Conference tallis::celt

I'm not too sure what that article was actually about. The fact that the
attitudes of Irish-Americans are not radically nationalist enough for
the author ? If so, I wonder what would satisfy him. Maybe if people gave
more support to Noraid and the IRA, then maybe enough blood would be spilled
to satisfy his craving.

I hate to see this kind of article, although I fear it is all too common.
Take a look at some of the blatently one sided comments : 

"The economic, political and religious rape of a nation."
"This endless tragedy of Ireland."
"Ireland and the plight of the Irish."
"Men, women, and children do indeed die there. And so does a nation."

When will people get it through their thick skulls that the 1916 rising
is dead and gone, and Ireland is already an independant self-governing
state. Northern Ireland happens to be part of the United Kingdom, and
the majority of its people wish it to remain so. What right have people
outside NI to dictate otherwise ? The problems in the North are caused
by the mindless paramilitary morons who on one side want to negate the
fact that nationalists are in a minority by killing innocent men, women
and children, and on the other side those who feel threatened and respond
with more needless tit-for-tat bombings and killings.

Irish-Americans who really want to help, should throw their support behind
any initiative that preserves the wishes of the majority, and yet at the
same time protects the rights and dignity of the minority. And where is
such an initiative ? I don't think the Hillsborough agreement is the
answer, but it is certainly a way forward. It is unfortunate that this
accord has come up against so much opposition from both sides, but then
surely that is to be expected. Staunch Unionists oppose it because it sets
up a frameword whereby the Irish Government can particpiate in ensuring 
that the Nationalist minority are free to express their own identity, and
staunch Nationalists oppose it because it guarantees that the North cannot
become part of the Republic until such time as the majority wishes it.

And what if one day the North was to become part of the Republic against
the wishes of the majority? I suppose that after the ensuing war (and lets
face it thats what would happen), the authors of such articles would come
over and stand in the midst of the burned out shells of buildings and walk
past the bodies, and say "Ah, but its the principle that counts."

<CFM>

    Pardon my ignorance in this, but at one point weren't a lot of people
    in NI disenfranchised unless they were property owners?  Has this
    changed?  Does everybody get to vote now?  Has the majority shifted?
    
    				Dennis Ahern, American of Irish descent

    RE: .0	Good article  - somehow I can't imagine it appearing
    in a newspaper here.
    
    RE: .1	Fine Gael you are!  I'll be back with a detailed response.
    
    

    Leaprechauns know that they brainwash them here too.
    
    Re .1
    My dear Conar Moron,
                        I find some of your remarks to be so "half"
    though out, that they couldn't possibly be your own.
    You said that Northern Ireland is part of UKOGBANI and the majority
    of its people wish it to remain so.
    That remark accepts that the statelet was set up in a democratic
    manner and is in effect a democracy. We may digress on that as the
    democratic process was not entered into when the setting up of this
    artifice was done. It was done by the forefathers of the present
    Irish government, under a treaty which gave one party all it required
    and the other party got the leftovers. Even that discredited treaty
    was never implemented (ref Boundary commission debacle), just like
    this government is unable to finish anything it ever starts.
    
    You said "what right do people outside of N.I. to dictate otherwise"
    and then you say that the Hillsborough agreement (sic) gives the
    Irish government a say in matters affecting N.I., and that it should
    be supported. MY GOD MAN YOU SPEAK IN FORKED TONGUES.
    
    .3 might be right about the son of the blueshirt in the clothes
    of a trendy liberal (Fine Gael). 
    
    I reserve my right to address the N.I. issue as being very relevant
    to the whole island of Ireland, not just one small northeastern
    corner.  Why should I??.....you may well ask, BECAUSE I PAY HEAVY
    TAXES TO MAINTAIN A BRITISH BORDER (more than my Reading colleagues
    do BTW).
    
    You appear to be of the school that thinks that N.I. can be shipped
    off to another part of this planet (like this government thinks
    about solving the unemployment crises they preside over). Well
    its not going anywhere, and you might as well face it.
    
    Hillsborough is but an interim response to the political catalyst
    of violence. Better to be seen to do something, absolves politicians
    from responsibility for the final resolution of the problem.
    
    Snake thinks the article was written by an Irish, Irish Press reporter.
    
    BTW, 1916 was opening shot in a long, drawn-out, and unfinished
    business.
    

    
    
    	For those that have not heard the term before ...
    
    	UKOGBANI = United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
    
    
    	KeVin

	I'm afraid the author of .4 displays a naivety that is paralleled
	only by the author of the original article. In his blind rush to
	defend his narrowminded nationalistic ego, he fell headlong into
	the trap of regurgitating ancient arguments like a schoolboy who
	falteringly recites a verse of poetry in class, not understanding
	the words but afraid that if he stops he will be punished.

	Saying that the fact that a treaty signed many years ago did not
	measure up to his questionable standards is no argument for
	ignoring the fact that the majority of people in the North do
	not wish it to become part of the Republic. Whether or not the
	'statelet' was set up a democratic manner does not invalidate
	its present status. (Of course Mr Hughes would have us believe
	that when the US was first colonised, a referendum was held among
	the natives which supported this). Anyhow that treaty was not
	setting up the North as a state, it was setting up the South.

	As regards his little "forked tongue" accusation, I'm sure that
	if I tried, I could extract parts of two sentences from .4, quote
	them out of context and make HIM seem to be contradicting himself.
	Lets see...
	  "the statelet was set up in a democratic manner and is in effect
	a democracy" and "It was done by the forefathers of the present 
	Irish Government" put together would seem to indicate that the
	Republic has absolutely no claim whatsoever to the North. QED 

	I agree that people in the Republic do have to pay taxes to
	maintain the border, but if Mr Hughes is worried about money,
	then maybe he should give some thought as to what unity would
	cost the taxpayer ??

	I do not think NI can be shipped off to another planet, rather
	Mr Hughes is of the school that thinks that we can disregard the
	wishes of the majority, say the magic words "We were here first"
	and magically the Border will disappear, Unionists will be 
	satisfied, and everything will be rosy.

	Lastly, does Mr Hughes really have to debase himself and his
	arguments by resorting to name calling ? This is what I would
	expect from a ten year old, and if he really has trouble spelling
	my name then I suggest he contact his Cost Centre manager about
	some sort of remedial class - maybe primary school ?

<CFM>

    At the risk of sticking my neck out I'd like to express my support
    for Conor (in .0 if not in .6). I too find the arguments of .0 and
    .4 (and elsewhere in this NotesFile) to be needlessly fueling a
    fire, provoking a symptom when the dis-ease would go away if only
    half the energy were directed positively that is now directed
    negatively. In saying this I make no comment about past actions,
    the responsibilities, blame, etc I hang my head when I see some
    of the historical (and contemporary) actions of my country (UK/England)
    but if I let that enbitter me I'd be a poor man indeed. Far better
    that we should look to the future, try to make less mistakes, try
    to ensure we have better leaders, work together to solve all our
    problems (including Northern Ireland) Let's try to help, not hinder.
    Love, not hate; and move on to real progress.
    
    Brian

Mike Barnicle, the author of the article, writes editorials for the Boston
Globe newpaper.  He is well known for his antagonistic, often blatantly
opinionated articles.  Some of what he writes I agree with, some I don't.

One thing did appeal to me in that article (.0), notably Irish Americans
general apathy towards the island of Ireland.


1) America's political unawareness

The fact that many Irish-Americans extol their Irish roots to anyone
and his brother, yet know little or care little of current situations.
They wear Claddagh rings, buy Aran sweaters, sing McNamara's band,
and parade around on St. Patricks day, but don't even know the basic
politics or geography of the island.  (Irish) Americans are insular.

2) America ignores NI deaths

Every night in the US news we hear news of murders and killings abroad
and of students and organizations that publicly denounce the causes of
these, e.g. apartheid, anti-semitism, etc.  But we rarely see any public
outrage and comment on the Northern Ireland situation.  There is too much
killing going on in the little province of Nothern Ireland and America
(with all her resources and ancestors of both sides) is not doing enough.

3) America's lack of financial aid

The American aid (in investments from both Government and private sector)
to the North dwindled from an original 200 million $ to about 50 million $,
while America gives millions of dollars to every other country on earth
(for both economic and military aid), and every other group that purports
an anti-communist stance.  There should be more more investment and financial
aid to NI from the US (tied together with fair and discrimination-free
employment practices).  Unemployment breeds terrorism.

There are approximately 15 million Jewish Americans in the US.  Israel gets
3 billion $ in US aid.  Irish Americans number 50 million.  Northern Ireland
gets 50 million $.  Enough said for apathy.


George

Associated Press Tue 16-SEP-1986 20:23                         US-Foreign Aid

   Senate Committee OKs $13 Billion Foreign Aid Bill
                        By ALEXANDER G. HIGGINS
                        Associated Press Writer
   WASHINGTON (AP) - The Senate Appropriations Committee on Thursday
approved a $13 billion foreign aid bill that would put U.S. military
assistance in the form of gifts instead of loans.
   The bill, which was approved on a voice vote, is $1.4 billion
less than the current bill because of U.S. spending constraints to
comply with the Gramm-Rudman deficit reduction law.
   The measure has the support of the Reagan administration, said
Sen. Robert Kasten, R-Wis., foreign operations subcommittee chairman
who worked out the bipartisan approach.
   Like a similar version in the House, the bill would provide
Israel with $3 billion and Egypt with $2.3 billion in economic and
military grants, the full amounts requested by the Reagan
administration.
   Almost all other countries would receive less than the
administration asked.
   The separate versions will be included in the catch-all spending
bill called the continuing resolution that Congress is to enact.
                                                            More -->
Associated Press Tue 16-SEP-1986 20:23                US-Foreign Aid (cont'd)

   Because the aid is not in the form of loans, it would not add to
the debt burden of the recipient countries, its sponsors said.
   Turkey would receive $490 million and Greece $343 million in
weapons grants. That would give Greece the 7:10 ratio sought by its
supporters in this country, $7 of military aid for every $10 going
to Turkey.
   Cyprus also would receive $15 million in economic aid under the
Senate bill, more than five times as much as the administration
sought. The bill also contains nonbinding language criticizing
Turkey for its occupation of the northern part of Cyprus.
   Jordan is entitled to receive up to $15 million in economic aid.
   It would be up to the administration to decide how much money to
give to countries that are not specified in the bill.
   Israel, the largest recipient of U.S. aid, has long enjoyed
widespread support in Congress, and Egypt receives the
second-largest amount because it is the only Arab country to make
peace with Israel.
   The House version protects aid for Pakistan, which would total
$669 million, because of the Soviet occupation of neighboring
Afghanistan and for Northern Ireland, at $50 million, to support the
                                                            More -->
Associated Press Tue 16-SEP-1986 20:23                US-Foreign Aid (cont'd)

new Anglo-Irish accord to bring peace to the troubled British
province.
   Already Egypt and Israel receive their military aid as grants so
that their debt burden will not be increased, and sponsors of the
change to all military grants in the Senate version noted that other
countries friendly to the United States would receive the same
benefit.
   The total military assistance would be $4.99 billion, the same as
is provided in the House version, though $2.5 billion less than the
package proposed by the Reagan administration.

Associated Press Tue 16-SEP-1986 20:24                NIreland-Discrimination

   Government Proposes Tougher Anti-Discrimination Measures
                           By MARCUS ELIASON
                        Associated Press Writer
   LONDON (AP) - The British government, facing pressure from
Ireland and from Irish lobbyists in the United States, proposed new
measures Tuesday to combat job discrimination against Catholics in
Northern Ireland.
   The proposals were unveiled in a ``consultative paper,'' a
statement of intent to be translated into action after a six-month
period during which the government solicits the opinions of
interested parties.
   They represent the most far-reaching attempt by any British
government to tackle job discrimination, a key factor underlying
Northern Ireland's 17 years of sectarian and political conflict.
   Compiled after a year-long study that included a look at U.S. and
Canadian affirmative-action programs, their thrust is to make equal
opportunity a requirement for all employers in Northern Ireland.
   If adopted, companies refusing to adhere to the measure will be
ineligible for government contracts. Private companies will lose
their right to state subsidies, while public sector employers such
                                                            More -->
Associated Press Tue 16-SEP-1986 20:24       NIreland-Discrimination (cont'd)

as state-owned industries and municipalities could face prosecution,
fines and dismissal of top executives.
   Although they comprise 40 percent of the population, Catholics
are 2 1/2 times more likely to be unemployed than Protestants, who have
had political and economic advantages in Northern Ireland since
their ancestors migrated from mainland Britain nearly 400 years ago.
   The reasons for the imbalance, the consultative paper says, are
not just bigotry, but geographical, educational and sociological.
   It said major industries tend to be located in Protestant areas
where Catholics often are reluctant to travel, Protestants are more
inclined to attend vocational schools while Catholics broadly favor
studies in the humanities, and that Northern Ireland has a highly
immobile work force, where jobs often are handed down from father to
son.
   Moreover, the paper says, competition for jobs has grown with the
unemployment rate, now officially at 22 percent.
   Since 1972, at the height of Northern Ireland's conflict, London
has sought to eradicate some areas of job discrimination. In its own
civil service, for instance, hiring closely reflects the population
division between Protestants and Catholics.
                                                            More -->
Associated Press Tue 16-SEP-1986 20:24       NIreland-Discrimination (cont'd)

   In 1976 Britain enacted an equal opportunities law for Northern
Ireland and a Declaration of Principle and Intent which all
employers had to sign to be eligible for government contracts.
   But Catholics complained it was toothless because there were no
monitors checking hiring practices.
   Sean Farren, a spokesman on employment for the Social Democratic
and Labor Party, the largest Catholic party in Northern Ireland,
said: ``The current equal opportunities certificate is a mockery.
Many employers rushed to sign it, hang it on their walls and then
ignored it.''
   The paper recommends a tougher ``Declaration of Practice,'' and
equipping the state-funded Fair Employment Agency to monitor hiring
patterns. Now companies would have to seek periodic renewal and
demonstrate an improved record of hiring Catholics.
   ``The threat of losing government tenders ... will be a badly
needed jab for those cynical employers who couldn't care less about
fairness and equality,'' said Farren in a statement welcoming the
proposals.
   Northern Ireland Secretary Tom King, Britain's top official in
the province, mentioned the problems of Shorts, the state-owned
                                                            More -->
ssociated Press Tue 16-SEP-1986 20:24       NIreland-Discrimination (cont'd)

Belfast aircraft manufacturer. Shorts' economic future depends
heavily on Pentagon contracts, and some Irish-American lobbyists in
Washington want such deals canceled because the company's
7,000-strong work force has only a few hundred Catholic employees.
   Protestant workers, King said, should realize their own jobs
depended on more Catholics being recruited to work beside them.

    THIS IS SIMPLY A QUESTION.  I know that the status of a Catholic
    in the NI is as a second class citizen.
    What is the status of a protestant in the South?  Do they
    constitute a very small minority, and therefore can be ignored?
    Have they been driven out?
    How about a swap?  All P's go north, all C's go south?  Seems
    like it would be a full and equitable solution.
    Then as truly homogenous states, they could settle down, and
    declare war like proper countries.  
    Phil (a P, part NI ancestory, so bias is out in open)

    Phil,
          I thought that the subject was taboo in this notesfile, if
    not then it should be, it is rather a naive question, but I suppose
    that sitting over the other side of the pond, you're allowed to
    be, this is the kind of question that transforms the mildest
    mannered person into a raving maniac, do you often light powder
    kegs then sit on them ?
    
    Drew (I think I'll stay away until this blows over)
    

    Re. 11
    
    I think that the status of Catholics in NI is not as second class
    citizens, but more appropriately as different citizens.
    
    Minorities in the Republic generally do not have any problems socially.
    There are Protestants everywhere you go and many Protestant churches.
    There is even a sizable Jewish community in Dublin that is represented
    quite well.  Protestants, however, more times than not, convert to
    Catholicism when marrying into Catholic families - a situation that
    does occur often due to the higher numbers of Catholics.
    
    Re. 12
    
    Drew, I agree that politics is a touchy situation that probably
    can evoke hostile emotions within all of us.  But, if these discussions
    can educate us, then all the better.

    Yes, I really appreciate reading the answers to such questions,
    obvious as they may seem to you on the European side of "the pond".
    I have to admit that I'd be too embarrassed to ask many of them,
    but I learn a lot reading the answers.  I used to ask questions
    like that as a teenager, but never seemed to get a thoughtful response.
    Especially not in history class.
    
    Is there a good basic not-too-scholarly book (or books) that people
    would recommend to help understand the history and current political
    situation in Ireland?  
    
    Holly
    
    (Please bear with us, Drew!)

    RE: .2  "disenfranchised tenants"
    
    I'm not sure as I've seen an answer here yet to my question as to
    whether or not property ownership was or is a requirement for voting
    in NI.
    
    All this talk of religion reminds me of the story, I can't remember
    where I saw this, of the Jew in NI who was asked to declare whether
    he was a Catholic Jew or a Protestant Jew.
    

    Re.15: Dennis, I seem to remember that property ownership was but
    is no more a requirement for voting in NI, the change being one
    of the decisions taken since direct administration of NI has been
    taken up by London. Could anybody confirm it as it's been a long
    time I haven't discussed Irish politics?
    BTW, I have feelings and opinions about the NI problem, but as I'm
    not Irish, I don't feel I have any rights to interfere with it.
    I think this is a problem for the Irish to solve, that any UNSOLLI-
    CITED foreign intervention or advice will be less than welcome,
    and that I'd better keep these opinions for myself, however strongly
    convinced I am of their pertinence.
    			Denis.

    re .15  CJ or PJ....
    
    I not sure if you were joking about 'Catholic or Protestant Jew...'
    but tend to credit it.  And it's not just NI.
    
    Growing up I travelled a good deal as my father was US Air Force.
    When I was about seven I transferred into a new school in southern
    Ohio, my records had not yet caught up to me and my new teacher
    wanting to get me properly 'classified' asked if I was Protestant
    or Catholic. [Apparently the name Annie Louisa Carlyle ruled out
    the possibility being Jewish]  Well, I'd heard of P's & C's but 
    truly did not have a clue to which I was [Now, had she asked me
    what my religion was I could have told her straight out that I am
    an Anglican, but she didn't ask that]. She told me to go home and
    ask.
    
    [a word about my Dad, here.  If you were to ask ANYONE, you would
    be told that my Dad is the gentlest and kindest of men, but he does
    have a sense of humour bordering on perverse at times.]
    
    Dad sent me back armed with the knowledge that I am a Catholic,
    knowing full well that the woman would sooner or later ask me what
    my father did for work.  He's an Anglican priest!
    
    It set the teacher back some.
    
    It was some years before I was able to find ANY humour in the
    situation.
    
    
    re .11  Perhaps I am naive as well, but partition on ethnic/religious
    grounds doesn't seem to have worked either in Palestine or India;
    I cannot imagine that it would work in Ireland.  [If it were me,
    *I* certainly wouldn't want to leave my home simply because it was
    agreed that I was of the wrong religion to live there]

First off, let's remember what the "Irish issue" is really all 
about.  It's about the military occupation of a small country by 
its more powerful neighbour.  The main brunt of that occupation 
is borne by the nationalist people in the north of the country.  
This is a brutal and brutalising experience for all those 
involved.  Nationalist ghettos are ringed with military 
installations (if they had such areas in Russia we would be 
plagued by the media coverage), military patrols and consequent 
harrasment are a daily occurance, the judicial system is corrupt, 
and unemployment has ravaged whole communities.  In short, it is 
a living hell here in what is deemed a parliamentary democracy.  
It is a crying shame and no effort should be spared by anyone 
with a sense of justice to expose this system at every opportunity.

re: .1

You claim that the original article is "blatently one sided" and 
in your own opening paragraph you can write something like 

"I wonder what would satisfy him. Maybe if people gave more support 
to Noraid and the IRA, then maybe enough blood would be spilled
to satisfy his craving."

>What right have people outside NI to dictate otherwise ? 

You have been asked and failed to answer why you then support the 
Anglo-Irish agreement, which _is_ outside interference.

The rest of your article is full of regurgitated platitudes which 
are not even believed by those spouting them.  However we still 
have a few morons about ready to take up the battle-cry.

Nobody, no interest group, no denomination, no political party, 
nobody whosoever has a right of veto over the sovereignty and 
independence of our country.  That right belongs to all the 
people of this country and to nobody else, least of all to an 
aggressive neighbour or her cronies.

re: .6

	Ah, the slave-mentality rears its thick skull.  Mike's 
reply has been the only one to represent the republican viewpoint 
(incidentally, the most powerful political force in the country.)

>Whether or not the 'statelet' was set up a democratic manner does not 
>invalidate its present status. 

The phrase "a crime is a crime is a crime" may be known to you?

re: .7
>    At the risk of sticking my neck out 

	You aren't!  More platitudes...



re: .8

> 1) America's political unawareness

Everyone can do his little (or large!) bit.  This notesfile is an 
example.


>3) America's lack of financial aid

My own personal opinion is that no aid should be given which 
helps prop up the artificial statelet NI and by definition 
prolongs British dominance over this island.

>Unemployment breeds terrorism.

Quite apart from my opinion that the real terrorists in Ireland 
are the British military and their allies, I don't think 
unemployment breeds terrorism.  Unemployment breeds apathy, 
depression, defeat and other negative things.  Violence however 
does breed violence.

>There are approximately 15 million Jewish Americans in the US.  Israel gets
>3 billion $ in US aid.  Irish Americans number 50 million.  Northern Ireland
>gets 50 million $.  Enough said for apathy.

3 billion breeds terrorism.

>   The reasons for the imbalance, the consultative paper says, are
>not just bigotry, but geographical, educational and sociological.

This is a dressed-up lie.  

>   It said major industries tend to be located in Protestant areas
>where Catholics often are reluctant to travel, Protestants are more
>inclined to attend vocational schools while Catholics broadly favor
>studies in the humanities, and that Northern Ireland has a highly
>immobile work force, where jobs often are handed down from father to
>son.

Why are industries located in Protestant areas?  Bigotry.

Why are Catholics 'reluctant` (haha) to travel?  Bigotry and the 
fear of being assasinated, which is all too real at present.

Why do Catholics study humanities?  Bigotry.  There isn't much 
point in studying for a job which you are not going to get 
anyway.


re: .14

	A good book to start with would be the historical novel 
'Trinity` by Leon Uris.  It is fiction, but he has done some 
exhaustive research and the plot does mirror the developing 
political scene in Ireland.

    Sorry if I offended anyone by effectively asking why does an
    annoyed minority stay where they are unhappy.

        My family left England in 1632 for exactly that reason, and
    settled in the Boston, Massachusetts Colony, area to foster
    Puritanism.   NO matter what U.S. textbooks say, they did not
    come over to extablish religeous freedom, they just wanted THEIR
    particular (and peculiar) form.
    Phil

    re: .19
    
    Thank you for sharing this irrelevant information with us.