Is the UK a foreign country?

mike65

To do otherwise is to accept the wrong that has been done 900 years ago.

Aghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! :eek: /bangs head off wall.

It was 800 years ago? Don't you know your Christian Brothers History?

Mike.

Victor

bik_ireland wrote:

The bottom line of this issue is the fact that britain illegally and immorally invaded Ireland.

Britain didn't exist when Ireland was invaded.

So back to my point. The baseline for any referenum concerning the north must be one of a) The country was illegally occupied by foreign invaders, b) Those invaders have given back 26 of the 32 counties. In our hearts we must still understand that Ireland has 32 counties!

And there wasn't 32 counties when invaded, when returned or now.

nobody lives ON the Irish sea or any other sea.

What of the islands in the Irish sea? And any off shore platforms?

murphaph

bik_ireland wrote:

I also take it, murphaph, that you are quite unconcerned with the promises that were made to our most northern brethren regarding our intention never to abandon them after partition.

Our most northern 'bretheren' lve in the RoI, Malin Head FYI. Wrt the people of Northern Ireland, they seem to be doing ok to me.

bik_ireland wrote:

The bottom line of this issue is the fact that britain illegally invaded Ireland.

Contrary to what law? Something has to be contrary to law to be illegal.

bik_ireland wrote:

So back to my point. The baseline for any referenum concerning the north must be one of a) The country was illegally occupied by foreign invaders, b) Those invaders have given back 26 of the 32 counties.

You do know the 'brits' were the ones who 'stamped' the traditional counties on our land about 500 years ago. I am surprised you so readily accept this foreign concept on a land traditionally divided by tribes and provinces.

Victor

Slightly off topic http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/front/2006/1002/1158591275647.html

bik_ireland

If I have to watch every word and phrase I use to attempt to get a point across there is not much point in discussing any issue with some of the people here. Reference to 32 counties was a contemporary one and had I been aware of the anally retentive nature of some of the "contributors" I would not have used it. Other references were made to sub-texts of my last post - but not one argument against the points of my post other than syntactical or perceived geographic ones.

murphaph wrote:

Wrt the people of Northern Ireland, they seem to be doing ok to me.

Being burned out of or intimidated from your home, ruled by a foreign power, denied basic civil rights for decades .. that's what you call doing all right?

murphaph

bik_ireland wrote:

Being burned out of or intimidated from your home, ruled by a foreign power, denied basic civil rights for decades .. that's what you call doing all right?

Question, do any/all of these things still happen? Do they only happen to those who believe themselves irish, or do prods also get burned/intimidated out? The majority of the population are happ with their government and do not consider it foreign. Do you still believe there are civil rights issues in NI? If so, what are they exactly? (remember things like minimum 50% Roman Catholic recruitment into the PSNI before answeing). Remember also that said PSNI is perhaps the most scrutinised police force in the world these days, far more accountable than our own boys in blue who still investigate themselves! Also, do you not believe that intimidation occurs in say places like Moyross, Limerick? What does that say about our great little country?

You're living in the early 70's my friend. It's time to recognise that Ireland, north and south has changed a little.

bik_ireland

murphaph wrote:

Question, do any/all of these things still happen? Do they only happen to those who believe themselves irish, or do prods also get burned/intimidated out?

Yes! They DO still happen - not only predominantly to Catholics, but also to "prods" as you refer to them. If you wish I can give you links to various media sources reporting same. Better still - look it up yourself.

murphaph wrote:

The majority of the population are happ with their government and do not consider it foreign

I assume based on your previous posts that the population you refer to is of the 6 counties. That being so - you are still making the mistake of assuming that ONLY the population of the 6 counties can make the decision on sovereignty.

The percentage of Catholics in the psni is closer to 20% - and this at the expense of other groups (protestants included) due to the "positive discrimination" policy of the psni - whose AIM is 50% Catholic membership.
The vast majority of the Catholic / nationalist population have a deep mistrust of the psni and consider it not to be representative of their communities. I would consider this a civil right issue. I would consider being barred from leaving your home by the aforementioned police force because a triumphalist orange order wants to parade down your street shouting insults about your history and religion a civil rights issue. I would consider collusion among big business and police at all levels (read "The Committee") regarding assassinations of people from known republicans to people with no political interests of note a civil right issue. And don't be so naive to think that this is not still happening. Look at the british government installing spies and spying devices in republicans cars and offices.

Yes there is intimidation in many parts of Ireland - north, south, east and west - however intimidation outside of the north is not within the scope of this particular discussion.

murphaph

bik_ireland wrote:

Yes! They DO still happen - not only predominantly to Catholics, but also to "prods" as you refer to them. If you wish I can give you links to various media sources reporting same. Better still - look it up yourself.

Ok, so you accept that anything that happens to catholics also happens to prods. Good.

bik_ireland wrote:

I assume based on your previous posts that the population you refer to is of the 6 counties. That being so - you are still making the mistake of assuming that ONLY the population of the 6 counties can make the decision on sovereignty.

We'll agree to differ on this one I think.

bik_ireland wrote:

The percentage of Catholics in the psni is closer to 20% - and this at the expense of other groups (protestants included) due to the "positive discrimination" policy of the psni - whose AIM is 50% Catholic membership.

You misread my post. I alluded to the 50% RC recruitment policy, designed to increase RC membership to more representative levels, not 50% RC membership proper!

bik_ireland wrote:

The vast majority of the Catholic / nationalist population have a deep mistrust of the psni and consider it not to be representative of their communities.

Sure the largest nationalist party (SF) are now on the brink of joining the Policing Board! Why would they ignore their electorate like this? Once SF are on board it'll be hard to throw verbal stones at the PSNI which, to be fair, are a transformed organisation from the RUC!

bik_ireland wrote:

I would consider this a civil right issue. I would consider being barred from leaving your home by the aforementioned police force because a triumphalist orange order wants to parade down your street shouting insults about your history and religion a civil rights issue.

Can you provide a lik where the PSNI has actually prevented someone actually leaving their house to allow a march past? I would imagine Nuala O'Loan would be very interested to hear of acts of illegal imprisonment by members of the PSNI. Don't the AOH and indeed republicans also march in NI? Should these paramilitary style marches also be banned? (one takes place in the overwhelmingly protestant Ballymena-surely rubbing the prods' noses in it?)

bik_ireland wrote:

I would consider collusion among big business and police at all levels (read "The Committee") regarding assassinations of people from known republicans to people with no political interests of note a civil right issue. And don't be so naive to think that this is not still happening. Look at the british government installing spies and spying devices in republicans cars and offices.

And you don't think the secret services of the United Kingdom don't spy on Loyalists in a similar manner? (many Loyalists believe Billy Wright was allowed to be murdered by the state!) It isn't discrimination if they do it to both sides. Both sides represent(ed) a threat to the state, so the british (and indeed irish) goverment spy/spied on them, just like any state would attempt to do the same on their internal threats.

bik_ireland wrote:

Yes there is intimidation in many parts of Ireland - north, south, east and west - however intimidation outside of the north is not within the scope of this particular discussion.

So, above (in the first paragraph) you accepted that intimidation happens to both catholics and protestants in Northern Ireland, and also that it happens in the Republic of Ireland, so how exactly would your united Ireland stop all this nasty activity? Why would a state which has it's own intimidation in say (just for example!) Limerick, be able to tackle intimidation in a state which you believe has much worse levels of intimidation? Your argument doesn't stack up.

bik_ireland

murphaph wrote:

Ok, so you accept that anything that happens to catholics also happens to prods. Good.

I accept that a level of intimidation has happened to protestants - but certainly not to the level the Catholic population has suffered it.

murphaph wrote:

Sure the largest nationalist party (SF) are now on the brink of joining the Policing Board!

Let's watch this space and see ..

murphaph wrote:

.. the PSNI which, to be fair, are a transformed organisation from the RUC!

The changes made in the changeover from the ruc to psni were superficial and fell far short of Pattens recommendations.

murphaph wrote:

Can you provide a lik where the PSNI has actually prevented someone actually leaving their house to allow a march past?

No - I don't know offhand where you might find one but I have knowledge of this practice through residents of various areas in the north. Eamonn O'Cuiv was at one particular gathering (in Dublin) where this was highlighted so I'm sure if you asked him for his recollections ..


To the best of my knowledge the AOH marches on St Patricks Day and the Feast of the Assumption. The number of Marches by orange orders exceeds 2,000 annually, while the number of nationalist marches would be a small, single-figure fraction of that number. Nationalist marches are not triumphalist and tend not to be antagonistic. How many nationalist marches have you ever seen make the news headlines? Read a litle about the reality of living on the Garvaghy road or other flashpoint areas.

murphaph wrote:

It isn't discrimination if they do it to both sides.

I didn't say the practice was discriminatory. I mentioned it to highlight the fact that the british are still operating under a war mentality.

murphaph wrote:

... so how exactly would your united Ireland stop all this nasty activity? Why would a state which has it's own intimidation in say (just for example!) Limerick, be able to tackle intimidation in a state which you believe has much worse levels of intimidation?

That's a discussion for another day and is not immediately relevant to this particular discussion.

redspider

Kaiser_Sma wrote:

Your unweildy inacurate names are significantly less valid. The UK is a term used all the time by millions of people, your names not only serve no purpose but are used by no one save the terminally pedantic.

Why do you place the fawklands and Gibralter higher than UK Virgin islands and the UK Pacific territory and Belieze etc.? Overseas possesions have never required any mention in a countries name. Northern Ireland is quite lucky.

They are no less official, and hence no less valid. I may call Ireland the auld sod, but it is not a valid official name for Ireland.

> Overseas possesions have never required any mention in a countries name. Northern Ireland is quite lucky.

You're right, Northern Ireland is an overseass posession, I couldnt have put it any better myself.

> fawklands

nice one, for fawk sake !

;-)


By the way, I am not arguing against you, or at you, just pointing out some common falicies in what people think there country is. I take it you are living in Youcogbani, or are you in Belize ?!?

Redspider

redspider

I don't have a link to this:

Folens to wipe 'British Isles' off the map in new atlas

Folens publishers has said it plans to produce a "more correct" version of its widely-used school atlas from January which will omit all references to the "British Isles", writes Áine Kerr.

The glossy world atlas has a section of 31 pages with maps and information, all of which show Ireland under the heading of the British Isles.

Following a recent complaint by a parent to the Minister for Education, Mary Hanafin, her private secretary issued a letter on her behalf recommending that the aggrieved parent raise the matter directly with the teacher who was using the atlas or the school's board of management.

"She also advises you to bring the matter to the attention of Folens, the publishing company concerned," the letter states, adding that the Department does not have a role in vetting the content of publications, including textbooks, produced by commercial companies.

The introduction of the Folens atlas follows a recent entry on the online encyclopaedia Wikipedia on the term "British Isles" which stated that the phrase could be "confusing and objectionable to some people, particularly in Ireland".

The term has in the past been used in a purely geographical sense, to make clear Ireland's proximity to Britain.

However, Minister for Foreign Affairs Dermot Ahern has ruled that the term is not used by the Government and is without any official status.

It was made clear by him that the term is not recognised in any legal or inter-governmental sense.

It has been suggested in education circles that the Folens atlas highlights the need to have a checking system whereby all textbooks are checked to ensure they conform with the curriculum as outlined by the National Council for Curriculum Assessment.

The Irish Embassy in London has also been urged to monitor the media in Britain for "any abuse of the official terms as set out in the Constitution of Ireland and in legislation".

John O'Connor of Folens insisted he had received no complaints from parents regarding the new atlas. The issue had, however, been brought to his attention by a geography teacher.

"I have a policy that if I see a potential problem I'll act on it immediately instead of waiting to see if a problem arises. So from January 2007 the reference will be removed."

© The Irish Times

banaman

Obviously not if you look at the rights that citizens of both juridictions receive under immigration law, both current and proposed.
UK citizens do not need travel documents only photo ID, they can vote in ALL elections except Seanod and referanda and are NOT subject to ANY "foreign national" restrictions.
The same is true for Irish citizens in the UK.
The only difference is one of citizenship which in this case confers little or no benefit or hardship in relation to the people concerned.
So on a person level the 2 countries are not effectively foreign in any meaningful way.
On a goverrnmental level the question is ridiculous. The two nations have seperate and independently elected governments and legislatures. Therefore they are foreign countries.
All of which just goes to show what a manufactured notion nationhood and national identities actually are.
To paraphrase Marx "people of the world unite you have nothing to lose but your chains."

mike65

Re Foleys wipe British Isles off map.

The issue had, however, been brought to his attention by a geography teacher.

The idiots are in charge!

I trust all references to North America are to be removed to appease cranky Canadians.

Mike.

murphaph

bik_ireland wrote:

Read a litle about the reality of living on the Garvaghy road or other flashpoint areas.

Sorry, what? The PSNI have spent the last how many years stopping the OO from marching their traditional route down that road? Like I said, you're not living in the present. Things have changed immensely in NI.

Ashdown

Victor wrote:

But, do the South Koreans consider the North Koreans foreigners?

You would probably have to ask a South Korean that. I am sure they would ecah have an individual opinion on the subject.

I believe that is the offical view of the state that North Korea as a state does not exist. Certinly the Democratic Republic of North Korea (DPNK) does not recognise the Republic of South Korea (ROK). Both states are still technicaly at war, so there has never been a need to recognise each other.

Ashdown

redspider wrote:

They are no less official, and hence no less valid. I may call Ireland the auld sod, but it is not a valid official name for Ireland.

> Overseas possesions have never required any mention in a countries name. Northern Ireland is quite lucky.

You're right, Northern Ireland is an overseass posession, I couldnt have put it any better myself.

> fawklands

nice one, for fawk sake !

;-)


By the way, I am not arguing against you, or at you, just pointing out some common falicies in what people think there country is. I take it you are living in Youcogbani, or are you in Belize ?!?

Redspider

RedSpider, the British Empire may last a thousand years, or it may not last a thousand days. The United Kingdom may rise to glory, or fade to the obscure. That nation has been recognised with a multitude of names in it's and our past (not all of them complamentary) and I am sure that it will be recognised with many others in whatever future lies ahead of it.

I cannot predict the future, and I cannot understand the present. However, one thing I am sure of after reading the post above is that you are a moran. I do not meen to jeer, rather I say this as what I believe is a bonafide fact. You are a very stupid person, you say very stupid things, and you are ignorant to both. You are a moran RedSpider.

Good day.

Ashdown

redspider wrote:

Yes, they are ! :-)

According to this:
http://worldfactbook.com/country/Falkland%20Islands%20(Islas%20Malvinas)/2005/gov

and I'm sure if you do more research yourself, you will find that the Falkland Islands are an overseas territory of the UK, officially. Officially its the UK. Officially when you are in Stanley you are in the same country as when walking in Hamsptead Heath, Picadilly Circus or the Falls Road in Belfast, or indeed Gibraltar.

Very little research on the internet reveals that Terrirories are not generally regarded as part of a country, as described in the link below. Maybe you should do a bit more research before telling others to do likewise.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_overseas_territories

Someone else already pointed out your error, however I failed to notice your reply.

Ashdown

mike65 wrote:

I trust all references to North America are to be removed to appease cranky Canadians.

Mike.

I think we should call the U.S.A. "Broken Canada".

sceptre

Ashdown banned for a calendar month for making a moronically abusive post here. An extremely dim view is taken by me of obvious and pointedly directed personal abuse like the above. Incidentally, "moron" contains the letter 'o' twice, not once.

Sgt. Sensible

Ashdown wrote:

you are a moran.

http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/f/f/get_a_brain_morans.jpg

redspider

mike65 wrote:

> geography teacher

The idiots are in charge!

Hi Mike,

I emailed Folens yesterday and asked them to liase with the Geographic Society(ies) in relation to a new name, lest the new name for the islands becomes "The Folens", or "Mr McCarthy's Islands" (a possible name of the geography teacher)!

In terms of North Amerigo or South Amerigo or Latin(!) Amerigo, a bit of a merry-go-round if you ask me! ;-)

But in all seriousness, the USA has no official connection with the colloquiallism(sp?) "america". America was the name given to the continents after people spoke of the New World, and America became shorthand for USA. Because people couldnt get their heads verbally around saying "you are a USA-in" (you-ess-ay-in), some people say Americans, some others say Yanks. Whether a Native American considers himself a native american is another story!

Redspider

redspider

Ashdown wrote:

the British Empire may last a thousand years, or it may not last a thousand days .....
The United Kingdom may rise to glory, or fade to the obscure ....
I cannot predict the future, and I cannot understand the present ....
Good day.

Ashdown, sorry to burst your bubble but if you have a look around, what was known as the 'British Empire' is clearly a pale speck of its former self. The UK Head of State and the UK Prime Minister (Betty and Tony) don't use the term anymore. Hong Kong was the last major territory which was 'returned' due to Chinese pressure. You may hear it on 'Last night of the Proms' though.

Glory? Well, that all depends on what your definition of 'glory' is. If its a so-called empire, then perhaps the term does not apply.

> I cannot understand the present
Yes, I think you have proven that, and dare I add the past as well.

> Good day
I just have, as I've just read you are banned for a month. Thanks Sceptre.

Redspider

murphaph

redspider wrote:

Hong Kong was the last major territory which was 'returned' due to Chinese pressure.

Actually it wasn't 'returned'. It never belonged to the UK, it was merely leased from China for a period of (IIRC) 99 years. That lease simply expired and China did not wish to renew it.

sceptre

murphaph wrote:

Actually it wasn't 'returned'. It never belonged to the UK, it was merely leased from China for a period of (IIRC) 99 years. That lease simply expired and China did not wish to renew it.

It's a little more complicated than that. Part of Hong Kong was ceded to the British in 1841. Half of Kowloon was added in 1860. What's known as the New Territories (plus the other half of Kowloon) was leased to the British in 1898. Most of the newer developments (airport, water reservoirs etc) were in the New Territories and it would have been difficult to administer the rump of Hong Kong when the leased section was returned. Hence after significant pressure from Beijing in the early 80s the fourth Treaty signed resolved to transfer the entire territory to China at the end of the lease of the New Territories. As opposed to Macau where the Portuguese had significant trouble getting China to take it back.

Most people appear to be unaware that only specific sections of Hong Kong were in fact leased. So you're both right, sort of. And I'm not sure what any of this has to do with the UK being a foreign country or not so I suspect this thread is reaching a limited lifetime.

Kaiser_Sma

Ashdown wrote:

Gibraltar, the Falklands and all the other overseas terrotorys have no parlamentary voting rights, and are threfor regarded as under sovereignty of the United Kingdom, but not part of the United Kingdom. This is something which should probably change in the long run though. When that happens, I will be very pleased to see the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and Anguilla and Bermuda and British Antarctic Territory and British Indian Ocean Territory and British Virgin Islands and Cayman Islands and Falkland Islands and Gibraltar and Montserrat and Pitcairn Islands and Saint Helena and South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands and Sovereign Base Areas of Akrotiri and Dhekelia and Turks and Caicos Islands, or "UKGBNIABBATBIOTBVICIFIGMPISBAADTCI" for "short".

By far the most interesting aspect of this thread has been my discovery that the British Antartic terriroty, with a population of zero, actually has it's own flag.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Flag_of_the_British_Antarctic_Territory.png

Alot of those places are just military bases, overseas troops do have voting rights. As for the rest, weather they have parlamentary rights or not does not have any bearing on the countries name at all, there are no international rules on country names, as long as they are recognised by several powerful nations it doesn't matter what you call them. Where i the new leader of Austria and i decided to change it to 'Japan 2' then as long as it is recognised it matters not (though people may complain). The transition from Great Britan to the United Kingdom was obviously for political reasons as was the transition to United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. There are obviously more pressing things for the house of commons to think about then weather or not to include British Antarctic Territory into the name.

Your link shows a crest accompanied by the union flag

Victor

Kaiser_Sma wrote:

Your link shows a crest accompanied by the union flag

No, its a flag with a white field, with the union flag in one corner and the crest in the other.

sceptre

Victor wrote:

No, its a flag with a white field, with the union flag in one corner and the crest in the other.

It's got a nice penguin though.

Anyone got anything to say relatively related to the original topic before I close this?

JaysusMacfeck

A discussion about Ireland, people? Or 'EIRE' (for the politically soft).

I love 'Southern Ireland' so much, I am going to move to Cork and bang every living thing. God forbid I'd operate in "Eastern Ireland", where bad people multiply.

Oh Southern Ireland, a failed flower of the UK. I love SI, I love Cork and Wex. Wait, southern Ireland? I'm from Eastern Ireland, Dublin, unfortunately the capital of "EIREAH!" - oh yes, that "troubled" region of Briton.

edit: I'm soo waiting for attacks on this one

county wrote:

what are you ranting about man,stop trying to wind-up people

Ah, get yer balls out a me neck ye feck!

JaysusMacfeck

sceptre wrote:

Anyone got anything to say relatively related to the original topic before I close this?

Hold fast, ranger.

I think this is a very interesmont thread, not to be shut just yet. I'm still getting it over on this one. (as creator) Love this thread so far.

No need for the closeage just yet.