Bloody Sunday, and a Perceived Constitution.
Nothing in this article gainsays the unjust and unjustifiable murder of innocent civilians and the enormity of that crime carried out by the Parachute Regiment in Derry on Bloody Sunday. This article attempts to explore how the U.K. constitution is perceived in Northern Ireland. In what follows perception is used in the dictionary sense of: -
“ The awareness of the external world or some aspect of it through physical sensations and the interpretation of these by the mind.”
The primary and ultimate role of the president of the U.S.A. is to support maintain and defend the constitution ultimately with the army. Apart from 9/11 the American constitution isn’t under threat. Here in N. Ireland the situation is different because the constitution is perceived to be under threat and has to be supported maintained and defended by the British Army and by an armed P.S.N.I.
Protestant Loyalist Ireland perceives Catholic Nationalist Ireland as a constitutional threat and perceives Catholic Nationalist Ireland as ambivalent about U.K. constitution and cannot be trusted. This is nothing new but stretches back in History.
Protestant Loyalist Ireland perceived Home Rule as Rome Rule. Home Rule in the fledgling Free State proved to be Rome Rule. This is evidenced in the Eucharistic Congress 1932 with a triumphant parading of Catholicism in Ireland. There was the enforced resignation of Dr Noel Browne by the Catholic hierarchy over Dr Brown’s mother and child scheme in 1948. There is also the case of Catholic Clergy intolerance of Protestant freedom of conscience of Sheila Cloney in Fethard on Sea over Ne Temere in 1957. In current times there was the turning of the blind eye by Dail Eireann to clerical child abuse in state institutions. So the perception by Protestant Loyalist Ireland that Home Rule would be something other than U.K. constitutional rule wasn’t wide of the mark.
The mistrust of Catholic Nationalists by Protestant Loyalists blighted the Civil Rights Association. Protestants Loyalists perceived the hidden agenda of Nationalists in the C.R.A. was to put them into a hated Republic by stealth. Ian Paisley captured this mistrust by calling the C.R.A. the I.R.A. and this misnomer was not without substance. The initial aims o f John Hume and the C.R.A. was to win equality of citizen ship for Catholics and this aim was laudable and needed. However the C.R.A. was infiltrated by Republicans whose constitutional agenda stretched far beyond the winning of equality for Catholics in N. Ireland to the over throw of the state’s constitution by violence. In Lord Saville’s report ~Republicans were a part of the Bloody Sunday march in the violent presence of Martin Magennis allegedly with a machine gun. So Ian Paisley’s naming of the C.R.A. as the I.R.A. has substance and Loyalist mistrust justified.
In N. Ireland the constitution is ultimately imposed by military might. This was the constitutional role adopted by the Paras on Bloody Sunday. The regiment perceived the marchers as a constitutional threat and a gut reaction of military fire- power followed. That doesn’t condone the murder of innocent people but illustrates the amorality and constitutional degeneracy of the soldiers involved. In this action the Paras drove the constitutional nationalism of John Hume’s C.R.A. off the streets of Derry and drove violent Republicanism onto the streets in strength. In a counter campaign of terror the Provisional I.R.A. attempted to impose a Republic on Loyalist Ireland by brute force and that campaign was as amoral, constitutionally degenerate and futile as was the murderous assault on marchers by the Paras.
U.K. constitution being unwritten relies on the ground on perception for interpretation. What Ireland now needs is a written constitution which goes beyond perception but is interpreted rationally. The written Republican constitution of the 26 counties won’t do as Republicanism is rejected by Loyalist Ireland whose historic psyche is Loyalty to the Crown, the free expression of which is a human right. By the same token the unwritten militarily imposed U.K. constitution is rejected by the vast majority of the people of Ireland. In the thesis put forward in Slugger the rejected U.K. constitution needs to be replaced with a Federal Kingdom Constitution expressed in the National Government of Ireland Act. This is a position central to U.K. constitution and Republicanism. This Act can be made as acceptable to the Catholics of Kerry as to the Protestants of Derry. The Government of Ireland Act partitioned the Island only the National Government of Ireland Act can unite it.
Protestant Church men have called on the people of Derry to unite but that begs the question ---Unite as what? As Union Jack Unionists? Surely not. As Irish Republicans? No way will they do that. But the people of Derry could unite under the National Government of Ireland Act. That is possible feasible and doable.
Michael Gillespie
Friday, 23 July 2010
Wednesday, 21 July 2010
The Pitfall of a Dual Identity
The Pit-fall of a Dual Identity.
The Reverend Stanley Gamble at the Orange demonstrations in Rossnowlagh in Donegal has called for a dual British/Irish identity to be recognised in the Republic just as a dual British/Irish identity is recognised in N. Ireland.
What the Reverend Gamble fails to understand is that the dual British/Irish identity in N. Ireland is a prime factor in the instability of the N. Ireland state and its proclivity to violence. A stable peaceful state should have only one citizen identity. In the United States of America the melting pot ensures that there is only one identity –American. It’s true there are Irish Americans, Italian American etc but when the chips are down these groups are first and foremost American who accept and abide by the American constitution. In N. Ireland one identity of citizens accept the constitution while another group rejects it. In such a socio- constitutional set up violence is the outcome as is obvious in recent rioting in Belfast.
In Great Britain there ought to be one identity i.e. British. If however a new wave immigrant population insists on retaining a different Moslem/Arab identity, inter- communal strife will be the future in Britain just as inter-communal strife has been the past and present in N. Ireland. The Republic would be well advised to retain a single Irish Identity and the Reverend Gamble should think again.
Derry/Londonderry
The Reverend Stanley Gamble at the Orange demonstrations in Rossnowlagh in Donegal has called for a dual British/Irish identity to be recognised in the Republic just as a dual British/Irish identity is recognised in N. Ireland.
What the Reverend Gamble fails to understand is that the dual British/Irish identity in N. Ireland is a prime factor in the instability of the N. Ireland state and its proclivity to violence. A stable peaceful state should have only one citizen identity. In the United States of America the melting pot ensures that there is only one identity –American. It’s true there are Irish Americans, Italian American etc but when the chips are down these groups are first and foremost American who accept and abide by the American constitution. In N. Ireland one identity of citizens accept the constitution while another group rejects it. In such a socio- constitutional set up violence is the outcome as is obvious in recent rioting in Belfast.
In Great Britain there ought to be one identity i.e. British. If however a new wave immigrant population insists on retaining a different Moslem/Arab identity, inter- communal strife will be the future in Britain just as inter-communal strife has been the past and present in N. Ireland. The Republic would be well advised to retain a single Irish Identity and the Reverend Gamble should think again.
Derry/Londonderry
Saturday, 17 July 2010
How Free is Free Derry?
How Free is Free Derry?
The statement --- You are now entering free Derry—came into existence with the violent disturbances in the Bogside in the late sixties. Protestant Derry in the Fountain and Waterside don’t identify with the statement so it has a sectarian connotation. The statement could mean that British/Unionist rule is at an end in Derry but it is indubitable that British/Unionist rule still holds in Derry as is clear in the title of the city ---Derry U.K. city of culture.
The statement throws up the question what does “Free Derry” really mean? In the novel ---THE WAY IRELAND OUGHT TO BE--- ( Amazon Books) freedom is examined in depth. In this analysis freedom is classified as: -
(a) Individual Freedom
(b) State Freedom
Freedom in the Bogside statement is really about individual freedom. Individual freedom consists of a hierarchy of freedoms: -
(1) Freedom from—such as freedom from unemployment poverty and ignorance et al.
(2) Freedom to become—in this sense the individual is free to become what the individual aspires to become according to age ability and aptitude. This freedom implies the individual has the right of access to an education of excellence.
(3) Freedom to be --- This freedom is realized when the individual is free to be that which the person has aspired to be. This implies the individual lives in a state that is economically strong with a multiplicity of job opportunities for the person.
In a free Derry in the Bogside or Fountain or in a free Falls Road in Belfast or in a free Shankill or Sandy Row in Belfast does these criteria of freedom hold? Certainly not. There is the tyranny of unemployment, poverty and low standards of educational attainment in an economy that is weak in the private wealth creating sector and top heavy in the non-productive public sector.
The Protestant Orange tradition in Ireland has its own sense of freedom bound up with a U.K. constitution. This tradition takes as freedom the right to maintain and impose the U.K. constitution by publicly posturing on the 12th of July through Catholic districts where a U.K. constitution is rejected. In this way a disputed U.K. is rammed by Orangemen along with an armed P.S.N.I. down the throats of those who object. Hence the recent riots in Belfast. However in this the Orange Order has the human right in state freedom to freely express loyalty to the Crown. This human right and state freedom of expression would be suppressed in a Republic of Ireland. For this reason the Orange Order is implacably opposed to a united Ireland. Recognising the free expression of this human right of loyalty to the Crown in Ireland, the Crown would have to be a part of a united Ireland.
It is recognised that U.K. constitution is rejected by the vast majority in Ireland but the state freedom to express Loyalty to the Crown is retained by a significant minority. To make Ireland a truly free democratic country will entail the reform of U.K. constitution in The National Government of Ireland Act to set up[U1] a Federal Kingdom for the Isles of the North Atlantic in which the state freedom of the expression of loyalty to the Crown would be recognised. The nuts and bolts of doing this are given in the Novel ---THE WAY IRELAND OUGHT TO BE--- (Amazon Books). If free Derry is to become truly free it will have to be freed from the shackles of unemployment, poverty and educational under achievement. This will require economic growth and extensive wealth creation throughout Ireland. This is freedom in its true sense and this true sense of freedom is missing in the working class Bogside, the Fountain and in working class inner city districts of Belfast. This true freedom can only be attained in an all Ireland setting with a constitution for all in the National Government of Ireland Act giving unity in a Federal Kingdom context.
Michael Gillespie
[U1]A Federtal
The statement --- You are now entering free Derry—came into existence with the violent disturbances in the Bogside in the late sixties. Protestant Derry in the Fountain and Waterside don’t identify with the statement so it has a sectarian connotation. The statement could mean that British/Unionist rule is at an end in Derry but it is indubitable that British/Unionist rule still holds in Derry as is clear in the title of the city ---Derry U.K. city of culture.
The statement throws up the question what does “Free Derry” really mean? In the novel ---THE WAY IRELAND OUGHT TO BE--- ( Amazon Books) freedom is examined in depth. In this analysis freedom is classified as: -
(a) Individual Freedom
(b) State Freedom
Freedom in the Bogside statement is really about individual freedom. Individual freedom consists of a hierarchy of freedoms: -
(1) Freedom from—such as freedom from unemployment poverty and ignorance et al.
(2) Freedom to become—in this sense the individual is free to become what the individual aspires to become according to age ability and aptitude. This freedom implies the individual has the right of access to an education of excellence.
(3) Freedom to be --- This freedom is realized when the individual is free to be that which the person has aspired to be. This implies the individual lives in a state that is economically strong with a multiplicity of job opportunities for the person.
In a free Derry in the Bogside or Fountain or in a free Falls Road in Belfast or in a free Shankill or Sandy Row in Belfast does these criteria of freedom hold? Certainly not. There is the tyranny of unemployment, poverty and low standards of educational attainment in an economy that is weak in the private wealth creating sector and top heavy in the non-productive public sector.
The Protestant Orange tradition in Ireland has its own sense of freedom bound up with a U.K. constitution. This tradition takes as freedom the right to maintain and impose the U.K. constitution by publicly posturing on the 12th of July through Catholic districts where a U.K. constitution is rejected. In this way a disputed U.K. is rammed by Orangemen along with an armed P.S.N.I. down the throats of those who object. Hence the recent riots in Belfast. However in this the Orange Order has the human right in state freedom to freely express loyalty to the Crown. This human right and state freedom of expression would be suppressed in a Republic of Ireland. For this reason the Orange Order is implacably opposed to a united Ireland. Recognising the free expression of this human right of loyalty to the Crown in Ireland, the Crown would have to be a part of a united Ireland.
It is recognised that U.K. constitution is rejected by the vast majority in Ireland but the state freedom to express Loyalty to the Crown is retained by a significant minority. To make Ireland a truly free democratic country will entail the reform of U.K. constitution in The National Government of Ireland Act to set up[U1] a Federal Kingdom for the Isles of the North Atlantic in which the state freedom of the expression of loyalty to the Crown would be recognised. The nuts and bolts of doing this are given in the Novel ---THE WAY IRELAND OUGHT TO BE--- (Amazon Books). If free Derry is to become truly free it will have to be freed from the shackles of unemployment, poverty and educational under achievement. This will require economic growth and extensive wealth creation throughout Ireland. This is freedom in its true sense and this true sense of freedom is missing in the working class Bogside, the Fountain and in working class inner city districts of Belfast. This true freedom can only be attained in an all Ireland setting with a constitution for all in the National Government of Ireland Act giving unity in a Federal Kingdom context.
Michael Gillespie
[U1]A Federtal
Thursday, 15 July 2010
When Will the Queen Visit U.K. Derry
When will the Queen visit the U.K. Bogside and the U.K.Falls Road?.
Since it is in order to call Derry the U. K. city it should also be in order to call the Bogside the U. K. Bogside and the Falls in Belfast the U.K. Falls. What brings this to mind is the proposed visit of the Queen to Dublin. It would be generally agreed that the Bogside and the Falls are no-go areas for a Royal visit and a heavy bitter history underlies that. In the early 20th century the relationship between the Crown and Ireland became ruptured. This rupture is aptly put in the ballad Kevin Barry: -
Another martyr for old Ireland
Another murder for the Crown
Whose cruel laws can kill the Irish
But cannot keep their spirit down
If the Queen’s visit is to repair the rupture and re-establish a new, close, permanent, working relationship between the Crown and the Irish that would be to the benefit of both but the visit could be about something else.
According to the Taoiseach the visit is to normalise an harmonious relationship between the two countries but that begs the question what exactly is being normalised. First of all a sectarian border is being normalized and with the Queen’s visit this sectarian border will be given the royal assent. Secondly the sectarian ghettoes in the 6 counties are being normalised and a Royal visit to Dublin will do nothing to eradicate this scandal but will perpetuate it. Thirdly the Royal visit will give the Royal assent to the constitutional mess the country is in. Two Heads of state in Ireland will be the established norm as will two conflicting national flags, two conflicting national anthems, along with two conflicting national passports. All of that will be reinforced by the Queen’s visit to Dublin and[U1] that reinforcement is perfectly acceptable to and condoned by a partitionist Dail Eireann, a Partitionist Westminster, a partitionist Irish President and now joining the partitionist ranks is a partitionist Queen.
Before the Queen visits Republican Dublin she should first visit the no-go areas in her own constitutionally dysfunctional disunited Kingdom in Northern Ireland. To date the Queen hasn’t made a Royal visit to the Bogside the Falls or Crossmaglen nor is it likely she will ever do so. It is hard to envisage the Queen doing a walk about in these districts with Martin Magennis waving a Union Jack and Martina Anderson presenting a red white and blue posy with a dutiful curtsy while Gerry Adams Peter Robinson Reg Empey and David Ford croon –God Save Our Queen—in four part harmony. But all of that is the real constitutional difficulty in Northern Ireland and Dublin and Westminster have washed their hands of that and now operate on the fallacy of a bogus G.F.A. constitutional settlement that cements sectarian division in Ireland and doesn’t bring peace.
While Dail Eireann Westminster the Irish President and now the Queen may be content to live with the constitutional mess Ireland is in, there must be those who see the mess as objectionable. Dr Hamilton has expressed concern about sectarianism but he sees the eradication of this as taking place in a U.K. constitutional frame work in N. Ireland. Archbishop Eames is of a similar outlook as is the Belfast Telegraph.. These people fail to realise that the border on the island is due to a sectarian mentality in Ireland North and South and if sectarianism is eradicated the border will be eradicated with it. To effectively combat sectarianism in Ireland it will have to be dealt with on an all Ireland basis since there is a sectarian mentality throughout Ireland. For those who are genuinely concerned about the eradication of this social disease an all Ireland approach is needed such as-- The National Government of Ireland Act---to give a written constitution for a Federal Kingdom. This Act is given in detail in the novel published by Authorhouse titled--- The Way Ireland Ought To Be and is available from Amazon Books In this approach the Crown would be constitutionally involved in a united all Ireland and would be constitutional Head of State of the Isles of the North Atlantic. If the visit of the Queen to Dublin were to be a step in that direction that would be welcome but if her visit is to ratify a sectarian border in Ireland Her Majesty would be well advised to stay put in Buckingham Palace and not become involved in Dublin in the historic constitutional mess Ireland is in. In the 21st century the rupture that happened between the Crown and the Irish in the early 20th century is repairable in a Federal Kingdom expressed in a written National Government of Ireland Act. The rupture repaired, Irish unity will follow. Why not do that?
Michael Gillespie
[U1]this
Since it is in order to call Derry the U. K. city it should also be in order to call the Bogside the U. K. Bogside and the Falls in Belfast the U.K. Falls. What brings this to mind is the proposed visit of the Queen to Dublin. It would be generally agreed that the Bogside and the Falls are no-go areas for a Royal visit and a heavy bitter history underlies that. In the early 20th century the relationship between the Crown and Ireland became ruptured. This rupture is aptly put in the ballad Kevin Barry: -
Another martyr for old Ireland
Another murder for the Crown
Whose cruel laws can kill the Irish
But cannot keep their spirit down
If the Queen’s visit is to repair the rupture and re-establish a new, close, permanent, working relationship between the Crown and the Irish that would be to the benefit of both but the visit could be about something else.
According to the Taoiseach the visit is to normalise an harmonious relationship between the two countries but that begs the question what exactly is being normalised. First of all a sectarian border is being normalized and with the Queen’s visit this sectarian border will be given the royal assent. Secondly the sectarian ghettoes in the 6 counties are being normalised and a Royal visit to Dublin will do nothing to eradicate this scandal but will perpetuate it. Thirdly the Royal visit will give the Royal assent to the constitutional mess the country is in. Two Heads of state in Ireland will be the established norm as will two conflicting national flags, two conflicting national anthems, along with two conflicting national passports. All of that will be reinforced by the Queen’s visit to Dublin and[U1] that reinforcement is perfectly acceptable to and condoned by a partitionist Dail Eireann, a Partitionist Westminster, a partitionist Irish President and now joining the partitionist ranks is a partitionist Queen.
Before the Queen visits Republican Dublin she should first visit the no-go areas in her own constitutionally dysfunctional disunited Kingdom in Northern Ireland. To date the Queen hasn’t made a Royal visit to the Bogside the Falls or Crossmaglen nor is it likely she will ever do so. It is hard to envisage the Queen doing a walk about in these districts with Martin Magennis waving a Union Jack and Martina Anderson presenting a red white and blue posy with a dutiful curtsy while Gerry Adams Peter Robinson Reg Empey and David Ford croon –God Save Our Queen—in four part harmony. But all of that is the real constitutional difficulty in Northern Ireland and Dublin and Westminster have washed their hands of that and now operate on the fallacy of a bogus G.F.A. constitutional settlement that cements sectarian division in Ireland and doesn’t bring peace.
While Dail Eireann Westminster the Irish President and now the Queen may be content to live with the constitutional mess Ireland is in, there must be those who see the mess as objectionable. Dr Hamilton has expressed concern about sectarianism but he sees the eradication of this as taking place in a U.K. constitutional frame work in N. Ireland. Archbishop Eames is of a similar outlook as is the Belfast Telegraph.. These people fail to realise that the border on the island is due to a sectarian mentality in Ireland North and South and if sectarianism is eradicated the border will be eradicated with it. To effectively combat sectarianism in Ireland it will have to be dealt with on an all Ireland basis since there is a sectarian mentality throughout Ireland. For those who are genuinely concerned about the eradication of this social disease an all Ireland approach is needed such as-- The National Government of Ireland Act---to give a written constitution for a Federal Kingdom. This Act is given in detail in the novel published by Authorhouse titled--- The Way Ireland Ought To Be and is available from Amazon Books In this approach the Crown would be constitutionally involved in a united all Ireland and would be constitutional Head of State of the Isles of the North Atlantic. If the visit of the Queen to Dublin were to be a step in that direction that would be welcome but if her visit is to ratify a sectarian border in Ireland Her Majesty would be well advised to stay put in Buckingham Palace and not become involved in Dublin in the historic constitutional mess Ireland is in. In the 21st century the rupture that happened between the Crown and the Irish in the early 20th century is repairable in a Federal Kingdom expressed in a written National Government of Ireland Act. The rupture repaired, Irish unity will follow. Why not do that?
Michael Gillespie
[U1]this
Which Flag at the Derry Cenotaph
Which Flag at the Derry/Londonderry Cenotaph?
It is known that the Irish Republican Tricolour and the Union Jack were flown at the Derry/Londonderry cenotaph together to commemorate the Irish fallen in W.W.1 The historical poppy cock that lies at the heart of this display should be examined.
The Flying of the Irish Tricolour on such an occasion implies that the Irish men who fought in France in W.W.1 were republicans. Nothing could be further from the truth. What motivated Irish men to fight and die in France is a complex matter and there are probably as many motives as there were individual soldiers. This can be considered by looking at the Irish Guards in W.W.1. The Irish Guards Regiment consisted of three battalions that fought with honour and distinction in all major engagements in the Great War. The Regiment won 406 medals including four V.C.s An expression of their motivation can be found in Rudyard Kipling’s poem –The Irish Guards---. Kipling wrote this poem as his son fell with the Irish Guards in France in 1915. To quote an extract: -
We’re not so old in the army list
But we’re not so new in the ring.
For we carried our packs with Marshal Saxe
When Louis was our king.
But Douglas Haig’s our marshal now
And we’re King George’s men
After one hundred and seventy years
We’re fighting for France again
Old days! The wild geese are ranging
Head to the storm as they faced it before
For where there’s Irish their hearts are unchanging
And where they are changed it’s Ireland no more.
Marshal Saxe refer to the battle o f Fontenoy 1745; in this battle the French army of LouisXV lead by Marshal Saxe and supported by the Irish Brigade defeated the British and Hanoverian forces at Fontenoy. The final attack by Dillon’s Irish Brigade foot soldiers was decisive in the battle. This poem was taught to recruits to the Irish Guards until after W.W.2. It is still part of the regiment’s history.
It is clear in this poem that the Irish Guards in W.W.1 had a keen sense of Irishness and were fighting for King and Country but the country wasn’t England or Britain but France and Ireland. This makes the Irish soldiers Constitutional nationalists but not Republicans since their flag was the Union Jack and their loyalty was to the Crown King George. This constitutional Nationalism of the soldiers is further revealed in the honorary discharge certificate issued to the Irish soldiers after the Great War, the certificate shows a armour clad Britannia holding a shield and sword of state in her left hand and a Union Jack in her right. To fly an Irish Tricolour at the cenotaph in Derry/Londonderry is to misrepresent the Irish Guards in W.W.1 along with all other Irish men who fought and died in France at that time.
The historical balderdash under scrutiny is an example of the Republican subterfuge to hijack constitutional nationalism and take it over. There is a crude attempt by Republicans to revise history and make nationalism republican. In a response to the article--- Whither Nationalism?—Stephen claims that now a days all Nationalists are Republicans, if they are that is to be regretted but perhaps a residual spark of constitutional nationalism still lives in the person of Margaret Ritchie. In a letter to the press written by her some time ago she complains that Sinn Fein has stolen the nationalist clothes of the S.D.L.P. It would seem that Sinn Fein is now ravening Republican wolves masquerading in constitutional nationalist sheep’s clothing. The reality is Sinn Fein are Republican in theory only but sit in a Unionist Union Jack assembly as crypto-unionists and with the withdrawal of articles 2 and 3 from the southern Republican Constitution the Irish tricolour in N. Ireland meaningless. TH Irish Tricolour has a place on the G.P.O. in Dublin where it represents a futile Catholic sectarian uprising to overthrow the U.K. constitution and the crown and set up a republic The Irish men who fought in France stood full square with the U.K. constitution and the crown so the Irish tricolour isn’t their flag no does it represent them. In more recent times the Irish Tricolour has been defiled by the Provisional I.R.A. to bomb and gun Protestant Loyalist Ireland in to a republic against their democratic wish.
The debased Irish Tricolour needs to be remade again in a new design as the Royal Flag Of Ireland that is representative of the history of both communities and can be recognised by all at the Cenotaph in Derry/Londonderry or any where else. The definition and design of such a flag is given in the published National Government of Ireland Act article 9 page 224. . For as long as there is a flag for Catholic Republicans and another for Protestant Loyalists for so long will the people of the city be divided and sectarianism and strife will thrive.
Michael Gillespie
It is known that the Irish Republican Tricolour and the Union Jack were flown at the Derry/Londonderry cenotaph together to commemorate the Irish fallen in W.W.1 The historical poppy cock that lies at the heart of this display should be examined.
The Flying of the Irish Tricolour on such an occasion implies that the Irish men who fought in France in W.W.1 were republicans. Nothing could be further from the truth. What motivated Irish men to fight and die in France is a complex matter and there are probably as many motives as there were individual soldiers. This can be considered by looking at the Irish Guards in W.W.1. The Irish Guards Regiment consisted of three battalions that fought with honour and distinction in all major engagements in the Great War. The Regiment won 406 medals including four V.C.s An expression of their motivation can be found in Rudyard Kipling’s poem –The Irish Guards---. Kipling wrote this poem as his son fell with the Irish Guards in France in 1915. To quote an extract: -
We’re not so old in the army list
But we’re not so new in the ring.
For we carried our packs with Marshal Saxe
When Louis was our king.
But Douglas Haig’s our marshal now
And we’re King George’s men
After one hundred and seventy years
We’re fighting for France again
Old days! The wild geese are ranging
Head to the storm as they faced it before
For where there’s Irish their hearts are unchanging
And where they are changed it’s Ireland no more.
Marshal Saxe refer to the battle o f Fontenoy 1745; in this battle the French army of LouisXV lead by Marshal Saxe and supported by the Irish Brigade defeated the British and Hanoverian forces at Fontenoy. The final attack by Dillon’s Irish Brigade foot soldiers was decisive in the battle. This poem was taught to recruits to the Irish Guards until after W.W.2. It is still part of the regiment’s history.
It is clear in this poem that the Irish Guards in W.W.1 had a keen sense of Irishness and were fighting for King and Country but the country wasn’t England or Britain but France and Ireland. This makes the Irish soldiers Constitutional nationalists but not Republicans since their flag was the Union Jack and their loyalty was to the Crown King George. This constitutional Nationalism of the soldiers is further revealed in the honorary discharge certificate issued to the Irish soldiers after the Great War, the certificate shows a armour clad Britannia holding a shield and sword of state in her left hand and a Union Jack in her right. To fly an Irish Tricolour at the cenotaph in Derry/Londonderry is to misrepresent the Irish Guards in W.W.1 along with all other Irish men who fought and died in France at that time.
The historical balderdash under scrutiny is an example of the Republican subterfuge to hijack constitutional nationalism and take it over. There is a crude attempt by Republicans to revise history and make nationalism republican. In a response to the article--- Whither Nationalism?—Stephen claims that now a days all Nationalists are Republicans, if they are that is to be regretted but perhaps a residual spark of constitutional nationalism still lives in the person of Margaret Ritchie. In a letter to the press written by her some time ago she complains that Sinn Fein has stolen the nationalist clothes of the S.D.L.P. It would seem that Sinn Fein is now ravening Republican wolves masquerading in constitutional nationalist sheep’s clothing. The reality is Sinn Fein are Republican in theory only but sit in a Unionist Union Jack assembly as crypto-unionists and with the withdrawal of articles 2 and 3 from the southern Republican Constitution the Irish tricolour in N. Ireland meaningless. TH Irish Tricolour has a place on the G.P.O. in Dublin where it represents a futile Catholic sectarian uprising to overthrow the U.K. constitution and the crown and set up a republic The Irish men who fought in France stood full square with the U.K. constitution and the crown so the Irish tricolour isn’t their flag no does it represent them. In more recent times the Irish Tricolour has been defiled by the Provisional I.R.A. to bomb and gun Protestant Loyalist Ireland in to a republic against their democratic wish.
The debased Irish Tricolour needs to be remade again in a new design as the Royal Flag Of Ireland that is representative of the history of both communities and can be recognised by all at the Cenotaph in Derry/Londonderry or any where else. The definition and design of such a flag is given in the published National Government of Ireland Act article 9 page 224. . For as long as there is a flag for Catholic Republicans and another for Protestant Loyalists for so long will the people of the city be divided and sectarianism and strife will thrive.
Michael Gillespie
Furter Ideas
Further Ideas on the Thesis of a Federal Kingdom
These ideas are put forward under freedom of mind thought and expression. The purpose is to shed new light on the highly complex constitutional realities involved in a new British /Irish relationship in a Federal Kingdom.
In a comment on a Federal Kingdom John O Neill raised two salient issues: -
(1) Will the Crown be democratically elected?
(2) How will all members of the Royal Family be constituted?
Both of these are dealt with in the published National Government of Ireland Act. Arthur Griffiths worked on the worthwhile thesis of a dual monarchy. In the 21st century a dual monarchy requires a dual constitution for the Isles of the North Atlantic. One part of this duality is a constitution for Great Britain where the current unwritten constitution is retained and the second part of the duality is a new written constitution for Ireland in the National Government of Ireland Act. Further a dual constitution will require a dual definition of the Crown. The following definitions are covered in the published Act, Article 3 The Crown Irish Page 192
Definition 1
ON British Territory the Crown is defined as the British Crown that is the constitutional Head of State of Great Britain and is Head of the Church of England. The British Crown is also Head of the Commonwealth and is Head of State of Canada Australia and New Zealand. The British Crown fulfils these constitutional roles by right of birth.
Definition 2
On Irish Territory The Crown is defined as the Crown Irish and fulfils the constitutional role of Irish Head of State by democratic election in Ireland.
The procedure for electing the Crown Irish is covered in Article 22 of the published Act pages 266/7/8/9
Two options are put to the Irish People in a 32 county referendum: -
(a) Ireland as a Republic.
(b) Ireland as a Sovereign Nation with the National Government of Ireland Act as its constitution.
The votes would be counted separately in the 6 and 26 counties. If option (a) carries a significant majority in favour in both territories Ireland is united as a Republic. If option (b) carries a significant majority in both territories Ireland is united as a Sovereign Nation within a Federal Kingdom. If option (a) carries a significant majority in the 26 counties and option (b) carries a significant majority in the 6 counties Ireland remains partitioned.
The constitutional role of all members of the Royal Family are dealt with in Article 3 Page 196 of the published Act The only members the Royal Family granted constitutional status in relation to Ireland under the Act are the Crown Irish and spouse and the Heir to the throne and spouse. No other member of the Royal Family would be granted constitutional status in Ireland and as far as the Irish state is concerned are private citizens. However all members of the Royal Family would retain their traditional constitutional role in Great Britain
For Catholic Republicans a further stumbling block could be the religion of the Crown Irish. In article 3 page 196 of the published Act the Crown Irish is defined as Christian when on Irish territory. IN this article 3 the state religion of Ireland is defined as Christian Ecumenism The Crown Irish being defined as Christian and Irish Head of State the Crown Irish is Head of Christian ecumenism in Ireland. Article 3 page 197 forbids the Crown Irish to attend any denominational act of worship when on Irish territory. When the Crown Irish intends to worship on Irish territory the act of worship must be Christian ecumenical as specified in the Act.
A further bone of contention with catholic Republicans is –Who can the Crown Irish or Heir to the Throne marry? In Article 12 page 245 the Act states that the Crown Irish Or Heir to the Throne are free to marry a spouse of personal choice but the spouse must be Christian.
This article is intended to give an insight into the immense constitutional complexities in the British/Irish relationship; the motive is to be of help in improving that relationship. There is no ulterior motive. The complexities are immense but even so since the Government of Ireland Act partitioned Ireland only the National Government of Ireland Act can unite it. But the Irish may be a thrawn people who prefer to argue and squabble over contradictory irreconcilable constitutional positions in a sectarian manner rather than reach an amicable and reasonable settlement of the dispute. This is possible feasible and doable in the National Government of Ireland Act if the will can be found to do it.
Michael Gillespie
These ideas are put forward under freedom of mind thought and expression. The purpose is to shed new light on the highly complex constitutional realities involved in a new British /Irish relationship in a Federal Kingdom.
In a comment on a Federal Kingdom John O Neill raised two salient issues: -
(1) Will the Crown be democratically elected?
(2) How will all members of the Royal Family be constituted?
Both of these are dealt with in the published National Government of Ireland Act. Arthur Griffiths worked on the worthwhile thesis of a dual monarchy. In the 21st century a dual monarchy requires a dual constitution for the Isles of the North Atlantic. One part of this duality is a constitution for Great Britain where the current unwritten constitution is retained and the second part of the duality is a new written constitution for Ireland in the National Government of Ireland Act. Further a dual constitution will require a dual definition of the Crown. The following definitions are covered in the published Act, Article 3 The Crown Irish Page 192
Definition 1
ON British Territory the Crown is defined as the British Crown that is the constitutional Head of State of Great Britain and is Head of the Church of England. The British Crown is also Head of the Commonwealth and is Head of State of Canada Australia and New Zealand. The British Crown fulfils these constitutional roles by right of birth.
Definition 2
On Irish Territory The Crown is defined as the Crown Irish and fulfils the constitutional role of Irish Head of State by democratic election in Ireland.
The procedure for electing the Crown Irish is covered in Article 22 of the published Act pages 266/7/8/9
Two options are put to the Irish People in a 32 county referendum: -
(a) Ireland as a Republic.
(b) Ireland as a Sovereign Nation with the National Government of Ireland Act as its constitution.
The votes would be counted separately in the 6 and 26 counties. If option (a) carries a significant majority in favour in both territories Ireland is united as a Republic. If option (b) carries a significant majority in both territories Ireland is united as a Sovereign Nation within a Federal Kingdom. If option (a) carries a significant majority in the 26 counties and option (b) carries a significant majority in the 6 counties Ireland remains partitioned.
The constitutional role of all members of the Royal Family are dealt with in Article 3 Page 196 of the published Act The only members the Royal Family granted constitutional status in relation to Ireland under the Act are the Crown Irish and spouse and the Heir to the throne and spouse. No other member of the Royal Family would be granted constitutional status in Ireland and as far as the Irish state is concerned are private citizens. However all members of the Royal Family would retain their traditional constitutional role in Great Britain
For Catholic Republicans a further stumbling block could be the religion of the Crown Irish. In article 3 page 196 of the published Act the Crown Irish is defined as Christian when on Irish territory. IN this article 3 the state religion of Ireland is defined as Christian Ecumenism The Crown Irish being defined as Christian and Irish Head of State the Crown Irish is Head of Christian ecumenism in Ireland. Article 3 page 197 forbids the Crown Irish to attend any denominational act of worship when on Irish territory. When the Crown Irish intends to worship on Irish territory the act of worship must be Christian ecumenical as specified in the Act.
A further bone of contention with catholic Republicans is –Who can the Crown Irish or Heir to the Throne marry? In Article 12 page 245 the Act states that the Crown Irish Or Heir to the Throne are free to marry a spouse of personal choice but the spouse must be Christian.
This article is intended to give an insight into the immense constitutional complexities in the British/Irish relationship; the motive is to be of help in improving that relationship. There is no ulterior motive. The complexities are immense but even so since the Government of Ireland Act partitioned Ireland only the National Government of Ireland Act can unite it. But the Irish may be a thrawn people who prefer to argue and squabble over contradictory irreconcilable constitutional positions in a sectarian manner rather than reach an amicable and reasonable settlement of the dispute. This is possible feasible and doable in the National Government of Ireland Act if the will can be found to do it.
Michael Gillespie
Is the Overthrow Of The Constitution and Deposing the Head of State True Democracy
s the overthrow of the constitution and deposing the Head of State true democracy?
I got an interesting comment to my article on--- Whither Nationalism—from Stephen who seems to have inside knowledge of the S.D.L.P. He assured me that all nationalists are nowadays Republicans and that the S.D.L.P. has been Republican since its inception. Stephen wrote of the S.D.L.P. desire for an all Ireland Republic to be arrived at democratically. In my understanding of Republicanism its aim is the overthrow of U.K. constitution and the deposing of the U.K. head of state with the setting up of a Republic with a President as Head of State in the case of the S.D.L.P. to be done democratically. The Republican Provisionals attempted to over throw the constitution by brute force but this effort failed. A defeated Sinn Fein now sit in the assembly with the same aim of overthrowing the constitution and deposing the Head Of State but now democratic means are to be used. Since the Republican S.D.L.P. and Sinn Fein have the same aim as parties they are indistinguishable. According to Stephen the parties can’t agree who was first with the G.F.A. but that difference seems academic.
But is the aim of Republicans as understood, true democracy? To look a t the matter further a field suppose in America a communist party was set up with the aim of overthrowing the American Constitution and reconstitute America as the United Socialist States of America with President Obama being replaced by a communist president and if all of that were to be done democratically would that be true democracy? Would that not be an abuse of democracy and such a party would be vigorously opposed in America. By the same token the aim of Republicans to over throw the U.K, constitution here by democratic means is an abuse of democracy also. This may have the support of Catholic Republican Ireland but it is vigorously opposed by Protestant Loyalist Ireland hence the sectarian constitutional dichotomy on the island and a border.
To change the constitution democratically is perfectly in order. The American constitution can be changed democratically with an amendment. U.K. constitution can be changed democratically with an Act of Parliament. UK Constitution was changed democratically when governments were devolved to Scotland and Wales. What is of interest now in Scotland is the S.N.P. If these nationalists are Republican they haven’t said so. If the S.N.P. were to declare openly that they are Republican with the aim of abolishing the U.K. constitution and the Head of State and establish a Republic of Scotland with a Scottish President S.N.P. fortunes in Scotland could collapse. They seem to be opting for independence as a Scottish Nation within the existing constitutional set up; that is realistic strategy.
The S.N.P. strategy is similar to the strategy put forward in the thesis of a Federal Kingdom of the Sovereign Nation of Ireland and Great Britain with a reformed Crown as Head of State. I know this thesis drives Republicans up the walls but it is a central constitutional position between the extremes of Tricolour Republicanism and Union Jack Unionism. A Federal Kingdom is a change of constitution and would require The National Government of Ireland Act to synthesise Nationalism and Unionism. This has been set out in a published version of the Act that runs to 20,000 words so the task is immense. Union Jack Unionism and Tricolour are divisive so the intelligent thing to do is to scrap both and replace them with a central constitution acceptable in both communities; this is possible feasible and doable in the Act under consideration to give a win-win out come to Nationalists and Loyalists What is needed is the will to do it with a voluntary political centre in N. Ireland
Michael Gillespie
I got an interesting comment to my article on--- Whither Nationalism—from Stephen who seems to have inside knowledge of the S.D.L.P. He assured me that all nationalists are nowadays Republicans and that the S.D.L.P. has been Republican since its inception. Stephen wrote of the S.D.L.P. desire for an all Ireland Republic to be arrived at democratically. In my understanding of Republicanism its aim is the overthrow of U.K. constitution and the deposing of the U.K. head of state with the setting up of a Republic with a President as Head of State in the case of the S.D.L.P. to be done democratically. The Republican Provisionals attempted to over throw the constitution by brute force but this effort failed. A defeated Sinn Fein now sit in the assembly with the same aim of overthrowing the constitution and deposing the Head Of State but now democratic means are to be used. Since the Republican S.D.L.P. and Sinn Fein have the same aim as parties they are indistinguishable. According to Stephen the parties can’t agree who was first with the G.F.A. but that difference seems academic.
But is the aim of Republicans as understood, true democracy? To look a t the matter further a field suppose in America a communist party was set up with the aim of overthrowing the American Constitution and reconstitute America as the United Socialist States of America with President Obama being replaced by a communist president and if all of that were to be done democratically would that be true democracy? Would that not be an abuse of democracy and such a party would be vigorously opposed in America. By the same token the aim of Republicans to over throw the U.K, constitution here by democratic means is an abuse of democracy also. This may have the support of Catholic Republican Ireland but it is vigorously opposed by Protestant Loyalist Ireland hence the sectarian constitutional dichotomy on the island and a border.
To change the constitution democratically is perfectly in order. The American constitution can be changed democratically with an amendment. U.K. constitution can be changed democratically with an Act of Parliament. UK Constitution was changed democratically when governments were devolved to Scotland and Wales. What is of interest now in Scotland is the S.N.P. If these nationalists are Republican they haven’t said so. If the S.N.P. were to declare openly that they are Republican with the aim of abolishing the U.K. constitution and the Head of State and establish a Republic of Scotland with a Scottish President S.N.P. fortunes in Scotland could collapse. They seem to be opting for independence as a Scottish Nation within the existing constitutional set up; that is realistic strategy.
The S.N.P. strategy is similar to the strategy put forward in the thesis of a Federal Kingdom of the Sovereign Nation of Ireland and Great Britain with a reformed Crown as Head of State. I know this thesis drives Republicans up the walls but it is a central constitutional position between the extremes of Tricolour Republicanism and Union Jack Unionism. A Federal Kingdom is a change of constitution and would require The National Government of Ireland Act to synthesise Nationalism and Unionism. This has been set out in a published version of the Act that runs to 20,000 words so the task is immense. Union Jack Unionism and Tricolour are divisive so the intelligent thing to do is to scrap both and replace them with a central constitution acceptable in both communities; this is possible feasible and doable in the Act under consideration to give a win-win out come to Nationalists and Loyalists What is needed is the will to do it with a voluntary political centre in N. Ireland
Michael Gillespie
Bloody Sunday and a Perceived Constitution
Bloody Sunday, and a Perceived Constitution.
Nothing in this article gainsays the unjust and unjustifiable murder of innocent civilians and the enormity of that crime carried out by the Parachute Regiment in Derry on Bloody Sunday. This article attempts to explore how the U.K. constitution is perceived in Northern Ireland. In what follows perception is used in the dictionary sense of: -
“ The awareness of the external world or some aspect of it through physical sensations and the interpretation of these by the mind.”
The primary and ultimate role of the president of the U.S.A. is to support maintain and defend the constitution ultimately with the army. Apart from 9/11 the American constitution isn’t under threat. Here in N. Ireland the situation is different because the constitution is perceived to be under threat and has to be supported maintained and defended by the British Army and by an armed P.S.N.I.
Protestant Loyalist Ireland perceives Catholic Nationalist Ireland as a constitutional threat and perceives Catholic Nationalist Ireland as ambivalent about U.K. constitution and cannot be trusted. This is nothing new but stretches back in History.
Protestant Loyalist Ireland perceived Home Rule as Rome Rule. Home Rule in the fledgling Free State proved to be Rome Rule. This is evidenced in the Eucharistic Congress 1932 with a triumphant parading of Catholicism in Ireland. There was the enforced resignation of Dr Noel Browne by the Catholic hierarchy over Dr Brown’s mother and child scheme in 1948. There is also the case of Catholic Clergy intolerance of Protestant freedom of conscience of Sheila Cloney in Fethard on Sea over Ne Temere in 1957. In current times there was the turning of the blind eye by Dail Eireann to clerical child abuse in state institutions. So the perception by Protestant Loyalist Ireland that Home Rule would be something other than U.K. constitutional rule wasn’t wide of the mark.
The mistrust of Catholic Nationalists by Protestant Loyalists blighted the Civil Rights Association. Protestants Loyalists perceived the hidden agenda of Nationalists in the C.R.A. was to put them into a hated Republic by stealth. Ian Paisley captured this mistrust by calling the C.R.A. the I.R.A. and this misnomer was not without substance. The initial aims o f John Hume and the C.R.A. was to win equality of citizen ship for Catholics and this aim was laudable and needed. However the C.R.A. was infiltrated by Republicans whose constitutional agenda stretched far beyond the winning of equality for Catholics in N. Ireland to the over throw of the state’s constitution by violence. In Lord Saville’s report ~Republicans were a part of the Bloody Sunday march in the violent presence of Martin Magennis allegedly with a machine gun. So Ian Paisley’s naming of the C.R.A. as the I.R.A. has substance and Loyalist mistrust justified.
In N. Ireland the constitution is ultimately imposed by military might. This was the constitutional role adopted by the Paras on Bloody Sunday. The regiment perceived the marchers as a constitutional threat and a gut reaction of military fire- power followed. That doesn’t condone the murder of innocent people but illustrates the amorality and constitutional degeneracy of the soldiers involved. In this action the Paras drove the constitutional nationalism of John Hume’s C.R.A. off the streets of Derry and drove violent Republicanism onto the streets in strength. In a counter campaign of terror the Provisional I.R.A. attempted to impose a Republic on Loyalist Ireland by brute force and that campaign was as amoral, constitutionally degenerate and futile as was the murderous assault on marchers by the Paras.
U.K. constitution being unwritten relies on the ground on perception for interpretation. What Ireland now needs is a written constitution which goes beyond perception but is interpreted rationally. The written Republican constitution of the 26 counties won’t do as Republicanism is rejected by Loyalist Ireland whose historic psyche is Loyalty to the Crown, the free expression of which is a human right. By the same token the unwritten militarily imposed U.K. constitution is rejected by the vast majority of the people of Ireland. In the thesis put forward in Slugger the rejected U.K. constitution needs to be replaced with a Federal Kingdom Constitution expressed in the National Government of Ireland Act. This is a position central to U.K. constitution and Republicanism. This Act can be made as acceptable to the Catholics of Kerry as to the Protestants of Derry. The Government of Ireland Act partitioned the Island only the National Government of Ireland Act can unite it.
Protestant Church men have called on the people of Derry to unite but that begs the question ---Unite as what? As Union Jack Unionists? Surely not. As Irish Republicans? No way will they do that. But the people of Derry could unite under the National Government of Ireland Act. That is possible feasible and doable.
Michael Gillespie
Nothing in this article gainsays the unjust and unjustifiable murder of innocent civilians and the enormity of that crime carried out by the Parachute Regiment in Derry on Bloody Sunday. This article attempts to explore how the U.K. constitution is perceived in Northern Ireland. In what follows perception is used in the dictionary sense of: -
“ The awareness of the external world or some aspect of it through physical sensations and the interpretation of these by the mind.”
The primary and ultimate role of the president of the U.S.A. is to support maintain and defend the constitution ultimately with the army. Apart from 9/11 the American constitution isn’t under threat. Here in N. Ireland the situation is different because the constitution is perceived to be under threat and has to be supported maintained and defended by the British Army and by an armed P.S.N.I.
Protestant Loyalist Ireland perceives Catholic Nationalist Ireland as a constitutional threat and perceives Catholic Nationalist Ireland as ambivalent about U.K. constitution and cannot be trusted. This is nothing new but stretches back in History.
Protestant Loyalist Ireland perceived Home Rule as Rome Rule. Home Rule in the fledgling Free State proved to be Rome Rule. This is evidenced in the Eucharistic Congress 1932 with a triumphant parading of Catholicism in Ireland. There was the enforced resignation of Dr Noel Browne by the Catholic hierarchy over Dr Brown’s mother and child scheme in 1948. There is also the case of Catholic Clergy intolerance of Protestant freedom of conscience of Sheila Cloney in Fethard on Sea over Ne Temere in 1957. In current times there was the turning of the blind eye by Dail Eireann to clerical child abuse in state institutions. So the perception by Protestant Loyalist Ireland that Home Rule would be something other than U.K. constitutional rule wasn’t wide of the mark.
The mistrust of Catholic Nationalists by Protestant Loyalists blighted the Civil Rights Association. Protestants Loyalists perceived the hidden agenda of Nationalists in the C.R.A. was to put them into a hated Republic by stealth. Ian Paisley captured this mistrust by calling the C.R.A. the I.R.A. and this misnomer was not without substance. The initial aims o f John Hume and the C.R.A. was to win equality of citizen ship for Catholics and this aim was laudable and needed. However the C.R.A. was infiltrated by Republicans whose constitutional agenda stretched far beyond the winning of equality for Catholics in N. Ireland to the over throw of the state’s constitution by violence. In Lord Saville’s report ~Republicans were a part of the Bloody Sunday march in the violent presence of Martin Magennis allegedly with a machine gun. So Ian Paisley’s naming of the C.R.A. as the I.R.A. has substance and Loyalist mistrust justified.
In N. Ireland the constitution is ultimately imposed by military might. This was the constitutional role adopted by the Paras on Bloody Sunday. The regiment perceived the marchers as a constitutional threat and a gut reaction of military fire- power followed. That doesn’t condone the murder of innocent people but illustrates the amorality and constitutional degeneracy of the soldiers involved. In this action the Paras drove the constitutional nationalism of John Hume’s C.R.A. off the streets of Derry and drove violent Republicanism onto the streets in strength. In a counter campaign of terror the Provisional I.R.A. attempted to impose a Republic on Loyalist Ireland by brute force and that campaign was as amoral, constitutionally degenerate and futile as was the murderous assault on marchers by the Paras.
U.K. constitution being unwritten relies on the ground on perception for interpretation. What Ireland now needs is a written constitution which goes beyond perception but is interpreted rationally. The written Republican constitution of the 26 counties won’t do as Republicanism is rejected by Loyalist Ireland whose historic psyche is Loyalty to the Crown, the free expression of which is a human right. By the same token the unwritten militarily imposed U.K. constitution is rejected by the vast majority of the people of Ireland. In the thesis put forward in Slugger the rejected U.K. constitution needs to be replaced with a Federal Kingdom Constitution expressed in the National Government of Ireland Act. This is a position central to U.K. constitution and Republicanism. This Act can be made as acceptable to the Catholics of Kerry as to the Protestants of Derry. The Government of Ireland Act partitioned the Island only the National Government of Ireland Act can unite it.
Protestant Church men have called on the people of Derry to unite but that begs the question ---Unite as what? As Union Jack Unionists? Surely not. As Irish Republicans? No way will they do that. But the people of Derry could unite under the National Government of Ireland Act. That is possible feasible and doable.
Michael Gillespie
Thursday, 8 July 2010
The Rape of Virgin Munchindun
Title:
The Rape of Virgin Munchindun
Sub Title:
Pen Name:
Michael Gillespie
Book ID:
66828
Author ID:
456041
Book Status
Sales Info
About the Book, About the Author, Free Preview
The Rape of Virgin Munchindun
Sub Title:
Pen Name:
Michael Gillespie
Book ID:
66828
Author ID:
456041
Book Status
Sales Info
About the Book, About the Author, Free Preview
The Rape of Virgin Munchindun
Munchindun is a fictional district in Co Tyrone N. Ireland
This topical novel deals with th e difficulties that exist between the communities in N. Ireland at the present time in a new interesting way
The novel tells a fascinating love story with a difference.
The book has been given a positive write up in the press.
The book--- THE RAPE OF VIRGIN MUNCHINDUN--- is available from Amazon Books on the Internet or through any book store.
Michael Gillespie Author
This topical novel deals with th e difficulties that exist between the communities in N. Ireland at the present time in a new interesting way
The novel tells a fascinating love story with a difference.
The book has been given a positive write up in the press.
The book--- THE RAPE OF VIRGIN MUNCHINDUN--- is available from Amazon Books on the Internet or through any book store.
Michael Gillespie Author
Wednesday, 7 July 2010
Bloody Sunday and a Perceived Constitution
Bloody Sunday, and a Perceived Constitution.
Nothing in this article gainsays the unjust and unjustifiable murder of innocent civilians and the enormity of that crime carried out by the Parachute Regiment in Derry on Bloody Sunday. This article attempts to explore how the U.K. constitution is perceived in Northern Ireland. In what follows perception is used in the dictionary sense of: -
“ The awareness of the external world or some aspect of it through physical sensations and the interpretation of these by the mind.”
The primary and ultimate role of the president of the U.S.A. is to support maintain and defend the constitution ultimately with the army. Apart from 9/11 the American constitution isn’t under threat. Here in N. Ireland the situation is different because the constitution is perceived to be under threat and has to be supported maintained and defended by the British Army and by an armed P.S.N.I.
Protestant Loyalist Ireland perceives Catholic Nationalist Ireland as a constitutional threat and perceives Catholic Nationalist Ireland as ambivalent about U.K. constitution and cannot be trusted. This is nothing new but stretches back in History.
Protestant Loyalist Ireland perceived Home Rule as Rome Rule. Home Rule in the fledgling Free State proved to be Rome Rule. This is evidenced in the Eucharistic Congress 1932 with a triumphant parading of Catholicism in Ireland. There was the enforced resignation of Dr Noel Browne by the Catholic hierarchy over Dr Brown’s mother and child scheme in 1948. There is also the case of Catholic Clergy intolerance of Protestant freedom of conscience of Sheila Cloney in Fethard on Sea over Ne Temere in 1957. In current times there was the turning of the blind eye by Dail Eireann to clerical child abuse in state institutions. So the perception by Protestant Loyalist Ireland that Home Rule would be something other than U.K. constitutional rule wasn’t wide of the mark.
The mistrust of Catholic Nationalists by Protestant Loyalists blighted the Civil Rights Association. Protestants Loyalists perceived the hidden agenda of Nationalists in the C.R.A. was to put them into a hated Republic by stealth. Ian Paisley captured this mistrust by calling the C.R.A. the I.R.A. and this misnomer was not without substance. The initial aims o f John Hume and the C.R.A. was to win equality of citizen ship for Catholics and this aim was laudable and needed. However the C.R.A. was infiltrated by Republicans whose constitutional agenda stretched far beyond the winning of equality for Catholics in N. Ireland to the over throw of the state’s constitution by violence. In Lord Saville’s report ~Republicans were a part of the Bloody Sunday march in the violent presence of Martin Magennis allegedly with a machine gun. So Ian Paisley’s naming of the C.R.A. as the I.R.A. has substance and Loyalist mistrust justified.
In N. Ireland the constitution is ultimately imposed by military might. This was the constitutional role adopted by the Paras on Bloody Sunday. The regiment perceived the marchers as a constitutional threat and a gut reaction of military fire- power followed. That doesn’t condone the murder of innocent people but illustrates the amorality and constitutional degeneracy of the soldiers involved. In this action the Paras drove the constitutional nationalism of John Hume’s C.R.A. off the streets of Derry and drove violent Republicanism onto the streets in strength. In a counter campaign of terror the Provisional I.R.A. attempted to impose a Republic on Loyalist Ireland by brute force and that campaign was as amoral, constitutionally degenerate and futile as was the murderous assault on marchers by the Paras.
U.K. constitution being unwritten relies on the ground on perception for interpretation. What Ireland now needs is a written constitution which goes beyond perception but is interpreted rationally. The written Republican constitution of the 26 counties won’t do as Republicanism is rejected by Loyalist Ireland whose historic psyche is Loyalty to the Crown, the free expression of which is a human right. By the same token the unwritten militarily imposed U.K. constitution is rejected by the vast majority of the people of Ireland. In the thesis put forward in Slugger the rejected U.K. constitution needs to be replaced with a Federal Kingdom Constitution expressed in the National Government of Ireland Act. This is a position central to U.K. constitution and Republicanism. This Act can be made as acceptable to the Catholics of Kerry as to the Protestants of Derry. The Government of Ireland Act partitioned the Island only the National Government of Ireland Act can unite it.
Protestant Church men have called on the people of Derry to unite but that begs the question ---Unite as what? As Union Jack Unionists? Surely not. As Irish Republicans? No way will they do that. But the people of Derry could unite under the National Government of Ireland Act. That is possible feasible and doable.
Michael Gillespie
Nothing in this article gainsays the unjust and unjustifiable murder of innocent civilians and the enormity of that crime carried out by the Parachute Regiment in Derry on Bloody Sunday. This article attempts to explore how the U.K. constitution is perceived in Northern Ireland. In what follows perception is used in the dictionary sense of: -
“ The awareness of the external world or some aspect of it through physical sensations and the interpretation of these by the mind.”
The primary and ultimate role of the president of the U.S.A. is to support maintain and defend the constitution ultimately with the army. Apart from 9/11 the American constitution isn’t under threat. Here in N. Ireland the situation is different because the constitution is perceived to be under threat and has to be supported maintained and defended by the British Army and by an armed P.S.N.I.
Protestant Loyalist Ireland perceives Catholic Nationalist Ireland as a constitutional threat and perceives Catholic Nationalist Ireland as ambivalent about U.K. constitution and cannot be trusted. This is nothing new but stretches back in History.
Protestant Loyalist Ireland perceived Home Rule as Rome Rule. Home Rule in the fledgling Free State proved to be Rome Rule. This is evidenced in the Eucharistic Congress 1932 with a triumphant parading of Catholicism in Ireland. There was the enforced resignation of Dr Noel Browne by the Catholic hierarchy over Dr Brown’s mother and child scheme in 1948. There is also the case of Catholic Clergy intolerance of Protestant freedom of conscience of Sheila Cloney in Fethard on Sea over Ne Temere in 1957. In current times there was the turning of the blind eye by Dail Eireann to clerical child abuse in state institutions. So the perception by Protestant Loyalist Ireland that Home Rule would be something other than U.K. constitutional rule wasn’t wide of the mark.
The mistrust of Catholic Nationalists by Protestant Loyalists blighted the Civil Rights Association. Protestants Loyalists perceived the hidden agenda of Nationalists in the C.R.A. was to put them into a hated Republic by stealth. Ian Paisley captured this mistrust by calling the C.R.A. the I.R.A. and this misnomer was not without substance. The initial aims o f John Hume and the C.R.A. was to win equality of citizen ship for Catholics and this aim was laudable and needed. However the C.R.A. was infiltrated by Republicans whose constitutional agenda stretched far beyond the winning of equality for Catholics in N. Ireland to the over throw of the state’s constitution by violence. In Lord Saville’s report ~Republicans were a part of the Bloody Sunday march in the violent presence of Martin Magennis allegedly with a machine gun. So Ian Paisley’s naming of the C.R.A. as the I.R.A. has substance and Loyalist mistrust justified.
In N. Ireland the constitution is ultimately imposed by military might. This was the constitutional role adopted by the Paras on Bloody Sunday. The regiment perceived the marchers as a constitutional threat and a gut reaction of military fire- power followed. That doesn’t condone the murder of innocent people but illustrates the amorality and constitutional degeneracy of the soldiers involved. In this action the Paras drove the constitutional nationalism of John Hume’s C.R.A. off the streets of Derry and drove violent Republicanism onto the streets in strength. In a counter campaign of terror the Provisional I.R.A. attempted to impose a Republic on Loyalist Ireland by brute force and that campaign was as amoral, constitutionally degenerate and futile as was the murderous assault on marchers by the Paras.
U.K. constitution being unwritten relies on the ground on perception for interpretation. What Ireland now needs is a written constitution which goes beyond perception but is interpreted rationally. The written Republican constitution of the 26 counties won’t do as Republicanism is rejected by Loyalist Ireland whose historic psyche is Loyalty to the Crown, the free expression of which is a human right. By the same token the unwritten militarily imposed U.K. constitution is rejected by the vast majority of the people of Ireland. In the thesis put forward in Slugger the rejected U.K. constitution needs to be replaced with a Federal Kingdom Constitution expressed in the National Government of Ireland Act. This is a position central to U.K. constitution and Republicanism. This Act can be made as acceptable to the Catholics of Kerry as to the Protestants of Derry. The Government of Ireland Act partitioned the Island only the National Government of Ireland Act can unite it.
Protestant Church men have called on the people of Derry to unite but that begs the question ---Unite as what? As Union Jack Unionists? Surely not. As Irish Republicans? No way will they do that. But the people of Derry could unite under the National Government of Ireland Act. That is possible feasible and doable.
Michael Gillespie
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
