On Monday (January 4th) THE IRISH TIMES gives its view on the Decade of Centenaries, telling its presumably simple-minded readers, that it is “a complex history”and endorsing Leo Varadker’s assertion that the Commemorations “had lost their way over the past year.”
The paper draws the conclusion that the Government should get “a grip on the programme of the year ahead so that official ceremonies are conducted in an inclusive and respectful manner.”
The Official Commemoration of the Decade so far were not intended to honour those who created a Government of the People, By the People, For the People, in 1918, in an election. That election was “regarded on all sides as a Plebiscite” according to THE TIMES of London, then quite as opposed the concept of Self Determination of Nations as its echoing rag in Dublin. The Irish electorate endured a reign of terror unleashed by the Usurping Imperialists in London, for three years. During those years they confirmed their adherence to their Republic in Municipal, Borough, County Council and other local election in 1920 and a General Election of 1921.
The so-called Decade of Remembrance was planned by the Irish Government to lobotomise the Irish People The generation which established Ireland’s first Democratic Government and heroically endured the terror unleashed upon them was to be treated as imbecilic and criminal. The Imperial Government’s terror was to be accorded as a service to Ireland, whether practised by Britishers or their Irish collaborators.
The Irish people were not impressed, to the chagrin of Varadkar, Charlie Flanagan, Micheal Martin, The Irish TImes and its secretive, oathbound, British established controlling “Trust.”
On Saturday (January 2nd) IRISH TIMES Reporter, Ronan McGreevy had already written “with some trepidation about the forthcoming commemoration of the centenary events in 1921”, under the Heading – “a Truce, a Treaty, and the Beginnings of Northern Ireland.”
Jack Lane of the Aubane History Society emailed the Editor of THE IRISH TIMES that day but his letter was not printed in the paper. Jack pointed out that there was no TREATY signed by Irish delegates in London in 1921. He cited the statement of the leader of the Irish delegation, Arthur Griffith, given to Dail Eireann on 10th December 1921 –
It was “not a Treaty, and I got the official title; ‘Articles of Agreement between Ireland and Great Britain.”
The full text of Jack Lane’s letter follows below and may explain the trepidation of Ronan McGreevy and his Editor
Dear Sir
Ronan McGreevy writes with some trepidation about the forthcoming commemorations of the centenary events in 2021. (A truce, a treaty and the beginnings of Northern Ireland. 2 Jan 2021.)
When he includes what he calls “a treaty” he means, of course, “The Articles of Agreement between Ireland and Great Britain” signed under threat of renewed war on 6th December 1921. That was not a treaty. The Irish Republic was not recognised by the agreement and instead was treated as a Dominion of the British Empire. It entailed an oath of Allegiance by one side to another. These aspects of that agreement make it oxymoronic to call it a treaty,
This was recognised at the time by the leader of the delegation which signed it, Arthur Griffith, who explained in the Dail, that it was not a treaty -“and I got the official title: ‘Articles of Association between Ireland and Great Britain’ ” (Dail debate 10/1/1921.)
No doubt Mr. McGreevy and others will return to the issue during the year. Could I suggest a New Year’s resolution by him and all concerned that events be called by their correct name?
This might be a great help in clarifying exactly what we are commemorating.
Yours sincerely
Jack Lane
Comments are closed.