BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 Jul 10 - 06:28 PM

McGrath and Jim, I think that Irish people would be angered by the very notion of asking mainland Brits to vote on their future.
Those dissident guests should be sniping at you two, not me.

The result of such a vote?
We do not want any part of Ireland thank you, but we would defend the right of the NI people to choose for themselves.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Crow Sister (off with the fairies)
Date: 06 Jul 10 - 06:40 PM

"I think that Irish people would be angered by the very notion of asking mainland Brits to vote on their future."

I wouldn't be angered if Britain had a say in whether or not a part of Ireland remained a part of Britain.

I wonder why "Irish" people would be concerned about what British people might choose to do with themeselves, seeing as they are apparently Irish instead of British?

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Jul 10 - 07:15 PM

I can't see a difference in principle between the notion that the people of Northern Ireland should be entitled to choose to separate themselves from the rest of the United Kingdom, and the notion that the rest of the United Kingdom should be able to choose to separate themselves from Northern Ireland.

However I'm inclined to prefer that the question doesn't get put, for the reason I gave.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Teribus
Date: 07 Jul 10 - 01:01 AM

How many people reside and could therefore vote in such a referendum Kevin? As the number of people who live in England far out numbers the populations of Scotland; Northern Ireland and Wales. Under your scheme the population od England to always outvote and dominate the desired courses of the native populations of those countries.

The same goes for an Irish Referendum, that is why it is up to the population of Northern Ireland to demonstrate its desire to become part of a united Ireland first.

But again I will ask my question if the North says Yes and the South says No will the nationalists in Ireland accept the vote that shows the "will of the people".

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Jul 10 - 01:47 AM

Jim, the mainland referendum was your "original thought."
When are you going to defend it?

You say that I don't have original thoughts.
I am glad I didn't have that one.
And you said it out loud!

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Jul 10 - 03:49 AM

"if the North wants Union and the South does not will you accept that decision? "
Not only would I accept that decision - I DO ACCEPT IT and always have because that is apparently the position as it stands at the present time. But I also say thet if that remains the position, then so does the instability, the threat of further violence and further incidents like Bloody Sunday.
Those who put together the Partition did so with the intention that it was a stop-gap measure in the full realisation that it was not a long term solution.
Partition was not put in place because that was what the Irish people wanted, it was to placate a Protestant minority and was itended to keep the peace until a further solution could be found. Because the Unionist two-thirds used the situation to maintain their authority over one third of the population of the six counties, the peace has not been kept and the inequalities of the two factions remained right up to comparitavely recently.
Whatever statements have been made here, the desire for a united Ireland has not gone away; as I said, it still remains as an aim of all the main political parties, though it has been put on the back-burner for the sake of peace at the present time - the same stop-gap measure it was originally. I repeat, though I have no doubt it will continue to be distorted, if it is democratic that the unionist minority in present day 'Britain' have a right to decide that the border remains in place, it is equally democratic that the British people have a right to decide their involvement in maintaining that border. No one has even suggested that the British people as a whole are opposed to the Union as it stands concerning Ireland - so it means tha situation as it stands can only me maintained by refusing the British people as a whole the right to have their say on the matter. "
"please give examples of racism against Gaels here, because I have never seen any."
To borrow an earlier statement - WHAT PLANET TO YOU LIVE ON? Britian is an extremely racist nation and the Irish have been one of the major targets for centuries - a sort of combination of Punch, Bernard Manning and Richard Bridge is pretty well the norm at the presentr time.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Jul 10 - 04:20 AM

"if it is democratic that the unionist minority in present day 'Britain' have a right to decide that the border remains in place, it is equally democratic that the British people have a right to decide their involvement in maintaining that border"

But we don't care Jim.
It is up to them.
We will be very happy when they decide to go, but meanwhile we will defend their right to choose.

"it has been put on the back-burner for the sake of peace "
Peace is what everyone wants Jim. Why do you want to change it?

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Jul 10 - 04:49 AM

"But we don't care Jim."
We don't care about what in particular? - I am suggesting that the British people have a say in whether Brtain continues to be involved in maintaining a border - paying for military intevention, sending troops etc - are you saying that you don't care about that - the British people certainly do and would change that situation tomorrow if asked? You are suggesting that they have no say in the matter - how undemocratic.
"Why do you want to change it? "
Do you deny violence is happening at the present time (see above news cuttings) and is likely to escalete given the circumstances.
That is what needs changing.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Jul 10 - 05:26 AM

It is democratic Jim.
It is representational democracy like all major countries have.
There is no suppressed public anger here about paying for troops who are not needed anymore anyway.
Sorry Jim, we just don't care.
You sort it out.

Do you say to your countrymen, "I know what we should do lads. Ask the British. They'll know."

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Jul 10 - 05:33 AM

BTW, how is that list of my invective coming on Jim?
I am looking forward to that.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: allanc
Date: 07 Jul 10 - 05:51 AM

"It is representational democracy like all major countries have."

Quite so - we have a parliamentary system. As far as I know there has only ever been one referendum put to the people of the UK as a whole and that was over membership of what is now the EU. There have been quite a few other referendums concerning constituent parts of the UK/GB or regional parts of England and in all of these referendums the vote was only given to the people directly affected in these various constituent parts of the state or regions of England. For example the two Scottish devolution referendums or the London Mayor referendum etc. That is a solid democratic principle. Scots would have simply not accepted that people outwith of Scotland should have the deciding vote on what happened within Scotland. The Scottish people chose their preferred option and that then had to be passed through Parliament for what was basically a rubber stamp. The same would be so for Northern Ireland - and I can't think why anyone should think they deserve less democracy than Scots, Welsh or Londoners got?

As far as I see it various opinion polls in GB have shown that the British people favour the idea that the people of Northern Ireland should have the right to choose and all the major parties back that idea. 90% or so of the people of the Irish Republic who voted agreed with that. And a majority of the people of Northern Ireland agree with that too. It wasn't broken down so that you could tell which religion voted which way - but I believe that the estimates are that the Catholic population of Northern Ireland voted the same way as the Republic with about 90% accepting the principle. The Protestant majority was still there but was much smaller with a substantial minority saying No. In other words the only people against it seem to be a small proportion of hard line Nationalists and a larger proportion of hard line Unionists. Both probably thinking that their opinion should over-ride the opinion of the people as a whole.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Jul 10 - 09:05 AM

"BTW, how is that list of my invective coming on Jim?"
On its way as soon as I get time Keith - notice you have avoided adding to it of late, which is a step in the right direction on your part - adulthood beckons!
"Do you say to your countrymen...."
Which countrymen woud they be - I'm sure the people of Liverpool would take that rather puerile remark for the prattishness it conveys.
"Sorry Jim, we just don't care."
Are you saying the British have no opinion on whether the six counties remain as part of Britain, or that their opinion doesn't count?
JIm Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Jul 10 - 09:39 AM

Jim, wherever you live now, you do not come across as English.
Do you not feel Irish?
If ever you do find yourself in a bar with real Irishmen, probably best not to argue too strongly for a British referendum to solve the problems of Ireland.
They will agree with me, in answer to your last question, that mainland Brits' opinions do not count.

Your penultimate question was whether we have an opinion.
Not really. When the Troubles were on we just wanted rid of the lot of you. That has faded now. Why should we think about it?

Do you not have any English friends Jim?
I can possibly suggest why that might be.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Jul 10 - 01:06 PM

Scrap what I said earlier - you are becoming childishly snide agin - adulthood seems as far away as ever
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Jul 10 - 01:25 PM

"When the Troubles were on we just wanted rid of the lot of you."
.......verging on exactly the sort of racism I was referring to earlier.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Jul 10 - 02:01 PM

That is not racism Jim.
That is how people here felt.
For the most part people here simply can not comprehend the sectarianism that fueled the conflict.
It seemed nothing to do with us and having NI as part of Britain brought us nothing but death, destruction and crippling costs.
If you do not feel any of that, you are not like the rest of us.
The way you talk about the Unionist people makes you unmistakenly part of that divided community.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Jul 10 - 03:09 PM

Your racist remark clearly makes you a racist.
I have to confess, I have been trying to work out what makes you the unpleasant individual your postings suggest you to be. At first I put it down to an inferiority complex, or some other insecurity.
Then the mask slipped, "we just wanted rid of the lot of you".
You are a sieg heiler, a goose-stepper, an anti-Irish racist, plain and simple, revealed by a slipped out remark.
If, as you say, "That is how people here felt", this only confirms what I said earlier - Britain is a deeply racist country - which is probably one of the few points we agree on.
This last couple of postings has been of tremendous assistance to me - for which, many thanks.
You only compound your dishonesty throughout this debate as referring to 'us' when discussing you and I.
I was born and brought up in Liverpool as was my mother, my father was born in Glasgow and his mother and father were born in Ireland and Liverpool respectively.
I have no problem with being described as 'Irish' but it would be a pretentious conceit on my part to accept it as accurate - show you my birth certificate and passport if you don't believe me.
Anyway, it seems far more important to you than it is to me - but that's the way racism, isn't it?
"The way you talk about the Unionist...."
Every thing I have said about the Unionists has come with examples of their behaviour in the six counties - feel free to dispute them should you not agree with them.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Jul 10 - 03:52 PM

I have used invective Jim.
All based on what I considered to be foolish in your posts.
But this is just disgusting.
"You are a sieg heiler, a goose-stepper, an anti-Irish racist, plain and simple"
I have loved Ireland since I walked and camped in the Wicklows aged 15 in 1965.
I have returned many, many times North and South.
I may have been fortunate, but I have yet to meet an Irish person I have not liked and got on with.
One of my boys married a Catholic Irish girl and they have just presented me with my first grandson.
A nephew is married to a protestant Irish girl.

You called me all those things for describing honestly how people here felt in the dark days.
McGrath will back me up I am sure.
It was part of PIRA strategy to make people feel like that
I also said that those feelings have subsided since the end of the troubles.
You talk of the Unionist as if they are all one breed. The sins of any of them damns them all.
That is sectarianism jim.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Jul 10 - 04:08 PM

"I have loved Ireland....."
Then what the **** is "we just wanted rid of the lot of you" all about if not racism pure and simple, whatever circumstances it was uttered in; as is "you are not like the rest of us"
"Us" - "them" - out of the mouths....
Your posting is very reminiscent of "some of my best friends are Irish, black, Jewish, Asian.... whoever racists pick on as a target for your viciousness.
You have spent a great deal of time accusing me of fascism, yet squeal like a stuck pig when your own words allow the mask to slip for a second.
Please return to your bunker.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 Jul 10 - 04:18 PM

Rid of the lot of you refers to not wanting any part of Ireland to be part of Britain politically.
You acknowledged that that is the commonly held view of mainland Brits.
It is, and that is how I feel and I have been saying that on this forum for years and years.

Your position was stated to be that NI should be forced into the Republic. That was how I justified calling you a bully.
That attitude could also be described as fascist, and I used that because you usually regard yourself as anti fascist.
I have never said anything that could justify what you have said about me.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Jul 10 - 04:42 PM

Your statement reeks of anti-Irish racism of the worst kind as does your attempted taunting of my supposed Irishness - the type of racism I have encountered all my life - you said it, live with the consequences. You're quick enough to dish it out so take it like a man my son!!!
"Your position was stated to be that NI should be forced into the Republic".
My position is and always was that all parties concerned with the partitioning of Ireland and are affected by the consequences should have a democratic say in the matter.
You have deliberately misinterpreted that in order to score some kind of points and to make me out a fascist - I have never used the term them and us and I have never wished to be "rid" of anybody as you have stated you have been.
Nor have I ever attempted to taunt anybody for being Irish, Welsh. British, Martian.... whatever.
People should never be 'wished' back anywhere - that's what us Internationalists believe anyway, unlike.... well, if the cap fits!
As I said, back to your bunker.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 07 Jul 10 - 06:56 PM

So far you've abuse people who disagree with you, you've distorted the arguments of others, you have still offered nothing orgiginal to this subject, but rather, fed of the contributions of others, you've shown no understanding of Irish politics, in spite of your camping holiday in Wicklow (at 15 even) and you've given us a blatent display of racism (and thrown a wobbler when you were found out).
Macrame seems your safest bet, don't you think
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: ollaimh
Date: 07 Jul 10 - 08:40 PM

as afaras i can see there has never been any forensic evidence of any one , ira or not firing at the paras. no bullets that are not military issues nothing.

the evidence seems to be the testimony of the paras who perjured themselves before the wiggery commission.

i remember seeing interviews on a documentary a few years ago with the paras who refused to perjurre themselves before the wiggery commission and were thus ship out to hing king(or some such place far asway) and they--three of them said there were no shots from anyone but paras.

unless i read otherwise i find it hard to believe the saville report it anything but a partial white wash to replace the total stich up. but at least there is finally admission of wrong doing.

as too racist remarks on mudcat i won't spend the time going to thread after thread. but there was a discussion of the boy scouts and a couple of anglos accused those who saw the boy scouts as part of imperialist propaganda of being pira. then on a bloddy sunday discussion the same occured. (i'm just repeating recent stuff)

on a canadian political discussion a guy called me a slur for useing a gaelic word as my name tag.

on another list a guy gratutiuosly attacked acadiens(they are mostly breton and accepted as celt at the world celt conferences).we adadiens were ethniclly cleansed by the british. remember evangeline--its based on a true story. they rounded up about half of us with no notice and no possetions and split families and shipped us the the far corners of the world(lousianna to st malo france). the guy slured that we were abusing the idians so deserved it . hello we got along with the natives. they recall us as the friends who didn't want all the land, traded european and agricultural goods they didn't have and freely intermarried.

there are a few others.

but the big two to me are the ignorance of le grand derangement(as we call it)

and the repeated assumption that because one opposses the violence and injustice of the british empire past and present you must be a terrorists.

well i've got new for you, we victums of imperial violence and injustice have a very different opinion of who were terrorists.

and yes the british army on bloody sunday came to kill because they also saw no difference between peacrefull position to injustice and terrorists, and thats; racism, hard and cold as it comes

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: ollaimh
Date: 07 Jul 10 - 08:55 PM

and for te record i think britian should hand over the six counties to an independent political authority. a provisional government with european soldiers rto police and let the whole place decompress for a few years. if not a decade.

a europen government would let neutrals apply neutral governance and justice and neutral commissions on the past and present. then when all voters are enumerated have real free elections. and yeas the tripartite commission did find that there has never been a free election in northern ireland. that was 1986 and they included members of the european commission on human rights the european high court of justice and the united nations commission on human rights.

there's too much violence for a free election and there has been hsitorical underenumeration of the irish community.

for those who wonder i'm not irish. franco gael yes but not irish. half highland scotts gael and have acadien. we scotts gaels also were ethnically cleansed from our homes in the highlands and the hebrides, and it was very tough for decades.

however for the record its pretty freaking good over here once you get roots down. of the probable three hundred thousand scotts gaels who surrivived the crossing(and hald died of disease on many ships--the empire saw no need for health care for the an duariane--dispossed) we are now over seventeen million on this side of the pond.

we were used to rotten weather hard work, poor conditions no health care and hostile governments and everything in north america was easy after that.

i'd like to see us all love one another. drop the discrimination and never stop in the search for justice

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Jul 10 - 01:13 AM

Jim, some of the invective you have used against me.
Eejit, not sharpest knife in box,idiocy, fool, redneck, troll (you took that back though I never asked you to), flat on arse, infantile.

That's fine Jim. Colourful debate.
Accusing me of racism is quite different and not acceptable as a debating tactic.
I had been addressing you as an Irishman. I referred respectfully to "your countrymen."
You said that was "peurile" and "prattish" because you lived in Liverpool.

We were discussing the attitudes of the English to Ireland, and I pointed out that yours was not typically English.
There is no racism in anything I have posted.

Your blanket condemnation of the Protestant/Unionist community does seem bigoted and sectarian.
I first used the "rid of the lot of you" expression way back when you claimed that Britain wanted to cling to NI as Empire.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Jul 10 - 01:16 AM

Ollaimh, Saville said there was "no doubt" that IRA had fired earlier.
We have discussed this at some length earlier in this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Jul 10 - 02:11 AM

Jim, you say,
"My position is and always was that all parties concerned with the partitioning of Ireland and are affected by the consequences should have a democratic say in the matter.
You have deliberately misinterpreted that in order to score some kind of points and to make me out a fascist"

But, NI's "say" would be overwhelmed by the numerically greater "say" of any of the other parties.
So, their say would make no difference.
So, their democratically expressed preference would be stamped down.
So, I described your position accurately.
On the old thread you actually stated that they had no right to choose for themselves.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Jul 10 - 03:34 AM

"Jim, some of the invective you have used against me."
Keith; I think you've nailed your particular colours to the mast clearly enough with recent statements to show us exactly where you are coming from, so perhaps we should move on.
A quick recap,
The six county state was set 80-odd years ago, under the threat of immediate invasion, giving the Unionist (Protestant) faction domination over the Nationalist (Catholic); this was never regarded as anything other than a temporary measure..
The Unionists abused the power they were given and prevented the Nationalists from having any effective say in the running of the State, by intimidating them with violence and the constant threats of violence, the threat and actual action of keeping them out of jobs, condemning them to poor-quality housing, rioting, house burning and general intimidation which persisted throughot the thirties, forties and well into the fifties, all backed up by massive triumphal, threatening marches and demonstrations by the Unionists.
This led to peaceful protest marches in the late 60s by the Nationalists which were met with baton charges by the RUC, who directed the marchers through screaming mobs of missile-hurling Unionists,
All this made it obvious to the Nationalists that they were never voluntarily going to be given a significant say say in the running of their state, so it erupted into open warfare throughout the 60s, 70s and into the 80s, causing massive suffering on both sides of the sectarian divide and on Mainland Britain - the latter more-or-less bringing about a huge opposition by a significant majority of the British people against the six states remaining in the Union.
It was early in the last period that British soldiers shot down unarmed Loyalist demonstraters, killing 13 a second BLOODY SUNDAY.
The 'Troubles' dragged the Unionists reluctantly to the conference table and some progress has been made on 'power sharing'; both sides have been forced into a position of accepting the situation as it stands, though in the long term, the Unionists wish to retain their dominance over the six counties and the Loyalists still wish for a United Ireland. A sort of peace has been arrived at, but it is so fragile that it could disintegrate into open violence at any time.
There has been violence on the streets of Belfast, and the Unionists are at present proceeding with intimidating triumphal marches, and are constantly demanding to take those marches through Nationalist areas thus stretching the fragile peace to breaking point.
The one significant thing that has happened on the Catholic side is that the Church has lost virtually all of its politial influence in the rest of Ireland due to the Clerical Abuse scandals - thus it has been removed from the six counties problem as a religious barrier.
That seems to be the way matters stand at the present time.
If you think that is 'peace' or 'settlement' or in any way a satisfactory position for a state to remain in for too long....... please tell us how?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Jul 10 - 04:18 AM

I hope I have showed exactly where I am coming from.
Just in case, I will reiterate.
I enjoy and welcome colourful invective, but to accuse me of racism is a despicable lie that can not be sustained by anything I have ever said.

Moving on.
Your long and rambling post contains much that I would challenge.
Picking out those bits and challenging them all would require an even longer post.

JIM, NO ONE READS POSTS LIKE THAT.
If you want my response, maximum of two points per post please.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Jul 10 - 05:54 AM

My thoughts on this are simple and need no explanation.
Let the people of NI decide for themselves.
And the Dublin government agrees with me.
And the people of the Republic overwhelmingly agree with me.
And the British government agrees with me.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Jul 10 - 12:38 PM

"but to accuse me of racism is a despicable lie"
I've given you the examples - and as you had no problem in describing me as a fascist, I really don't see you have any room to complain, especially as I at least provided proof of your philosophy - but let's move away from this cess-pit.
Both the Dublin and the British, Governments' stated attitudes were taken in the shadow of the violence of 'The Troubles' - pretty much, "anything for a quiet life"; no basis to build a future policy.
The same with the Irish people I live amongst, but I do not know one Irishman here who doesn't envisage a United Ireland as a reality, even a necessity for the future of the country. Decisions taken and opinions formed under duress and threat are liable to constant change and the more things settle down, the more you are likely to see an upsurge in the movement towards a United Ireland.
You must tell us sometime when you were able to discuss the matter with the Dublin Government, the people of the Republic and the British Government to be able tpo state so catergorically that they all agree with you.
You still don't tell us your alternative for ensuring a lasting peace - but I don't suppose that you ever shall.
I do notice that you haven't challenged my analysis, so can I assume that you agree with it - if not, where?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Jul 10 - 01:39 PM

The example you gave of my racist statement was just me expressing the wish, common here, that NI would leave the UK.
I have expressed that, using the same words, much earlier in this thread, and in similar words on previous threads.
You can have no substance for your allegation because it is false.

You are well known for your liberal views and for being anti fascist.
That is why I kept emphasising your illiberal attitude here.
You try to dress it up, but your belief is that a small population should have an unwanted regime forced upon it. Fascist is a reasonable description of that intention.

You said, "You must tell us sometime when you were able to discuss the matter with the Dublin Government, the people of the Republic and the British Government to be able tpo state so catergorically that they all agree with you"
They do agree that a united Ireland shall be brought about only by peaceful means with the consent of a majority of the people, democratically expressed, in both jurisdictions in the island.
That is my view too.

You say,
"I do notice that you haven't challenged my analysis, so can I assume that you agree with it - if not, where? "

Did you not see,
"Your long and rambling post contains much that I would challenge.
Picking out those bits and challenging them all would require an even longer post
If you want my response, maximum of two points per post please."

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Jul 10 - 03:17 PM

"common here, that NI would leave the UK."
Then you agree that Britain should have the option to vote on whether to intervene militarily, I take it?
"That is why I kept emphasising your illiberal attitude here."
I'm afraid infantile name-calling won't do - if my views are illeberal, counter them instead of relying on behaviour that belongs in the schoolyard. As you continue this behaviour here, that negates everything you say anyway.
If it is 'fascist' to suggest that the Republic should have a say in whether it continues to have six of its counties usurped, then I wouldn't begin to know how to describe the suggestion that the people of the UK should have NO say in whether they send their children and their money to support a regime that has kept one third of its population under its thumb as I described above.
"They do agree that a united Ireland shall be brought about only by peaceful means with the consent of a majority of the people...."
No argument as long as that consent is sought under normal circumstances (not after a bloody, twenty-odd year long war where both sides were traumatised into submission) and as long as the WHOLE OF THE POPULATION OF THE SIX COUNTIES HAVE AN EQUAL SAY IN THE PROCEEDINGS. This has yet to happen - power sharing is nowhere near in place yet, and the Unionists continue to behave like thugs towards the Catholic third. If you believe that the situation in the State is 'normal' I suggest you take a look at the Orange marches or the Belfast riots but more typically, try this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_Cross_dispute - (or simply search for Holy Cross dispute.)
Any decision on the permanent or continuing partition is bound to produce a distorted result in the present situation and is certain to lead to further violence in the future.
"Picking out those bits and challenging them all would require an even longer post"
So you can't even be bothered - says it all really.
"If you want my response, maximum of two points per post please."
Pathetic - but you choose.
You continue to feed off the posts of others, you have no ideas of your own and display no knowledge of the Irish situation - wonder if you support Celtic or Rangers - let me guess....
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Jul 10 - 04:14 PM

Then you agree that Britain should have the option to vote on whether to intervene militarily, I take it?

This seems to be an important point for Jim, he somehow feels that it is an imperative, what a pity then that Ireland didn't get a chance to vote on whether or not to sanction military intervention by the PIRA way back in 1971, the vote would have been a massive NO (That was the Official IRA's reading of the situation)

But as with everything about Jim, he has one set of rules for his side and a completely different set for whoever he sees as their opponents. One law for the goose another for the gander.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 08 Jul 10 - 04:32 PM

"whether or not to sanction military intervention by the PIRA"
Nobody here has spoken up in support of illegal paramilitary organisations. They are terrorist organisations who are answerable to nobody but themselves - none of us get a vote on their behaviour.
The British army is armed and paid by and made up of British people.
To suggest that anybody should or could have a vote on the actions of any paramilitary organisation is diversive nonsense.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 08 Jul 10 - 05:18 PM

I have no ideas of my own.
On this that is true.
Let the people of NI choose their government.
That's it, and all the parties agree on it, and without your ridiculous proviso that the Troubles must be unhappened first.
WHOLE OF THE POPULATION OF THE SIX COUNTIES HAVE AN EQUAL SAY IN THE PROCEEDINGS.
Er, obviously Jim.

"Then you agree that Britain should have the option to vote on whether to intervene militarily, I take it?"
Like most countries we vote in elections Jim.
That is how democracy works.

It is funny that you can not get your head around me not being part of your sectarian lunacy.
I give not a toss about your teams.

And no, I can't be bothered with your long posts.
If you want me to respond, one or two points at a time please, and nothing before 1970 on this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Jul 10 - 02:48 AM

"And no, I can't be bothered with your long posts."
As I say, you accept my analysis of the situation in Ireland and its origins - even if it is only by default.
"That is how democracy works."
So the people of Britain did 'vote' to invade Iraq?
"If you want me to respond, one or two points at a time please, and nothing before 1970 on this thread."
No ideas of your own, as I said, you can't even select points of your own to discuss - ah well1
I wonder if you read up the Holy Cross incident - isn't that what the suspect always says - "No comment"?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Jul 10 - 03:16 AM

Sorry - very early in the morning here after a heavy night of music and song. I was silly enough to take your suggestion seriously.
Let me get it straight;
YOU ARE SUGGESTING THAT I CHOOSE WHAT YOU DISAGREE WITH IN ORDER TO DISCUSS IT - IS THAT RIGHT?
This is all getting rather silly.
I stand by everything I have said about the situation prevailing in the six counties and its causes.
I also stand by my suggestions for an improvement of the situation.
Yours are????
Put up or shut up!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Jul 10 - 03:18 AM

Jim, in Britain we do not have a referendum about every troop deployment.
Can you think of any countries that do?
Irish Republic? No.
Compile another of your lists. It would not take you any time at all.

Anyway Jim, the days of military intervention are long gone.
Where have you been?
We have PSNI officers over here now helping our police in Northumberland.

Those scuffles around the marches may have been big stories in your Irish Times, but they got no mention anywhere else.

I told you I have no ideas of my own about this.
I agree with the people of Ireland and our governments.
You are the one thinking out of the box.

I do not need to look up Holy Cross. I have discussed it in the forum before. Sectarianism is an evil that breeds evil.

I told you I did not accept your "analysis."
I challenge much of it, but I am not going to wade through it all again.
Once was enough.
Now, anything you want to put to me, post 1960?

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Jul 10 - 03:21 AM

Cross posts.

"YOU ARE SUGGESTING THAT I CHOOSE WHAT YOU DISAGREE WITH IN ORDER TO DISCUSS IT - IS THAT RIGHT?"

No Jim. Your points should be good enough to stand alone or in pairs.
It is not reasonable to put up a page full and expect me to work through them.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Jul 10 - 04:16 AM

"I challenge much of it, but I am not going to wade through it all again."
Game, set and match, I think
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Jul 10 - 04:29 AM

Thanks Jim, but must you give up.
Surely you have one argument that could stand up on its own.
Think another "own thought".

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 09 Jul 10 - 04:33 AM

As I said, you have my arguments - put up or shut up.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 09 Jul 10 - 04:47 AM

Its up to you Jim.
One at a time, or at least in pairs, but you can not expect anyone to debate with a whole page of stuff.

I brought myself up to date on Holy Cross School.
There has been no trouble for seven years.
Why bring it up now?

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 11 Jul 10 - 02:49 AM

I have an apology to make to the members of this forum for the fact that our squabbling has dominated what I believe to be an important subject and prevented others from taking part – for me it ends here.
I have stated what I believe to be the causes of the Bloody Sunday massacre of unarmed demonstrators by British troops in Derry and I believe the fact that the situation that caused the massacre remains unchanged makes it possible, even likely that such incidents could happen again. Keith, Terribus, anybody is perfectly at liberty to challenge anything I have said and produce evidence that I am wrong; should they choose not to do so doesn't in any way make me right or wrong, it just means my analysis goes unchallenged. It is not up to me to second-guess and select what people might or might not disagree with – that's up to them.   I believe what I have said is well documented, but I'm happy to look at alternative documentary evidence, should anybody care to produce it.
Nobody here has a right to tell us how we must discuss this subject and draw time-lines around it; ("we can't go there; that happened seven, twenty, thirty, ninety years ago). If they want that power they must apply for the job of forum adjudicator – as far as I'm concerned, the ones we've already got do a good enough job, despite the problems people like me give them.
Nuff sed on the squabble – sorry for my part in it!
As I understand it, Bloody Sunday happened because of the prevailing situation caused by the partitioning of six counties of Ireland 88 years ago. The threat of invasion it was introduced under, the manipulation of the border, giving the Unionists a majority, the consolidation of the already long-established inequality of the Catholic population, poor housing and employment opportunities and an unequal say in the running of the State meant that the new situation created a resentment from the beginning. The anti-Catholic riots in 1932 and 1936, the constant persecution of and discrimination against Catholics right up to the 1950s, the attacks on the Civil Rights marches in the sixties and the 20/30 years of bloody sectarian warfare in Ireland and mainland Britain that followed has led to the continuation of that resentment that has not been dissipated, and the present-day acceptance of the border creates a misleading picture of the situation. Visitors from Belfast and Derry, here in Clare for the music this week have told me that many Catholics or neutrals like myself in the position to do so, leave their homes around this time of year to avoid the menace of the parades. The fact that 'The Troubles' have not gone away is evidenced by the persistent aggressive behaviour of militant Unionists which manifests itself in massive intimidatory marches, particularly around this time of year. Proof enough of the aggressive nature of these marches is the constant demand by the organisers that they should be allowed to take place through Catholic areas. A particularly shameful example of Unionist aggression was the cowardly terrorising of Catholic schoolchildren at Holy Cross School in the Ardoyne seven years ago. Just how current the threat of violent trouble is is shown by the rioting on the streets of Belfast this week.
So unless people can prove otherwise, for me the problem still exists and can break out at any time. The British people are paying to maintain the fragile peace in partitioned Ireland and, should trouble break out again, it is they who will provide the cannon-fodder and the cash to force the lid back on it yet again.
As I have repeated throughout, if the border is to remain it must do so on the basis, and, if possible, with the full agreement of all concerned, the majority of the British population, the people of the other twenty-six counties, and the population of the six counties. The decision has to be taken under normal circumstances and not with the threat of further violence and bloodshed, as it has in the past, otherwise it will have no lasting validity.
If the overall decision is to keep the border then some other way has to be found to establish a lasting peace – none has been found yet and there is little evidence of one being suggested on this thread so far.
Jim Carroll
Up-to-date news; Five dissident Republicans were arrested in County Louth yesterday; they were caught smuggling explosives across the border into the six counties.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Jul 10 - 12:22 PM

Jim says "I have stated what I believe to be the causes of the Bloody Sunday "
So why tell us all over again Jim?
And why wrap it up in TWO SCREENFULLS of solid text!
AGAIN!

How can anyone reply to the one sided, partisan and blinkered view of history that you have regurgitated, when there is SO MUCH of it in one post.

I do not think you have to go back 88 years to discuss the Saville Report.
Nor did Saville.
I can not stop you wallowing in all that ancient stuff but I will not be joining in.
If you want to know why I think you are talking shite, call my bluff and start another Irish History thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Jul 10 - 12:40 PM

I will say what really led to Bloody Sunday.
Under the old Stormont regime, the Nationalist people were discriminated against and denied basic civil rights.
As in USA, a Civil Rights movement (NICRA) began to challenge the old prejudices.
Their dignified, peaceful protests were often violently attacked, as in USA.
The people of mainland Britain were surprised and disgusted by what had been going on.
Stormont was shut down and all NICRA's demands were met.
I believe that, but for PIRA's campaign, progress would have continued and we would have been where we are now 30 years ago and thousands of deaths and mutilations avoided.
That Sunday's demonstration was in a tense and violent time.
The previous evening, a few minutes walk away, two policemen were killed in cold blood, just because they were policemen.
Both family men. One catholic and one protestant.
A thompson gun was used. Who could that have been?
The soldiers on duty would have known that there were well armed people right there looking for a chance to kill soldiers, and shots were fired at them.
No excuse for firing on demonstrators but Saville says it was only four of them and there was no premeditation.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 11 Jul 10 - 01:55 PM

I may have misled over the policemens' murder.
A thompson was just one of the guns used to kill them.
There was quite a gang in who shared in the death of the two helpless men.

Jim you also keep trying to bring up present day violence, even though there is little of it now, and PSNI seems to have it under control.
I am going to place your comment on the "Peace Process" thread.

Big Mick described the dissidents thus,

Coninuity IRA - this is a splinter group of dissidents that is estimated to have 50 to 80 members, according to Reuters.

RIRA - a splinter off CIRA that has even fewer members.

IRLA - according to the Independent Monitoring Commission this group is "not terrorist in nature" and is essentially a group of folks involved in criminal activity.

INLA - estimated to have a couple of dozen members, and a few hundred supporters.

Oglaigh na hEirrean - one of a number of groups using the name, but the one I suppose you refer to is the splinter off of CIRA. They have few weapons, have committed some robberies, and use pipe bombs from time to time.

Add it all up and you have a few hundred, then stack that against the Republicans that have embraced the peace process, and you see that they will make a few headlines but the day of the gun is essentially over. It is now about the ballot box.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 12 Jul 10 - 02:13 AM

Keith,.
Our bickering seems to have sent this subject nose-diving into the sea and out of sight - shame on us both; as ard mhacha aptly observed on the other thread you opened, "you are talking to yourself" (on two threads).
A quick last word before I ride off into the sunset with the rest of the contributors to this thread that we have driven away with our monopolising.
You have not put forward one original thought on the subject of the Irish situation, instead, you have based your responses on the ideas of others.
"I will say what really led to Bloody Sunday...."
I had very little problem in finding the net article that you cut-and-pasted your 'analysis' (almost verbatim) from - doesn't count as an original thought I'm afraid.
The nearest you came to hitting any sort of mark was in raising the behaviour of the PIRA (which were still there two days ago and active as ever).
Paramilitaries are illegal terrorists, answerable to no one and acting only for themselves. The paratroopers who deliberately shot down unarmed demonstrators showed themselves as being no different than the terrorists they claimed to be fighting - their actions and the aftermath shamed the British Army, the British Government, the British judicial system and the British people - they are two sides of the same coin.
You understandably veer away from discussing the 'Holy Cross' incident because it happened "seven years ago". The Saville enquiry has just presented an enquiry on an incident that took place 38 years ago; equally relevant to the Irish situation today. Holy Cross serves to illustrate not only the continued presence of Loyalist belligerance (this time directed against children) but also the bestial nature of their behaviour.
You rightly say that the marches will continue, in spite of the fact that each 'little scuffle' takes Ireland a step nearer to the brink, also an exellent example of the nature of militant Unionism.
If I have learned anything from this thread it is never to become involved with people who use serious subjects to hang their egos on - won't happen again.
Happy trails pardner!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 12 Jul 10 - 03:16 AM

I was talking to myself on the "Peace process" thread because no one wanted to discuss it.
Similarly Irish history.
There used always to be a current thread on it, but for the last few years no one wanted to discuss it anymore.

People DID want to discuss Saville. This thread is a composite of three.
But Jim does not let people have what they want.
They HAD to discuss partition, Falklands, Thatcher, current issues.
Anything but Bloody Sunday.

Now you tell us that Ireland is being "taken to the brink" by "militant unionism"
Because they want to hold their traditional marches.
No blame on militant Repubs who endanger everyone with their bombs, and who mercilessly gun down pizza delivery boys and unarmed soldiers on route to Afghanistan!
No sectarian bias and double standards from you then Jim!

And you leave us with a filthy lie to undermine my credibility.
My piece on Bloody Sunday was my own.
I am flattered that you thought it that good, but it was my own.
You said you found it on the web.
You lie.