Alex Homits on partition, the Good Friday Agreement and Irish republicanism.

Introduction

The decision of the United Kingdom to leave the European Union shone a spotlight onto its continued occupation of six counties of Ireland. This occupation is mired in contradictions.

They begin as far back as 1913 when Irish people who identified with loyalty to the British crown -- with the support of the British crown, formed the ‘Ulster Covenant’ . This Covenant pledged over a quarter of a million people to armed resistance to any introduction of devolved government in the form of ‘ Home Rule ’. Home Rule was postponed by the outbreak of inter-imperialist rivalries of the British Empire and the German Empire, but it was offered on the premise that the Irish fight in the imperial war machine of Britain. The Irish Parliamentary Party, the official representative body in Westminster for Irish Nationalists, championed recruitment and delivered almost 100,000 Irish people for fodder. The elements committed to Revolution and Insurrection remained in Ireland. The first proper outbreak and attempt to overthrow the British Empire commenced in 1916 -- today we remember the Easter Rising as a ‘blood sacrifice’ that the leadership knew they were going to. This would be an accurate description if it were true, but the truth is that nationalist elements with little to no interest in social change such as Eoin MacNeil undermined their comrades in Dublin and ultimately guaranteed their execution and failure of the rising. The 1916 Rising birthed the electoral victory of the party that at this time sought to collectively represent the interests of all of Ireland: Sinn Féin.

Sinn Féin candidates stood on a platform of declaring an Independent Irish Republic. This mandate delivered 73 seats out of the 105 that Ireland had for the House of Commons. Otherwise, a clear majority. This majority then set about convening and declaring an independent parliament that would decide and exercise sovereignty over Ireland. With this extraordinary set of events -- came the whip, boot and rifle of the Empire. Ireland, despite returning a majority of representatives under Britain’s own ‘democratic’ model of parliamentarianism, was not afforded the right to determine its own destiny.

War, Partition, Dependency 

A War for Independence began in January 1919. In North-East Ulster, the Unionist community was frenzied into anti-Catholic and anti-Nationalist action by it’s leaders. While this is not the origin of cross-community sectarianism in Ireland, it is a pivotal moment in Irish history. The Government of Ireland act of 1920 partitioned the country, giving majority control to one community in the southern parliament and northern majority in the northern parliament. The Anglo-Irish Treaty which was brought back by Michael Collins and the delegation is an enhanced and slightly tweaked version of the Government of Ireland Act.

The 1921 election was held on the basis of a partitioned political unit, copper fastening the incoming partition of the country and minor breadcrumbs The southern statelet was given Dominion status, swore an oath of allegiance to the crown and maintained all of the pompous and arrogant traditions of the British Empire while North-East Ulster was maintained within the British Empire with some devolved powers.

Partition ushered in a ‘carnival of reaction’ as James Connolly predicted. The northern state openly and brazenly discriminated against a sizable Catholic minority. Tommy McKearney describes it as an “orange fascist state” in his book From Provisional IRA to Parliament. This is an accurate enough description that captures the extraordinaryy policing powers, the immense discrimination and inequality that persisted in the six counties.

In the South, the Unionist political forces in the Irish Unionist Alliance merged into the political party that came to represent the staunch pro-treaty forces of Sinn Féin. This political entity was called Cumann na nGaedhal. This entity maintained the economic exploitation of the Irish working class, looked after the gentry and effectively replicated the rule of Britain in Ireland. Ireland remained economically dependent through it’s financial institutions and it’s currency on Britain. How the economy functioned, who held wealth and who dominated political life did not change. Northern Protestants and Presbyterians also looked on in horror down South at the intricate role of the Roman Catholic Church in influencing the decisions being made in the South.

For all intents and purposes, Ireland was successfully partitioned and each majority interest given rule over a specific geographic area, otherwise, North and South. All socially progressive forces, from the women's’ organisations, to the trade union movement or to the Communist Party fell into the background as partition deepened and attitudes hardened.

Civil War 

Inevitably, conflict erupted in the North. The demand for some modicum of equal treatment transformed into street protests and the formation of NICRA, the Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association. Inevitably and like many times before, the response of British Empire was fire, blood and death. In 1972, peaceful protesters were gunned down by British paratroopers. The response of the Irish community, in Ireland and abroad was one of complete shock and outrage. The response also came militarily, as the IRA at first responded, then split over it’s response, and then responded again. Civil war erupted. Internment (imprisonment), arrest, pogroms and torture, backed once more by the British State were normal methods of dealing with the ‘terrorists’. As the saying goes, collusion is no illusion.

An attempt at an agreement in 1973 to create a power-sharing cross-community executive was boycotted by the political representatives of Unionism and a loyalist general strike in 1974. This permanently scuttered the prospective agreement. A referendum on unification or continued membership of the United Kingdom in 1973 was boycotted by the non-loyalist community and delivered an obvious result.

It took another 25 years for an agreement, titled the Good Friday Agreement to take shape and be ratified, thus disengaging the largest participant in this conflict, the Provisional IRA and paving their transformation into a constitutionalist and parliamentary orientated political entity.

Peace, But Actually War

The agreement released prisoners belonging to specific paramilitary organisations that were linked to the political parties leading the negotiations. It did not take away any of the militaristic or police state powers that led to their imprisonment, nor it did fundamentally alter the manner in which the police services operated and who composed and led them.

The Good Friday agreement provided for a devolved government that would be focused on power sharing, a Northern Ireland Assembly that would in turn fill out a Northern Ireland Executive. This is referred to as ‘Strand One’ in the Good Friday Agreement. The powers that Stormont exercises are essentially the powers that a Home Rule entity would have exercised in 1919. The statelet remains an integral part of the United Kingdom and administers British rule in Ireland.

Brexit and Ireland

The complications that British departure from the European union brought to Ireland are straightforward. It should be reiterated that the central contradiction for unification is the historical invasion of Ireland and contemporary occupation of six counties. Nevertheless, the fact that both Ireland and the United Kingdom were in the European Union ensured that all rules regarding the freedom of movement within the EU were uniform. The Free Trade Agreement unites the European economies into one economic trading bloc internationally. Internally it gets rid of custom tariffs and other pesky obstacles to moving money about between large financial institutions.

The question of whether another border would emerge in Ireland dominated political discourse. Would the British State re-introduce secondary and tertiary borders in the form of customs points, checkpoints and tariffs? Nobody on the island of Ireland wanted that primarily because the majority of those living in the 6 counties voted to remain in the European Union. Multiple contradictions opened up and the question of unity and sovereignty arose with it.

It’s generally agreed that there is no desire for a harder partition of Ireland, but it’s impossible to predict right now. Sinn Féin of today, which is absolutely a different entity from the Sinn Féin of 1918, has brought the question of a border poll by stating that a hard border is not in the interests of the people. An obvious enough and an agreeable statement but not easily reconcilable in a pyramid of competing interests ultimately tied to the whim of the British Empire.

The GFA: Another Government of Ireland Act, Another Anglo-Irish Treaty

If Sinn Féin of today existed in the yesteryear of 1918, their political position would be closely associated with the Irish Parliamentary Party, who believed constitutional means and collaboration were the best means to achieve limited self-government. The Republican movement in the 1916-1922 movement was significantly more balanced between those seeking total non-negotiable separation and those interested in cutting various deals and agreements.

The treaties that Britain has imposed, through armed force and threat of war, have always maintained a strong British role in Irish affairs. The partition of Ireland and the creation of a ‘free state’ might have created a new political entity in the world, but it did not change social or economic relations. It in fact developed entirely as James Connolly predicted, flags changed and the English landlord and commercial institutions continued to rule Ireland.

The Good Friday Agreement, negotiated during the civil war and agreed upon as a political and legal document, created a framework for the communities in the Six counties to live peacefully side by side. The agreement is a fascinating document because as identified by former Justice Richard Humphreys in Beyond the Border:

As a matter of international legal obligation, the Agreement institutions are permanent. They do not depend on any one party being ‘open to considering’ them, nor are they ‘transitional’ arrangements. Stormont is a permanent feature of the landscape under the Agreement, whether within a United Kingdom or a United Ireland.

This is not simply a question of a veto being given to one community -- it is a question of retaining all political and administrative functions of partition and nominally accepting unification. Even in the prospect of unification, even in the prospect of a triumphant social democratic and majoritarian victory in Dáil Eireann -- the Good Friday Agreement blockades all meaningful attempts at unification.

Conor Donohue perfectly summarizes this by stating that:

Should a United Ireland eventuate, this does not mean that the role of the United Kingdom in the North will cease. It will be continued in at least two ways, both of which will ensure that the interests of unionists are aptly protected. First, the Agreement creates cross-border bodies and forums, which allow the discussion of matters of mutual concern. As the Agreement will continue in force, these entities, too, will continue to exist … Secondly, the people of Northern Ireland will remain entitled to British citizenship. States have a right to invoke the responsibility of another state for wrongful acts done to one of their nationals. Theoretically, the United Kingdom could therefore invoke the responsibility of Ireland for any violations of the right to self-determination, or other fundamental rights, of unionists therein.


In short, the GFA ensures the role of Britain and continues the legacy of the gross violation of Ireland’s right to determine its own destiny. By manufacturing partition and creating two  gerrymandered statelets, it is almost guaranteed that one all Island approach cannot be legally or constitutionally taken -- even if you are politically active on both sides of the border.

Beyond British Empire and Partition

This creates a number of obstacles that have not been accounted for by any political entity in Ireland. The border poll has been supported by various campaigns, including the Connolly Youth Movement. Our motives for expressing support for the border poll vary wildly to the interests of other organisations. We see it as a minimal expression of imperialism and bourgeoisie democracy and it needs to be exercised -- mostly to demonstrate the futility of the exercise.

Above -- it’s clearly demonstrated that the Good Friday Agreement which is another Anglo-Irish Treaty in sheep's clothing, delivers nothing but further complications to the advancement of one all Island Republic. The role of the Republican movement is to identify that, much as it was identified by the anti-treaty forces in 1922 and 1923. Now that we have identified the contradictions, let’s identify potential methods of overcoming the trappings of Empire.

To further consolidate partition and refuse to challenge it, is to maintain the economic and political interests of the British Empire, the European Union and the American Chamber of Commerce. Ireland, divided, will remain pilfered -- an open market for the Cromwells of today to pillage as they see fit. A vision for the future has to confront the competing international financial interests and present a plutocratic, participative model of democracy that is linked to the social ownership of the economy on an all Island basis.

Many liberal, unionist and Imperial commentators repeatedly use the line that Unionism must be safeguarded in Ireland. This overlooks the immediate class contradictions within the Unionist community and tries to suggest that all unionists should fear the Republican movement. The fact of the matter is that, this is an argument that primarily benefits big house unionism i.e. the section of the unionist community that line their pockets by exploiting other humans, stealing the value they create as labourers and tenants.

The Workers Republic


The coming storm regarding the border has passed for now, but it will resurface as long as the country is partitioned and each time it does so -- will exist an opportunity to express and present viable and alternative means of unification. The priority for progressive forces should be to look far beyond the confines of the Good Friday Agreement and focus on the Ireland we are struggling for.

The process must begin by envisioning a new constitutional order for the entire island. This constitutional order must place social and economic rights above those of private property. It must guarantee housing, education, health, religious worship, employment and so on. We can draw on great inspiration from the Cuban Constitution and the Soviet Constitution. A new constitution that places the need of humanity and the environment by default challenges many of the contradictions that exist in Ireland today, including the clever treaties and agreements that maintain partition.

By placing social and economic rights at the centre of a new constitutional order, we will conclusively demonstrate to the working class of every community that our struggle is against the exploiters, as opposed to our fellow workers who choose to worship in a different church or fly a different flag. Rights of this constitutional order will stem from one, unitary Workers Republic.

This process of placing all law and regulation around human need has to be supplanted by rigorous and systemic organising across every community and district. This is not a fight between the Communist Party and the many forces of Imperialism -- but between every exploited inhabitant on the island of Ireland. Now is the time to consistently highlight the completely inadequate nature of the Good Friday Agreement for overcoming sectarianism and partition and present a viable, revolutionary and long-term alternative.

Alex Homits is the General Secretary of the Connolly Youth Movement.

Beyond Borders ➤ Disunity in Unity

Alex Homits on partition, the Good Friday Agreement and Irish republicanism.

Introduction

The decision of the United Kingdom to leave the European Union shone a spotlight onto its continued occupation of six counties of Ireland. This occupation is mired in contradictions.

They begin as far back as 1913 when Irish people who identified with loyalty to the British crown -- with the support of the British crown, formed the ‘Ulster Covenant’ . This Covenant pledged over a quarter of a million people to armed resistance to any introduction of devolved government in the form of ‘ Home Rule ’. Home Rule was postponed by the outbreak of inter-imperialist rivalries of the British Empire and the German Empire, but it was offered on the premise that the Irish fight in the imperial war machine of Britain. The Irish Parliamentary Party, the official representative body in Westminster for Irish Nationalists, championed recruitment and delivered almost 100,000 Irish people for fodder. The elements committed to Revolution and Insurrection remained in Ireland. The first proper outbreak and attempt to overthrow the British Empire commenced in 1916 -- today we remember the Easter Rising as a ‘blood sacrifice’ that the leadership knew they were going to. This would be an accurate description if it were true, but the truth is that nationalist elements with little to no interest in social change such as Eoin MacNeil undermined their comrades in Dublin and ultimately guaranteed their execution and failure of the rising. The 1916 Rising birthed the electoral victory of the party that at this time sought to collectively represent the interests of all of Ireland: Sinn Féin.

Sinn Féin candidates stood on a platform of declaring an Independent Irish Republic. This mandate delivered 73 seats out of the 105 that Ireland had for the House of Commons. Otherwise, a clear majority. This majority then set about convening and declaring an independent parliament that would decide and exercise sovereignty over Ireland. With this extraordinary set of events -- came the whip, boot and rifle of the Empire. Ireland, despite returning a majority of representatives under Britain’s own ‘democratic’ model of parliamentarianism, was not afforded the right to determine its own destiny.

War, Partition, Dependency 

A War for Independence began in January 1919. In North-East Ulster, the Unionist community was frenzied into anti-Catholic and anti-Nationalist action by it’s leaders. While this is not the origin of cross-community sectarianism in Ireland, it is a pivotal moment in Irish history. The Government of Ireland act of 1920 partitioned the country, giving majority control to one community in the southern parliament and northern majority in the northern parliament. The Anglo-Irish Treaty which was brought back by Michael Collins and the delegation is an enhanced and slightly tweaked version of the Government of Ireland Act.

The 1921 election was held on the basis of a partitioned political unit, copper fastening the incoming partition of the country and minor breadcrumbs The southern statelet was given Dominion status, swore an oath of allegiance to the crown and maintained all of the pompous and arrogant traditions of the British Empire while North-East Ulster was maintained within the British Empire with some devolved powers.

Partition ushered in a ‘carnival of reaction’ as James Connolly predicted. The northern state openly and brazenly discriminated against a sizable Catholic minority. Tommy McKearney describes it as an “orange fascist state” in his book From Provisional IRA to Parliament. This is an accurate enough description that captures the extraordinaryy policing powers, the immense discrimination and inequality that persisted in the six counties.

In the South, the Unionist political forces in the Irish Unionist Alliance merged into the political party that came to represent the staunch pro-treaty forces of Sinn Féin. This political entity was called Cumann na nGaedhal. This entity maintained the economic exploitation of the Irish working class, looked after the gentry and effectively replicated the rule of Britain in Ireland. Ireland remained economically dependent through it’s financial institutions and it’s currency on Britain. How the economy functioned, who held wealth and who dominated political life did not change. Northern Protestants and Presbyterians also looked on in horror down South at the intricate role of the Roman Catholic Church in influencing the decisions being made in the South.

For all intents and purposes, Ireland was successfully partitioned and each majority interest given rule over a specific geographic area, otherwise, North and South. All socially progressive forces, from the women's’ organisations, to the trade union movement or to the Communist Party fell into the background as partition deepened and attitudes hardened.

Civil War 

Inevitably, conflict erupted in the North. The demand for some modicum of equal treatment transformed into street protests and the formation of NICRA, the Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association. Inevitably and like many times before, the response of British Empire was fire, blood and death. In 1972, peaceful protesters were gunned down by British paratroopers. The response of the Irish community, in Ireland and abroad was one of complete shock and outrage. The response also came militarily, as the IRA at first responded, then split over it’s response, and then responded again. Civil war erupted. Internment (imprisonment), arrest, pogroms and torture, backed once more by the British State were normal methods of dealing with the ‘terrorists’. As the saying goes, collusion is no illusion.

An attempt at an agreement in 1973 to create a power-sharing cross-community executive was boycotted by the political representatives of Unionism and a loyalist general strike in 1974. This permanently scuttered the prospective agreement. A referendum on unification or continued membership of the United Kingdom in 1973 was boycotted by the non-loyalist community and delivered an obvious result.

It took another 25 years for an agreement, titled the Good Friday Agreement to take shape and be ratified, thus disengaging the largest participant in this conflict, the Provisional IRA and paving their transformation into a constitutionalist and parliamentary orientated political entity.

Peace, But Actually War

The agreement released prisoners belonging to specific paramilitary organisations that were linked to the political parties leading the negotiations. It did not take away any of the militaristic or police state powers that led to their imprisonment, nor it did fundamentally alter the manner in which the police services operated and who composed and led them.

The Good Friday agreement provided for a devolved government that would be focused on power sharing, a Northern Ireland Assembly that would in turn fill out a Northern Ireland Executive. This is referred to as ‘Strand One’ in the Good Friday Agreement. The powers that Stormont exercises are essentially the powers that a Home Rule entity would have exercised in 1919. The statelet remains an integral part of the United Kingdom and administers British rule in Ireland.

Brexit and Ireland

The complications that British departure from the European union brought to Ireland are straightforward. It should be reiterated that the central contradiction for unification is the historical invasion of Ireland and contemporary occupation of six counties. Nevertheless, the fact that both Ireland and the United Kingdom were in the European Union ensured that all rules regarding the freedom of movement within the EU were uniform. The Free Trade Agreement unites the European economies into one economic trading bloc internationally. Internally it gets rid of custom tariffs and other pesky obstacles to moving money about between large financial institutions.

The question of whether another border would emerge in Ireland dominated political discourse. Would the British State re-introduce secondary and tertiary borders in the form of customs points, checkpoints and tariffs? Nobody on the island of Ireland wanted that primarily because the majority of those living in the 6 counties voted to remain in the European Union. Multiple contradictions opened up and the question of unity and sovereignty arose with it.

It’s generally agreed that there is no desire for a harder partition of Ireland, but it’s impossible to predict right now. Sinn Féin of today, which is absolutely a different entity from the Sinn Féin of 1918, has brought the question of a border poll by stating that a hard border is not in the interests of the people. An obvious enough and an agreeable statement but not easily reconcilable in a pyramid of competing interests ultimately tied to the whim of the British Empire.

The GFA: Another Government of Ireland Act, Another Anglo-Irish Treaty

If Sinn Féin of today existed in the yesteryear of 1918, their political position would be closely associated with the Irish Parliamentary Party, who believed constitutional means and collaboration were the best means to achieve limited self-government. The Republican movement in the 1916-1922 movement was significantly more balanced between those seeking total non-negotiable separation and those interested in cutting various deals and agreements.

The treaties that Britain has imposed, through armed force and threat of war, have always maintained a strong British role in Irish affairs. The partition of Ireland and the creation of a ‘free state’ might have created a new political entity in the world, but it did not change social or economic relations. It in fact developed entirely as James Connolly predicted, flags changed and the English landlord and commercial institutions continued to rule Ireland.

The Good Friday Agreement, negotiated during the civil war and agreed upon as a political and legal document, created a framework for the communities in the Six counties to live peacefully side by side. The agreement is a fascinating document because as identified by former Justice Richard Humphreys in Beyond the Border:

As a matter of international legal obligation, the Agreement institutions are permanent. They do not depend on any one party being ‘open to considering’ them, nor are they ‘transitional’ arrangements. Stormont is a permanent feature of the landscape under the Agreement, whether within a United Kingdom or a United Ireland.

This is not simply a question of a veto being given to one community -- it is a question of retaining all political and administrative functions of partition and nominally accepting unification. Even in the prospect of unification, even in the prospect of a triumphant social democratic and majoritarian victory in Dáil Eireann -- the Good Friday Agreement blockades all meaningful attempts at unification.

Conor Donohue perfectly summarizes this by stating that:

Should a United Ireland eventuate, this does not mean that the role of the United Kingdom in the North will cease. It will be continued in at least two ways, both of which will ensure that the interests of unionists are aptly protected. First, the Agreement creates cross-border bodies and forums, which allow the discussion of matters of mutual concern. As the Agreement will continue in force, these entities, too, will continue to exist … Secondly, the people of Northern Ireland will remain entitled to British citizenship. States have a right to invoke the responsibility of another state for wrongful acts done to one of their nationals. Theoretically, the United Kingdom could therefore invoke the responsibility of Ireland for any violations of the right to self-determination, or other fundamental rights, of unionists therein.


In short, the GFA ensures the role of Britain and continues the legacy of the gross violation of Ireland’s right to determine its own destiny. By manufacturing partition and creating two  gerrymandered statelets, it is almost guaranteed that one all Island approach cannot be legally or constitutionally taken -- even if you are politically active on both sides of the border.

Beyond British Empire and Partition

This creates a number of obstacles that have not been accounted for by any political entity in Ireland. The border poll has been supported by various campaigns, including the Connolly Youth Movement. Our motives for expressing support for the border poll vary wildly to the interests of other organisations. We see it as a minimal expression of imperialism and bourgeoisie democracy and it needs to be exercised -- mostly to demonstrate the futility of the exercise.

Above -- it’s clearly demonstrated that the Good Friday Agreement which is another Anglo-Irish Treaty in sheep's clothing, delivers nothing but further complications to the advancement of one all Island Republic. The role of the Republican movement is to identify that, much as it was identified by the anti-treaty forces in 1922 and 1923. Now that we have identified the contradictions, let’s identify potential methods of overcoming the trappings of Empire.

To further consolidate partition and refuse to challenge it, is to maintain the economic and political interests of the British Empire, the European Union and the American Chamber of Commerce. Ireland, divided, will remain pilfered -- an open market for the Cromwells of today to pillage as they see fit. A vision for the future has to confront the competing international financial interests and present a plutocratic, participative model of democracy that is linked to the social ownership of the economy on an all Island basis.

Many liberal, unionist and Imperial commentators repeatedly use the line that Unionism must be safeguarded in Ireland. This overlooks the immediate class contradictions within the Unionist community and tries to suggest that all unionists should fear the Republican movement. The fact of the matter is that, this is an argument that primarily benefits big house unionism i.e. the section of the unionist community that line their pockets by exploiting other humans, stealing the value they create as labourers and tenants.

The Workers Republic


The coming storm regarding the border has passed for now, but it will resurface as long as the country is partitioned and each time it does so -- will exist an opportunity to express and present viable and alternative means of unification. The priority for progressive forces should be to look far beyond the confines of the Good Friday Agreement and focus on the Ireland we are struggling for.

The process must begin by envisioning a new constitutional order for the entire island. This constitutional order must place social and economic rights above those of private property. It must guarantee housing, education, health, religious worship, employment and so on. We can draw on great inspiration from the Cuban Constitution and the Soviet Constitution. A new constitution that places the need of humanity and the environment by default challenges many of the contradictions that exist in Ireland today, including the clever treaties and agreements that maintain partition.

By placing social and economic rights at the centre of a new constitutional order, we will conclusively demonstrate to the working class of every community that our struggle is against the exploiters, as opposed to our fellow workers who choose to worship in a different church or fly a different flag. Rights of this constitutional order will stem from one, unitary Workers Republic.

This process of placing all law and regulation around human need has to be supplanted by rigorous and systemic organising across every community and district. This is not a fight between the Communist Party and the many forces of Imperialism -- but between every exploited inhabitant on the island of Ireland. Now is the time to consistently highlight the completely inadequate nature of the Good Friday Agreement for overcoming sectarianism and partition and present a viable, revolutionary and long-term alternative.

Alex Homits is the General Secretary of the Connolly Youth Movement.

41 comments:

  1. Well stated, that Provisional Sinn Fein today are just newer Redmonites collaborating with British rule. And the GFA is just “…another Anglo-Irish Treaty in sheep's clothing” that will not (by British intention and design) unite Ireland.

    In fact, the cited remarks from 2018 by former British Justice Richard Humphrey and Conor Donohue’s about the permanency of Stormont and British rule in Ireland echo British Rear Admiral Geoffrey Sloan’s remarks from 1997 about same:

    Given the current preferences of the British government with respect to Northern Ireland, this most recent geopolitical dualism looks likely to underpin British strategic policy for some time to come.

    Sloan, G.R., The Geopolitics of Anglo-Irish Relations in the 20th Century, (Leicester University Press, London & Washington, 1997) at page 266.

    The dualism being Brits paying lip service to Irish unification all the while maintaining geopolitical hegemony over it all forever. In short, an honest British lie, aka the GFA.

    Versus:

    “We’ll have a United Ireland by 2016.”Martin McGuinness in 2003.

    https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/well-have-a-united-ireland-by-2016-says-mcguinness-25922555.html

    And:

    “Thatcher is gone and so is the British veto.”Gerry Adams in 2016.

    https://www.thejournal.ie/readme/gerry-adams-united-ireland-2922882-Aug2016/

    Versus:

    “Gerry Adams sold defeat as victory in a career based on illusion... he’s no nearer to achieving a united Ireland than he was at the start of his journey.”Suzanne Breen in 2018.

    https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/suzanne-breen-gerry-adams-sold-defeat-as-victory-in-a-career-based-on-illusion-hes-no-nearer-to-achieving-a-united-ireland-than-he-was-at-the-start-of-his-journey-36584301.html

    ReplyDelete
  2. A synopsis, followed by a projected idealization of a future that the author has provided no mechanism for.

    This is what baffles me about Republicans. You are clearly educated and articulate but venerate a mirage of a hypothetical "United Ireland" with no real understanding of how to bring it to fruition. Neither are you selling it to the fence-warmers. Almost as if you expect a sectarian headcount to sort everything out in the end, it won't, as I suspect the Republic at present will be far more cautious about accepting troublesome Nordys anytime soon.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Steve R.,

    Here you go in 2 easy steps for bringing a "UI" to fruition:

    1. Brits out (like US out of Vietnam, & France out of Algiers, etc.)

    Followed by…

    2. Éire Nua, or "New Ireland", a proposal for a federal united Ireland.

    [Which would even allow for the keeping of Stormont]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89ire_Nua

    This is also the federal model for US governance.

    But without the Electoral College.

    So, it's even better!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Eoghan

    And how are the Brits to be forced/persuaded to leave?

    And who is going to make the proposal for a federal united Ireland and under what auspices?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Barry,

    Same way they were forced/persuaded to leave their other colonies.

    And anyone can make this proposal under the auspices...

    That it's a good idea!

    Even your UK government can make it sua sponte.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Eoghan

      By armed struggle by any chance? That worked well for 30 years didn't it, especially for those who grieve for Lost Lives.

      Delete
  6. The dynamic which would result from a nationalist majority in the Occupied Six Counties cannot be wasted on the limited ‘agreed’ Ireland being carved at present to safeguard British interests come the eclipse of the Unionist Veto. What gives Humphreys the right to dictate that the Good Friday Agreement must continue come that circumstance? No harm to the man, to put it bluntly (pardon my French), but fuck him — his ilk don’t get to re-write the rules when their own rules, at last, have been beaten.

    While a nationalist majority expressed by referendum is in no way Irish self-determination — even where held alongside a concurrent vote in the 26-Counties — this need not mean that it should not, immediately, lead onto such. In this regard, Republicans need to build the argument that immediate elections to a national constituent assembly — elected pro rata from an all-Ireland constituency — should follow on at once. It is there where Ireland’s future should be decided and by the Irish people alone. We of course, though, must insist on their convene regardless — as in without the requirement for a supporting vote, of whatever hue, to begin with.

    I hope that Irish Republicanism, as a political bloc, can soon come to support this demand. I firmly believe it can put us in the space where we need to be, as momentous times in our history hurtle towards us. Britain is depending that we fail in that regard, in order that her slaves can secure free reign. For as Brexit and demographic change in the North carve new political realities, colonialism is bent on their contain, assisted as ever by the gombeen class in our midst. It cannot be allowed to succeed here. On the graves of the martyrs of Ireland, it cannot be allowed to succeed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sean,

      But surely you see my point? Do you really believe FF or FG will want to get rid of their hegemony and realign the entire political set up of the South to accommodate a North full of potential trouble?

      Delete
  7. I suppose the point, Steve, is that this is not for Fine Gael or Fianna Fáil to decide. Even when we put them together, they are a minority now in Ireland. Demographic change, then, is not confined to the North, though its immediate consequence there is greater, due to agreements binding on whether or not there can be a United Ireland. I think if we run with an Éire Nua-type provision for self-rule to Ulster, under a 32-county republic, the threat of violence will be greatly diminished. The rest, the overspill, will just have to be mopped up by the justice system. Threats of violence can’t be allowed to derail Irish self-determination and ultimately they won’t. We’ve endured enough of that and for too long. With respect, it just ain’t going to wash in the future.

    ReplyDelete
  8. But who is going to make the proposal for an Eire Nua type provision for self-rule for Ulster or anywhere else, Sean? Do you really believe that the Republic of Ireland is going to abolish itself; there is no precedent for such an event anywhere in the democratic world? Have you ever realised that much of the British political class and population would be happily shot of Northern Ireland?

    The best way forward for unification aspirations are surely the mechanisms in the Good Friday/Belfast Agreement and the continued development of the Republic as a secular, cosmopolitan society and functioninbg member of the EU rather than tribal head counts.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Barry,

      You actually said: "The best way forward for unification are surely the mechanisms in the Good Friday/Belfast Agreement..."

      Did you even read this article by Alex Homits here?

      He said that "... the Good Friday Agreement blockades all meaningful attempts at unification."

      And he cogently spelled out why that is the case.

      So, what part didn't you understand?

      Just consider that a rhetorical question.

      Because arguing with you is like arguing with:

      Nathan Thurm

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWomk2yt-C8

      Delete
  9. Barry,

    Do the comparative math:

    England has always ruled Ireland by armed force for 800+ years.

    And that has worked well for them.

    Despite all those grieving for lost lives.

    That’s why their Army and secret Police are still there.

    Since their violence gets them what they want.

    Which of course you're more comfortable with.

    But be that as it may…

    Learn to read more carefully:

    “Same way they were forced/persuaded to leave their other colonies.”

    “Even your UK government can make it sua sponte.”

    And if these are words you don’t understand then look them up.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Eoghan

    As I said to Sean, there are many in the British establishment and general public who would be glad to get rid of its troublesome province across the Irish Sea. Granted that I have not researched this conndection myself, but it would not surprise me that many Brexiteers would be of this frame of mind bearing in mind their utterly calllous disregard for the effects of Brexit on the island of Ireland.

    Colonial analogies may be have been applicable when the whole of Ireland was part of the UK at a time when a third of the globe was red. This is manifestly not the case as Brexit Britain cuts an increasingly pathetic figure on the world stage.

    Collapsing the complexity and nuances of Anglo-Irish history into one one lineal narrative of 800 years of oppression and struggle for freedon is just not good history and it removes any sense of agency and responsibility for Irish actors.

    FYI, British soldiers were withdrawn to barracks in 2007 and, whether you wish to believe it or not, the UK govt has said that it has no selfish or strategic interests in Ireland. Your comment that "off course" I am "more comfortable with" ...the "violence of their Army and secret Police" is defamatory. As a legal professional you may need to be more prudent in your use of words in the future.

    Could it be that with a sovereign and modernisng Irish nation state increasingly punching its weight above its former overlord across the Irish Sea, the parking of NI's constitutional status by the Belfast Agreement and the proof of the utter futility of "armed struggle that nationalism/republicanism may have run out of road?

    Look benhind the 800+ years conmfort blanket and you will find that it has been constitutional methods and/or protest movements that has delivered the outcomes that really mattered to Irish people , be it Catholic Emancipation and the Land League in the 19th century; the Anti-Conscription Campaign of 1918; trade uniomism in the Dublin Lockout in 1914; the NI Civil Rightd campaign in the 1960s and 70s and, most transformative of all, the women's movement in ROI from the 1970s to the Repeal of the Eighth Amendment.

    The 800 year + narrative reminds me of so much of certain English nationalists who trace their imagined "free-born Englishman" lineage and their hostility to Europe to the Anglo-Norman invasion of the 11th century. Both victimhood narratives could learn a lot from each other, both belong in the dustbin (not recycling bin) of history.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Look benhind the 800+ years conmfort blanket and you will find that it has been constitutional methods and/or protest movements that has delivered the outcomes that really mattered to Irish people , be it Catholic Emancipation and the Land League in the 19th century; the Anti-Conscription Campaign of 1918; trade uniomism in the Dublin Lockout in 1914; the NI Civil Rightd campaign in the 1960s and 70s and, most transformative of all, the women's movement in ROI from the 1970s to the Repeal of the Eighth Amendment."

      Pish.

      Delete
  11. The proposal for an Éire Nua-type arrangement come a United Ireland, Barry, would presumably be made by its advocates. Unionists with whom I’ve had discussions have all said, to a man, that they would prefer an arrangement of its nature, with regard to Ulster at least, should it come to the point of an all-Ireland constitution. So, to answer your question, it’s likely that this section of Irish society would make the proposal.

    They will have support in that endeavour from the likes of myself, as I think it works as a fair compromise. It affords self-determination to the Irish people while also providing a large measure of same to the Ulster Protestants. Many, however, just want one parliament in Dublin and, at the end of the day, if that is what is determined towards then all concerned will have to respect that. It is ultimately the right of the Irish people to decide these things and they must be afforded an ability to do so. I have confidence that they will prove magnanimous.

    My longer term hope is that we can get to the point where we no longer distinguish between ourselves along lines as are prevalent now, though that is sadly for well down the line. We must first resolve our constitutional status but that will happen soon, given the direction of travel. When that moment comes we must be sure not to kick the can down the road, for that will only prolong the conflict between our divided people. Let’s do this right when the time comes around. Let’s move forward as one, together and in peace

    ReplyDelete
  12. As the impacts of the pandemic washes through its not easy to predict with much accuracy which changes will come to pass in the months and years ahead but any thrust towards political unity is unlikely to be one of them.

    The overall trajectory is more likely towards chaos than it is towards order.

    The inevitable economic decline that is to come will most likely eventually precipitate greater fragmentation and divisiveness across and between societies.

    Though the most lost and the most gullible will probably be seduced by those they perceive as 'strong leaders' and many will find solace and comfort in new, or repackaged existing 'movements' the majority will remain driven by 'enlightened self-interest'.

    If Republicans were to take a more balanced view of Sinn Féin's electoral success in 1918 and factor in the significance of impending conscription, coupled with women over 30 now having a vote, the more reasonable and more intelligent amongst that cohort might concede that the electorates motives were as much, or indeed if not more so, out of self-interest rather than an expression of nationalist fervour. No family wanted they sons offered up for slaughter in a foreign war.

    And likewise in 1998 the people of Ireland, North and South exercised that same self-interest when they endorsed, what Eoghan recently called, the pacification process of GFA.

    Unless the Unification Project is promoted in such a way that it is not seen as leading to even the slightest of inconvenience to middle Ireland then its potential remains little more than a pipe-dream.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Henry Joy,

      I think your correct.

      “Enlightened self-interest” will factionalize...

      The national interest.

      And that’s true just about anywhere.

      So, it'll likely be the “enlighten self-interest”...

      Of English people whose growing indifference about N.I.…

      Could spell abandonment of same in the guise of independence…

      Similar to Jamaica's experience as a British colony:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamaica#Post-independence_era

      And no matter the inconvenience to middle Ireland.

      Who will not matter anymore than middle Jamaica.

      Unless they’re all like Barry Gilheany…

      And beyond the reach of our best reeducation camps.

      But that’s more national nightmare than pipe dream.

      Which is why I'm stocking up on dunce caps for them.

      Because it's important we all do our part.

      As was done for John Candy here:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZ6UuF85ENA

      Delete
    2. Yeep, but the abandonment scenario you propose still couldn't exactly be claimed as the self-determination of the Irish people, now could it?
      Wouldn't some of the cracked uber-nationalists resent such an outcome too! (lol)

      (In a 2011 survey in Jamaica 60% reported that they believed they'd been better off had they remained a British Colony).

      Delete
  13. MickO

    Would it not be easier for to say ":Pish" instead of going to the trouble of transcribing that passage and then offer up your usual four-lettered pearl of wisdom?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Barry,

    Comfort blanket?

    How Britain’s dark history with Ireland haunts Brexit

    https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/brexit/2019/02/how-britain-s-dark-history-ireland-haunts-brexit

    Only for Vichy Irish and West Brits. Especially those who deny there is even such a thing as colonialism in British colonialism or that they are only our “…former overlords”.

    Worse is your repetition of British government lies “…that it has no selfish or strategic interests in Ireland.” And of course, you believe that because you want to because it's your comfort blanket - despite the contrary evidence, i.e. they’re still there (along with MI5 & MI6):

    Operation Helvetic is the operational name for the British Armed Forces' residual[1] operation in Northern Ireland from July 2007 to the present day.

    The operation is also intended to provide military support to the PSNI in the event of serious public disorder or an environmental crisis.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Helvetic#cite_note-3

    https://www.irishnews.com/news/northernirelandnews/2017/07/31/news/ten-years-since-end-of-operation-banner---and-start-of-helvetic-1096778/

    But of course, that won’t stop you from repeating UK government lies.

    Or glibly repeating that Ireland punches above its weight…

    More so you say than England even. LOL! Where, when, how?

    Fact is you're so comfortable with British pacification in Ireland…

    You won’t even call it that let alone ever demand: “Brits out now!”

    So, defamation is only actionable - if at all - if it’s untrue.

    Now here is some good news for real Irish people:

    Half of Brits don’t care if Northern Ireland leaves the UK

    22 April 2020 | UPDATED: 17:27 22 April 2020 by Adrian Zorzut

    https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/half-of-brits-don-t-care-if-northern-ireland-leaves-uk-many-support-border-poll-reunification-brexit-1-6619364

    So, the key to Irish freedom will likely be the English people...

    Not Irish people like you.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Eoghan

    I regards the use of language such as "West Brits", "Vichy Irish" and "real Irish people as racist (and I believe that UK equality and race legislation). I say racist because those are pejorative remarks based on and in referral to my ethnicity.

    I, in the words of Martin Luther King, do not judge anyone by race, colour of skin, private practice of religion or any other protected characteristic under the 2010 UK Equality Act but on the content of their character. I have debated with others on this forum with a republican/nationalist background (and who have personal experience of the brutality of the NI conflict which you do not have) but no one has ever descended to the use of, and I will say it again racist language. And it is racist because under UK law I perceive it as such.

    And, believe me, accusing me of suppporting acts of state violence in NI (or any act of violence) without producing any evidence is defamatory and therefore actionable.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Barry,

    Collaboration is not a legally protected class status.

    Nor is it a race or ethnicity. LOL!

    At best it’s just witness-protection and exploitation.

    Also, you support the British status quo in Ireland.

    Which is based on their military force and violence.

    Worse, you lie about it and get caught lying about it.

    That means truth is an affirmative defense to your nonsense.

    In turn that means you can and would be counter-claimed.

    Remember, when all else fails, there is always law school.


    ReplyDelete
  17. Henry Joy,

    Sure, it could be!

    While they abandon, we take over as done in Saigon 1975:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fall_of_Saigon

    Besides us uber-nationalists will take it any way we can.

    Although as you point out independence isn’t for everyone.

    There are even Americans who’d rather still be British.

    But growing up is always hard to do for a lot of people.

    LOL!

    ReplyDelete
  18. Eoghan

    Your statements that "collaboration is not a legally protected class status" and that I "support the British status quo" are statements of opinion; of self-serving bombastic rhetoric. Not a statement of cold hard facts.

    And the facts are that you have made derogatory remnarks relating to my ethnicity and nationality; i.e. that I am a West Brit, Vichy Irish, self-loathing Irish and collaborator as opposed to "real Irishmen". Perhaps you could explain what "real Irishmen" are though your reply will probably not surprise me.

    I ask to be judged on this forum to be judged on what I write or comment; not on characteristics relating to my ethnicity that others b believe I should have. Your sewer generated comments have similar meaning and intent to "self-hating Jew", "coconut" or "House Negro" all of which are also pejorative comments relating to race.

    Would such comments to be said to be in a workplace, professional or social forum then, believe me, I would sue on the grounds of race-based prejudice and/or discrimination.

    You accuse me of suppporting killings and other misdeeds by the security forces. Produce the evidence (not just bluster) or respectfully withdraw that allegation, mo chara.

    But racism is not the only prejudice that you hold and display. I do recall your "special school" and psychiatric ward epithets. Such contempt and disregard for the learning disabled/different and mentally ill did lead to sterilisation and/or lobotomies as in the case of Rosemary Kennedy, sister of your hero JFK. It was also the precursor to the T4 euthanesia programme in Nazi Germany of the mentally ill

    Oh and I forgot to mention that I am late diagnosed Dyspraxic (Motor morons used to be the term that neurotypical supremacists like you would describe us neurodiverts) and High Functioning Autism which for millions like me meant job dismissals and long periods experiencing the degrading institution that is the UK's social security system before embarking on my PhD to the sounds of "Get a Proper Job" from the Daily Mail and every semi-intelligent job centre jobsworth that I had to deal with. Heard that expression somewhere recently... In my twenties in NI in the 1980s, I was part of Western Europe's most educated dole queues. Would really love to take you to a disability tribunal as well.

    And lastly Luciana Berger MP "crying wolf". Isn't that what those who wish to discredit rape victims say?

    So, mo chara, a lot of bigotry and prejudice bubbling up under that veneer of "anticolonialism" and eulogising Noam Chomsky and Howard Zinn.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Eoghanee,

    I consider myself one of the lucky ones ... one that grew up hard and yet managed to mellow with age!

    Maybe time might heal you too. ^_^

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Barry - you are entitled to make an official complaint to the blog where it will be considered by three quillers of which I will not be one and whose judgement I will not seek to influence one way or the other. The fact that Eoghan's comments have appeared means that I don't consider them to be as you see them but you do have the right to more attentive consideration.

      Delete
    2. Henry Joy,

      Nah, I just age like a fine wine...or is it whine? LOL!

      Delete
  20. Barry,

    Start to practice naked yoga or something and learn to chill...You are very good at throwing insults around yourself.. Let me refresh your memory...You know (like all Quiller's) that my oldest wee girl is Jewish..and you had the bare faced cheek to call me a Gobbles propagandist..AKA a NAZI...!!!!!

    Grow a pair of balls and man up and stop spitting your dummy tit out every other post..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Frankie - there is something to that. Barry is too sensitive for the rough and tumble of the blog. He should simply ignore but once he engages he becomes part of the problem he then complains about. The only observations people make to me is how they switch off once the spats start as they find them so boring. They are not taking one side or the other. But the site has a duty of care to all its writers and will protect them from bullying if it arises.

      Delete
    2. Frankie

      The "Goebbels propagandist" remark was a reference to your repeated promotion of Rothschild conspiracy theories whiuch have conclusively shown to be antismmitic in oriogin and intent. The faith/ethnicity of your daughter or yourself is irrelevant.

      Yes, this is a free speech blog which you can post anything on. I get that. I also have the right to exercise free speech to call out and challenge race and other prejudice that other contributors If you wish to respond with ridicule then be my guest because your stock replies say more about yourself than it does about me.

      Delete
  21. Barry,

    You lost me at "...your hero JFK”.

    Go figure.

    Look, there is no handicapping in the big leagues.

    Swing at the pitches thrown or get out.

    If you want special attention then get a dog.

    This isn’t a faculty lounge of snobby Fabians.

    At least not yet anyway.

    And stop lying.

    Or at least stop complaining about getting caught lying.

    Because like a lot of people you’re typical.

    You can dish it out but you can’t take it in.

    Tough!

    Now read that book I recommended to you.

    You will find it helpful.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Anthony,

    I;m with the program...some heads just don't know when to quit when they think they are a head...

    Quillers, as a for naked yoga, some of you should try it...Personally I've the praying mantis pose down to a T

    ReplyDelete
  23. Barry and I have our political differences, and I've either debated these with him or decided on some issues that it would be unproductive to continue engaging with him.
    When debating with anyone, I have tried not to make it personal - to 'play the ball not the man' no matter how aggravating I find their line.
    I'm not sure that I'd agree that the name calling which Barry has been subjected to constitutes 'race-based prejudice and/or discrimination', but making derogatory remarks about someone's mental condition/ disability/ illness is discriminatory, especially when the victim has made his condition known to his adversary.
    Tomorrow is Mental Health awareness week, perhaps a good opportunity for some to go and acquaint themselves with what it is like to be afflicted with these conditions.
    The very last thing anyone should do is tell someone with such a condition to grow up, or catch themselves on etc. You might as well tell someone from Africa to change their skin colour.


    https://www.changeyourmindni.org/our-campaigns

    On the actual topic - the above article:
    I agree that the 1916 rising was not a 'blood sacrifice'. Had it not been scuppered by MacNeil it far more chance of success than the war prosecuted by the Provos half a century later.
    Throughout the article, the author references the importance of the class question yet predictably, all of the comments skip over this and go straight to the territorial issue.
    There is much in the article I disagree with, (where were all these unionists who became the pro-treaty TDs?) and in my view citing the USSR and Cuba as models of democratic socialist societies is exactly what is holding back revolutionary politics.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Mike Craig,

    Calling anyone out for their political bias, lies or distortions does not constitute race-based prejudice or discrimination against any legally protected class status. Nor were there any derogatory remarks made here about BG’s mental condition, disability or illness as he (who is dishonest) claims to have, i.e. dyspraxia and higher functioning autism. The former is a developmental disorder in some children (such as being unable to tie their shoes) that is outgrown and or easily cured (wear loafers). The latter you couldn’t pick out of a crowd – just see this interview of university professor Tim Page who has/had both conditions (and you will only know this because he says so):

    Tim Page of University of Southern California

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wY1IFfJXN2E&t=143s

    Me thinks then that BG is smoke screening for pity’s sake.

    Which is a disservice to all genuinely disabled persons.

    That said, the author here Alex Homits...

    Didn’t just focus on class questions.

    He also focused on the GFA as the legal cul-de-sac that it is.

    He even (quite correctly in my opinion) called it:

    “Another Government of Ireland Act, Another Anglo-Irish Treaty”.

    My comments focused on that part of his article.

    Fact that you prefer other parts of that article...

    Is a matter of importance for you.

    But I wouldn’t read into that as any more than that.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I was diagnosed with Ideomotor dyspfraxia at Colchester General Hospital after five sessions of Weischler Adult Intelligence Tests by a very competent neuropsychologist in July-August 2000.

    I was diagnosed with Asperger Syndrome at Sinmon Baron-Cohen's (a world renowned expert on the condition) Cambridge Asperger Clinic over two sessions in November and December 2001.

    I was in receipt of Low Rate Personal Care and Mobility Disability Liviing Allowance (DLA) until this year until I was disallowed the DLA successor Personal Independence Payment (PIP) in its infamous Work Capability Assessment; I am currently in the process of going to appeal tribunal.

    I have suffered five bouts of depression and anxiety directly related to the consequences of having these neurodiverse conditions; I have been on 50 mg Sertraline antidepressants since September 2013.

    Who is Eoghan or any other neurotypical bigot to opine on who is genuinely disabled and on what medical authority or expertise does he distinguish between the deserving and non-desserving disabled?

    ReplyDelete
  26. Barry - you are under no obligation to disclose your personal medical history here. Any future comments in relation to it will not be published. People who challenge other people's professed medical conditions end up damaging themselves - much like the time Cate Hate tried to ridicule Ann Travers over the authenticity of her cancer condition.
    The onus was on TPQ to have moved earlier but given that we were bored out of our tree by the exchange we didn't pay sufficient attention to the detail.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Well-being is rarely static ... we all vacillate on the various spectra which contribute to and constitute it.

    As humans we all have strengths as well as our weaknesses and vulnerabilities.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Anthony,

    He discloses it for distraction and pity sake purposes.

    Because I challenged his dishonest arguments here.

    Caught lying he ink sprays like an octopus on the run.

    His alleged medical history does not interest me.

    Nor have I inquired about it.

    We only know about it here because he publishes it.

    So don't be fooled by him.

    But if you're bored by the commentary then turn the channel.

    Barry,

    FYI - I used to work in the field and would've denied your claim.

    Not because I'm a bigot since I'm all for helping people who need it.

    But because you're not disabled - at best you're just different.

    And that's assuming you're even telling the truth.

    And if you are...

    Then fair play to any Irishman for raping his piece in England.



    ReplyDelete
  29. Eoghan - I think you sound more of a bully than he does a liar. I assure you of this: you will bully nobody here.
    It is you I am not fooled by.
    I will take your advice and turn the channel - I will not be looking at any of your comments. Which means they do not get moderated, which means they will not appear.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Here's a comment I made contemporaneously but went astray in the ether!

    The drama triangle continues: persecutors, victims and rescuers.

    ReplyDelete