Whatevr happened to the 32 county sovereignty?

TBH,I'd get new lawyers.

Mucco

Hey, quirk., why do you want a 'united' Ireland?

Liam Lynch

flogen wrote:

Secondly, I don't doubt that people in Ireland support an all-island state, nor am I surprised that British people feel similar. The problem is the people who will make the decision are not based in Ireland or England, they're based in Northern Ireland

Actually they're based in a British Cabinet. Ask any unionist.

Liam Lynch

Tristrame wrote:

I see...
And what did you think of the overwheming 90% + vote in favour of ammending the constitution to drop its claim on the 6 counties and recognising that consent from the people of the 6 countieswould be needed for a united Ireland.
That was democratically passed.
Do you believe in democracy?

Moving beyond statistics, and onto democracy, perhaps you could outline the democratic basis for British Parliamentary activity in Ireland? I mean which member of the British Cabinet is democratically accountable to any section of the Irish people? Or to put it another way when Mandelson unilaterally suspended the 'democratically endorsed' institutions of the GFA to whom in Ireland was he democratically accountable to for such actions?

Liam Lynch

Tristrame wrote:

As those articles were created after the creation of the ROI and NI -can you point out where they say they are to be or can be applied retrospectively?

Struggling are we? Hoping such articles didn't exist did we? I'm sure anti slavery laws were formulated after the practice of slavery should they not be applied retrospectively? The point being of course, of course, does the criterion set out in the articles apply to the given situation as a description of that situation? Let the politics flow, since the politics has been initiated.

Liam Lynch

Tristrame wrote:

TBH,I'd get new lawyers.

TBH you should think politics.

Liam Lynch

Sleepy wrote:

Just tell me these guys haven't got the wherewithal for another Omagh.

Well hopefully they don't have the wherewithal for standing idly by. Now there's a casualty list.

the_syco

Fratton Fred wrote:

Talking is useless, getting involved in a process of democratic change is the only way forward.

I agree, talking is useless, but when it's either talking, or throwing bombs, bullets, turf on fire, pitchforks, and whatever else we can find at the brits in the past, talking seems better. Unless of course talking gets us nowhere, and its back to using the bombs, etc.

Sure, Adams & co have gotten somewhere, they've stopped some of the violence, ensured that they get paid by both our goverment and the brits, and have gotten NI some jobs, but they sit in Stormount... a place where they once refused to accept... but now that they're getting paid by the brits, they seem happy to do so.

Lemming wrote:

Last time I checked this [the Republic of Ireland] was a sovereign state. Not to mention also a R.E.P.U.B.L.I.C.

I googled it, but it doesn't say the NI is part of said republic.

=-=

The sad fact is, we don't want NI. Sure, our goverment pumps millions into it every year to try and improve it, but at the end of the day, neither side wants the other. The Irish goverment would have to keep paying millions in an attempt to pump up NI's industry, and the people in NI would have to avail of our crap healthcare service.

Its a lose - lose situation. I consider myself a republican, but at the same time, a realist. It'd be nice to have a 32 county republic, but is it what everyone wants?

=-=

http://www.32csm.org/submit.htm seems to be an intersting read, but I was wondering if there are any inaccuracies in it? If it were all true, I'll read it, but biased history tends to be flawed history

Liam Lynch

Liam Lynch wrote:

Struggling are we? Hoping such articles didn't exist did we? I'm sure anti slavery laws were formulated after the practice of slavery should they not be applied retrospectively? The point being of course, of course, does the criterion set out in the articles apply to the given situation as a description of that situation? Let the politics flow, since the politics has been initiated.

No and No to the first two.

Ignoring the 90% + vote to drop the claim on NI untill such time as a majority up there are in favour of it is laughable though given everyone over 18 and registered on the island was entitled to vote.

I doubt any UN court would ignore it as easily as you seem to,in fact I'd imagine they'd be sniggering to themselves.
To be frank,When Jehohava's witness's come to my door ,I know that they are convinced that they think their version of the way,the truth and the life is the way to go.
That doesn't mean it is or that a majority of people accept their version of events.
But at least they use talk and don't resort to a hint of sulpher every now and again.

Getting back to the 90%+ it's convenient to ignore democracy when it suits isn't it ?

It's just not acceptable though.

Fratton Fred

quirk. wrote:

Yeah Nuala O'Loans report.

Also there was 2 good articles relating to this in the buisness post this past Sunday

Omagh bomb trial described as a ‘farce’ by victim’s husband and Omagh: the questions that still need answering

apart from accusations, I can't see anything which says either government could have stopped it.

All I can see is some people tying to ease their guilt by blaming someone else for it. You defend their right to take armed action, those people died in your name and no amount of finger pointing can change that.

Fratton Fred

quirk. wrote:

I have no link but I will try to find one. As far as I am aware it can be applied and this is what the International lawers at the UN advised us.

I guess his was just before they took your money right? have you seen these lawyers again?

It will be interesting to see this take effect around the world. Australia given back to the aborigines, the US given back to the Native Americans, it should be a landmark alright.:rolleyes:

Colonel Sanders

A quick question here for 32CSM supporters. I assume that the 32CSM supports whatever means are likely to remove a British presence from Ireland, including 'armed struggle' if necessary?

I know this has never been put to the people in an official referendum and probably never will but what percentage of the people would actually support the use of armed struggle (both north and south) if it was put top them? My guess would be less than 0.5% in total over the 32 counties.

If RIRA went back to 'war' they would no doubt claim to be representing the people of Ireland (as PIRA did). However this was not true of the actions of PIRA and most certainly would not be true if RIRA was to try drag the 6 counties back to the bad days.

The GFA agreement was ratified by the majority of people NORTH AND SOUTH (if I remember the 'yes' proportions were 94% south and 71% north). That makes it the will of the Irish people (throughout the 32 counties) whether we like it or not. We may not all agree with the decisions the electorate make, however as democrats we have to accept them. I detest FF however the people of Ireland elected them to govern this country so I have to accept this.

If trying to suppress the will of the people (i.e. destroy the GFA agreement) is the aim of 32CSM then their actions are undemocratic at best and treason at worst.

oscarBravo

quirk. wrote:

The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. GA Res. 2200A(XXI), Dec 16th 1966. 21.GAOR Supp. (No 16) at 52, UN Doc. A/6316 (1966). 999 U.N. -S.171 entered into force March 23, 1976. ) Part.1 Art,1(1).

1. All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.

The principle of self-determination was accepted by the majority in both parts of this island when they voted for the GFA. It seems to me that the 32CSM are demanding the right of self-determination only for one community, and ignoring the overall will of the people.

But let's suppose that article means what you think it does, and that it's ok for an arbitrary group to define themselves as a "people" and demand the right of self-determination. Would you support calls for an independent People's Republic of Cork?

quirk. wrote:

The United Nations Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples. (Adopted by the UN General Assembly on 14th December 1960). GA Res. 1514/XV, Dec 14th, 1960. Article 4 and Article 6.

4. All armed action or repressive measures of all kinds directed against dependent peoples shall cease in order to enable them to exercise peacefully and freely their right to complete independence, and the integrity of their national territory shall be respected.

Northern Ireland is not a colony. Ireland in 1916 was not a colony. From 1800 onwards, Ireland was an integral part of the United Kingdom. UN Declarations on colonies don't apply.

quirk. wrote:

6. Any attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity and the territorial integrity of a country is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations.

Oh look - any attempt to split Northern Ireland out of the United Kingdom goes against the UN Charter. Did your UN Lawyers point that out to you?

bonkey

Liam Lynch wrote:

The point being of course, of course, does the criterion set out in the articles apply to the given situation as a description of that situation?

The given situation in this particular case, is that 6 counties of the island of Ireland are part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. The remaining 26 counties are part of teh Republic of Ireland.

What the law says is that the people(s) of these nations should have the freedom to democratically choose and persue their future.

It does not say that those people in the 6 counties who are Unionist are to be denied their voice or their wishes.

It does not say that the 32 counties should be considered as a whole in terms of decisions to be made.

What it does is reinforce the idea that all sides in the issue should work towrds finding the best solution....which is what they are doing. Just because you don't like where we are now, or where we may be heading doesn't make it illegal.

Incidentally, if you wish to assert that the imposition of rules by foreign nations is illegal and non-binding and can be applied retrospectively, you're left with the awkward situation that you don't end up with a united, 32-county Ireland as the "legal" end result as its not what we had before the British came to Ireland.

Why aren't you fighting for the 5 "Cuige" to be restored? How dare you insist that the people of the island be subjected to your "unified" vision, when what we had prior to the British imposing unity on us were effectively multiple mini-states.

flogen

Liam Lynch wrote:

Actually they're based in a British Cabinet. Ask any unionist.

Are you referring to Stormont?
If nationalists gain the majority in Stormont they can call a referendum on Irish Unity. The only way they'll gain a majority is if the people give them one.

The British and Irish governments have nothing to do with this.

Liam Lynch

flogen wrote:

Are you referring to Stormont?
If nationalists gain the majority in Stormont they can call a referendum on Irish Unity. The only way they'll gain a majority is if the people give them one.

The British and Irish governments have nothing to do with this.

Does the British Cabinet sit in Stormont? Chuckle, chuckle, chuckle! Don't tell me, you believe the British government to be neutral?

Liam Lynch

bonkey wrote:

The given situation in this particular case, is that 6 counties of the island of Ireland are part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. The remaining 26 counties are part of teh Republic of Ireland.

Firstly it is the disputed given situation. Secondly it was disputed by the Irish government up to the abandoning of Articles 2 & 3. The UN Submission was drafted prior to the referrenda dropping those articles and the validity of that process is exactly what the Submission challenges.

What the law says is that the people(s) of these nations should have the freedom to democratically choose and persue their future.

Exactly. So why does a British Cabinet exercise control over an Irish democratic process?

It does not say that those people in the 6 counties who are Unionist are to be denied their voice or their wishes.

Oh really, so said Unionists can deny the wishes of the rest of the island, not to mention a British Cabinet with equal influence?

It does not say that the 32 counties should be considered as a whole in terms of decisions to be made.

And our argument is that it should, hence the Submission for international arbitration. The Irish Government could have done this also, but they didn't.

What it does is reinforce the idea that all sides in the issue should work towrds finding the best solution....which is what they are doing. Just because you don't like where we are now, or where we may be heading doesn't make it illegal.

What it reinforces is that the best solution cannot be found based on old colonial practices, that the ending of such practices should cease as a prerequisite to finding the best solution.

Incidentally, if you wish to assert that the imposition of rules by foreign nations is illegal and non-binding and can be applied retrospectively, you're left with the awkward situation that you don't end up with a united, 32-county Ireland as the "legal" end result as its not what we had before the British came to Ireland.

Lost!

Why aren't you fighting for the 5 "Cuige" to be restored? How dare you insist that the people of the island be subjected to your "unified" vision, when what we had prior to the British imposing unity on us were effectively multiple mini-states.

How the Irish people wish to govern themselves is a matter for the Irish people themselves without outside impediment.

Liam Lynch

Tristrame wrote:

No and No to the first two.

Ignoring the 90% + vote to drop the claim on NI untill such time as a majority up there are in favour of it is laughable though given everyone over 18 and registered on the island was entitled to vote.

I doubt any UN court would ignore it as easily as you seem to,in fact I'd imagine they'd be sniggering to themselves.
To be frank,When Jehohava's witness's come to my door ,I know that they are convinced that they think their version of the way,the truth and the life is the way to go.
That doesn't mean it is or that a majority of people accept their version of events.
But at least they use talk and don't resort to a hint of sulpher every now and again.

Getting back to the 90%+ it's convenient to ignore democracy when it suits isn't it ?

It's just not acceptable though.

What a joke:D Are you conveniently ignoring the fact that your 90% is obsolete given that a national minority has veto over it? A La Carte democracy, how convenient? But tell me, in your democratic wisdom, how democratically accountable is British Parliamentary activity in Ireland to the Irish people? Do we get a vote say on MI5 activity here?

What was it Mo Mowlam and Martin McGuinness said again????????

Fratton Fred

Liam Lynch wrote:

Does the British Cabinet sit in Stormont? Chuckle, chuckle, chuckle! Don't tell me, you believe the British government to be neutral?

you're right. The British government would get rid of Northern Ireland at the earliest opportunity.

but that's not what you meant is it:rolleyes:

Liam Lynch

Liam Lynch wrote:

What a joke:D Are you conveniently ignoring the fact that your 90% is obsolete given that a national minority has veto over it? A La Carte democracy, how convenient?

You seem to ignore the fact that 94% of the people of the 26 counties agreed to this-democracy-Deal with it.

But tell me, in your democratic wisdom, how democratically accountable is British Parliamentary activity in Ireland to the Irish people?

Well I'd suggest that (1) the vast majority of the people of the 26 counties couldn't care less and (2) the majority of the people in the 6 counties can tell the British government to hump off if a majority of them support that.They don't and the vast majority of the people in the 26 counties agree with that-Deal with it.

Do we get a vote say on MI5 activity here?

They are perfectly entitled to do what they like within the law in the 6 counties.
They're not entitled to anything in the south except for their portion of D4.

This concerns you,I know it truly does by the sounds of things.
However-much as I know some of the jehovah's witnesses calling to my door want to save me from eternal damnation.I'll exercise my right like that of the vast majority of the people of this island to respect their opinion but ignore them for the tiny minority that they are.

The Vast majority of the people of this island do the same with your movement-Deal with it.

bonkey

Liam Lynch wrote:

What a joke:D Are you conveniently ignoring the fact that your 90% is obsolete given that a national minority has veto over it?

What national minority?

The nation of 32 counties doesn't exist. Never has, except under the very rule you insist has no authority to have imposed laws on us.

And no - they don't have a veto over it. Over 90% said they wished to drop our constitutional claim. No minority has a veto over whether or not that claim was dropped or whether or not such a claim could be re-established.

What you might mean is that they have a veto over the making of that claim a reality. In this case, yes....they do. We accepted that when we dropped the claim in the first place. We, in this case, is a majority of the Republic, a majority of the population of the North and a majority of the voting residents of the island.

So whatever way you look at it, you are arguing that the democratically expressed wishes of the majority shouldn't count because you don't like them.

flogen

Liam Lynch wrote:

Does the British Cabinet sit in Stormont?

No, but they [Stormont] are the only ones who can call a vote on Irish Unity (or not, as the case may be)

Don't tell me, you believe the British government to be neutral?

I think the British Government would love to give NI to Ireland but it has to follow the will of the citizens in NI.

Zombrex

quirk. wrote:

They were not given the choice of a united Ireland.

They were given the choice of not voting for the Good Friday Agreement :rolleyes:

How can you claim you represent the wishes of all of the island when you ignore the democratic will of 95% of the population.

Part of democracy is accepting the will of the people even if you personally don't agree with it.

"Republican" (i use the term loosely) groups like yourself never seem to get that. You are all for democracy for all of Ireland so long as this democracy produces what you want. But when it produces what you don't want you simply ignore it. Instead of listening to what the people want you are telling them what they should want based on what you want.

quirk.

Wicknight wrote:

They were given the choice of not voting for the Good Friday Agreement :rolleyes:

How can you claim you represent the wishes of all of the island when you ignore the democratic will of 95% of the population.

Part of democracy is accepting the will of the people even if you personally don't agree with it.

"Republican" (i use the term loosely) groups like yourself never seem to get that. You are all for democracy for all of Ireland so long as this democracy produces what you want. But when it produces what you don't want you simply ignore it. Instead of listening to what the people want you are telling them what they should want based on what you want.

The people were asked to accept the GFA or not. They were also aware that the British would remain no matter what the outcome (after all the acceptance of Britains claim to sovereignty in the north was a prerequisite for entering the talks). As a yes vote was sold as "peace" it is no suprise that the majority voted yes. But the fact is that it is not the will of the people as all options were not on the table. They were not asked if they wanted a united Ireland.

If a gang approach someone and say to them "we are going to rob you or we are going to both rob you and beat you up" the fact that they probably would decide to just be robbed does not make that their will.

quirk.

flogen wrote:

No, but they [Stormont] are the only ones who can call a vote on Irish Unity (or not, as the case may be)

Wrong. The decision to call a referendum in the 6 counties rests with the British secretary of state a person who is not democratically accountable to the Irish people.

flogen wrote:

I think the British Government would love to give NI to Ireland but it has to follow the will of the citizens in NI.

Their actions suggest otherwise.

flogen

quirk. wrote:

Wrong. The decision to call a referendum in the 6 counties rests with the British secretary of state a person who is not democratically accountable to the Irish people.

And he must exercise that power if it appears to him that the majority of Northern Ireland may want to join the Republic.

Their actions suggest otherwise.

What actions? There's never been close to a majority in support of Irish unity in NI yet, so they don't have to do anything.

If they moved to give NI back to the Republic now that would be as undemocratic as the decision to partition it in the first place.

Zombrex

quirk. wrote:

The people were asked to accept the GFA or not. They were also aware that the British would remain no matter what the outcome (after all the acceptance of Britains claim to sovereignty in the north was a prerequisite for entering the talks). As a yes vote was sold as "peace" it is no suprise that the majority voted yes. But the fact is that it is not the will of the people as all options were not on the table. They were not asked if they wanted a united Ireland.

That is ridiculous.

You might as well claim that if they were actually asked for a united Ireland they weren't asked for a united Ireland with a 3 day working week and a bowl of ice cream, and therefore the vote for a united Ireland is an invalid representation of the people :rolleyes:

People are asked to vote on what they are asked to vote on. If they don't want it they don't vote for it. Simple as.

It was the will of the people to support the GFA.

You (as in you the individual) are in no position to tell the people of Ireland what they want while simultaneously ignoring what they have already voted for.

If the people of Ireland didn't want to accept the GFA they wouldn't have voted over overwhelmingly to support it.

Trying to second guess the will of the Irish people just because you don't agree, trying to claim that that isn't what they really want, and instead telling them what they really do what, makes a mockery of the democracy that you are supposed to be strive for.

More anti-democratic nonsense from so called "republicans" :rolleyes:

Liam Lynch

Fratton Fred wrote:

you're right. The British government would get rid of Northern Ireland at the earliest opportunity.

but that's not what you meant is it:rolleyes:

After eighty odd years of holding on to it that argument doesn't really hold much currency now does it?

Liam Lynch

Tristrame wrote:

You seem to ignore the fact that 94% of the people of the 26 counties agreed to this-democracy-Deal with it. Well I'd suggest that (1) the vast majority of the people of the 26 counties couldn't care less and (2) the majority of the people in the 6 counties can tell the British government to hump off if a majority of them support that.They don't and the vast majority of the people in the 26 counties agree with that-Deal with it.They are perfectly entitled to do what they like within the law in the 6 counties.
They're not entitled to anything in the south except for their portion of D4.

What democracy deal? You seem confused between an electoral arrangement and a democratic one. You shoud try to address that confusion first before you proffer arguments for democracy.

They (the British Government) are perfectly entitled to do what they like within the law in the 6 counties.

But they're not democratically for it. Is the penny beginning to drop?

This concerns you,I know it truly does by the sounds of things.
However-much as I know some of the jehovah's witnesses calling to my door want to save me from eternal damnation.I'll exercise my right like that of the vast majority of the people of this island to respect their opinion but ignore them for the tiny minority that they are.

Ah, quantity over quality. The veracity of the argument means nothing to you, only the statistics behind it?

The Vast majority of the people of this island do the same with your movement-Deal with it.

We are.

Liam Lynch

flogen wrote:

No, but they [Stormont] are the only ones who can call a vote on Irish Unity (or not, as the case may be)

Really, so the issue of Irish unity is not to be a matter for the people of Ireland, only some of them, as the British government demanded?

I think the British Government would love to give NI to Ireland but it has to follow the will of the citizens in NI.

And there's your problem.