Lisbon Treaty Voter guide

1 Bealtaine, 2008
Issue: 25 – May 2008
Lisbon Treaty Voter guide
Courtesy of the National Platform –



Below are the two key sentences of the amendment which you will be asked to put into the Irish Constitution on Thursday 12 June.

If people vote Yes they will be giving the European Union the constitutional form of a Federal EU State, in which Ireland would become a provincial state or region. This would be the end of Irelands position as an independent sovereign country. The French and Dutch have already rejected this proposal in referendums. By voting No we remain full EU Members based on the Nice Treaty, but we reject the Lisbon Treaty as a step too far. Millions of Europeans who are being denied referendums on Lisbon by their politicians, are hoping that we will say No to it for their sakes.

The State may ratify the Treaty of Lisbon signed at Lisbon on the 13th day of December 2007, and may be a member of the European Union established by virtue of that Treaty. No provision of this [Irish] Constitution invalidates laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the State that are necessitated by membership of the European Union, or prevents laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the said European Union or by institutions thereof, or by bodies competent under the treaties referred to in this section, from having the force of law in the State. (emphasis added)
– 28th Amendment of the Constitution Bill, 2008. What the Irish people will be voting on in the referendum

The Lisbon Treaty would:

1. Establish a legally quite new European Union in the constitutional form of a Federal EU State. This new EU based on the Lisbon Treaty would have the same name but would be fundamentally different from the present EU, which was founded by the 1993 Maastricht Treaty. Lisbon would turn Ireland into a provincial or regional state within this new Union, with the EUs Constitution and laws being made superior to the Irish Constitution and laws in any case of conflict between the two. It would be the end of Irelands position as an independent sovereign State in the international community of States (Arts.1 and 47 TEU; Declaration No.17 concerning Primacy);

2. Turn us all into real citizens for the first time of this new post-Lisbon European Union, owing obedience to its laws and loyalty to its authority over and above our obedience and loyalty to Ireland and the Irish Constitution and laws. One can only be a citizen of a State. We would retain our Irish citizenship, but it would be subordinate to our EU Federal citizenship, as is normal for citizens of Federal States such as Germany, the USA, Switzerland, Canada etc. (Art.9 TEU);

3. Be a power-grab by the Big States for control of this new Union. By basing EU law-making primarily on population size, the Lisbon Treaty would double Germanys say on the EU Council of Ministers from 8% to 17%. Frances say would go from 8% to 13%, Britains and Italys from their current 8% to 12% each. Irelands voting weight on a population basis would be more than halved to 1% (Art.16 TEU);

4. Amend the existing treaties to give the EU Court of Justice the power to rule against Irelands 12.5% company tax rate if it decides that this is a distortion of competition in the EU internal market as compared with Germanys 30% rate (Art.113 TFEU). This low rate of tax is the principal reason for foreign firms coming to Ireland and staying here when they come. Lisbon would also give the EU the power to impose its own EU taxes directly on us for the first time (Art.311 TFEU);

5. Copperfasten last Decembers Laval/Vaxholm judgement of the EU Court of Justice, which makes it illegal for Governments or Trade Unions to enforce pay standards higher than the minimum wage for migrant workers. At the same time Lisbon would give the EU full control of immigration policy (Art.79 TFEU). This combination threatens the pay and working conditions of large numbers of Irish people. A new Treaty Protocol is needed to set the Laval judgement aside;

6. Remove any Irish voice from the EU Commission, the body which has the monopoly of proposing all EU laws, for five years out of every 15 (Art.17.5 TEU);

7. Abolish our right to decide who the Irish Commissioner is when it comes to our turn to be on the Commission, replacing it by a right to make suggestions only for the new Commission President to decide (Art.17.7 TEU);

8. Hand over to the EU the power to make laws binding on us in 32 new policy areas, such as crime, justice and policing, public services, immigration, energy, transport, tourism, sport, culture, public health, the EU budget etc.;

9. Give the EU Court of Justice the power to decide our rights as EU citizens, including such matters as the right to life, the right to strike, the rights of the child, the right to fair trial etc. Irelands Supreme Court would no longer have the final say on what our rights are (Art.6 TEU);
10. Be a self-amending Treaty, which would permit the EU Prime Ministers to shift most of the remaining policy areas where unanimity still exists, to majority voting, without a need for new EU Treaties or referendums (Art.48 TEU);

11. Militarize the EU further, requiring Member States to progressively improve their military capabilities and to go to the defence of other Member States in the event of war (Art.42.7 TEU).



1. Lisbon will copperfasten last Decembers Laval/Vaxholm judgement of the EU Court of Justice, which makes it illegal for Governments or Trade Unions to enforce pay standards higher than the minimum wage for migrant workers. At the same time Lisbon would give the EU full control of immigration policy (Art.79 TFEU). This combination threatens the pay and working conditions of large numbers of Irish people. A new Treaty Protocol is needed to set this judgement aside.

2. It will give the EU Court of Justice the power to rule against Irelands 12.5% company tax rate if it decides that this is a distortion of competition as compared with Germanys 30% rate (Art.113 TFEU). This low rate of tax is the principal reason for foreign firms coming to Ireland and staying here when they come.
3. It will give the EU the power to impose its own EU taxes directly on us. The EU Prime Ministers would have to agree this and it would have to be approved by National Parliaments, but if that is done no further referendum would be needed in Ireland (Art.311 TFEU).


4. It is a power-grab by the Big States for control of the new post-Lisbon European Union. By basing EU law-making primarily on population size, the Lisbon Treaty would double Germanys say on the EU Council of Ministers from 8% to 17%. Frances say would go from 8% today to 13%, and Britains and Italys from their current 8% to 12% each. Irelands voting weight on a population basis would be more than halved to 1% (Art.16 TEU).

5. It removes any Irish voice from the EU Commission, the body which has the monopoly of proposing all EU laws, for five years out of every 15 (Art.17.5 TEU).

6. It abolishes our right to decide who the Irish Commissioner is when it comes to our turn to be on the Commission, replacing it by a right to make suggestions only for the Commission President to decide (Art.17.7 TEU).

7. It will establish a legally quite new European Union in the constitutional form of a Federal EU State. This new EU based on the Lisbon Treaty would have the same name but would be fundamentally different from the present EU, which was founded by the 1993 Maastricht Treaty. Lisbon would turn Ireland into a provincial or regional state within this new Union, with the EUs Constitution and laws being made superior to the Irish Constitution and laws in any case of conflict between the two. It would be the end of Irelands position as an independent sovereign State in the international community of States (Arts.1 and 47 TEU; Declaration No.17 concerning Primacy);

8. It will turn us all into real citizens for the first time of this new post-Lisbon European Union, owing obedience to its laws and loyalty to its authority over and above our obedience and loyalty to Ireland and the Irish Constitution and laws. One can only be a citizen of a State. We would retain our Irish citizenship, but it would be subordinate to our EU Federal citizenship, as is normal for citizens of Federal States such as Germany, the USA, Switzerland, Canada etc. (Art.9 TEU).

9. Lisbon is a self-amending Treaty which would permit the EU Prime Ministers to shift most of the remaining policy areas where unanimity still exists, to majority voting, without need for new EU Treaties or referendums (Art.48 TEU).


10. It will give the EU Court of Justice the power to decide our rights as EU citizens, including such matters as the right to life, the right to strike, the rights of the child, the right to fair trial etc. Irelands Supreme Court would no longer have the final say (Art.6 TEU).

11. It hands over to the EU the power to make laws binding on us in 32 new policy areas, such as crime, justice and policing, public services, immigration, energy, transport, tourism, sport, culture, public health, the EU budget etc.

12. It will militarize the EU further, requiring Member States to progressively improve their military capabilities and to go to the defence of other Member States in the event of war (Art.42.7 TEU). This would make a mockery of traditional Irish neutrality and any pretence to an independent Irish foreign policy.

Public opinion will be led to adopt, without knowing it, the proposals that we dare not present to them directly – All the earlier proposals will be in the new text, but will be hidden and disguised in some way. – V.Giscard DEstaing, former French President, who helped draw up the EU Constitution which the French and Dutch rejected in their 2005 referendums but which is now being implemented through the Lisbon Treaty; Le Monde, 14 June 2007


Interview with Declan Ganley

1 Bealtaine, 2008
Issue: 25 – May 2008
Interview with Declan Ganley
Declan Ganley was born in North London of Irish parents. The family moved back to Ireland when he was still a child. A successful entrepreneur, the Galway-based businessman shocked the Establishment by his strong opposition to the Lisbon Treaty, which he has eloquently argued is bad for Ireland and Irish business interests. His organisation Libertas has been actively campaigning for a No vote in the forthcoming referendum on the Treaty and he has been travelling the country to present their case on the issue to the Irish people.

What is Libertas?
Libertas was founded in 2006 and is committed to making the EU more democratic and accountable for the decisions it takes. Libertas has been following the evolution of the Lisbon Treaty and after seeing the final draft in 2007, decided to oppose it on the basis that it would weaken Irelands position in Europe, and do nothing to address the corruption and unaccountability of the EU.

Could Lisbon affect our tax rates?
Well, France has already said that it is committed to harmonising taxes within the EU, meaning that we would be obliged to pay the same high rates as them. Remember, low taxes have been great for the Irish economy but under Article 93 of the Treaty the European Court could rule that Irelands low tax rates are an unfair distortion of competition.

How will Lisbon affect Irelands influence within the EU?
Our voting weight on the European Council, if we say yes, its halved – we go down to 0.8 percent. They say make Ireland stronger, and we give away half our voting weight. Now, how does that work again? Its reduced by half. Germanys is going to be doubled. Frances is increased by sixty percent. Ours is halved.
We lose our Commissioner for five out of every fifteen years. For five years at a time we are not going to have a commissioner. Thats like a long term of a government.

Do you think there is any national consciousness of the fact that this is one of the most important decisions we will ever make?
No, not yet. But it is getting there, and it is going to be down to the media, to make sure the people understand that, because once we give these things up, if we do, and we give them up without having anybody to vote for or against to change things – which we do not get – there is no mechanism – ever – for us to get them back. Which is why I have started to point out that the seeds of the destruction of the European Union are in this treaty. Why? There is an article called article 50, which is for complete withdrawal from the Union, which is a right that every member state should absolutely have, but I would hope would never exercise, because that would be very bad for the European Union.

Article 50 says that you can withdraw. Now, you have to pay the European Union – theyll tell you how much money you owe to them and all of that stuff. Oh, and by the way, Europe can fine us, but we cant fine them. See whos really in charge here.

Article 50 means that a member state can withdraw. Now, bearing in mind how fundamentally anti-democratic this treaty is, just think about the highly unlikely scenario that we get a bad President of Europe. Im sure that would never happen, right? But lets just say that we were unlucky, and we got a bad President of Europe and a bad Foreign Minister of Europe, and that the scandals that are being covered up in Europe right now of very many millions of waste, fraud and abuse and embezzlement – lets say that those scandals become more widely and publicly known. Do you think that its going to be tempting for a political party in any number of member states to be opportunistic and say, this European Union is out of touch, out of control and we have no one that we can vote for or against – we should leave, and we are going to run a general election campaign on leaving the Union. Its extremely likely – and it will happen, probably next door. Its very possible that things could go very wrong and that some party could win an election on that commitment – to exercise Article 50, and leave – and there, because of the anti-democratic nature of this thing, it makes the likelihood of withdrawal from some member states high. So you could have Britain, leaving – Denmark, leaving – the Netherlands, leaving – Sweden, leaving – and a renting, a splitting of Europe again along some very old lines – and we cannot afford to go back there and have that happen. Its an enormous risk – which is why we have to recognise that Europe belongs to the close to half-a-billion people who are Europeans. That is what Europe is. Its not some small clique of elites in Brussels. It must be accountable to that close to half-a-billion people at the ballot box – thats democracy.

For all the reasons I have outlined, and more, we have to say no to this – even if it was just out of respect for the French and the Dutch – but for all of these reasons we have to say no.

By the way, what does Ireland get in this treaty that we dont already have? Nothing. Not a single thing. What kind of deal is that? So we are giving up massive power and influence. We surrender and subjugate ourselves to unaccountable leadership – we are going to have these people [travelling around the globe] purporting to represent us as European citizens – we open these back doors to taxation – we are having our voting weight halved in the European Council – we are losing our European Commissioner for five out of every fifteen years – and in return we get what? Nothing that we dont already have.

Why do you think there is such a national political consensus?
At every meeting that weve had, that is a question that everybody is asking. There is a huge sense of disappointment in our party political process here in Ireland, that there is no mainstream political party voice coming out against this thing. I think there is a degree of indolence going on, insofar as they do not want to rock the boat. I think that there is maybe even a little bit of intimidation. Some people seem to be awestruck or something by the attention that we are getting over this issue.

You have the gravy train factor as well.
Huge. Something that we will be breaking shortly, … information that we have received from an extremely reliable source says that there is currently a big scandal breaking in a locked room in Brussels, and there is extremely limited access to the information. It is the report on the MEP expense abuse scandal. It runs to tens of millions of euro apparently. There was a motion put down to disclose the contents of the report from the European Parliament, and many Irish MEPs voted to keep it covered. Theres information on

Theres a big cover-up going on. The EU hasnt had its accounts signed off by its own auditors for fourteen years. If they were in business theyd be struck off and jailed by now. If that was national government, they would have resigned. It would never have been allowed to go this long. Fourteen years, they havent had their accounts signed off for. There isnt a small business in Europe, there isnt a sweetshop that hasnt had its accounts signed off in fourteen years – and were supposed to give these people more power?
I mean, this is like debating how bad it is to have a nuclear bomb go off in your back garden – and actually having a rational debate over it. Well, you are exaggerating about the heat and the blast rate factor because it is not actually 9,400 degrees, its 9,300 degrees. Youre a liar!

Are we even having this discussion? Democracy is something that is not debatable. Democracy is very fragile in Europe. Its only been around, across Europe, since after the war. Its not debatable! If you are going to rule and make laws for the people, you have to make yourself accountable at the ballot box – or get lost! Thats why we have got to say no and send this thing back. If we say no this will be the third time that this package has been rejected. They will not be able to ignore it this time – and lets send Brian Cowen back with a mandate from the Irish people to say that this was a bad deal, they rejected it, we couldnt sell it, God knows we tried, we lied through our teeth to try and get this thing through. We need a better deal. And if he wont do that, lets make the 2009 European elections right across Europe be an issue of, ok, what is the future of Europe going to be? and lets force them to explain how the instruments of governance in Europe are going to be made more accountable. Europe does need a constitution. It needs to be successful. We cannot risk Europe failing, weve come too far. But taking it off the cliff, as this treaty does, is absolutely the wrong thing. The most pro-European thing that we can do is be pro the half-a-billion people of Europe, and we need to hand Europe back to them by saying no to this Lisbon Treaty.

Declan, we all see the Treaty as a failure, but what specifically would Libertas advocate, that would be acceptable?
For a start, I dont want Irelands voting weight reduced at the European Council. In fact, Id like to see it increased. So there. Lets start from that position. I certainly dont want it to be halved, while Germany is doubled and Frances is increased by sixty percent. Lets have an increase in our voting weight. We are a small member state, maybe it should be a little bigger to balance things out.

I want a tool to apply democratic accountability to those lawmakers in Brussels. If theres going to be a President of Europe and a Foreign Minister, let that person present themselves for election to the people of Europe – for us to vote them up or down, and be able to hold them accountable to us. I do not want Brussels, the policy makers and lawmakers to be unavoidably open to the enormous influence of lobbyists against the voices of the people. As it stands we have to go and get a million signatures to get our voices heard.

I want these tax back doors that are open to affect the overall tax situation and tax-competitiveness of Ireland made so that they really work. This veto [on tax] – its like trying to anchor a ship with a tiny piece of cotton thread. They say, well its tied to the dock – with a piece of dental floss. We need something thats going to really protect our tax competitiveness.

There are things in this treaty that I [personally] would like to see gone. For instance, Brussels gives itself the power and authority to intervene in even issues like children – to guarantee the physical an moral integrity in sporting issues especially with the young. So, Brussels is going to be the guarantor of my childrens moral standards in sporting and education functions? They are giving themselves that power. What are their morals? I need to know first. Are they the same as the ones that I want for my children? Are they going to be telling me, and setting down laws that my wife and I completely and fundamentally disagree with, for our children? Who the hell told them that they should have the right to reach down into my family and set moral standards, whatever their moral standards are, for my children? Get the hell out of my family! I dont want you in there. I dont know who you are. You never have to ask me for a vote. Stay away! There are things in there that are an absolute insult to our intelligence, and where there is massive overreach in this thing.

It is open to such massive and wide interpretation. This was McEvaddys point. He said, you could challenge every line of this thing. The US Constitution is thirteen A4 pages – its done them for 250 years.

McEvaddy said what we need to do is give them twenty blank sheets of paper and say make it fit on that first. Thats your first job, and make sure that everyone can understand and read it, and then we will look at it again. Thats your mission statement. The Larkin Declaration which set this whole thing off in train was supposed to bring Europe closer to its citizens. This does exactly the opposite. But, the question why the political parties are doing this, it boggles the mind.

Education. Vocational training, youth and sport. It says here, the Union shall contribute to the promotion of European sporting issues while taking account of the specific nature of the sport, its structures based on voluntary activity, and its social and educational function. It gives itself this role of developing the European dimension in sport. Now, the European dimension, (whats that?) … by promoting fairness and openness in sporting competitions, (thats nice, right), and co-operation between bodies responsible for sports, and by protecting the physical and moral integrity of sportsmen and sportswomen, especially the youngest sportsmen and sportswomen.

They are going to protect my childrens moral integrity. I dont need them to protect my childrens moral integrity. Thats weird stuff.

The other thing to bear in mind is that we give up a veto in that. Its a QMV issue.

Thats a very good point. So whatever they do here, we cant stop it.

It means that our children could be indoctrinated.


Well actually no you cant say that Johnny, you cant bless yourself before a game because that would suggest that you might have some kind of religion or something. Sing the Euro Song and off you go.

Think about all the bad things that could happen with that.

Article 48 says something to the effect that anything we havent thought about in all this, we can do afterwards.
Correct. There are two articles actually, that mean that the deal that we are signing here, if we were stupid enough to agree to it, even that deal can be changed afterwards. They can make changes to it with out the need of having a referendum in Ireland. Its Article 48 and Article 308. There are two articles that mean that the treaty can be changed and amended and changed after we say yes.

Again, they call us liars. Once they cant defeat us on the facts they just say that that is a red herring.

Do you find yourself to be the victim of a smear campaign?
Oh, theres a huge smear campaign going on, but its nothing that we didnt expect. Look, if you cant beat us on the facts, you have to call us liars, and try and turn me into some kind of Bond villain. I mean its just crazy stuff.

In the event that the people vote no, where does that leave the whole European project bearing in mind that a European Green speaking in Galway said that the Irish vote was irrelevant?

Its wishful thinking on his part. Well, lets say no and then see how irrelevant it is. If it is so irrelevant why is Angela Merkel and Barroso and all these people over? Look, if we say no, and I firmly believe we will, if we say no, the status quo remains. Nothing slows down, nothing goes out of control.

And you could argue do you want this thing to work more efficiently while it isnt democratically accountable? Why is that good? Is efficiency always a good thing? We do need to become a more capable global actor, I firmly believe that, I want to see that happen. We need to get competitive, this certainly doesnt provide for that. We need to get innovative. We need to re-establish ourselves as serious world leaders. This should be the European century, I dont accept that it has to be the Asian century. I think we can have a huge and real renaissance in European influence in the world, but its got to be based on the fundamentals of democracy, rule of law, and accountability to the peoples of Europe, because ultimately power is vested in you and you delegate it to those who legislate and make the laws.

What about the EU military issue?
I do not want the further development of a large European military unless it has democratically accountable civilian leadership, that the President who is representing us is democratically accountable. You dont build big armies, navies and air forces without having democratically civilian leadership above them.

Whos to say that the European army couldnt be used against a section of the people?

I didnt say that.

But, if theres no accountability?

In the US theres a big thing called posse-comitatus, part of their body of law which very much restricts the ability of the US military to act within the continental United States. Whatever you think about the American system and the war, they are ultimately accountable to a civilian leadership who are ultimately accountable to the people, which is why there is such a healthy debate going on in the US about the war [in Iraq], because people know that the people they are going to have to answer to are at the ballot box.
But their civilian leadership is very closely linked to the military arms trade, isnt it?

It is. Thats true, and look, its a far from perfect system. But I tell you what, its a hell of a lot better than being closely linked with the arms trade and never having to ask for a vote.

Thats the lobbyist kind of relationship – if you can pay the four of five million euro to the lobbyist and the guy never has to get elected, as a lobbyist you are going to have huge sway and influence, and this [the EU] is the same organisation that wants to cover up reports into corruption within the organs of Brussels.

Is part of the plan to build a military block to challenge China?
It is part of the agenda, I wouldnt even say that it is a sinister part of the agenda. I think that an emerging China is a very serious military power, and it is very old fashioned in many ways. Its basically colonising Africa now from a natural resource standpoint. They are developing a big what they call bluewater navy, that has a very powerful distant projection capability. We can ignore that and do anything about it and let them do whatever they are going to do, or we have to counterbalance this. Its whats gone on in the world for thousands of years. It does need to stop. But, let no-one say that that is not on the agenda, it is on the agenda, and I would say it is going to happen whether Ireland likes it or not. There is definitely nothing we can do to stop it. So the issue is, do you want that significant military power that Europe is going to have to project across the globe, do you want it to be accountable to a civilian democratically accountable leadership or not? Because the chances of getting into a war with a leadership that is not fully democratically accountable… by the way, they call it the High Representative for Foreign and Security Affairs – read the policy that he is responsible for. Its the Foreign Security and Defence Policy of the Union. They dropped the word defence from the title because they knew it would have to go to a referendum in places like Ireland.

Let me tell you this: I am an ardent proponent of Irish neutrality under this formula. We cannot be part of a common European defence that isnt accountable to a democratically elected civilian leadership.

Do you find that youve had, for want of a better term, sister groups throughout Europe who are looking towards Ireland with this referendum in sight?

No, not sister groups, but individuals, and lots and lots and lots of them.

The media are saying that we have to get in line.
In line with what?

So the reality is there are people in Europe looking to us for inspiration. Absolutely. We are the only country thats having a referendum. If they had a referendum in France, Germany, the UK, Denmark, Sweden, and a raft of other member states, this thing would be defeated. Nicolas Sarkozy was asked a few months ago why was France not having another referendum, and he said, because the French people would vote no. Ok. So Who do you work for?

Brown reneged on a Labour manifesto commitment to have a referendum. Let me tell you, there is one career that could be teetering on the edge of the Irish result, and thats Gordon Browns position as Prime Minister of Britain. If we say no, given all of the other pressures that hes under, it might be very difficult for Gordon Brown to stay on as Prime Minister, having reneged on his referendum commitment. There will be a huge call for his resignation.

There is speculation that Berties recent departure had more to do with the referendum than anything else. Would you concur with that?
Ive heard that. Ive heard it in Brussels. Ive heard it here. I dont know, but I do know that in Brussels the bureaucrats were terrified of people voting no here as a vote against Bertie Ahern. I actually think, if that was part of the reason, that they very unwittingly they did us an enormous favour, because one thing I was nervous about was the fact that they would try and de-legitimise the no vote here by saying that they didnt vote on the treaty – because they tried to to that with the French and the Dutch – they said they didnt vote on the Constitution, they voted on the price of carrots or something. Thats why I want a very high turnout, whatever the result is. A high turnout would be good.

They are saying that they need a high turnout for a yes vote, but I think that a high turnout is going to produce a no vote on this occasion. If we have that high turnout they can now not say that people were voting against the Government. So, they have put themselves in the situation where the only defence that they had to de-legitimise the result here is now gone. It was a huge boost for us.

And it also exposes their weaknesses. It showed their fear.
Their fear is immaterial to me.

But when you put it in perspective it is important.
Sure, Sure. I mean the fact that they wheeled out Angela Merkel to come here and tell us how we should be voting while she hasnt asked a single German their opinion on this. The audacity of that, it just boggles the mind.

By the way, Barroso said that theres no Plan B if we say no. Now, I tell you, thats a very interesting statement on his part because it reduces the possibilities to three things. He says that there is no Plan B, so, given that one of the primary functions of government and people responsible for legislation, etc., is contingency planning, hes the President of the European Commission, do you think he should have a contingency plan? He has no contingency plan. He should resign. He is incompetent if he has no contingency plan. He should resign or be fired, immediately. He is derelict in his duty to the people of Europe.

Or, two: there is a Plan B and they are not telling us what it is. Its another one of their many cover-ups. Or three, hes just lying. Its hilarious, you know, the stuff that these guys come out with.

So, thats it.

Thank you.
Youre very welcome. We are looking for volunteers right across the country – weve got a great response so far – to hand out leaflets. So we need to get the word out.


Catholic forces mobilise

1 Bealtaine, 2008
Issue: 25 – May 2008
Catholic forces mobilise
For months now pro-life Catholic Nationalist activists have been quietly mobilising in preparation for the Lisbon Treaty Referendum.
Groups such as Éire go Brách and CIR have been organising throughout the Twenty-Six Counties since late last year and they are now in full campaign mode.

In addition to holding meetings aimed at informing the public about the serious dangers Lisbon poses for the Irish Nation and our Catholic culture, several organisations have been engaged in door-to-door canvassing and thousands of households, particularly in Munster, have already received highly informative campaign literature on the Treaty.

Well placed activists have told The Hibernian that the overwhelming majority of those canvassed have come out categorically in favour of the No side. Campaigners are eagerly awaiting the announcement of an official date for the referendum so that they can swing fully into action for the occasion.

At the beginning of last year, The Hibernian predicted that Ireland would witness the rise of Catholic Nationalism throughout the Thirty-Two Counties; and this has been the case. Among the successes to date have been preventing the extension of the 1967 British Abortion Act to the Six-Counties and the halting of legislation promoting homosexual marriage in the South. The next target is Lisbon. May God Bless the work of Catholic Irish Nationalists in this great endeavour.


Inside view – May 2008

1 Bealtaine, 2008
Author: Gerry McGeough
Issue: 25 – May 2008

Inside view – May 2008
This issue marks The Hibernian magazines second anniversary.
We could never have reached this point were it not for the guiding hand of Our Lady of the Immaculate Conception, to whom the publication is dedicated, and the tremendous support of our loyal and ever-growing readership.

Since the launch of the first edition, in May of 2006, The Hibernian has been quite open and forthright about what it is that we stand for, and lest there should be any confusion or doubt then allow me to repeat our position.

We aspire to the establishment of an independent, 32-County Irish Nation free of all foreign domination. We believe that such a Nation should be thoroughly Catholic and Gaelic in culture and outlook. We extend the concept of Irish Nationhood to include the vast Irish Diaspora, particularly in the United States, and we recognise the contribution that the Irish overseas have made to our Homeland over the centuries.

At The Hibernian we have consistently opposed the imposition of the Liberal / Masonic Agenda on our country. We reject the notion of a multi-cultural, multi-faith secularised Ireland for the nonsense that it is. There can be only one Ireland-a Catholic one that is true to its Gaelic roots. Such is the real Ireland and anything else is essentially a fraud.

Over the past two years, The Hibernian has supported the endeavours of Catholic Patriots who have been active in keeping abortion out of Ireland and we applaud the efforts of all those who are working to ban pornography, contraception and the promotion of homosexual marriagein our society. In addition, we praise the work of those activists who are trying to clean up the mess created by lesbian-feminists during the course of their assault on the Traditional Family.

It goes without saying that we have stirred-up quite a bit of opposition to our existence. Ironically, we’ve actually been able to use this to our benefit as far as the spreading of our message has been concerned. Outraged groups ranging from Permissive Liberals to pro-British Orange Order types regularly reproduce swathes of Hibernian material for the shock/horror benefit of their sundry respective adherents. Happily, this enables us to reach an audience that might otherwise not hear our message.

The success of that message may be measured in the fact that more and more people are becoming aware of, and openly talking about, the behind-the-scenes-plans of Freemasons and other sinister elements who are hell-bent on forcing Ireland into their nefarious New World Order scheme.

A facet of this cabal is the ever-encroaching power of the European Union into the lives of our citizens. Our stance at The Hibernian has been to oppose the development of a European Superstate, which would reduce the Irish Nation to the status of a tiny province within a wallowing empire. Weve had more than enough of that in the past…and were still not quite rid of our British problem to this very day. To this end, The Hibernian urges a No vote in the forthcoming Lisbon Treaty and we fully support the Patriotic work being done by groups such as Libertas in this regard.

Finally, we commend all Catholic Nationalists around Ireland and elsewhere for the tremendous work that you are doing. Keep the Faith. Beannacht Dé libh agus Éirinn go Brách.

An tAthár

1 Bealtaine, 2008
Author: Pádraig Ua Corbaidh
Issue: 25 – May 2008

An tAthr
(ar lean n mh seo caite)

Chaith San Blr a ln ama ag caitheamh pingn le buachaill ga eile agus sin in am an tsaoiste.
Chaith s a ln ama chomh maith ag argint le Liam Mirtn (RIP). Rinneadh Liam an pacileadh agus choimed s an t-ireamh do na fir a riabh ar obair thasc. Ar an Aoine thug s an cntas isteach don oifig. Bh liam brdil as go raibh an cntas ceart agus cruinn aige. Ar uaireanta bhodh San ar obair thasc agus dharfadh s le Liam T dh grsa agat orm. Bheadh Liam ar buile leis uaireanta agus dhearfadh s Nl aon rud agam ort. M’s t rachaidh m go dt an oifig agus cuirfidh m fios orthu. Bhain m spraoi as agus ‘choimed m San suas’ chun a dhanamh.
Thinig tinneas ar Liam ag an Nollaig 1955 agus nor thinig s ar ais don muileann. I Lnasa 1956 chuaigh San Mac Aoidh (RIP) agus mise ar chuairt air i mBaile Shamais Dhuibh, it a bh s ina chna le inon. I 1958 bh s in Ospidal an Chontae i gCabhn le strc. Thug m cuairt air ar an 18 Bealtaine. I M Dheireadh Fmhair, thinig s chun chnaithe le inon eile. Rs-ine Bean U Mhuireadaigh i gCill na Seanrtha. Mhair s ansid n go bhfuair s bs n riabh s in ann caint. Ach bh s go maith chun cainte go dt an trimhse dheireanach sin. Nuair a bh m ins an ospidal ar mo chuairt do Liam chas m ars ar Thoms Mac Uidhir (RIP). Bh s ag obair i ‘dteach na tine’ ag fad an ghaileadin ag an muileann Aibran 1953 go dt tos 1956. Bh s dona lena ghoile. Ach nor chuir s sin aon bhac air ag l. Bh s in ann bil mra a dhanamh i ‘dteach na tine’. Chaith mo chntir, San Blr, a ln ama ag caint leis agus ag caitheamh toitn. Chaith Liam Mirtn a ln ama ann freisin ag argint le Toms, faoin gcreideamh agus faoin bpolaitocht.
Rinne Toms a chcaireacht, mar a luaigh m i ‘dteach na tine’. Chomh maith leis nigh s ada agus bhearr s ann. Bh m ag iarraidh San a choimad as ‘teach na tine’. Dharfainn go raibh Toms ag danamh ‘anraith stoca’ agus ‘slach sabh’ (sock soup and shavo gravy) agus go raibh s (San) ag l iad. Ach nr chuir sin aon imn air. Scar San liom mar chntir i nDeireadh Fmhair 1955 agus thinig Brian Ruairc ina ionad.
I 1955 bh s an-t an samhradh sin. Bh m in ann obair gan mo brga a chaitheamh. I rith tinneas Dhaideo bh m sa bhaile obair. Chuaigh m ar ais ar an 18 Aibran (1955). shin n go dtinig Pid agus Bern chun chnaithe liom fuair m mo dinnar i mbialann Pheig U Chiarin (RIP). Mise duine de na fir a bhfuair an dinnar sa chistin. Bh San Seosamh Raghallagh, San de Blclaigh (RIP) agus an promh maor oibre, Proinsias Mac Mghnus ann freisin. Fuair Proinsias bs uair igin i 1962 (RIP).
I 1955 bh m im’chathaoirleach ar chraobh Chill na Seanrtha de Chlann na Poblachta. Bh na toghachin i gcomhair na gComhairl Chontae chun a bheith ann ar an 23 Meitheamh. Bh an craobh ag iarraidh airgid a fhil. Nos dana cuireadh crannchur ar bhun. Ar an Satharn 27 Lnasa rothaigh m go Bal an tha Mir, Co. Liatroma agus dhol m naoi dag leabhar ticad. Bh s timpeall 02.30 nuair a bh m sa bhaile ar an 28.
Ar an Satharn 3 Man Fmhair chuaigh cuid againn go dt An Cabhn chun ticid a dhol. Bh an rna chraoibhe, Samus Mac Giolla Phdraig (RIP), Samus Fionnalaigh (RIP), San Mac Tighearnin (RIP) agus mise. Thugamar beirt gharsn linn, Seosamh Mac Tighearnin (RIP) agus Uinseann Raghallaigh (RIP). Dearthir de Shan Seosamh at luaite cheana ba ea Uinseann. I 1963 bh Seosamh Gealagin agus mise i Sasana. Ar mo shl abhaile St. Mawgan, Newquay, An Corn chas m air ag staisin Paddington.

Ach anois ar ais go Cabhn agus an 3 Man Fmhair. Cheap r rna go ndolfadh an bheirt gharsn a ln ticad ach n hamhlaidh a tharla s. Is beag an iarracht a rinne siad ticid a dhol ach is m na bil a d’itheadar. Chuamar go Cabhn i ngluaisten Sheoirse U Bhlr- athair Shain.

Ag an muileann an bhliain sin, 1955, cheap an saoiste-an tUasal Fletcher- nach raibh go leor oibre dhanamh agus go raibh fir ag cur an iomarca ama am. Mar sin d’fhostaigh s an tri maor oibre-an tUasal Des Herlihy (RIP). Ach nor fhan s r-fhada. Bh s ann Feabhra go tos Mhan Fmhair. I rith an ama sin ‘choimad s sil’ ar gach rud agus gach aoinne. Bh daoine speisialta aige-mar Shan Blr agus Earnn Mac Gairbheith. Bh gluaisrothar ag Earnn agus bh s ina chara mr le Liam Mirtn. Bhodh Liam ag dul anseo is ansid agus thabharfadh Earnn ar an ngluaisrothar. N ligfeadh Liam d’aon duine drochfhocal a r faoi Earnn. Dharfadh Liam go raibh Herlihy ag an muileann chun ‘sil a choimad’ ar Shan Blr. Dharfadh daoine eile gurbh fin agus Earnn a bh Herlihy ag ‘coimad sil’ orthu.

Ach choinad an tUasal Herlihy sil ar gach oibr. Thug s cuairteanna ormsa ar an ‘ilar’ (an Roinn Phint agus Dathanna). Ach go luath i Man Fmhair bh argint idir eisean agus an saoiste faoi rud igin agus thug s ‘a fhgra isteach’. An tseachtain ina dhiaidh sin d’fhag s sln leis an muileann. Bhomar gan an tri maor oibre n gur ghlac Samus Mac Suabhraig (RIP) an post i mBealtaine n Aibran 1956.

Is i 1955 a thosaigh fir Bhaile an Mhuilinn ag obair ag an muileann. Duine dobh sin n Mchal Ceallaigh. D’imigh s go Sasana in Aibran 1955. chuaigh an chlann go lir ann i Man Fmhair na bliana sin.

I 1955 bh a ln imeachta Poblactacha ar siil i gCill na Seanrtha. Bh m ag dol na nuachtn An tireannach Aontaithe agus Glr Uladh. Bh Samus Mac Gabhann agus San Ua Crag ag cur bhill suas i mBealtaine faoi bhailichn a bheith ann do Shinn Fin. Chuir an Sirsint de Sin (RIP) faoi ghabhil iad mar nacj raibh ceadnas acu don bhailichn. Bh an Garda Mac an Bhaird (RIP) in ineacht leis. Bh an bailichn faoi chostais Shinn Fin sna toghachin sna S-Chontaethe. Bh tuairisc faoi ar Glr Uladh in eagrn Mheithimh.

I Lnasa bh Samus Mac Gabhann, San Crag agus m fin ag baili airgid lasmuigh an tsipil i mBal tha Conaill i gcomhair Shinn Fin. Bh an t-airgead do chostais Thomis Mhistil a riabh mar iarrthir do Shinn Fin i Lr-Uladh- ars! Bh argint againn leis an nGarda Pdraig Mac Aodha (RIP) tar is an chad Aifrinn. Ach leanamar leis an mbailichn ag an dara Aifreann gan aon cheadnas oifigiil agus n raibh aon trioblid eile againn. Bh tuairisc faoi ar Aisir i Man Fmhair 1955 agus ar Glr Uladh i nDeireadh Fmhar 1955.

i nDeireadh Fmhair 1955 bh argint mhr agam in oifig an phoist i gCill na Seanrtha. Bh m ag cur airgid chuig An tireannach Aontaithe le hord airgid. D’iarr m ar an gcntr a chomhlnadh as Gaeilge. Ach n raibh s toilteanach sin a dhanamh. Tar is argnte fada agus tar is cead a fhil n cheann-oifig i gCabhn fuair m mar a bh s uaim. Tuairisc eile ar Glr Uladh i M na Samhna 1955 agus ar Aisir i M na Nollag 1955.

For. Bh 1955 ina bliain mhaith do chis na Poblachta. I gCill na Seanrtha bh an trir againn ag danamh r bpirt. Agus in iteacha eile bh fir eile ag danamh a ln nos m. Ach d’imigh an chuid sin dem’shaol. Phs m agus beagn nos dana chuamar go Sasana. Bh Samus Mac Gabhann imithe go Sasana cheana fin. Agus mar a luaigh m bh San Crag imithe as radharc. I Sasana n raibh m riamh ach ar imeall na cise.

Idir Aibran agus Lnasa 1955 fuair m mo dhinnar i mbialann Phig U Chiarin. Bh an samhradh sin bre te grianmhar. Beagnach gach l tar is mo dhinnir chuaigh m ar ais don mhuileann agus luigh m ar imeall an locha.
Tharla a ln ruda i 1955. tharla cuid acu dom. Fuair m lacht saoirse ar an 1 M na Samhna. Ar an mhaidin sin d’fhan m obair le dul ar Aifreann. Nor thaitnigh s sin leis. I 1957 fuaireamar uair saor ar mhaidin ar L Saor Eaglasta le dul ar Aifreann.

San alt seo tim ag scrobh ar ruda a tharla i 1955. Ach anseo is ansid thinig blianta eile isteach sa scal. Mairfidh 1955 im’chuimhne go deo. T Pid agus Bern go speisialta i gcuimhne agam. I 1959 thinig deirfir Bhern, Maureen, ar chuairt chucu. Ar 3 Deireadh Fmhair 1960 bh Maureen agus mise psta. Nuair a bh m i Sasana is minic a smaoinigh m ar na sean-laethanta-na blianta a d’imigh roimhe sin. Stair at sa chuid eile.

(T an t-alt seo scrofa nta a rinneadh idir 21 Meitheamh agus 1 M na Nollag 1963. Tabhairfear faoi dearadh na RIP-eanna go bhfuil a ln daoine a raibh pirt acu sa scal ar sl na bhfran anois. An muileann n ‘Fletchers’, nos m na muileann sbhadireachta a bh ann. Monarcha a rinne an chuid adhmaid de scuaba as raibh ann. T s druidte le cuid blianta anuas anois.)


ag caitheamh pingn – pitch & toss
am an tsaoiste – the boss’s time
ag argint – arguing
obair thasc – piece-work
brdil – proud
cntas – account
ceart agus cruinn – exactly right
T dh grsa agat orm – I owe you two gross
ar buile – mad, raging
spraoi – sport, fun
‘choimed m San suas’ – ‘I kept San up’ (to do it)
i mBaile Shamais Dhuibh – in Ballyjamesduff
an trimhse dheireanach sin – that last period
i ‘dteach na tine’ – in the fire house
ag fad an ghaileadin – firing the boiler
bil mra – big meals
mo chntir – my assistant
faoin gcreideamh – about religion
faoin bpolaitocht – about politics
a chcaireacht – his cooking
bhearr s – he shaved
aon imn – any worry
gan mo brga chaitheamh – without wearing my boots
Aibran – April
i mbialann – in the restaurant
na toghachin – the elections
i gcomhair na gComhairl Chontae – for the County Councils
crannchur – raffle
rna chraoibhe – branch secretary
n hamhlaidh a tharla s – it didn’t happen like that
is beag an iarracht – it was little effort
go leor oibre – enough work
ag cur an iomarca ama am – wasting too much time
d’fhostaigh s – he employed
‘choimad s sil’ – ‘he kept an eye’
daoine speisialta – special people
gluaisrothar – motorbike
n ligfeadh Liam – Liam wouldn’t let
drochfhocal – a bad word
gach oibr – every worker
Dathanna – Colours
‘a fhgra isteach’ – ‘his notice in’
maor oibre – foreman
imeachta Poblachtacha – Republican activities
faoi bhailichn – about a collection
faoi ghabhil iad – arrested them
iarrthir – candidate
aon cheadnas oifigiil – any official permit
tuairisc – account
le hord airgid – with (by) a money order
a chomhlnadh – to fill it in
toilteanach – willing
c(h)eann-oifig – head-office
bpirt – our part
ar imeall na cise – on the fringe of the cause
lacht – lecture
L Saol Eaglasta – Church Holyday
anseo is ansid – here and there
go speisialta – especially
na sean-laethanta – the old days
stair – history
Tabhairfear faoi dearadh – It will be noticed
sl na bhfran – way of the faithful (departed)
muileann sbhadireachta – saw-mill
monarcha – factory
an chuid adhmaid de scuaba – the wooden part of brushes

Letters – May 2008

1 Bealtaine, 2008
Issue: 25 – May 2008
Letters – May 2008
Money & wealth
A chara,
The series of articles on finance, credit and money by Tommy Price were simple and clear. It created a wonderful basic working knowledge everyone should know. It expressed the concern by Professor Alfred ORahilly the Chancellor of the University of Cork (1943-54) that the basics of finance were not being taught at either a school or University level.

Knowledge is of no use unless it can be used to better our lives or prevent predictable outcomes. Here come my suggestions on the present and future finance: As circulating currency is not benchmarked against any one commodity such as gold or silver but rather against consumable commodities such as oil/food then we see the price of oil escalates. We should view not the price of oil/food but the trading exchange value of our currency (Euro, dollars, sterling, yen etc.)

Result: The value of all currencies is eroding rapidly in relationship to material commodities. This reminds us historically of what South American nations suffered in the 1970s before benchmarking against the dollar began. Now the dollar has fallen and eventually the Euro/Sterling will follow rapidly. Currency is chasing each other in a downhill spiral. Savings in currency will be daily eroded. Stock prices along with property will fall initially as credit from banks becomes more restricted but will reach a point that there is only true measurable value in material objects- commodities and property.

Transferring value for work preformed into salaries has in the past 200 years ment saving for the average person accumulating currency in the bank or buying a portion of a company producing material products. (Stocks and shares)

The Irish farmers mainly invested in property (another field) or more live stock. Some portions of his work was transferred into currency which ended up as in investments in family education (educating priests, doctors, nurses, lawyers etc.,) It was simple yet diverse. The added field was productive property.

Now we seem to concentrate on money as our wealth which is so far from the truth. Money is only the vehicle of transfer of services and commodities from one owner to another. Money enables the free transfer from one to another. The money truck is breaking down and we fail to see it. [Beware of buying broken down trucks.] Accumulating savings in a currency is not the smartest maneuver. We should transfer wealth into material commodity or productive property; not speculative land only productive land and productive property.

In times like this be sure your wealth is in something you can touch and see: Gold and silver are static and of themselves do not produce added value. They are a stable commodity as well as easily transferable credit. Good for some but not for all!

Productive property in uncertain times seems to be the safest another arable field, a new fishing vessel, a part owner in a commercial property that will be productive even during a recession a more efficient farm etc. The market is restricted but there is always something to convert your saving currency into; check it out and keep it as local as possible.

Beware of transferring falling property into an unstable currency. Hold fast to what you can see and touch; it is reality. Base the value on its productive wealth not just the fleeting principle that its value is what someone else will pay for it. Think long and deeply before changing property into cash. Tommy Price, what do you think?

Joe OBrien, USA

Parliament Hath Not The Power…

1 Bealtaine, 2008
Author: Ellen O’Donnell
Issue: 25 – May 2008

Parliament Hath Not The Power…
The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill

There is a Bill currently passing through the Houses of Parliament in Westminister which, if it becomes law, sets to surpass any previous legislation in perversity and degradation.

The matter should be going through the final stages in the House of Commons this month of May. If this Bill is sucessfull, and at the time of writing it looks likely, then not only England , Scotland and Wales will be affected but also Ireland as the law will be enabled in the Six- Counties.

Half Angel, half dog…
Whilst the current Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act, made law in 1990, allowing for abortion to full term for disabled babies amongst other heinous clauses, is preposterous and completely contravenes Catholic moral codes, this new version is, if it is possible, far worse. Consider this; the new HFE Bill will allow for animal-human hybrid embryos to be created for experimentation. This alone makes it possibly the worst piece of legislation imaginable. The government intends by this Bill to redefine humanity and allow the creation of monsters. The Bill proposes to legalise the creation of animal-human inter-species embryos including true hybrids, cloned interspecies embryos, human chimeras and transgenic human embryos. Chimera embryos (entities containing a mix of cells from different species) will not be regulated by the 14 day limitations in the HFE Bill if they are introduced in human form, as they will be dealt with separately by the Home Office (as animal chimera embryos already are). This will mean that human/animal chimera embryos may be brought to half term gestation in an animal womb, and even further. This is just one of the loopholes in the legislation about which the proponants of the Bill are blatently misinfomrming the public.

It is a little known fact that since the 1990 HFE Bill it has been legal to inseminate a hamster egg with human sperm. These embryos are supposed to be destroyed after 2 days and are used in IVF treatment to test the human sperm. This proceedure wasnt discussed much by the media at the time and was brought in quietly. Supporters of the Bill will therefore argue that it is already being done, however it is still entirely wrong and the public are broadly unaware that this was happening. This fact further shows that nothing will ever be enough once science breaches moral boundries.
Further horrors include the concept of saviour siblings being legitimised. That is, children created via IVF deliberately to conform with the DNA another sick child of the family so that the saviour Sibling can be a donor for the sick child. Also the definition of family will be altered, dismissing the idea that a father is required and therefore allowing for lesbians to obtain IVF treatment. Abortion fanatics will press for amendments to include nurses being given licence to carry out abortions and the removal of the two doctor signature, so that abortions become as easy to obtain as sweets.

Although this Bill has often been called Frankenstinian, it is in fact far worse than Frankenstein science. At least Shellys Frankenstein was only trying to imitate God, all be it in a terrible way, he was trying to create a man. However the fusion of man and beast is something which subverts the very nature of creation. This Bill is in effect denying the very soul of man. It will say that man is indeed no better that a dog- a base animal – something which the Devil himself has aimed to prove ever since his fall from paradise. Should Westminster pass this Bill it will be setting in law a statute which redefines creation, something which flies in the face of God in the very worst way. Westminster will be saying, Man has no soul, man is nothing more than a beast.

A well known Saint has said that man was half angel, half dog. We are in the process of denying the angelic part of our nature, of turning to God and saying, see we are worthless, Lucifer was right, we were not worth the Sacrifice of Christ for our redemption…
But, for Ireland, there is another very sinister and terrible threat inherent in this Bill. The extension of the 1967 Abortion Act to the north of Ireland. Although this is not yet written into the draft Bill, abortion promoter Evan Harris MP (LIB) has said he and others intend to table an amendment in the Commons to use this Bill as a vehicle to extend the Abortion Act and enforce it in the north. Harris is so prolific in his anti-life views that even his friends call him Dr Death. Having qualified as a doctor, shortly before he went into politics, he chaired the Committee on the HFE Bill, ensuring that all views against the vile legislation were treated with contempt. The fact that he is in a relationship with the secretary for the biggest abortion provider in Britain, BPAS, didnt concern the government , who considered that this would not at all colour his view of the task of chairing the Committee. Harris has previously called the fact that the north of Ireland does not have equal access to abortion (as Britain, I suppose) disgraceful! Harris is indeed the Robespierre of this particular revolution, shunned and despised by even his own colleagues who see him as a loner, a hater of Catholics and a virulent pro-abort. He will one day, as we all will, stand before the Court of Christ the King, but for now he is the embodiment of the enemy and is poised to launch an attack on our children.
I say this will affect the whole of Ireland because indeed it will. There must be no room for the myth that Ireland has not encountered abortion, or stem cell research, when in fact their brothers in the north are being subjected to these very things from legislation enforced by Westminster. In fact there are illegal abortions happening already and being bragged about in the English press by pro-abortion activists such as senior NI midwife Breedagh Hughes. Further, at a recent international meeting of abortion practitioners and facilitators in London last October, hosted by Marie Stopes international, it was lamented that the north of Ireland was far behind the Republic with regard to abortion. At least in the south, said one contributor, there is a body of pro-choice doctors.
Also, in the Republic the members of the Dil do not seem so staunchly opposed to abortion as their northern counterparts. When you consider that the north has suffered repeated attempts to have abortion introduced, all of which have been thwarted, it really is incredible that they have resisted so much. We cannot ignore the dogged persistance of our Protestant neighbours in this fight against legalised abortion. One observation which I have noted with interest is that while the Catholic heart of the everyday people is set firmly against abortion, it seems to be that the Protestant politicians are far more active against this threat than their Catholic equivalants both north and south. When the Catholic people of the north look for their leaders in this battle they see nothing but ambivolence from the Church in Ireland, yet when a Cardinal such as Cardinal OBrien of Scotland preacehes firmly and fearlessly against the murder of innocents the effect is wonderful due to the great Catholic graces a Cardinal posseses when he speaks Catholic truth. At the same Marie Stopes abortion conference already mentioned it was shown by an independant media expert that of all the media stories concerning abortion in 2007 the story which was most covered was that of the Cardinal likening abortion to a masacre. This, despite the enormous hold that the pro-abortion contingent have over the press and the massive amounts of money pumped into promoting abortion in the media.

Of course, Westminster has not got the authority to legalise this Bill, and in the eyes of Heaven and the Church it will be an illegal act on behalf of the Members of Parliament who seek to introduce this legislation. Parliament did not have the power in the sixteenth century to declare King Henry VIII the head of the Church in England, and it has now excelled itself in diabolical disorientation from the true purpose of its existence and declared that instead of enforcing Gods law on earth, and making laws to support a Godly life, it will in fact declare that it is higher placed than God and overrule him in the matter of creation. A law like this will in effect undermine many of the previous laws passed in Westminster which were based on a Christian understanding of life.

What can we do? Pray the Rosary and attend Mass, Catholic graces are all that can really affect this situation. Remember, as Pope St Pius X said, All the strength of Satans reign is due to the easygoing weakness of Catholics.

We must in any case resort to the Sacred Heart and the Immaculate Heart because, even if the abortion amendment fails, the main act will still be enforced on the north, where no doubt there will be some who will dabble with the animal-people embryos. We see from Our Ladys warning at Fatima that the errors of Russia are truly spread abroad and the consequences must be awful, for how offended is our Holy God by all of this?

And yet know this, the abortionists have tried every subtle way to press abortion on the Irish people of the north, and it has been vomited back at them from the belly of the people every time, force is their last resort.

Sinn Féin-Feeling Voters Pain

1 Bealtaine, 2008
Issue: 25 – May 2008
Sinn Féin-Feeling Voters Pain
During mid-April, Sinn Féin engaged in its own version of the loyalists Tour of the North by engaging in a series of so-called Town Hall meetings at a number of venues across the Six-Counties.
Ostensibly, the party sought to touch base with its voters and learn of their concerns while taking some earthy advice on the way forward. All very well, except for the fact that the Sinn Féin leadership rarely concerns itself with the views of its base, generally preferring to treat the Rubes with contempt knowing that, come what may, they will dutifully file-out on voting day, which is all that matters.

This new departure by the leadership reflects the unease that has been filtering up from the grass roots since the partys disastrous performance in last years elections in the Twenty-Six Counties, which failed to deliver the promised breakthrough and Dáil ministerial seats. In addition, Sinn Féins sheepish behaviour at Stormont and its perceived subservience to the DUP has disgusted many of its erstwhile staunchest supporters.

Although the turnout at the various meetings was modest, the make-up of the gatherings was significant and will surely give cause for concern back at Head Office. In a crude attempt to play the Republican card, the leadership invited relatives of activists killed in the Troubles to special private meetings before each main gathering. The take-up at these was mixed, with many families boycotting them outright while others went along without any sense of commitment to those hosting the meetings.

The staged affairs that occurred afterwards spoke volumes about the current state of the Republican Movement in its Northern stronghold. In the first instance, the party deployed large numbers of its most prominent names to man the top tables at each gathering, a tactic clearly aimed at both impressing and intimidating those present.
However, it was the absence of large swathes of the core Republican constituency that was most significant about these meetings, which were in any case little more than PR stunts. The fact that activists who had been loyal to Sinn Féin up until just a few months ago have elected to stay away in their droves reflects the true state of affairs, and the leadership must be grateful for the fact that no political alternative has yet emerged to challenge them electorally, although such remains only a matter of time.

For the most part the questions posed at these episodes were safe ones for the panel; relating to local infrastructural issues and the like. However, a number of sincere Republicans were in attendance and managed to upset proceedings with real questions on such matters as National Independence and the SF sell-out in that regard.
In Galbally, in County Tyrone, for example, the somewhat complacent leadership was seriously rattled by accusations from the floor that it had betrayed the Cause by urging people to become informers while doing nothing to alleviate the plight of several Republican families in the East Tyrone area who are currently being hounded by the same British Crown Forces that Mr Adams and his cronies are giving their full support to.

More Town Hall meetings are planned.

On Meeting Mary & Learning to Pray… (Part IX)

1 Bealtaine, 2008
Author: Padraig Caughey
Issue: 25 – May 2008

On Meeting Mary & Learning to Pray… (Part IX)
Dark Night

Id like to talk next about how I got sentenced in court and a bit about happened when I was released and more about prayer at this time.

Saint John of the Cross not only puts forward the idea of the Night of the Soul, but a kind of a night within a Night, or a prison within a prison, a kind of spiritual rock bottom as it were. I think Jesus touches upon this when He tells the parable of the house built on sand. When the great storms came the house on sand collapsed. The house built on stone however, stood. So with Job, these black winds that blow are purifying and intense and we have to ask ourselves questions about the very nature of our faith.

After leaving the monastery I continued to pray constantly and to go to mass every day. But it was a bit like someone who walked through very dark deep waters. However our love for God, our prayers, dont depend on our emotions. As I suppose anyone who has ever been married will say, love is about a whole lot more than hugs and kisses.

A year or two later my twenty-six year-old brother Colm died of Hepatitis, caught during a heart operation. Colm was always the complete atheist and laughed at even the mention of the word God or an afterlife. I know I tried to argue with him about it a few times, to his amusement.

However the morning after he died he came to me in a park were I was walking, smiled and said, You were right and I was wrong He paused and laughed, But dont get too proud about it, I know a lot more than you do about these things now! He laughed and faded into the sky.

I was foolish enough to tell folks about what I had seen and had to put up with a great deal of scorn and mocking about attention seeking. This upset me, a lot more than it would now, and I went down to see my Spiritual Director, Father Bernard, who assured me that seeing the souls of the departed, especially the recently departed, was really quite common. However, unlike me most people have the good sense to keep their mouths shut about it. Im glad to say that I had the last laugh, When my mother died a couple of years ago several people told me they had seen her. One of them being among those who had mocked me earlier. Times have changed I suppose and people nowadays are more open to these things.

A couple of years after this my other brother Cormac, again 26, his wife Teresa and their two year old daughter Shona were all killed in a car accident and I had to go to the mortuary to identify them. When they pulled back the rubber sheets it was like the De Profoundis sounding in my heart. Saint Teresa of Avila had a vision one time of Our Lady holding Our Lords body after it had been taken down from the Cross. She said Our Lady didnt cry, that she was frozen like a statue with grief. I can sympathise with this as I was frozen too and said the De Profundis;

Psalm 130
130:1 Out of the depths have I cried unto thee, O LORD. 130:2 Lord, hear my voice: let thine ears be attentive to the voice of my supplications. 130:3 If thou, LORD, shouldest mark iniquities, O Lord, who shall stand? 130:4 But there is forgiveness with thee, that thou mayest be feared. 130:5 I wait for the LORD, my soul doth wait, and in his word do I hope. 130:6 My soul waiteth for the Lord more than they that watch for the morning: I say, more than they that watch for the morning. 130:7 Let Israel hope in the LORD: for with the LORD there is mercy, and with him is plenteous redemption. 130:8 And he shall redeem Israel from all his iniquities.

After this my brother- in-law Brian died aged 32 leaving my sister, Eithne, with four small children to care for. Sometimes I think prayer pilgrims are like camels and we store up the graces of prayer for the bad times ahead. Thus people who pray indeed build their houses on foundations of stone.

However I dont believe that our greatest trials in prayer really come through the great trials that life leaves at our doors. The greatest trial lies in the ordinary things that each day brings us; loosing our car keys, forgetting the groceries, an intemperate boss and a nosey neighbour. In a way life is like some great whirling sandstone wheel fashioning in beauty the soft wood of our hearts. But only if we accept truly and deeply that for those who love God all things work together unto the good. The person who does not love God, who does not pray is perpetually neurotic and at war with the lived reality in which he finds himself. The prayer pilgrim, on the other hand goes with the grain of lifes wood, knowing in prayer that all has reason and purpose and wonderful end.

One of the things that hurt me most in those dark days was that although I very much still felt called to be a priest, I was constantly rejected by Bishops and Cardinals. They all said I had a vocation but each passed me on to someone else, each thinking, I suspect, that I being an ex-prisoner would be better planted in someone elses diocesan garden. Eventually I went to Our Lady and left matters in Her hands. If She wanted me in the priesthood She could arrange it herself, I felt I tried often enough and had endured enough disappointments.

The greatest trial of my faith came after four years just before the end of the Dark Night. The Loyalists had already tried to kill me while I was driving the taxi….

To be continued…

God & Man at Central High

1 Bealtaine, 2008
Author: Thomas McGrath
Issue: 25 – May 2008

God & Man at Central High
As a lifelong Catholic and a twelve year veteran of the public schools, I am often asked about the situation regarding religion in the American system of public education.

It goes without saying that most people who are interested in this issue have religious sentiments, and that they are concerned about the removal of God from the public square entirely. They are usually well-informed on such matters, and they are concerned spectators of what commentators now refer to as the culture wars. Sharing their concern, there are times when my impulse is to tell them that there is considerable prejudice against Christianity, and that we ought to be very concerned about it. After all, most local high schools now have a school-sponsored club/support group for homosexuals, and though the law requires schools to provide equal access to Christian groups (like the Fellowship of Christian Athletes) to advertise their meetings during the morning announcements, the Christian groups are required to meet off campus, whereas the homosexual support group is permitted to meet at the school. Furthermore, Christian groups must preface their advertisement by stating: the following is not a school-sponsored activity, while the school usually has no problem sponsoring the homosexual group.
And yet, the less belligerent part of me acknowledges that the issue of religion in the public school is more complicated than the aforementioned example of overt (and absurd) discrimination. After all, the earliest battles against the teaching of religion in the public schools were mounted by Catholics who objected to the Protestant perspective through which Christianity was being taught. Despite the Public Schools Societys promise that all parents of all religious sects [should be able] to send their children to public schools without doing violence to their religious teachings, the early history of the public school system is rife with anti-Catholic sentiment and bigotry from the Protestant majority which, in many cases, extended all the way to the President himself.

Fearing the impact of an aggressively Protestant perspective on the faith of their children, Catholics petitioned the courts to remove the King James Bible (with its warnings against popery), and their goal was to create an environment in which religious minorities would be safe from bigotry and the active evangelism of the more dominant Protestant belief system. Ultimately, this battle, combined with the considerable anti-Catholicism of the mid-nineteenth century, are what led to the creation of the Catholic school system in America, and to a variety of conflicts between the Irish Catholic immigrants and the Protestant social infrastructure which sought to break them of their beliefs.

In view of that history, Catholics in particular should be sympathetic to religious minorities and their concerns about a government-imposed (and tax-payer funded) religious ethos taking hold in the public school system. In a nation that was founded by religious minorities seeking to escape religious oppression in England, it is virtually un-American to suggest that minorities should be required to adhere to practice the dominant religion, and the authors of the First Amendment were very astute to the possibility of such concerns.

And yet, it seems equally un-American to neglect the importance of religion by excluding it from the education system entirely. After all, as commentators often point out, the American people are promised freedom of religion, not freedom from religion. As such, the idea that Christian groups would not be allowed to meet on campus seems in violation of this principle, as does the fact that many teachers almost entirely avoid the subject of religion in their classes out of fear that something they might say could be interpreted as evangelical speech.

Although the courts do not seem as committed to this idea of excluding religion from the public school dialogue as the militant secular progressives who foment these controversies, the controversies themselves have had their intended chilling effect. It is the fear of conflicting with these intellectual bullies that inspires many teachers to avoid the topic of religion entirely, and it is this sad fact which leaves countless students bereft of a clear understanding of the faith that has shaped their own history and culture. Despite the fact that the courts have made it clear that while teachers may not proselytise, they may talk about religion, the current zeitgeist is such that most teachers feel its safer to avoid the subject entirely lest one of their students interpret one of their statements as an attempt to evangelise them. In this regard, the culture wars have had their intended effect of silencing the majority through fear.

For this reason, it is unfortunate to contemplate the number of students leaving high school without knowing that the abolitionists were not the secular liberals of their era, but devout Christians, and that without their uncompromising defense of African slaves as Gods children, the efforts to free the slaves would not have succeeded. Nor do most students have much of an understanding as to the importance of the Judeo-Christian value system on the shaping of the culture in which they live. Although one hopes that the young soldiers returning from Iraq and Afghanistan will make it clear to their generation that western values are, simply put, better than those that have shaped the Middle East, most contemporary students graduate high school with the false concept that all cultures and religions are created equal, and that globalisation will eventually lead the rest of the world to the morality that has long protected the nations of the west from the injustices and inequalities of the rest of the world.

In the final analysis, it is difficult to comment as to the long-term impact of these problems on the future of America, and western civilisation at large. Clearly, not all students attend public schools, and one can hope that that those who know better will offset this problem. Furthermore, it should be recalled that the public school system is not the only place where people learn about their history and heritage. In addition to their families and churches, many people become interested and aware of such matters through later exposure to it, often finding that what they learned in secondary school and university were inadequate (and sometimes ideological) versions of events and social movements.

Nonetheless, most historians will acknowledge that those cultures that do not respect their heritage will not remain intact for very long. For this reason, the neglect of religion in the public school is creating a generation of people who neither have an understanding of nor a reverence for the religious traditions that have created, guided, and protected their society for generations, and this is no small tragedy. In an age in which there are countless assaults on the very architecture of western society and the forces that have defined it, this is no small concern.