforts by the British state. However, here’s the rub. The vast majority of Presbyterians were no less hostile to the Irish language and culture than the vast majority of their British Unionist counterparts in the Anglican, Methodist and other sects of Protestantism and to suggest otherwise is devious myth-making.

As British Unionist Protestant Professor John Brewer observed: Unionists can more readily tell you what they oppose than what they represent. If truth be told, British Unionists in Ireland dread their colonial sense of identity becoming eclipsed if they ceased proactively sustaining their forefathers suppression and opposition toward native Irish identity and culture.

In addition to Ben Lowry’s ‘alarm’ and ‘suspicious’ remarks on the BBC Talkback radio programme there are other striking example of what truly motivates Unionists attitude toward Irish language and culture. For instance, during a 19th February 2015 televised Stephen Nolan show whereon the Irish language was being discussed DUP politician and Orangeman Nelson McCausland oozed insecurity when he alleged that the Irish nation were promoting our indigenous language in order to, supposedly, cause the ‘cultural humiliation of [British] Unionists’, adding he was ‘absolutely… absolutely’ serious.

When you invite British Unionists born in Ireland to describe their ‘British’ sense of identity most struggle. This is unsurprising given it's rejected by most English (67%), Welsh (60%) and Scottish (62%). Many refer to their incessant flag waving and militaristic parading etc. Others seek to claim sole ownership over universal values and common, modern western nation characteristics. To-date, none have convincingly rebutted the central point made by wise Welsh politician Gwynor Evans who opined:

‘What is Britishness… it is another word for Englishness… which extends Englishness over the lives of the Welsh, the Scots and the Irish. If one asks, what the difference is between English culture and British culture ones realises that there is no difference.’

In closing, I leave British Unionist readers in particular with this doubly telling remark from their English former master Winston Churchill who at least understood the spirit of we Irish would never be crushed:

Oscail an doras go saol eile, léigh leabhar Gaeilge – Open the door to another world, read an Irish language book!


P.s The original version of this blog post was published by me on Sunday 14th May on Jude Collins website.

Sunday, 14 May 2017

N Ireland: succinctly label your constitutional politics position?

Imagine you’re standing outside a polling booth and have been invited to enter to answer this question: “What’s your political choice on the constitutional status of Northern Ireland”:

I opt for Northern Ireland to:

1) maintain its status quo of being a constituent part of the United Kingdom
2) be governed by the UK and RoI under a new centre-ground joint sovereignty agreement
3) become a nuetral independent sovereign country in its own right
4) reunite with the Republic of Ireland and as one united country rejoin the UK
5) unite with the RoI and form a new sovereign and independent country

Party Raison d'etre

A political party exists to promote a certain political ideology and it translates this into specific policies. Thereafter, it actively assists voters to make informed decisions and empower the party to implement its ideological values: this is the raison d'etre of each and every political party. Importantly, party candidates are not a collective of independents with personal manifestos. What they are selling you - or ought to be selling you - is the true ideological values of the party, not lone wolf personal choices. Consequently, never allow a candidate to hoodwink you or prevaricate on a particularly wishy-washy party policy stance.

Your Political Belief

The politically naïve party supporter taught the trite mantra 'I don't belong in a binary choice box' is now at a ballot box and hence now obliged to state their choice. The obfuscating party member has nowhere to hide. Now, the above full range of applicable options on the constitutional status of N Ireland is before them so they must now state their choice: they either opposed voting on the issue and thereby still passively accept the status quo, or they cast a vote to re-enforce or change the status quo.

Ideological Definitions

Now, let’s proceed to ascribe a succinct and unique political identity label to each of the above choices such as will help readily distinguish them during a political debate. Note, we aren’t herein seeking to denote a person’s national identity, cultural and/or religious choices but just their constitutional politics choice. This writer contends, how a citizen reacts to the above question might reasonably and logically translate into their ‘constitutional status’ identity label being depicted as follows:

a) British Colonialist – presently wants to keep the Irish nation divided and maintain the status quo of NI being governed by the English-dominated colonial Westminster parliament in England (Alliance and Greens?)

b) Northern Irish Separatist – wants to create a new independent sovereign NI country (a John McMichael?)

c) British-Irish Neutralist – promotes joint sovereignty over NI by the UK and RoI governments as the centre-ground way forward (not Alliance or Green parties?)

d) Irish Unionist – supports uniting the Irish nation within the UK Union (a Ruth Dudley-Edwards?)

e) Irish Nationalist – advocates a united Irish nation forming a new independent sovereign country (a George Galloway?)

The Party' Ideology

The DUP and UUP are unashamedly pro-UK British Unionists/Colonialists.

SF and SDLP are unashamedly pro-United Ireland Nationalists/Republicans.

The Alliance Party were formed as a pro-UK Unionist-lite liberal party. Like the Green Party, it professes to be 'neutral' and supposedly offers a 'middle ground' position on the constitutional status of N Ireland. However, in practice, despite their semantics, both of these parties share the very same constitutional status position as the DUP and UUP: all do not propose any change to the status quo of NI being a constituent part of the UK Union.

Disguised Sectarian Politicking

The pro-UK Unionist-lite Alliance in particular engage in thee most duplicitous sectarian politicking. In their quest to maintain Westminster's colonial rule, Alliance strive to demonise Irish republicans into silence, offensively accusing us of being supposedly ‘sectarian’ and ‘divisive’ when we invite Alliance and its fellow British Unionists to properly debate reuniting the Irish nation in Ireland.

If you want to glean the true constitutional politics of the supposedly ‘neutral’ Alliance and indeed the Green Party, test them on the above options and await their machiavellian squirming to evade giving you straight and coherent answers.

Honesty Creates Understanding

Finally, if we are ever to truly understand each others position and reconcile our differences,  we must escape the wishy-washy liberal speak and false accusations of trolling. We must begin to meaningfully engage in stating, defining, and then understanding and reconciling our differences. A  serious impediment to truly overcoming this fundamental obstacle is the dishonest ‘neutral’ and ‘sectarian’ shenanigans intended to deceive us.


I published the original version of this blog post on Jude Collins website on 30th April 2017

Sunday, 26 February 2017

North of Ireland – mainstream media is part of our problem

Our society needs a lengthy series of televised conflict related debate programmes. These ought to consist of a panel of spokespersons from recognised victims groups and human right bodies and focus on clinically interrogating a panel of political party leaders on a truth and reconciliation theme.

The fact that the DUP and UUP failed to attend this week's major cross-community victims conferences at the Balmoral Hotel and Europa Hotel speaks volumes and must be challenged by mainstream media presenters.

In a broken society pleading to be helped to heal its hurt and divisions ours, more than most societies, needs but lacks a truly independent and probative mainstream media.

Jurists are taught to remain vigilant to the fact that every human is endowed with various prejudices, biases and personal preferences and some can lurk at a subconscious level and shape our words and deeds. In this regard, mainstream media Presenters are no less human. Indeed in their profession keeping a ratings-ego in check and stretching beyond stoking sensationalism are all factors that present additional challenges to remaining impartial enough to properly discharge a solemn public interest duty. Some succeed, some do not!!!

On 17th February 2017, Stephen Nolan interviewed Sinn Fein's Conor Murphy to supposedly review the party's election manifesto. However, Nolan spent this interview demonising Sinn Féin's republican ideology and belittling its demand that Unionists show equality and respect to Irish citizens – you can rest assured British Unionist Nolan avoided grilling fellow Unionists in the UUP and DUP on their history of involvement with Unionist terrorist groups, plus their regular glorification of British state forces and campaigning for immunity for those forces who murdered hundreds of Irish civilians?

On 21st February 2017, William Crawley conducted a pre-election interview with the UUP party leader. During the 'phone-in segments, British Unionist Crawley seemed to actively assist the UUP leader's efforts to avoid acknowledging it wasn't Sinn Féin but British penal laws and then a UUP government that politicised the Irish language; the UUP run state excluded our native Gaeilge language and Gaelic sports from the state school curriculum.

On 23rd February 2017, Mark Carruthers chaired a debate involving a panel of politicians being quizzed by a student audience. British Unionist Carruthers was faced with a student contending we need a border poll given the disastrous impact Brexit will have on the NI economy and on our GFA peace. Carruthers ignored this and proceeded to invite a different student to pose a pre-arranged inane time-wasting question: which politician from a different party did the individual panel members most admire.

It's vitally important to monitor how certain Presenters frame, constrain and/or divert debates relating to our most important and contentious issues. Equally, it's vitally important to monitor the attitude of BBC and ITV mainstream Presenters to certain political sectors: they tend to treat British government officials such as the SoS as masters who deigned to be interviewed; they mostly treat Unionist politicians like delinquent siblings in need of scolding; and too often they treat Republican politicians as tantamount to a foreign arch enemy.

Our broken society needs to see a step-change in attitude by our mainstream media Presenters; start working truly in 'the public interest'... or resign!!!

Thursday, 22 September 2016

Northern Ireland - Unionist values and identity dilemma

The mindset of many Unionists within the Northern Ireland statelet is, at times, truly baffling...

Unionists Ideological Anchor

Who are that large cohort the UUP and DUP describe as the "British Unionist Protestant people of Ulster" who empower them to speak and act on their behalf? What we know about the professed collective values of this cohort can, I believe, be summarised thus: they claim to be loyal to the British state but have frequently refused to obey its authority, attacked and even murdered state officials. Furthermore, though they contend their ideological anchor with Britain is a supposed shared belief in personal autonomy and equality of UK citizenship rights, oddly, they have since their arrival on the island of Ireland opposed native Irish Nationalist Catholics accessing those equal UK citizen rights.

'Do not blame Caesar, blame the people of Rome who have so enthusiastically acclaimed & adored him & rejoiced in their loss of freedom' - Cicero

Supremacist Unequal Citizenship

Today, there are a few loud Unionist voices who contend their community solemnly cherish modern British values. However, the evidence says otherwise. Firstly, most voting Unionists continue to empower the DUP, UUP and TUV who oppose modern abortion rights and LGBT marriage rights available to citizens in other parts of the UK. Secondly, whereas the Scottish and Welsh nations of the UK have native language protection laws, Unionist politicians continue to oppose a similar native Irish language protection Act. Thirdly, Irish Nationalist Catholic districts remain the most impoverished districts of NI according to official measures and that's due to a sectarian refusal by Unionists to allocate poverty funds on objective needs grounds.

Ulster Unionists must free themselves from what in truth are their ancient British Empire era colonial values and learn to embrace the 21st century societal values cherished by the Irish in Ireland and the British in Britain.

Confused Colonial Identities

On this island of Ireland known to the world as the native homeland of the Irish nation, too many Unionists in this backward NI colony statelet region conflate the differences between a) nation(al) identity verses b) state citizenship. If Unionists are minded to understand and thereafter escape their self-destructive, antiquated British colonial mindset and resulting muddled identity choices then they might want to consider the following:

British Only: If you believe the NI state is legitimate, why do you lack the commitment and confidence to embrace its 'N Irish' identity? Is it that your sense of identity is rooted in a political ideology and thus any acknowledgement of even a pseudo 'Irish' dimension to your identity alarms you?
British and Irish: If your sense of identity isn't rooted in politics and/or you aren't suffering from an identity crisis, why aren't you advocating a reunified Ireland within the UK? Being Irish, how could you sensibly want to maintain the division of the nation to which you claim to belong?
British, Irish and N Irish/Ulster: If you believe the NI state is legitimate and should remain a part of the UK why bother insincerely professing to part of the 'Irish nation' whose unity you oppose?
N Irish/Ulster Only: If you're neither British nor Irish but Northern Irish, why are you not promoting an independent NI state? Is it, you're just a British Unionist but too dishonest or ashamed to admit it?
Irish Only: If it isn't that you're just lazy or otherwise just deceiving yourself or out to deceive others, why aren't you actively promoting the reunification and independence of your divided nation?

To place the above in context, note that based on the 2011 Census data for the N I colony state region those deemed to belong to the Ulster British Unionist Protestant community can be divided into six groupings:

76% British only;
11% British and N Irish/Ulster only;
1% British Irish and N Irish;
5.5% N Irish/Ulster only;
1.1% British-Irish only;
5.4% Irish only
Importantly, the sum of these 6 cohorts represent roughly 15% of Ireland's total population.

Unionists abandonment of Irish identity stretches back to the 1st Home Rule Bill of 1886 and was down to 20% by 1968 (the year before they started our last internecine conflict then labelled Nationalists the aggressors). To most Unionists/Colonialists, Irish was only ever a mere British ethnicity and not a ancient nation in our own right. As the majority Irish nation kept rising against abuses by colonisers and sought to end foreign colonial rule by London, the Unionist community's view on identity became that expressed by the infamous 1912 Larne gunrunner Fred Crawford who said: "I am ashamed to call myself an Irishman. Thank God I am not one...".

Nowadays, Unionist politicians who oppose reunification of the Irish nation (whether a reunified Ireland were inside or outside of the UK) continue to perpetuate a British colonial identity psychosis that's destructive of the wellbeing of citizens they purport to represent. For instance:

DUP's Sammy Wilson advises, he's 'not Irish' despite being born in Ireland. He insists, 'I'm British' despite he wasn't born in Britain; a political jurisdiction consisting of England, Scotland and Wales.
UKip's David McNarry says "you can't be both British and Irish" and insists Irish people like me also born in the (colonially ruled) North of Ireland region should surrender our birthright Irish Passports.
PUP's party leader Billy Hutchinson very publicly mocks those born within the occupied North of Ireland who identify as 'Irish', while members of his party profess and promote a British-Irish identity.
Additionally, Unionists mostly from the N Irish cohort will blandly say they're advocates of our 1998 'shared future' peace deal while telling me, my nation(al) identity is supposedly N Irish not Irish.

British Identity: I am not British; I wasn't born in Britain. And it's offensive colonial supremacism for the Unionist 1% British-Irish identity cohort to tell me, I'm supposedly anti-British people as I object to being told I'm British and told my 'Irish nation' is de facto some mere British-Irish ethnicity; it's just the IRISH NATION!!!

Northern Irish: I chuckle at the ironic naivety of this cohort of Unionists insisting, whether I like it or not I'm supposedly not Irish but N Irish - did this fabricated British colonial hybrid identity form any part of the 1998 GFA "shared future" peace deal this cohort often mention but only in mischeviously vague terms? No!!! Can these "Wolves in Sheep clothing" Unionists convince even a third of fellow Unionists to adopt this NI statelet identity and particularly given that to all Unionists the NI statelet is a supposedly legitimate and cherished entity? No!!!

Citizenship: Unlike Unionists, my sense of nation(al) identity isn't dependent on whether I'm entitled to a Citizenship Passport from the Irish State or UK State. Unionists who require their British identity to be propped-up by a Passport travel document and/or our 1998 GFA peace deal plainly must feel terribly insecure.

Logic suggests - being mindful they're in a land outside Britain, Unionists prefer to avoid facing the above points as such shake the very foundations of their colonial state identity construct.

'We have always found the Irish a bit odd. They refuse to be English' - Winston Churchill
John Heywood: ‘There are none so blind as those who will not see. The most deluded people are those who choose to ignore what they already know’.

Wednesday, 3 August 2016

Greatest Speech Of 20th Century - human rights activist and Irish freedom fighter

One of the greatest speeches ever was orated on 29th June 1916 by renowned human rights activist and latter Irish freedom fighter, Sir Roger Casement. This statement was given by Roger as he stood in the dock of a foreign British court in England that had just announced its intention to murder him for loyalty to his own nation and country: Ireland.

Roger Casement began:

'My Lord Chief Justice, as I wish my words to reach a much wider audience than I see before me here, I intend to read all that I propose to say. What I shall read now is something I wrote more than twenty days ago. I may say, my lord, at once, that I protest against the jurisdiction of this court in my case on this charge, and the argument, that I am now going to read, is addressed not to this court, but to my own countrymen.
There is an objection, possibly not good in law, but surely good on moral grounds, against the application to me here of this old English statute, 565 years old, that seeks to deprive an Irishman today of life and honour, not for "adhering to the King's enemies", but for adhering to his own people.
When this statute was passed, in 1351, what was the state of men's minds on the question of a far higher allegiance - that of a man to God and His kingdom? The law of that day did not permit a man to forsake his Church, or deny his God, save with his life. The "heretic", then, had the same doom as the "traitor".
Today a man may forswear God and His heavenly kingdom, without fear or penalty - all earlier statutes having gone the way of Nero's edicts against the Christians, but that constitutional phantom "the King" can still dig up from the dungeons and torture-chambers of the Dark Ages a law that takes a man's life and limb for an exercise of conscience.
If true religion rests on love, it is equally true that loyalty rests on love. The law that I am charged under has no parentage in love, and claims the allegiance of today on the ignorance and blindness of the past.
I am being tried, in truth, not by my peers of the live present, but by the fears of the dead past; not by the civilization of the twentieth century, but by the brutality of the fourteenth; not even by a statute framed in the language of the land that tries me, but emitted in the language of an enemy land - so antiquated is the law that must be sought today to slay an Irishman, whose offence is that he puts Ireland first.
Loyalty is a sentiment, not a law. It rests on love, not on restraint. The government of Ireland by England rests on restraint, and not on law; and since it demands no love, it can evoke no loyalty...
Judicial assassination today is reserved only for one race of the King's subjects - for Irishmen, for those who cannot forget their allegiance to the realm of Ireland. The Kings of England, as such, had no rights in Ireland up to the time of Henry VIII, save such as rested on compact and mutual obligation entered into between them and certain princes, chiefs, and lords of Ireland. This form of legal right, such as it was, gave no King of England lawful power to impeach an Irishman for high treason under this statute of King Edward III of England until an Irish Act, known as Poyning's Law, the tenth of Henry VII, was passed in 1494 at Drogheda, by the Parliament of the Pale in Ireland, and enacted as law in that part of Ireland. But, if by Poyning's Law an Irishman of the Pale could be indicted for high treason under this Act, he could be indicted in only one way, and before one tribunal - by the laws of the Realm of Ireland and in Ireland. The very law of Poyning, which, I believe, applies this statute of Edward III to Ireland, enacts also for the Irishman's defence "all these laws by which England claims her liberty".
And what is the fundamental charter of an Englishman's Liberty? That he shall be tried by his peers. With all respect, I assert this court is to me, an Irishman, charged with this offence, a foreign court - this jury is for me, an Irishman, not a jury of my peers to try me on this vital issue, for it is patent to every man of conscience that I have a right, an indefeasible right, if tried at all, under this statute of high treason, to be tried in Ireland, before an Irish court and by an Irish jury. This court, this jury, the public opinion of this country, England, cannot but be prejudiced in varying degrees against me, most of all in time of war. I did not land in England. I landed in Ireland. It was to Ireland I came; to Ireland I wanted to come; and the last place I desired to land was in England.
But for the Attorney-General of England there is only "England"; there is no Ireland; there is only the law of England, no right of Ireland; the liberty of Ireland and of an Irishman is to be judged by the power of England. Yet for me, the Irish outlaw, there is a land of Ireland, a right of Ireland, and a charter for all Irishmen to appeal to, in the last resort, a charter, that even the very statutes of England itself cannot deprive us of - nay more, a charter that Englishmen themselves assert as the fundamental bond of law that connects the two kingdoms. This charge of high treason involves a moral responsibility, as the very terms of the indictment against myself recite, inasmuch as I committed the acts I am charged with to the "evil example of others in like case". What was the evil example I set to others in the like case, and who were these others? The "evil example" charged is that I asserted the right of my own country and the "others" I appealed to, to aid my endeavour, were my own countrymen. The example was given, not to Englishmen, but to Irishmen, and the "like case" can never arise in England, but only in Ireland. To Englishmen I set no evil example, for I made no appeal to them. I asked no Englishman to help me. I asked Irishmen to fight for their rights. The "evil example" was only to other Irishmen, who might come after me, and in "like case" seek to do as I did. How, then, since neither my example, nor my appeal was addressed to Englishmen, can I be rightfully tried by them?
If I did wrong in making that appeal to Irishmen to join with me in an effort to fight for Ireland, it is by Irishmen, and by them alone, I can be rightfully judged. From this court and its jurisdiction I appeal to those I am alleged to have wronged, and to those I am alleged to have injured by my "evil example" and claim that they alone are competent to decide my guilt or innocence. If they find me guilty, the statute may affix the penalty, but the statute does not override or annul my right to seek judgment at their hands.
This is so fundamental a right, so natural a right, so obvious a right, that it is clear that the Crown were aware of it when they brought me by force and by stealth from Ireland to this country. It was not I who landed in England, but the Crown who dragged me here, away from my own country to which I had returned with a price upon my head, away from my own countrymen whose loyalty is not in doubt, and safe from the judgment of my peers whose judgment I do not shrink from. I admit no other judgment but theirs. I accept no verdict save at their hands.
I assert from this dock that I am being tried here, not because it is just, but because it is unjust. Place me before a jury of my own countrymen, be it Protestant or Catholic, Unionist or Nationalist, Sinn Féineach or Orangemen, and I shall accept the verdict, and bow to the statute and all its penalties. But I shall accept no meaner finding against me, than that of those, whose loyalty I have endangered by my example, and to whom alone I made appeal. If they adjudge me guilty, then guilty I am. It is not I who am afraid of their verdict - it is the Crown. If this is not so, why fear the test? I fear it not. I demand it as my right.
This is the condemnation of English rule, of English-made law, of English government in Ireland, that it dare not rest on the will of the Irish people, but exists in defiance of their will: that it is a rule, derived not from right, but from conquest.
Conquest, my Lord, gives no title; and, if it exists over the body, it fails over the mind. It can exert no empire over men's reason and judgment and affections; and it is from this law of conquest without title to the reason, judgment, and affection of my own countrymen that I appeal.
I can answer for my own acts and speeches. While one English party was responsible for preaching a doctrine of hatred, designed to bring about civil war in Ireland, the other, and that the party in power, took no active steps to restrain a propaganda that found its advocates in the Army, Navy, and Privy Council - in the House of Parliament, and in the State Church -- a propaganda the methods of whose expression were so grossly illegal and utterly unconstitutional that even the Lord Chancellor of England could find only words and no repressive action to apply to them. Since lawlessness sat in high places in England, and laughed at the law as at the custodians of the law, what wonder was it that Irishmen should refuse to accept the verbal protestations of an English Lord Chancellor as a sufficient safeguard for their lives and liberties? I know not how all my colleagues on the Volunteer Committee in Dublin reviewed the growing menace, but those with whom I was in closest cooperation redoubled, in face of these threats from without, our efforts to unite all Irishmen from within. Our appeals were made to Protestant and Unionist as much almost as to Catholic and Nationalist Irishmen.
We hoped that, by the exhibition of affection and goodwill on our part toward our political opponents in Ireland, we should yet succeed in winning them from the side of an English party whose sole interest in our country lay in its oppression in the past, and in the present in its degradation to the mean and narrow needs of their political animosities. It is true that they based their actions, so they averred, on "ears for the empire", and on a very diffuse loyalty that took in all the peoples of the empire, save only the Irish. That blessed word empire that bears so paradoxical resemblance to charity! For if charity begins at home, empire begins in other men's homes, and both may cover a multitude of sins. I, for one, was determined that Ireland was much more to me than empire, and, if charity begins at home, so must loyalty. Since arms were so necessary to make our organization a reality, and to give to the minds of Irishmen, menaced with the most outrageous threats, a sense of security, it was our bounden duty to get arms before all else. I decided, with this end in view, to go to America, with surely a better right to appeal to Irishmen there for help in an hour of great national trial, than those envoys of empire could assert for their weekend descents on Ireland, or their appeals to Germany.
If, as the right honourable gentleman, the present Attorney-General, asserted in a speech at Manchester, Nationalists would neither fight for Home Rule nor pay for it, it was our duty to show him that we knew how to do both. Within a few weeks of my arrival in the United States, the fund that had been opened to secure arms for the Volunteers of Ireland amounted to many thousands of pounds. In every case the money subscribed, whether it came from the purse of the wealthy man, or from the still readier pocket of the poor man, was Irish gold.
We have been told, we have been asked to hope, that after this war Ireland will get Home Rule, as a reward for the lifeblood shed in a cause which, whomever else its success may benefit, can surely not benefit Ireland. And what will Home Rule be in return for what its vague promise has taken, and still hopes to take away from Ireland? It is not necessary to climb the painful stairs of Irish history - that treadmill of a nation, whose labours are as vain for her own uplifting as the convict's exertions are for his redemption, to review the long list of British promises made only to be broken - of Irish hopes, raised only to be dashed to the ground. Home Rule, when it comes, if come it does, will find an Ireland drained of all that is vital to its very existence unless it be that unquenchable hope we build on the graves of the dead. We are told that if Irishmen go by the thousand to die, not for Ireland, but for Flanders, for Belgium, for a patch of sand in the deserts of Mesopotamia, or a rocky trench on the heights of Gallipoli, they are winning self-government for Ireland. But if they dare to lay down their lives on their native soil, if they dare to dream even that freedom can be won only at home by men resolved to fight for it there, then they are traitors to their country, and their dream and their deaths are phases of a dishonourable phantasy.
But history is not so recorded in other lands. In Ireland alone, in this twentieth century, is loyalty held to be a crime. If loyalty be something less than love and more than law, then we have had enough of such loyalty for Ireland and Irishmen. If we are to be indicted as criminals, to be shot as murderers, to be imprisoned as convicts, because our offence is that we love Ireland more than we value our lives, then I do not know what virtue resides in any offer of self-government held out to brave men on such terms. Self-government is our right, a thing born in us at birth, a thing no more to be doled out to us, or withheld from us, by another people than the right to life itself - than the right to feel the sun, or smell the flowers, or to love our kind. It is only from the convict these things are withheld, for crime committed and proven and Ireland, that has wronged no man, has injured no land, that has sought no dominion over others - Ireland is being treated today among the nations of the world as if she were a convicted criminal. If it be treason to fight against such an unnatural fate as this, then I am proud to be a rebel, and shall cling to my "rebellion" with the last drop of my blood. If there be no right of rebellion against the state of things that no savage tribe would endure without resistance, then I am sure that it is better for men to fight and die without right than to live in such a state of right as this. Where all your rights have become only an accumulated wrong, where men must beg with bated breath for leave to subsist in their own land, to think their own thoughts, to sing their own songs, to gather the fruits of their own labours, and, even while they beg, to see things inexorably withdrawn from them - then, surely, it is a braver, a saner and truer thing to be a rebel, in act and in deed, against such circumstances as these, than to tamely accept it, as the natural lot of men.' [THE END]

On 03rd August 1916, Roger Casement was hanged in Pentonville prison in England for his efforts to acquire weapons for a planned Rising against foreign British colonial rule over Ireland...

It's rightly often said, the British don't know their true history and we Irish never forget ours.

We the people of Ireland shall never forget the courage and sacrifice of Roger Casement and our other brave Irish warriors. History books are littered with ample evidence to support a fact stated by Padraig Pearse: Ireland unfree shall never be at peace!!!

Sunday, 29 May 2016

World War One - fighting alongside your worst enemy

Irishmen fought in British force ranks during world war one to benefit the self-determination aspiration of the Irish nation i.e to encourage the British state to loosen its colonial grip on Ireland. However, self-serving British Colonists in the North of Ireland foolishly seek to portray this as the Irish suffering some form of Stockholm syndrome allegiance to our foreign British colonial occupier.

It's an uncontentious fact 'why' in 1914 the Irish Parliamentary Party leader John Redmond encouraged Irishmen to join the British war effort. He held a misguided belief the British state would, at the conclusion of the war, do the honourable thing; fully implement his 1912 Home Rule Bill to grant Ireland one new parliament in Dublin.

Ireland's Colonial Occupation

Ireland was known as 'the land of Saints and Scholars' in the centuries preceding British occupation but in the subsequent centuries British brutality transformed the Irish nation into a virtual peasant people. Consequently, the Irish nation many times rebelled against foreign British colonial rule e.g research the reign of Queen "bloody" Mary I, Oliver "the butcher" Cromwell, Arthur "the enslaver" Chichester, Charles "the genocidal" Trevelyan and the Risings of 1534, 1569, 1579, 1594, 1608, 1641, 1798, 1803, 1804, 1848, 1867, 1912, 1916, 1918 and others. Our small nation evidently lacked the resources to oust the mighty British empire from our native homeland. After so much brutality, denigration and many failed rebellions our people felt obliged to try securing our freedom in stages when eventually given limited representation within a perversely gerrymandered colonial parliamentary system. Despite a wealth of contrary evidence, British Colonialists who forced the undemocratic partition of our homeland stupidly portray this curates egg option of last resort as indicative of we Irish embracing foreign British colonial rule - this vile propaganda serves only to belittle the many Irish victims of the British state and its Colonists and insults the memory of the many brave Irishmen and Irishwomen who fought and died in pursuit of Irish freedom.

"…there is no nation of people under the sun that doth love equal and indifferent justice better than the Irish…" - Sir John Davies (17th century Attorney General under English King James I)

Bloody Imperial Conquesting

While the British state was brutally occupying a small and harmless Irish nation it was dishonestly portraying world war one as "a noble quest to free a small beleaguered nation" from the German empire. But, truth is WW1 was a bloody land-grab venture between imperial powers and little brutal Belgium was one of them. Furthermore, WW1 concluded with the "noble" British occupying an additional dozen countries. These facts being true, those who fought in WW1 might well have been brave and honourable men but that doesn't exonerate the state using them as cannon fodder in a bloody land-grab war that ought never to have occurred. And, until fools wise up and use commemorations to outright condemn wars then your war-mongering state will lead and use commemorations to perpetuate the lie that to supposedly "fight and die for your country" are heroic and honourable deeds.

World War One Treaty

World War one was concluded with the British state increasing the size of its empire and it signing the Treaty of Versailles in 1919. This Treaty contained 14 principles agreed by the British state and the other major powers, and two of these principles pertained directly to the predicament of small nations such as Ireland. Namely:

5) A free, open-minded, and absolutely impartial adjustment of all colonial claims, based upon a strict observance of the principle that in determining all such questions of sovereignty the interests of the populations concerned must have equal weight with the equitable claims of the government whose title is to be determined.
14) A general association of nations must be formed under specific covenants for the purpose of affording mutual guarantees of political independence and territorial integrity to great and small states alike...

British Anti-democratic Terrorism

It must be borne in mind 'British involvement in Ireland already lacked democratic legitimacy. As Tom McGurk put it: "British rule was entirely a product of conquest and therefore devoid of moral authority".' - Chris Donnelly. Consequently, British Unionists in N Ireland must be obliged to acknowledge some plain truths. Firstly, the British state had no mandate to usurp Irish Brehon Law and incorporate Ireland into the United Kingdom as per its 1800 Act of Union? Secondly, when in 1914 the British state planned to partition Ireland into two states it usurped the "democratic process" it imposed and which was successfully used by the Irish nation to secure the Home Rule Bill of 1912? Thirdly, the majority of the Irish electorate expressed its 1918 democratic will to form an independent Ireland outside the UK. However - despite its Treaty of Versailles commitment of 1919, in 1921 the mighty British state engaged in terrorism by threatening "immediate and terrible war" if our tiny Irish nation refused to concede to partitioning Ireland into two states and remain under British colonial rule?

Friendly Neighbours Paradox

It's vitally important to draw a distinction between the average citizen of Britain verses the British state albeit the former elect the latter to represent them. That said, apparently, almost half the British population are 'proud of Britain's history of colonialism'. The Irish nation has no gripe with the average British citizen and remain open to growing cordial neighbourly relations with them. Nevertheless, the people of Britain must appreciate that we Irish will not be relieved of our profound sense of grievance that their foreign government's colonial rule over a part of Ireland keeps our nation divided in our native homeland - politicians diplomats and their puppets in the media who seek to promote an alternative image of this profound Irish mindset are being wilfully dishonest.

The greatest obstacle to cementing British-Irish relations is not Irish Republicans just quest to reunify our island nation and build a new egalitarian society. Rather, the problem is those Unionists/Colonialists who keep electing N Ireland's unBritish DUP and UUP parties - to them the UK Union flag is not a tool to promote modern British values but a flag of convenience to mask retention of their Afrikaner-like supremacist attitude toward the native Irish population. History proves, the Irish in Ireland are the upholders of legitimate democratic values whereas the unapologetic terrorists are the British state and the Unionists/Colonialists it planted in our Ulster province to aid and abet its untold evils against the Irish nation in our native homeland.

In the inimitable words of our 1916 Easter Rebellion hero Padraic Pearse: 'Ireland unfree shall never be at peace'...

Sunday, 24 April 2016

Ireland - British Colonial Terrorism Founded NI Statelet

'If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about answers' - Thomas Pynchon

No British Mandate

Q1: When - if ever, did a foreign British state gain a mandate from the Irish nation to impose its will over all or any part of Ireland (notwithstanding UK universal suffrage for males and females over 21's didn't exist until 1928)?

Q2: Was it 1914 that the British state decided to partition Ireland i.e two years before the 1916 Easter Rising?

Q3: What mandate had the British state to partition Ireland in 1921, given both the 1918 expressed will of the majority of the Irish nation to exit the UK plus the relevant 'nation' terms of the 1919 Versailles Treaty?

British Colonialist Terrorism

It's vitally important to have regard to the words and deeds of supremacist British Unionists in the years preceding the Irish rebellion of 1916:-
1904: 'I predict that Home Rule will never be killed until we show any British Government which brings it forward that we will resist to the death, even with arms if necessary' - Frederick Crawford CBE (British Colonialist 'Larne Gunrunning' leader).

1910: 'we are quietly organising' men willing to take 'active steps' to resist enforcement of the Home Rule Bill... 'various lodges have received enrolment forms and will be taught simple [military] movements' - Colonel Robert Wallace (Orange Order County Grand Master of Belfast).
1911: 'I am not for a game of bluff and, unless men are prepared to make great sacrifices which they clearly understand, the talk of resistance is useless' - Sir Edward Carson (British Colonialist Barrister).
1912: 'Drilling is illegal. Only recently I was reading the Act of Parliament forbidding it. The [UVF] volunteers are illegal, and the Government knows they are illegal, and the Government dare not interfere with them' - Sir Edward Carson (Barrister and leader of the Ulster Volunteer(s) (Force)).
1912: 'I can imagine no length of resistance to which Ulster can go in which I should not be prepared to support it' in defying the law - Andrew Bonar Law (UK (Conservative) Shadow Government leader).
1912: We the undersigned pledge, to '...use all means which may be found necessary to defeat the present conspiracy to set up a home rule parliament in Ireland...' - Colonialist minority in Ireland.

According to United Kingdom laws dating from the 1819 Unlawful Drilling Act to current legislation, the above conduct by British Colonialists in the province of Ulster was unlawful and indeed constituted acts of terrorism:

UK Terrorism Act. Interpretation.
Section One: (1) In this Act 'terrorism' means the use or threat of action where -
(a) the action falls within subsection (2), (b) the use or threat is designed to influence the government or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and (c) the use or threat is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious or ideological cause...'

Colonial "Democratic" Perversions

In 1800, the gerrymandered British Colonialist-dominated 'Protestant Ascendancy' parliament in Ireland was abolished due to perpetual abuses against the majority Irish Catholic population. Ireland was then forced under the governance of the UK parliament in England. The Irish nation didn't consent to this Act and it thus remains thee root cause of the profound Irish sense of injustice against a foreign British state's colonial interference in Ireland.

In 1886 - after tireless campaigning by constitutional Irish politicians such as Daniel O'Connell, the 1st Home Rule Bill seeking a new and democratic parliament in Ireland was presented before the UK parliament in England but was narrowly defeated.

In 1893, the 2nd Irish Home Rule Bill was presented by Irish politician Charles Stewart Parnell and passed by the elected House of Commons parliament. Alas, this Bill was rejected by the unelected House of Lords.

In January 1910, the UK election produced a hung parliament and the Irish Parliamentary Party held the balance of power between the main Conservative and Liberal parties.

In 1911, John Redmond's Irish Parliamentary Party supported the UK Government's Prime Minister Herbert Asquith to pass a Bill revoking the unelected House of Lords absolute power to veto House of Commons legislation.

In April 1912, the UK Government passed the 3rd Home Rule Bill for Ireland but its enactment was delayed until 1914 due to the shenanigans of a House of Lords dominated by Conservative peers.

In 1914, British army Officers involved in the "Curragh Mutiny" incident advised they would resign their commission' rather than obey any order to enforce the Government's Home Rule Bill within the province of Ulster - this was not an isolated incident but part of an ongoing conspiracy by conservative elites within senior army ranks.

On 10th March 1914, the UK Prime Minister Herbert Asquith announced to parliament he intended to partition Ireland into two states - this being done without a mandate from the electorate was perverse... constitutional politics was thereby utterly corrupted by a minority of British colonial fascists in Ireland using threats of terrorism!!!

Protecting Home Rule

In November 1913, Óglaigh na hÉireann (the Irish Volunteers) was formed and gradually built-up to a counterforce of more than twice that of Ulster's British Colonialist 100k UVF ranks. The stated aim of the Irish Volunteer army was to uphold implementation of the Home Rule parliament Bill across the whole of Ireland, though some founding members intended readying this army to fight for an independent Irish Republic.

The Violent Time

In August 1914, the British Empire declared war on Germany and many Irishmen joined this colonial venture for a variety of reasons - the vast majority believing to fight would encourage the British grip on Ireland to loosen in the form of it honouring the Home Rule Bill. In April 1916, Irish revolutionaries commenced an armed Rising against British colonial rule over Ireland and declared an independent Irish Republic but this was swiftly defeated and the leaders executed.

Irish Public Backlash

The Home Rule crisis, the 1916 Rising and the British state's reaction to both awoke the Irish nation from a dejected subjugated slumber induced by a fruitless colonial political system and brutal reprisals after earlier failed rebellions in 1534, 1569, 1594, 1641, 1798, 1803, 1848 and 1867 etc. Within even the British Empire's citadel of Dublin, Irish citizens readily came out in their tens of thousands to protest when British forces murdered civilians during the early Home Rule period. Similar outrage spread across Ireland when British forces summarily executed civilians during the Easter Rising and killed hundreds more by indiscriminately using gunboat and mobile artillery shells and heavy duty machine guns on Dublin's inner city streets. Add to those incidents, British forces brutally imposed martial law across Ireland, engaged in mass arrests and internment and then executed the leaders of the Rising including one strapped to a chair. On top of all this, families were receiving daily news of the mounting death toll of Irishmen duped into fighting an imperial land-grab war in Europe and a threat of conscription was looming which would steal away Ireland's remaining Sons... the Irish tide had well and truly turned hence the 1916 Rising.

Ireland's Electoral Mandate

Following the ending of world war one on 11th November 1918, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland held a general election on 14th December 1918 - this was the first ever UK election in which all men above 21 and all women above 30 could now vote and without the need to own property. Of Ireland's 108 constituencies, the pro-republic Sinn Féin Party secured a 73 seat majority 'independent Republic' mandate and the pro-colonial rule Unionist Party won 22 seats.

British Anti-democratic Terrorists

During 1920-21, the mighty British Empire ignored the 1918 majority will of the Irish electorate to form a free and independent Irish Republic, threatening "immediate and terrible war" if little Ireland refused to sign a treaty partitioning the country into two states and further agreeing both would remain under the control of the British empire - this gunboat-laden diktat was contrary to the Versailles Treaty and amounted to an act terrorism...

Thus was born Ireland's Afrikaner Statelet a truly evil sectarian cesspit, which will remain poisonous for as long as British Colonialists are allowed to use the UK Union flag as a cover to treat the native Irish as second-class citizens in our own homeland.