• It has come to our attention that some users may have been "banned" when they tried to change their passwords after the site was hacked due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software. This would have occurred around the end of February and does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you believe you were affected by this, please contact a staff member or use the Contact us link at the bottom of any forum page.

32csm UN submission


john kerr

Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
7
This topic deserves it own section, rather than being stuck in the middle of the david ervine is dead topic.

Firstly, the 32 csm submission was rejected by the free state gov as being pie in the sky as it basically said that the submission failed to recognise agreements between the irish and british that were legal and recognised by the UN.


Ciaran said:
merle's opinion on the GFA is irrelevant to the questions posed in the submission as is the current location of the UN submission and what stage it is at going through the UN. As i think edifice pointed out the UN doesn't operate on a qeueing system but rather each submission will go further in porportion to the amount of weight added to it or put behind it. The more groups add their support to it the further it will go, the first step to getting that support is to debate on the issues contained. The submission was accepted by UN officials and as yet has not been thrown out, i will endeavour to answer find out who recieved it and what body on behalf of. My guess is that due to the lack of debate on it, intervention from both Britain and the Dublin government and our inability to go to the UN HQ and follow it up (what with being deemed a foreign terrorist organisation) that it is probably gathering dust in an in tray. This however does not invalidate the contents of the submission nor its addendum submitted in 2001 in geneva.
 

edifice.

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 24, 2005
Messages
8,407
Re: 32csm un submission

john kerr said:
This topic deserves it own section, rather than being stuck in the middle of the david ervine is dead topic.

Firstly, the 32 csm submission was rejected by the free state gov as being pie in the sky as it basically said that the submission failed to recognise agreements between the irish and british that were legal and recognised by the UN.

Ciaran said:
merle's opinion on the GFA is irrelevant to the questions posed in the submission as is the current location of the UN submission and what stage it is at going through the UN. As i think edifice pointed out the UN doesn't operate on a qeueing system but rather each submission will go further in porportion to the amount of weight added to it or put behind it. The more groups add their support to it the further it will go, the first step to getting that support is to debate on the issues contained. The submission was accepted by UN officials and as yet has not been thrown out, i will endeavour to answer find out who recieved it and what body on behalf of. My guess is that due to the lack of debate on it, intervention from both Britain and the Dublin government and our inability to go to the UN HQ and follow it up (what with being deemed a foreign terrorist organisation) that it is probably gathering dust in an in tray. This however does not invalidate the contents of the submission nor its addendum submitted in 2001 in geneva.
That's not true. Firstly the British government has not addressed it. Secondly the FS governments recognised our right to put forward the submission but said that such an option was not open to them because of previously concluded treaties with the British. They were pressed on how this constraint squared with their constitutional committments vis a vis Articles 2&3 and they replied that the articles were aspirational, later rebuked by their own Supreme Court rendering them Constitutional Imperatives.
 

john kerr

Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
7
Re: 32csm un submission

edifice. said:
[quote="john kerr":11xtmlwe]This topic deserves it own section, rather than being stuck in the middle of the david ervine is dead topic.

Firstly, the 32 csm submission was rejected by the free state gov as being pie in the sky as it basically said that the submission failed to recognise agreements between the irish and british that were legal and recognised by the UN.
That's not true. Firstly the British government has not addressed it. Secondly the FS governments recognised our right to put forward the submission but said that such an option was not open to them because of previously concluded treaties with the British. They were pressed on how this constraint squared with their constitutional committments vis a vis Articles 2&3 and they replied that the articles were aspirational, later rebuked by their own Supreme Court rendering them Constitutional Imperatives.[/quote:11xtmlwe]


If i remember right, then art 2+3 were already out of the question via the gfa, when the submission was made.

So why should the brit gov address it when they have concluded treaties with the irish ?
 

edifice.

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 24, 2005
Messages
8,407
Re: 32csm un submission

john kerr said:
[quote="edifice.":2d6cgmdu][quote="john kerr":2d6cgmdu]This topic deserves it own section, rather than being stuck in the middle of the david ervine is dead topic.

Firstly, the 32 csm submission was rejected by the free state gov as being pie in the sky as it basically said that the submission failed to recognise agreements between the irish and british that were legal and recognised by the UN.
That's not true. Firstly the British government has not addressed it. Secondly the FS governments recognised our right to put forward the submission but said that such an option was not open to them because of previously concluded treaties with the British. They were pressed on how this constraint squared with their constitutional committments vis a vis Articles 2&3 and they replied that the articles were aspirational, later rebuked by their own Supreme Court rendering them Constitutional Imperatives.[/quote:2d6cgmdu]


If i remember right, then art 2+3 were already out of the question via the gfa, when the submission was made.

So why should the brit gov address it when they have concluded treaties with the irish ?[/quote:2d6cgmdu]

Wrong again. The Submission was made prior to their removal.
 

john kerr

Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
7
Re: 32csm un submission

edifice. said:
Wrong again. The Submission was made prior to their removal.
When was the submission made exactly ?
was the submission answered before or after the gfa ?
was the submission answered before or after the omagh bomb ?
why should the brit gov address it when they have concluded treaties with the irish ?
 

edifice.

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 24, 2005
Messages
8,407
Re: 32csm un submission

john kerr said:
[quote="edifice.":3n5xdgqy]

Wrong again. The Submission was made prior to their removal.
When was the submission made exactly ?
was the submission answered before or after the gfa ?
was the submission answered before or after the omagh bomb ?
why should the brit gov address it when they have concluded treaties with the irish ?[/quote:3n5xdgqy]

Do you not think you should inform yourself of basic facts before you try and engage in debate with them?
 

john kerr

Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
7
Re: 32csm un submission

edifice. said:
[quote="john kerr":1rme0jsk][quote="edifice.":1rme0jsk]

Wrong again. The Submission was made prior to their removal.
When was the submission made exactly ?
was the submission answered before or after the gfa ?
was the submission answered before or after the omagh bomb ?
why should the brit gov address it when they have concluded treaties with the irish ?[/quote:1rme0jsk]

Do you not think you should inform yourself of basic facts before you try and engage in debate with them?[/quote:1rme0jsk]

lets establish the basic facts then, simply by replying to my simple questions.

None of my questions can be answered by reading the 32 csm website so why cant you give a simple answer, or do you not know yourself ?
 

edifice.

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 24, 2005
Messages
8,407
Re: 32csm un submission

john kerr said:
lets establish the basic facts then, simply by replying to my simple questions.

None of my questions can be answered by reading the 32 csm website so why cant you give a simple answer, or do you not know yourself ?
Actually they can which reinforces my view that you haven't bothered that much. And if you look at my previous post further up you'll find answers there also. If you have a point come out and make it.
 

john kerr

Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
7
Re: 32csm un submission

edifice. said:
[quote="john kerr":yrlsxuae]
lets establish the basic facts then, simply by replying to my simple questions.

None of my questions can be answered by reading the 32 csm website so why cant you give a simple answer, or do you not know yourself ?
Actually they can which reinforces my view that you haven't bothered that much. And if you look at my previous post further up you'll find answers there also. If you have a point come out and make it.[/quote:yrlsxuae]


what another arrogant answer ! You simply don't know.
The point is that the 32 csm submission is a waste of time unless the fs gov make the submission themselves.
 

qtman

Active member
Joined
Jan 24, 2005
Messages
280
Re: 32csm un submission

I'd imagine the UN is probably a bit preoccupied with other things at the moment, you know, like the impending nuclear conflict between Israel and Iran.

I somehow doubt if you'll be hearing from them any time soon.
 

Pidge

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 5, 2004
Messages
427
Ciaran said:
here is the link,
www.32csm.org/unsubmission.html

Please read and take on the points raised and lets have a debate on the issues contained within rather than debates about non related issues.
But that just says that it was given to "the United Nations". As Smiffy quite simply asked on another thread, which part of the UN was it given to?

Did someone just post it off to "The UN, New York, USA"???
 

Universal_001

Active member
Joined
Apr 7, 2006
Messages
222
Good point actually? Security Council? General Assembly? SGs office? where?

Since I know sweet fa about the 32CSCM when I give it a read I will be giving an objective responce.
 

john kerr

Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
7
Ciaran said:
here is the link,
www.32csm.org/unsubmission.html Please read and take on the points raised and lets have a debate on the issues contained within rather than debates about non related issues.
heres an issue worh debating -

(quote from 32 site) Whenever the Irish people have moved to express their right to sovereignty, Britain has moved to oppose that right and sought to perpetuate partition.
The pretext for partition - the wishes of a national minority to maintain British rule - holds no validity against the expressed wishes of the vast majority of the Irish people.


this is unrealistic. what about the ulster covenant - carsons uvf, and the unionist resistance to a ui during the troubles.

basically you can't force the unioist into a ui. it'll lead to more war.
 

Universal_001

Active member
Joined
Apr 7, 2006
Messages
222
Invent a time machine, then go back and prevent the Ulster Plantation?
 

Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,343
john kerr said:
basically you can't force the unioist into a ui. it'll lead to more war.
And tell me John, if 51% of voters in the 06 want a UI, and the 49% say they will go to war rather than allow it, will you be advising the Croppies to just lie down? Or will you support facing down the Unionist threat?
 

john kerr

Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2006
Messages
7
Cael said:
john kerr said:
basically you can't force the unioist into a ui. it'll lead to more war.
And tell me John, if 51% of voters in the 06 want a UI, and the 49% say they will go to war rather than allow it, will you be advising the Croppies to just lie down? Or will you support facing down the Unionist threat?
what are croppies ? i support the democratic principle.
 

Worldbystorm

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
321
There's a nice photograph in Black Operations the Secret War Against the Real IRA by John Mooney and Michael O'Toole which shows Francie Mackey and Joe Dillon beside the President of the UNs podium. Mackey appears to be holding the submission in his hands.

According to the text, and perhaps edifice will enlighten us as to whether this is correct, it says they passed the document to the UN.

Not very enlightening is it?
 

jjacollins

Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2005
Messages
64
This is typical of the Irish, everyone wanting to be the boss.

Why cant the 32CSM just accept that the IRISH GOVERNMENT which speaks for 90% of the Irish Nation, north and South has agreed to the fact that the NE will not change hands until the Irish in the NE are the majority.
 
Top