First minister of the north wants an apology

[blandy]

Thank you Uni guy for saving me a lot of typing, I think Odlum is just allowing his natural prejudices show.

Now if Odlum really wishes to compare and contrast NI & the Southern US we could look at the success of a civil rights movement without a terrorist group using it as political cover (and diminishing it in the eyes of those it was trying to speak to!). Did Martin Luther King advocate or practise bombing, murder of Black police officers etc?

Anyway, in a hurry out - should hope to be able to respond more fully to the latest responses tomorrow.

Cheers,

B

[odlum833]

Originally Posted by blandy

his natural prejudices show.

This is the pot calling the kettle black right here. It's late and I think you don't get it. So I will just ask you a simple question


Why is it that we had refugee camps along the border for Catholics and nationalists in the late 1960's and early 70's during which time thousands crossed the border and why did the Irish government recommend to the UN security council that a UN peacekeeping force should be sent to the north instead of British troops?

Anything seem a little disturbing about that to you? That's just normal is it? Take your time and consider the implications seriously before attempting to degrade and undermine the treatment a certain large percentage of the population there was subjected to to varying degrees. Whether it's political gerrymandering, intimidation, discrimination in employment in housing and in basic benefits and entitlements including voting rights which were manipulated gleefully using property ownership and outright murder. We have a name for this. Sometimes it's called a pogrom. Quite a description isn't it? And that's why we had the civil rights movement and when they were attacked that is why a section of the population needed protection from loyalist mobs. That's when the provisional IRA came about. NOT as a result of anything the government here did but as a direct result of misgovernance in the 6 counties.

And Unionists have some cheek looking for apologies. They are the ones who were responsible for not only the IRA but all forms of other paramilitaries that grew from the late 1960's on through their own policies. That is their legacy not our legacy.

[manrush]

Originally Posted by blandy

Thank you Uni guy for saving me a lot of typing, I think Odlum is just allowing his natural prejudices show.

Now if Odlum really wishes to compare and contrast NI & the Southern US we could look at the success of a civil rights movement without a terrorist group using it as political cover (and diminishing it in the eyes of those it was trying to speak to!). Did Martin Luther King advocate or practise bombing, murder of Black police officers etc?

Anyway, in a hurry out - should hope to be able to respond more fully to the latest responses tomorrow.

Cheers,

B

True. Some people still wear their 'Ireland: all 32 counties or nothing' blinders on, refusing to see that reality is just different.

What the 32 County Republican types don't get is that Northern Ireland is not occupied by the British, that it was never a part of an independent Ireland.

[Onoudidnt]

As soon as that gobshite and his mates in the uvf and suchlike start apologising for the (equally as vile) atrocities they played a part in over the past 50 odd years, then he might get to seek an apology. Before that, he should stick to twiddling his thumbs and pretend to work; like the rest of the Northern Assembley.
(At the risk of sounding like a Shinner type, I must point out I am of a long line of English Protestants

[odlum833]

Originally Posted by manrush

True. Some people still wear their 'Ireland: all 32 counties or nothing' blinders on, refusing to see that reality is just different.

What the 32 County Republican types don't get is that Northern Ireland is not occupied by the British, that it was never a part of an independent Ireland.

Did or did not Ireland as a whole vote for complete independence in 1920 by proxy by voting overwhelmingly for Sinn Féin after a war of independence - yes or no?


I don't see how a small minority of the population on this island should have been allowed to subvert the wish of the majority on this island. Do you?

Let's say France occupied England and the English decided to fcuk them out of their country but the French had planted a French population in 6 south east counties of England and they did not want independence and the country was partitioned. How would you feel then? Oh and not only that but the French subversives decided that special treatment was in order for the English nationalists. Would you be happy with that?

[manrush]

Originally Posted by odlum833

Did or did not Ireland as a whole vote for complete independence in 1920 by proxy by voting overwhelmingly for Sinn Féin after a war of independence - yes or no?


I don't see how a small minority of the population on this island should have been allowed to subvert the wish of the majority on this island. Do you?

Let's say France occupied England and the English decided to fcuk them out of their country but the French had planted a French population in 6 south east counties of England and they did not want independence and the country was partitioned. How would you feel then? Oh and not only that but the French subversives decided that special treatment was in order for the English nationalists. Would you be happy with that?

Moot point, because the Irish majority voted for Sinn Fein to sit at the House of Commons. They were returned into power after the elections in the House of Commons for Southern Ireland (the Unionists winning an overall majority in the Northern Irish House of Commons). The Shinners then declared their Dail to encompass the entirety of the island, which was the South imposing its will on the North.

Another point: Ireland started as an independent state sans Northern Ireland.

And here's a third point: a majority of those living in Northern Ireland wish to remain within the UK. To make a vote for unification an all-island vote would be essentially the more populated South imposing their will on the less populated North.

[odlum833]

Originally Posted by manrush

Moot point, because the Irish majority voted for Sinn Fein to sit at the House of Commons, not suddenly take up seats in the Second Dáil (of a self-proclaimed Republic, mind you). Thus, the establishment of the Second Dáil was contrary to the wishes of the electorate.

Another point: Ireland started as an independent state sans Northern Ireland.

And here's a third point: a majority of those living in Northern Ireland wish to remain within the UK. To make a vote for unification an all-island vote would be essentially the more populated South imposing their will on the less populated North.

That's rubbish. Once again think of the point I made about England. And also do you think Sinn Féin in 1920 (the days of Collins etc) were going to sit in a foreign parliament - members of which they were killing!? Irish people knew what they were voting for. They were voting for the Dáil and independence not the House of Commons. End of story. You are completely stupid if you don't think the Irish people did not know the platform on which Sinn Féin stood. The 6 counties was a subversion of democracy.

Don't think groups like the IRA grow like Brussel sprouts in a field. There is a reason they existed. People don't just go out and do this stuff on a whim. They don't wake up one day and say "this will be great craic".

[manrush]

Originally Posted by odlum833

That's rubbish. Once again think of the point I made about England. And also do you think Sinn Féin in 1920 (the days of Collins etc) were going to sit in a foreign parliament - members of which they were killing!? Irish people knew what they were voting for. They were voting for the Dáil and independence not the House of Commons. End of story. You are completely stupid if you don't think the Irish people did not know the platform on which Sinn Féin stood. The 6 counties was a subversion of democracy.

Don't think groups like the IRA grow like Brussel sprouts in a field. There is a reason they existed. People don't just go out and do this stuff on a whim. They don't wake up one day and say "this will be great craic".

In 1920, Ireland was still legally a constituent country of the United Kingdom. Thus, Westminster was Ireland's parliament as much as it was Scotland's and England's parliament.

You're assuming that the vote in 1921 was an all-Ireland vote. It wasn't. It was a vote for two separate Houses of Commons. Just because the Shinners at the time treated it as such, doesn't mean it was true.

When was Ireland partitioned into North and South? When it was still legally a member of the UK.

There was no subversion of democracy. Hell, the misrepresentation that Sinn Fein performed during that year could arguably have been the subversion of democracy.

[odlum833]

Your ignorance of history cuts no ice with me. Complete rubbish. I could not be bothered. You resort to bullshit to defend the indefensible much like our minority friends in the 6 counties. You are equally as blinkered. Stay in Britain. And your last point about misrepresentation - complete nonsense There was no misrepresentation of anything. We had a war of independence. A lot of people died so this country could be independent. People voted for that. My point is made above.

[belfastuniguy]

Originally Posted by manrush

Moot point, because the Irish majority voted for Sinn Fein to sit at the House of Commons. They were returned into power after the elections in the House of Commons for Southern Ireland (the Unionists winning an overall majority in the Northern Irish House of Commons). The Shinners then declared their Dail to encompass the entirety of the island, which was the South imposing its will on the North.

Another point: Ireland started as an independent state sans Northern Ireland.

And here's a third point: a majority of those living in Northern Ireland wish to remain within the UK. To make a vote for unification an all-island vote would be essentially the more populated South imposing their will on the less populated North.

That'll never happen, if a majority in NI vote to remain in the UK then NI will continue to be part of the UK. The wishes of those voting in NI will always have preference and unification can only occur when a majority in NI approves it.


Though going by the latest research that's a long way off.

Irish unity is a dead political issue for at least a generation, an exclusive Belfast Telegraph poll has revealed.

The findings suggest that for the vast majority of people here, the border issue — which has dominated politics here for decades — has now been settled.

Only 7% of voters in Northern Ireland would vote to remove the border this year. Even when asked if they would vote to remove it in 20 years time the figure increases only to 32%.

Significantly, the proportion of the Catholic population who favour unity now or in 20 years is also a minority — just 48%. The findings come from a major new survey commissioned by the Belfast Telegraph and carried out by our polling partners LucidTalk, who are members of the British Polling Council (BPC).

The poll sheds new light on the long-standing question of nationhood in Northern Ireland and provides a fascinating snapshot of public opinion at a key time in our political history. People were asked: “If a border referendum was held within the next year how would you vote?”. They were given the options “Yes”, “Yes, in 20 years”, “No, keep Northern Ireland” and “No opinion”.

This allowed us to distinguish support for unity as an immediate political priority and as a longer term ideal. Protestants were overwhelmingly against Irish unity, but the Catholic population was more divided. Just 7% of Catholics would vote for it now and a further 41% would opt for it in 20 years’ time, 48% in all.

The proportion of Catholics offering no opinion on the issue (14%) mirrored the percentage in the population as a whole. This was a low opt-out rate compared to other questions.

If these ‘don’t knows’ are ignored, 63% of people, including 44% of Catholics, want Northern Ireland to remain a separate entity even after 2032.

Across all social classes and amongst both men and women, support for removing the border now is below 11% in every category. It is favoured as a longer-term option, in 2032, by 48% of Catholics, 4% of Protestants and 36% of people who say they are neither Catholic or Protestant.

It is often argued by commentators and politicians that if the Catholic population ever replaces Protestants as the majority then Irish unity will inevitably follow. This assumption tribalised local politics for most of Northern Ireland’s history. Our figures indicate that this ‘sectarian headcount’ model is no longer entirely valid.

Instead, a substantial minority of Catholics and an overwhelming majority of Protestants (96%) favour the status quo. This means that any dramatic change in Northern Ireland’s constitutional status based on a demographic change is at best a remote possibility.

Another study, published by the Community Relations Council in February, found that Catholics are already the majority population for people under the age of 30. Despite this, our survey shows that support for Irish unity is marginally lower in the 18-24 year old group — 36% compared to 37% in the population as a whole.

Support for unity is slightly higher amongst those aged 45-64 (38%) where Protestants are still in the majority.

The overall message is that support for Irish unity does not rise in line with the Catholic proportion of the population as had been long predicted.

Further analysis of the results suggests that the bulk of Catholics who want to remain within the UK do not currently vote — though some support the SDLP, Alliance, the Greens or one of the unionist parties. Under the Good Friday Agreement, a border referendum can be held once every seven years.

Irish unity occurs if is backed by a majority in both Northern Ireland and in the Irish Republic voting separately.

The Secretary of State can call a referendum at any time when he thinks a change is likely to be endorsed. On the present showing he would have little grounds to do so.

The findings confirm the broad trend in other recent polls carried out by the province’s universities.

They show that support for Irish unity has been decreasing since 2006, despite a steady rise in the Sinn Fein vote.

Belfast Telegraph, June 2012

[blandy]

Odlum - You're the one who made the broad brush attack on the Ulster Scots, where have I shown prejudice in any of my posts.

I am merely pointing out that the attitude of the unionist community in NI was by definition conditioned by 40yrs of on&off IRA violence and the actions of what was seen as a hostile southern state. Discussing the causes of discrimination no more trivialises it than discussing the causes of IRA violence trivialises that violence.

For the record the South wanted the UN involved in an effort to internationalise the conflict and thereby advance their designs on the North. The British Army were initially welcomed in the Catholic areas, it was the IRA which drove a wedge between them.

If you recognise the right of the Republic of Ireland to opt out of an all British Isles political unit then equally you must recognise the right of Northern Ireland to opt out of an all Ireland political unit.