I read this and found the contents very interesting, realistic and close to what I have been saying in my past posts.

LAN

In N. Ireland, census hints at shifting political equation

Demographers say the number of Catholics and Protestants will be even within two decades.

BELFAST, NORTHERN IRELAND - In the mainly Protestant Oldpark neighborhood of north Belfast, newly renovated houses stand silent and empty, waiting for families who will never come.

Across the nearby 12-foot-high brick fence, the so-called peaceline, children in the Catholic Ardoyne neighborhood ride bikes and kick balls along bustling streets where families of up to nine people are crammed into tiny, two-bedroom homes.

Bursting Ardoyne and silent Oldpark illustrate a new demographic reality that could have dramatic implications in a province that has endured 30 years of sectarian strife: The Catholic population is rising at a faster rate than that of Protestants.

Census figures to be released this summer are expected to show that, if current trends continue, the size of the Protestant and Catholic communities in Northern Ireland is likely to draw even within 20 to 25 years.

The prediction by demographers of a coming 50/50 Protestant/Catholic split has come as a seismic shock to the Protestant community. Protestants, who support the current union with Britain, will soon have to adjust to living in a state where their Catholic neighbors, who wish to be united with the rest of the island of Ireland, are equal in strength, or even more numerous.

"The debate is no longer whether the two communities will ever reach the same size, but what will happen after they do," says Colin McIlheney, head of research at the Belfast office of PriceWaterhouseCoopers, who has studied census figures for 25 years.

A Catholic majority, however, is no guarantee of a united Ireland. About 10 percent of Catholics now support the union with Britain and may do so even when their community draws even numerically with Protestants, says McIlheney.

Dr. Brian Feeney, a former Belfast city councillor for the moderate Catholic party, the SDLP, and now a commentator on social change, says: "The figures mean the rival communities may have to embark on a 'charm offensive' to persuade each other of their respective causes - whether that be the status quo or a united Ireland."

The alternative could be a retreat from peace efforts here, and a society even more divided by bitterness, distrust, and violence, says Dr. Rick Wilford of the politics department of Queens University, Belfast.

"Young Catholics have bought into the [1998] Good Friday peace agreement as a transition to a united Ireland, which they believe can be achieved within a generation," Professor Wilford says.

"On the opposite side you have young male Protestants who are even more opposed than the older generation to a united Ireland. You can see that from the increasingly militaristic murals on the walls around Belfast, and from the fact that unionists who voted strongest against the Good Friday peace agreement were concentrated in this group."

Professor Wilford says that a Queen's University survey last year showed that, although 70 percent of Protestants would probably live with a united Ireland if they had to, 30 percent would never accept a united Ireland under any circumstances and would likely resort to violent measures.

Some among the Protestant political leadership here have refused to acknowledge the demographic trends. Stephen King, an adviser to the Ulster Unionist leader David Trimble, rejects the inevitability of an imminent 50/50 split, saying "We believe this is the end of a trend, not the beginning."

Northern Ireland, with a current population of 1.7 million, was created in 1921 from the island's six northeastern counties, where Protestants were concentrated, to retain the new state's link with Britain. For most of the past century, the unionist/Protestant majority held steady. The unwritten assumption underpinning Protestant political domination was a belief that Catholics would always be a minority.

Protestants have yet to come to terms with the new demographics - partly because, until this year, there were two distinct camps within the small number of academics and statisticians who study population trends in Northern Ireland.

One camp insisted that the Protestant majority would continue indefinitely, despite a higher Catholic birth rate, because of smaller Catholic families after the mass availability of contraception. The other said Catholic family sizes in Northern Ireland still remained larger than the Protestant equivalent and pointed to the relatively high number of Protestant middle-class students in British universities who never returned home after graduating.

Now both camps agree that a 50/50 Protestant/Catholic breakdown is inevitable, perhaps within 10 years but almost certainly before the year 2020. The Protestant population is also older - 10,000 die every year, compared with 5,000 Catholics.

The official census figures will be released later this year, but other indicators already support the expected statistics. There were 173,000 Catholic schoolchildren last year, compared with 146,000 Protestant. Northern Ireland's three largest cities - Belfast, Derry, and Armagh - all now have Catholic majorities.

In last general election, 44 percent of voters supported the two parties who desire a united Ireland: the Social Democratic and Labour Party, and Sinn Fein (up 4 percent from the 1997 general election).

This year's census is expected to show that between 44 and 46 percent of Northern Ireland's population is Catholic. The last census was in 1981, but since many Catholics boycotted it, the results were flawed.

Professor Wilford says the recent economic "miracle" in the Irish Republic, along with increasing secularization and the decline of the authority of the Catholic Church, has made the prospect of a unified Ireland less frightening for the Protestant middle class, although a debate has yet to begin in working-class areas.

The mainly Catholic SDLP is deeply uneasy with any discussion about birth rates and demographic trends, fearing the predictions could rattle Protestants. But Sinn Fein, seen as the political wing of the Irish Republican Army, is eager to highlight the trends and predict the possibility of a united Ireland before the centenary of the Easter Rising of 1916.

Under the Good Friday agreement, a key section of the Government of Ireland Act, by which Britain governs Northern Ireland. The British government will legislate for Irish unity if a majority of Northern Ireland's residents approve it in a referendum.

Most opinion polls in Britain show its people have little desire to hold on to its troublesome and costly province. The most recent survey, for The Guardian newspaper in August 2001, showed that only 1 in 4 Britons wants Northern Ireland to remain part of the country, with 41 percent supporting the province's joining the rest of Ireland.

This is why the unionist/loyalists are so paranoid. they fear the inevitable, and will lash out more as that inevitabilty draws nearer.

Agree fully. Those hard-liners will do everything to stop or slow the process.

Republicans must realise that the GFA is a framework for certain unity that in the long-term will favour the Republican cause. But Republicans must play their cards right in achieving that.

I am in favour of the GFA. It may have some points that are not CURRENLTY acceptable, but in the long-term the GFA will become the trump card for the nationalist cause.

As the report I posted states:

"The figures mean the rival communities may have to embark on a 'charm offensive' to persuade each other of their respective causes�

I agree with this statement. fully. This will definitely happen, but only if the GFA is given a chance.

If the GFA is a success and violent rivalry is all but extinguished then the predicted 30% of Protestants who may resort to violence may well be far fetched. It is up to the nationalists to reduce this 30% as far as possible.

If as predicted that there will be a United Ireland in 20 years or so. It will then be the Republican government who will have to deal with the sectarian troubles and not the British. It is in the hands of nationalists today, how widespread these problems will be. Todays very young protestants growing up in a divided community will be the mainstay of those that may be throwing / planting bombs in a united Ireland.

What must be done now and I have stated this before is that all religious and political festivities that breed hatred and violence (both sides of the community) such as Orange marches have to be banned outright.

I think these policies are happening but very slowly, through small steps. With the introduction of certain restrictions, then complete restrictions and finally out right banning. Republicans must continue to assert pressure here, however accept that they may have to fulfill certain requirements too. (Compromise)

I think the British government has played a lead role. The biggest problem that she faces is that she is seen by the rival factions as being to one sided to the others opponent. In my opinion she is not. She is walking a very thin line, knowing that the future is a united Ireland, but trying to get there with as little bloodshed as possible.

I think nationalists will have to work closer with the Brits in supporting the GFA and not against her. It is obvious that Britain does not want to deal with continuous problems in Ulster. She would rather build on the very good economic and political ties with the Republic. A Republic that includes the 6 northern counties.

That is why I am against warfare and the policies of the RIRA. They will further divide and stop the natural process. In other words they are playing into the hands of the Unionists. Thay are part of their card game.

These are the points that were agreed in the Anglo - Irish agreement for constitutional change in Northern Ireland.
(Irish Foreign Affairs Office).

CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES
1. The participants endorse the commitment made by the British and Irish Governments that, in a new British-Irish Agreement replacing the Anglo-Irish Agreement, they will:

(i) recognise the legitimacy of whatever choice is freely exercised by a majority of the people of Northern Ireland with regard to its status, whether they prefer to continue to support the Union with Great Britain or a sovereign united Ireland;

(ii) recognise that it is for the people of the island of Ireland alone, by agreement between the two parts respectively and without external impediment, to exercise their right of self-determination on the basis of consent, freely and concurrently given, North and South, to bring about a united Ireland, if that is their wish, accepting that this right must be achieved and exercised with and subject to the agreement and consent of a majority of the people of Northern Ireland;

(iii) acknowledge that while a substantial section of the people in Northern Ireland share the legitimate wish of a majority of the people of the island of Ireland for a united Ireland, the present wish of a majority of the people of Northern Ireland, freely exercised and legitimate, is to maintain the Union and, accordingly, that Northern Ireland's status as part of the United Kingdom reflects and relies upon that wish; and that it would be wrong to make any change in the status of Northern Ireland save with the consent of a majority of its people;

(iv) affirm that if, in the future, the people of the island of Ireland exercise their right of self-determination on the basis set out in sections (i) and (ii) above to bring about a united Ireland, it will be a binding obligation on both Governments to introduce and support in their respective Parliaments legislation to give effect to that wish;

(v) affirm that whatever choice is freely exercised by a majority of the people of Northern Ireland, the power of the sovereign government with jurisdiction there shall be exercised with rigorous impartiality on behalf of all the people in the diversity of their identities and traditions and shall be founded on the principles of full respect for, and equality of, civil, political, social and cultural rights, of freedom from discrimination for all citizens, and of parity of esteem and of just and equal treatment for the identity, ethos, and aspirations of both communities;

(vi) recognise the birthright of all the people of Northern Ireland to identify themselves and be accepted as Irish or British, or both, as they may so choose, and accordingly confirm that their right to hold both British and Irish citizenship is accepted by both Governments and would not be affected by any future change in the status of Northern Ireland.

2. The participants also note that the two Governments have accordingly undertaken in the context of this comprehensive political agreement, to propose and support changes in, respectively, the Constitution of Ireland and in British legislation relating to the constitutional status of Northern Ireland.

Unification: consent or dual consent?

Interesting thoughts from Martin Mansergh on what it might take to effect a democratically determined unification of Ireland:

This is largely written in reply to an article by Frank Millar a few some time ago, suggesting that such an outcome depended upon consent within both communities. Danny Morrison was one of the first to challenge this premise.

Speaking about the attitudes of the minority Catholic community Mansergh says:

"They have almost all accepted, however reluctantly, that, if there is to be peace now and peaceful change perhaps in the future, the question has to be decided by a majority of the people of the North in the first instance, as has been the formal constitutional principle in one form or another going back to 1920, from which unionists until now have been the beneficiary. The Ulster Unionist Party and loyalist parties also accepted that in 1998, and it was endorsed by a substantial majority of the people of the North."

On the mechanics of the process he points out:

"In reality, a border poll, resulting in a majority for a united Ireland, an event that is not a realistic prospect at present, could only be a first step in a much longer and more intensive process. Detailed negotiation would be required that would provide the essential guarantees needed on all sides to provide a workable, stable and harmonious unity."

He concludes:

"The real poll would be one held North and South that ratified concurrently (or rejected) a negotiated agreement, leading to the enactment of consequential parallel legislation in the Westminster and Dublin parliaments. Consent is sufficient to put a united Ireland on the table. Parallel consent North and South (and parliamentary legislation) is required to bring it into being."

I think you're being a bit nieve to presume that the Brit government wouldn't interfere with any future vote on the unification of Ireland. The GFA was voted for by the people, yet the Brits and Unionists have time and again tempered with its policies. They've manipulated the GFA to force the hand of the Republican movement, and will continue to do so as long as we are trapped in this "agreement". You have no proof that they will act otherwise, in good fate.

Ultimately, the Brit government is soley resposible for the descision on whether or not "them Fenians" are capable of ruling themselves. Now we can either sit like lap dogs and obey their every command, as we have done for the last 7 years, or we can take a stand and change things, meaning we force the hand of the Brits, not the other way around.

Sl�n

Fianna

What do you mean by the Brits? The Brit governmenrt in Westminster or the Unionists in Ulster.

I personally do no think that the British Government would interfere with the democratic wishes of the people of Ulster. it is written in the GFA. However I agree with you that the Unionists would anything to hamper it.

That is what I meant in one of my earlier posts. " The biggest problem will be the hardliners in Ulster" They will do everything to upset the apple cart like slowing down the process or resorting to violence in order to get an appropriate violent responce from the republican community.

This is where the republican community is not allowed to be nieve and play into the hands of the unionists. The Republicans have done this in the past, but lately they are getting to understand the unionist game. That is good

Most people in England actually support the idea of a united Ireland.

I tend to agreee more with Lan.

What are Britannias interests. They only keep claim to the 6 counties because the Unionists talk of abandonment.

The people and government of Britain would be only too pleased to see a united Ireland. Do they really need the problems that the unionists brought on themselves and continue with their intransigence ?

Sinn Fein have to convince the unionist population that their rights would be upheld and their safety would be assured in a 32 county republic.

Our Day Will Come

Hold on second, you're telling me with a straight face that Britain has no interest in the Six Counties? That they'd just return it to "the Paddies" with an "aye" from the Commons, a nod from the Queen and a click of Blairs fingers? Gimme a fuckin break, you've gotta be kidding me. Britain has a continuing economic and strategic interest in the 6 Counties. Those 15,000 troops, SAS, MI5, PSNI/RUC, they must all be there for the weather right? Cause they sure as fuck ain't there to maintain the peace or because the "Unionists talk of abandonment". They are there as an army of occupation to exploit the land and its people.

First off, as we all know, less than a century ago (still the modern era and in living memory), the Brits partitioned Ireland, keeping the 6 Counties. Why did they do this? It wasn't just because a load of Paddies thought they were Brits, so demanded they have a place to call the UK while still living in Ireland. It was to do with the economic rape of Ireland and the strategic positioning of Ireland geographically. Believe it or not, the geographical positioning of Ireland is the same as it was 100 years ago! It hasn't changed! And therefore retains its strategic importance. And some would say that the economic rape of Ireland continues to this day, with British companies setting up shop here in the South, only to destroy small Irish businesses and send the profits home to the "mainland".

I'm not going to get into the value of the Six Counties to the Brit Army, I think it's fairly obvious. An area to train troops in a real combat situation, only an hours flight from the UK. An area to test new equipment, vehicles and weaponry. An area to gain experience and improve techniques. All these thing so valuable to a modern, active army. Most countries would give anything to have a "back-yard battlezone" like the Six Counties. It's invaluable to the Brit Army.

But one of the biggest interests the Brits have in Ireland is with their lucrative arms trade. You know, where they sell weapons, explosives and gas to unstable dictators. Britain is one of the leading exporters of weapons and arms in the world, and is worth billions to the British economy, as they exploit and encourage the suffering of vunerable Third World countires. Why are they so successful? I can tell you one reason why. Along with each weapon comes the tag-line "Tried and tested in the heat of battle in Northern Ireland", or "Successful at combating terrorism in Northern Ireland" or "As tested in Northern Ireland". What more evidence could a potential buyer want that the product he is going to buy, at great cost, is going to be effective? It's been proven on the ground, where it matters. Nice selling point. What would they do if they lost this selling point? Even if it only resulted in a tiny loss of income, that's still huge job losses in the massive British arms industry.

So there you have it, the retention of the Six Counties is directly influencial on the well-being of the British economy. See, them Brits ain't as stupid as you'd like to think...

Sl�n tamaill a chairde

Fianna mo chara.

You write with such anger, I hope it's taken as read that we are on the same side.
This is a forum for a frank exchange of views I believe, and whilst we don't have to always agree to the letter it's good to see things from a different viewpoint.

I was born in London and have always lived here in the UK so of course I will see things differently from you. I am nearly 40 now and I'm embarrassed to say that during the hunger strikes I was pretty much oblivious to the troubles.

As I got older my interest in Irish history made me realise the injustices inflicted upon Ireland over centuries, and the music and songs encouraged me to become more republican. I'm a member of Cairde Sinn Fein and Troops Out Movement.

So now more than ever I am an Irish republican I always have and always will visit "home" as often as possible. I'll do what i can to further the cause here in England.

Back to the original points...

The net cost to the UK of maintaining the union far outweighs the economic benefits derived from the 6 counties.

Is the strategic importance of the 6 or indeed the 32 counties what it was 100 years ago ? We're all members of NATO now.

Will a united Ireland stop huge british companies setting up shop in Dublin, Cork, Limerick, Galway, Waterford etc. and repatriating profits back to "the mainland" ?
Of course not. Do you think economic protectionism works in the 21st century ? look how successful Coca-Cola and McDonalds are in China and Russia !

Finally mo chara, don't hate the British people, hate British policy. You would be amazed to see how much sympathy there is here from the "man in the street."

Also where are these 15,000 troops. In the last 3 years i was twice in the North. I was in the Bogside of Derry, up the Falls Road to Milltown Cemetary, and I didn't even see 1 Brit Soldier.

Help me to see things from your viewpoint, but remember, we are comrades.

Slan go foill

I have to fully agree with what Chucky says here. Well put. Living in England, one does get a different picture of the actual opinions of the Brits. They are not the same as those stereotyped views in Ulster.

I understand the anger of Fianna and his anger towards the Brits. But this anger in my opinion is wrong. This is where Republicans have to wake up. It is not Britain or the UK. It is the unionists they have to sway..

As Chucky puts it. The British have far more to loose in holding on to sovereignty of the 6 counties than she does if they were united with the Republic. The only reason that the 6 counties are still British is down to the wishes of the Unionists.

The Unionists happen to be unfortunately in the majority (AT THE MOMENT). Give it 10 maybe 15 years and you will see that Ulster will unite with the 26 counties. Those unionists know it. It is up to the Republicans how and how well that is going to be achieved. They know that Ireland will be united. They are holding the ball. They just need to play the game tactfully and the goal will be theirs.

The U.K. is not what she was 100 years ago. She has no strategic interests in Ulster. She has no longer an imperialist empire that covered nearly half of the world. She is no longer a super power. The only super power is the US. What does she have to gain from the 6 counties? Training military personnel is in my opinion a lousy excuse. She has nothing to gain. She would be glad to see Ulster unite.

Britain and The Republic have now better economic and political ties than ever before in history. The UK is a good friend of the Republic and is the Republics biggest investor. She is no longer a plunderer or rapist of Ireland.

Business brings cash, employment and secures the future. 20 years ago the Republic was nearly bankrupt. Only Portugal was worse off. She had to survive on handouts from the EU, not forgetting the U.K. Those EU handouts or cash injections stopped in 2000 as Ireland had developed above the 75% of the average GDP in Europe (Average GDP being set at 100%).

Ireland is no longer a beggar but a major exporter of high tech goods such as computers or software. Why? Inward investment from countries such as the US or the UK.

I think Republicans need to distinguish between Brits (Unionists) and Brits (Britain). They are not the same, only on paper.

Ok, where to start with this shit...

Fianna

I'm a little taken aback by your aggressive stance towards me.

Maybe you should direct your anger at the enemies of our cause. Do you think you know more than the SF and PIRA leadership ?

Such intransigence is exactly why the UUP reneged on their deal last week. If everyone in Ireland shares your lack of compromise we'll be exactly where we are now in another 30 years, with thousands of unnecessary deaths into the bargain.

As i've already stated, this discussion board if for a frank exchange of views. If you cannot accept someone elses point of view then that's a big shame. Just coz you don't agree does that make me wrong ?

As I keep saying, we want the same end result, just see a different way of achieving it.

Daithi

No, I don't think I know more than the Provos and Sinn F�in, but that's not to say that the Provos and Sinn F�in are infallible, their policies and leadership unquestionable. And by saying that you're the one that's dismissing my views. Since I don't know as much as the Provos and Sinn F�in, why should I bother posting? Why should any of us bother?

Alot of people think it's your type that are the problem with the the Republican movement at the moment. You join Chairde Sinn F�in and march about London a couple of times a year, maybe visit Ireland to give your "support", discuss politics at your local. You follow Sinn F�in blindly, and are happy to sit on your arse until things slowly swing (hopefully) our way. And once Freedom is achieved, you'll be the first to tell your grandchildren that you were a "proud Republican" and sing Republican Army songs with your "chairde" in your local, toasting the memory of your fallen "comrades".

I'm not attacking you personally, and I'm not trying to define your Republicanism, because after all, as Bobby Sands said, "Everybody has a part to play". I just don't think you've any fuckin right to tell me where to "direct my anger".

I do accept your views. You can think what you like, it means shit it me. I'm just arguing my point, and if I express it too strongly for you then maybe you'd be better off ignoring my posts.

Sl�n

Enough, guys, please.
I'm afraid the problem of republicanism is not one type or another of Republicans but the fact that you can't get on well and speak with one voice. Please, just do try to find some agreement. You are the future of Ireland, never forget this.

Slan go foill

Fianna,

You criticise my small part in our struggle (without knowing shit about me) so would you rather I did nothing ? Would you prefer I just vote Labour or Tory (both pro union parties) ? Would you prefer people like me not to organise marches and protests ?

Ok so now I am fucking angry. What do you do that sets you apart, that makes you more of a republican than me ? Maybe you want to tell your grandkids you killed someone, I want to tell mine that I remember when Ireland was divided.

Alienate me and my type (who do you think paid for your war ?) and you end up isolated and obsolete.

Do other posters think we should be bickering like this? If so this will be my last post.

There are many ways to be a Republican. We are ALL doing our part. As far as telling someone where and how to direct thier anger, You cant do that. You cant tell someone who you have Oppressed for 800+ years to sit back and let things just happen. You cant expect them to act anything less than civil towards an Invader that has lied and cheated every step of the way. Its easy to pontificate about yourself and your views when you dont live in Ireland. Its also easy to see two sides to this. I am with Fianna on this one. I dont trust the Brits any farther than I could throw them. We all want a United Ireland. Some of us are a little more Radical about achieving our goal. Personally, I dont condone violence, But when talking just doesnt work anymore, It should be expected.

SAOIRSE!

Go raibh maith agat Patrick a chara, t� bu�ochas orm.

Republicans speaking with one voice is the problem Charlotte. While unity is great, questions and discussing the current direction of the movement should be encouraged, not cracked down on as it is presently. And by movement I unfortunately mean Sinn F�in.You cannot question the Sinn F�in leadership on anything at the moment, from it's national policy right down to its local council policies. I've seen it for myself in �gra and the Cumann, if you don't agree with what the leadership says you are told to shut the fuck up. You are even advised when you go to the Ard Fheis that you should not ask controversial questions.

So now you're angry Daithi. Which makes me wonder what emotion you were feeling before this arguement. Occupation, state murders and collusion doesn't anger you?

I must admit I tend more to agree with Fianna... I'm not arguing now or making some point as I'm joining the conversation quite late (not been on the net for a time). I think it's a bit too easy to state: "Don't blame the British, but the British policy". ?!?!
Lot's of points to discuss indeed, but it's getting late and I'm off to me bed...

What are you doing pals?!
Do you really can not live without seeing an enemy?
That's the problem that we got here with soldiers 21-26 years old who had returned from Chechnya!!! They keep walkin through the markets searchin' for Caucasian sellers...
There was a time on that Forum when loyalist's puppys were barkin' to anyone. We were united to oppose them. Now no puppys and you fight to each other...
Shame on you, respect each other.
Both ways are important (remember Collins and DeValera?), one hand warms another.
Pax vobiscum!

Believe me I have no desire to argue with those who share my hope of a United Ireland. I truly didn't mean to tell anyone what to believe and who to be angry with.
I am still a bit shocked at the level of anger directed towards me but I am a big boy, I can take it.
My beliefs are unshakeable, I can't help that I was born in England to Irish emigres, just as James Connelly and De Valera were born outside Ireland. I never question anyones credentials, if they are on my side then I thank God for the support. I'll never apologise for who I am.

I think the situation got somehow overheated, but I don't think that's really somethimg to worry about. People dissagree on topics, nothing new under the sun is it?

Pity that I did not participate in the argument. I was in The Netherlands and I am this week in Brussels. I did not have the time to go into the forum.

A lot has been posted. I agree or understand the feelings with most of the posts. But I can only fully agree with Chucky�s posts. They are spot on.

I agree it is not the people of Mainland Britain that one has to blame (Noels Statement). But I also cannot blame the Government in Westminster. Westminster basically follows a simple rule. The wishes of the majority have the last say. It is clearly written into the GFA.

I do not believe (Fiannas Statement) that the British government will pedal back, to preserve Ulster in the Union. If the majority of people in Ulster were to vote for unification with Ireland and Britain were to step in, then I think Britain would have a lot to loose in world opinion and would probably face grave consequences from the international community.

You only need to look at situation of Gibraltar. The EU pressured Britain into opening negotiations with Spain, to resolve internal EU problems that were being vetoed by Spain, due to Spain questioning on the sovereignty of Gibraltar.

Spain has always stated that the treaty of Utrecht was void. Britain in part has agreed and was open to changes that had to be agreed by the majority of the people.

Britain even tried to help Spain�s cause by proposing dual sovereignty for the Rock in order to try and find a long-term solution. She has done a similar move with the GFA in Ireland.

What happened in Gibraltar is that 97% voted to remain with the U.K and said no to the dual sovereignty package. What is Britain to do? On paper the people on the Rock have British Citizenship. Is she to ignore the wishes of majority that say they are British.

Look to Jamaica 1962. There, there was also a referendum on Independence. Jamaica voted for Independence, but to remain within the Commonwealth. Did Britain send troops? No
All that remains in Jamaica is a small naval base, in agreement with the Jamaican government. In fact most countries in the BE gained independence through majority votes..

Britain faces a similar problem with Ulster. Can Britain simply say, " Right, Enough is enough. The Republic of Ireland can have Ulster back and the majority of Ulster will simply have to accept that". I do not think so. Again Britain would loose face in world opinion. I.e. giving in to terrorism.

The government in Westminster can only shape the path towards Irelands Union. The decision in Ulster lies purely with the people of Ulster.

The point I am trying to get at, is that you can choose the natural way through evolution. (Ireland will be united) or you can choose the violent way which will mean more troops, more deaths, more division and never Ireland will never be united.

We all speak the same voice, we all want a united Ireland. I may speak a slightly different. I want a united Ireland. Bu I want an Ulster that wants to be part of a united Ireland. I do want an Ulster that is forced to become part of a united Ireland.

We may speak slightly different languages in getting a united Ireland, but that is what forums are all about. It is through openness and understanding that we can only advance. As has been said on many an occasion.� Irelands biggest problem with its past and future is its lack of understanding and acceptance within its own people�

I'm tending to agree more with Chucky and Noel.

I can understand that Fianna is enraged at the British establishment, but the British people, on average, either couldnt give a fuck whether Ulster stays British or not, or want to see the back of it.

And the only way to get a United Ireland in the world of today is to have the majority in Ulster.
So if the IRA start up their terror campaign again, they will only lose support, hence making it even longer to get a united Ireland, which I think is inevitable if things continue as they do just now.

OK, Lets start over again.......
1) We are ALL Irish republicans
2) We ALL have our own part to play in achieving a United Ireland
3) We DONT all share the same opinion
4) We ALL think Charlotte is HOT
5) We ALL think LAN dances funny

Cool!

I'll drink to that guys, Fianna, will ye raise a glass with me ?



I read a nice verse this morning written by Thomas Davis in 1842:

Yet start not, Irish born man,
If you're not to Ireland true,
We heed not race, nor creed, nor clan,
We've hearts and hands for you.

Can I ask a stupid question here?
The election that is coming up, Who all can vote? Everyone in the Republic, or just the people in the 6 counties? Ooops, Thats 2 questions.

Hi Noel

I can uderstand your feelings here and your frustration about the past and the current.

I agree that the Brit Govt in the past could have been fairer. However it was no the Brit Govt in London but the Ulster Govt which was corrupt towards the Catholics. That is also one of the reasons why London disolved the Northern ireland Govt back in the early 70's.

30 years on the situation in N. Ireland is quite different Demography in Ulster has changed considerably, views in mainland britain have also changed. I found a very interesting article in the Guardian concerning the N. ireland situation. It is a report on the views of British people concerning Unification. It makes very interesting reading.

I also agree with you that fighting brought some success in Ireland, but that success was only confined to the South. The huge majority of people in the 26 wanted it like that. In the 6 it was quite a different.

The fighting in the Northern has in my opinion done the opposite. It was not a success. It only drove a dividing wedge into the community. In my opinion all the paramilitaries did is cause hatred, death, pain and division.

The GFA is a process of trying to build on understadning and acceptance and to final unification. Yes the Republic had to change their consitution accepting the integrity of the 6 counties. That decision was a strategic move, in order to get unionist acceptance. The GFA ia part of a road map for future unification, being backed by Westminster and Dublin alike. If this were not the case then I would not have accepted the 6 counties as an integral part of the U.K.

You have to remember that the GFA states that the majority will decide the future of Ulster. What fairer proposition is possible without causing further bloodshed.

The Westminster of today will accept that. She knows that unification is around the corner. If she was against unification and was for holding onto the 6 counties then she would not have accepted the majority decision article in the GFA.

You state that you think that the fighting should continue as it had for most of the previous 30 years. Was this really a success? Did the British ever look like that they were going to fold and give in?

Unification will come. The unionists and the Republicans know it. They should work together in order to ease the ramifications of unification when the time comes. i.e social differences, currency, employment etc. The republic will need initial economic and practical support to achieve this. This will most likely come from the U.K or the EU. But before this will happen the GFA will have to be siccessful.

Patrick

The vote will be for the people of the 6 counties only. They will be voting for the N.Ireland Assembly. Catholics and Protestants all have the same voting rights.
(1 person, 1 vote).

In the past the Catholics refused to vote in that they did not accept British Rule and hence would not vote for an election that in their view is illigetimate.

This time it is different. The N.Ireland assembly is part of the GFA. The GFA was voted on by all 32 counties and was overwhelmingly supported.

The Catholic community has to vote in my opinion to try and get a large Republican element within the assembly and to show the Unionist community that there is large and growing Republican element in Ulster. In not doing so it will only artifically favour the Unionists.

I agree with you Noel, they've manipulated the rights of the people before, there is nothing to say that they won't do it again.

The day we put our weapons away and wait for "evolution" to take its course is the day that the Brit occupation of Ireland is accepted, the day that the Republican movement breathes its last breath and the day the dream of a United Ireland is shattered.

Sl�n go foill

A United Ireland is inevitable. That's why people like Ian Paisley have been so angry towards the idea, they can see that certain day approaching.
We are here because of the sacrifices made by our heroes through hundreds of years. I look forward to the day when Irealnd can properly take her place amongst the nations of the world, a full and undivided sovereign island Nation.
Where is here ? Republicans being seen as serious politicians with a message actually being listened to.

The evolution you speak of is nearly over.

I'm no apologist for stickys and traitors, but I can understand why the unionists want assurances about dis-armament.

If politics fails us I'lll be happy to line up beside ye's in South Armagh, or wherever we engage them.

1 way or another, our day will come.

It was not the paramilitaries that drove a wedge into the coummunity of the Six Counties. Paramilitaries are a natural creation of a supressed people who believe they are left with no other way of achieving their political goals. They are created by the community. It's not hard to discover what drove a wedge into the Six Counties; it wears a red beret, carries a rifle and talks with an English accent.

Why can't people just accept that the occupation of Ireland by Britain is the root of the problems in the Six Counties? Because to deny that, or to shift the blame elsewhere as you seem to like doing LAN', is just fuckin umbelieveable.

Ian Paisley is not angry because he believes a United Ireland is inevitable. He is angry because he sees Protestants talking in the same room as Catholics. And being the fascist fuck he is, this is enough to send him through the fuckin roof.

Ian Paisley is an old 77 or 78 year old mentally deranged right wing idiot. He has lost touch with reality. The DUP will fade away along with him, when he is dead and buried.

Fianna and Chucky

The reason why Paisley is angry is both. He hates Catholics and he is against the GFA. Paisley would love to return to the old days of violence. The survival of the DUP and its policies thrive on division and violence.

For every unionist death or bomb detonation the process towards peaceful unification (GFA) would be weakened. and the hard-line unionists such as the DUP would gain on votes.

Paisley knows that peace and the GFA will lead to eventual unification. He will do everything to mask and weaken the peace process. He knows that in the long-term he has more to loose through the GFA than the Republicans do.

You may both think otherwise. I believe Sinn Fein knows that by giving up on weapons and on violence the Unionist argument will be heavily diluted. With time the Unionists will be seen as the barrier to Ulster�s future.

Republicans will increasingly have more to say in the day to day running of Ulster, as they gain prominent positions and increasing numbers in the assembly. It will be the hard-line Unionist�s that will probably start the next wave of aggression in a desperate to hold on to power. Sinn Fein, Dublin and London will need to prepare for that eventuality.

Fianna

I Like the Spider Man.

Fianna

Those guys wearing those red berets and carrying a rifle are not all English. They can be English, Scottish, Irish or Welsh. We should not change the subject and start attacking the English in person. Most English guys I know in London are a good bunch and support the notion of a united Ireland. We should be talking about the Unionists or Ulster Scots as some of them like to be called. They are the root of the problem.

Then you have to take note. Why is the army is in Ulster. They were originally sent in to keep the paramilitaries of both sides apart.

Hence one can conclude that violence and paramilitary activity not only brought violence, hatred, pain, death and division it also brought in the British Army. A contiunation of paramilitary activity would only prolong that presence.

Now the British War Machine is slowly being reduced. Why? Because the situation in the 6 is getting better. If that were to change for the worse, the Brits would be back in full strength, back to 18/20,000 troops or more. Worse of all they would have the backing of the rest of the world, due to the global fight against terrorism.

Exactly, why vote for a government you don't trust? By voting you accept the existence of a government you don't even recognise as legitimate.

When I said the troops have an English accent I didn't mean it to be taken literally. I was just saying it to make a point. Which doesn't change the fact that alot of them are English and not wanted.

Noel and Fianna

I am going to ask both the same questions.

1. Why do you think politics has failed?

I see that politics has brought some successs. There is the formation of an Ulster Assembly and times are now more peaceful than before

Damn I accidentally pressed the execute key. Ignore the previous post.


Noel and Fianna

The British Army was brought in to separate the parties. Your dads will tell you that the Republicans originally supported them as a safety barrier against the marauding loyalists.
I do agree with you both that the Loyalists brought the whole situation upon themselves, but all that happened some thirty years ago. What about the next thirty years and there after?

About Paisley! I agree with you that he is not quite gone yet. There will always be an element of ultra right wing loyalists. But these guys are increasingly becoming a minority. The main masses of loyalists are the middle of the way loyalists who will support Trimble. These are the loyalists that we must all prevent in going the direction of the DUP.

Concerning the election. I think Republicans must stand up and vote and show themselves in force. You are there, why let yourselves be ignored or be seen as non-existent.

You state that the assembly is not legitimate. I fully understand your feelings here, but that assembly was voted for as part of the GFA by all 32 counties. I voted for it knowing that this would be the best way to achieve a United Ireland. In my opinion it is legitimate enough to pave a way. There is nothing else on the table at the moment that is more legitimate than the GFA. Give it a chance. You state GFA has had its chance, but you are both not willing to give it a chance in the first outset.

Do vote and show those unionists that they are not in Ulster alone. By not doing so you will only play into their hands. They want you to do that. The more support Sinn Fein gains the easier she can fight for Republican rights and policies and put these into practice. This is the part that all Republican have to play now. Give it a chance. I would vote if I could, but I am not from the 6 counties.

I have a couple of questions. I am trying to get to grips with your perception on this matter.

1. Why do you think politics has failed? What are your reasons here?
2. What do you think will be the end result if fighting broke out again? Do you think that unification would come quicker? If so Why?
3. I know your feelings about the GFA, legitimacy and not voting for it. Does this have more to do with your pride, when on the other hand the GFA can bring about what you are both longing for? Why are you not giving the GFA a chance?

1. Politics have failed because the Unionists are simply unable to envisage sharing power with Nationalists. They value their dominace and power in the Six Counties over everything else, including the rights and well being of their fellow countrymen.

2. Nobody can predict the outcome of war, so I don't know why you're asking. All I know is that we've beaten the British Army before, and I've no doubt we can do it again. And yeah, I'm positive unification would come sooner through armed struggle. It might still take a long time, but it sure as fuck would be sooner than the snail-like pace of the GFA.

3.

Fianna

My gut feeling tells me that I fully agree with everything what you say. Particularly in the way that you answered. I see that you are proud and your pride is strong. That is one character that has united all the Irish.

It seems to me also (Gut Feeling) that the GFA has not brought much about, but on the other hand I also feel that it has to be givien a chance, a real chance.

I was not actually trying to put pride down as a negative point. I was trying to see if pride is one those human sides that can actually stop progress. Being proud and showing that pride is good. It is how one uses it . If wrongly applied it can lead to the opposite. Being proud/pride is also what the loyalists say.

I am Irish, I am from the Republic and I love my country. On the other hand I am also a Protestant. Not one of those Prods from Ulster. I am originally from Dublin.

When I first went to Belfast (Work) I could never really understand how people could hate one another due to relegion. But I always understood the political fight.

In the Republic I was of the minority. Well at university there were some protestants. Mostly the issue of relegion was not a problem. But to some people (A very small minority) even in Dublin it was. Outdside Dublin in places like Cork I preferred to not talk about it or tried to avoid the questions or answers.

My mother is English and my father Is Irish. When my Father married he was not allowed to marry a protestant, as the Catholic Church at the time forbid it. Protestant were only allowed to marry Catholics. He married in England. I know that, that law changed back in 91.

The biggest personal problem I had with Belfast was with secrecy. People in Belfast did'nt like the idea of being placed into a particualr bracket, particularly with the younger generations. i.e Catholic, Protestant, Republican or Loyalist etc.

I would love to say more, but as you I am also real busy. I have to prepare and get ready to go off to Germany next week. As one says Shit Happens.

Been away. I have had loads to do and I still have.

I followed the NI elections and the result did not surprise me. Looks like it is going to take a miracle to save anything of the Peace Process, now that the DUP are the main Party in NI.

What do you think will happen next. I for one think it is the end of the peace process and an end to give power sharing chance.

Basically a stalemate. In my view a really bad outcome.

Interesting Read.

LAN


Sworn enemies - or sparring partners?

Election victors DUP and Sinn F�in say they hate each other. The truth is, they can and do work together

Angelique Chrisafis, Ireland correspondent
Saturday December 6, 2003
The Guardian

Beside the fried potato-bread and bacon in the Stormont canteen lies an invisible cordon sanitaire. For years in Northern Ireland's assembly building, members of Ian Paisley's Democratic Unionist party have congregated behind a pillar to avoid eating breakfast near Gerry Adams's Sinn F�in. Nor will they pass the ketchup, speak to them, greet them in the corridor or, in some cases, take the same lift.
Across town, at Belfast city council, unionists used to adopt tougher measures, playing toy trumpets whenever Sinn F�in spoke, spraying air freshener on Sinn F�in councillors, unfurling huge banners bearing Bible tracts, locking them out of committee meetings, and, in the case of one Sinn F�in councillor who returned to City Hall after he was shot in the stomach, calling him "lead-belly".

Sinn F�in - made to sit back from the table in committee meetings - would retaliate by inching their chairs slowly forward over the course of the meeting until they could put their feet up on the table. This culminated in a spate of court battles over discrimination in the 1980s and 1990s which Sinn F�in won.

Now that the DUP is the largest unionist party and Sinn F�in the largest nationalist party in Northern Ireland, Tony Blair faces the job of playground monitor. To the DUP, Sinn F�in are terrorists until the IRA completely disbands, so there is no question of talking to them. Sinn F�in, meanwhile, are engaged in a form of warfare by politeness. They often go out of their way to smile and say good morning to DUP members in the corridor. The DUP will not be budged.

Some suggest the apparent animosity is an elaborate game being played in front of the cameras. Away from the public gaze - on local councils - the two parties are pairing up successfully to collect rubbish, refurbish leisure centres, grant planning permission, build playgrounds and ensure that out-of-town shopping malls do not threaten town centres.

The DUP works alongside Sinn F�in on 18 of 26 local councils. It speaks through a chairman or chairwoman in meetings to avoid speaking directly to Sinn F�in. Often an empty chair is left between the two parties, and they enjoy their cups of tea at different ends of the council foyers. But the junket culture is rife in local politics, and DUP and Sinn F�in councillors have flown together to countries including the US, Spain and China, staying in the same hotels to put on a united front for their council. There have even been DUP mayors with Sinn F�in deputies, working successfully without speaking directly.

Alex Maskey, a former boxer and now Sinn F�in mayor of Belfast, said that mixed council committees worked well. He was regularly greeted in the corridors by DUP members, and they had been known to socialise with him. "It is hypocritical and an absolute farce when they say they won't deal with us. In actual fact, they have been working with us for years."

A documentary about Mr Maskey's role on Belfast city council will be aired on BBC Northern Ireland next week. It includes a scene in which Mr Maskey passes DUP councillor Sammy Wilson in a corridor and they cordially acknowledge each other. "It is not formally acknowledged that this goes on," said one source in the council.

Mr Wilson dismissed the scene and said he and Mr Maskey were "usually spitting fire at each other". He added: "The reason Belfast city council works is because there is no requirement to involve Sinn F�in in every decision, like there was in the [suspended] assembly. It is every party for itself, and the parties can make whatever coalition or alliance they like."

The Rev William McCrea, gospel singer and DUP member, led Magherafelt district council with a Sinn F�in deputy. He is outraged by suggestions that the DUP meets and greets Sinn F�in behind closed doors.

"There is no socialising or fraternising with Sinn F�in, and well they know it. Personally, I wish everyone inside those council chambers was democratic; because it's not the way I was brought up to walk past people in corridors without greeting them. But I cannot fraternise with people who tried to murder me, my family, my friends, and the unionist community."

He said that whenever he needed a stand-in for a function, he called another DUP member rather than his Sinn F�in deputy.

But even in the assembly, Sinn F�in and the DUP worked together on committees, notably the agriculture committee, chaired by Mr Paisley.

A source inside the assembly said that the animosity was part of a game. "When the cameras weren't present, they got on. It's all done in a slightly guarded way, in a way that is deniable. I have seen them work together for five years."

There has certainly been progress in front of the cameras. Once, the DUP refused to appear in the same studio as Sinn F�in, and had to take part in debates via a live feed. This year, it has begun to sit opposite Sinn F�in, but address its representatives through the programme's host. One source in local television said: "In the eyes of the voters, the DUP had to put themselves in a position where they were seen to confront Sinn F�in and not walk away from the row."

Beneath the twinkling chandeliers of Armagh city council chamber, the Sinn F�in mayor, Pat O'Rawe, chaired the latest monthly council meeting without difficulties. But the seat next to her remains empty, as unhappy unionists refused to nominate a deputy.

Paul Berry, a DUP councillor for Armagh and the youngest DUP member voted on to the assembly last week, explained why he worked alongside, but not "together with", Sinn F�in. "Just because Sinn F�in is in a room it doesn't mean I am going to stay out of that room. I have to represent the interests of my community.

"But we are certainly not sitting down and supping tea with them."

According to one Sinn F�in councillor in Belfast, the idea of non-cooperation is a myth, but "the war of attrition" continues.

Yes. The British are right in keeping Northern Ireland, because that is what the Northern Irish want. They are not being British against their will. So the Irish are wrong when they claim that it belongs to them. The Spanish are wrong when they say that Gibraltar belongs to them, because Gibraltar wishes to remain British. The Spanish made a deal with the British about 200 years ago saying that Gibraltar will always remain British and that Spain will never want it back, so it is a bit strange now that Spain actually wants Gibraltar back. I suppose if the Republic of Ireland wants to get Northern Ireland back then they will have to send an army and invade Northern Ireland, but being a part of the UK that will be no mean feat. But if they succeeded, then the irish will be the imperial colonisers- which is the very same thing that they have been accusing the British of for 800 years.

did the people of nothern Ireland did have the right to choose?
as far as I know not...
so why do you think you have the right to speak for all people in northern Ireland?

what you see in the TV or read in the newspaper is nothing more than the British government wants you to know, and the british government wants northern Irlend at any price...