51 Comments

• seanomelb | Jan 14, 2013, 12:30 AM EST

  A story not often told cillowen well done

• cillowen | Jan 13, 2013, 11:18 PM EST

  It is this moving story that compelled the current Minister of St. Kitts, G. A. Dwyer Astaphan, to meet with Tom Culhane of Union, New Jersey and discuss his proposal to erect a suitable monument on the island in memory of the Irish slaves. African Negroes had to be purchased, while the Irish were free for the catching, so to speak. It is not surprising that Ireland became the biggest source of livestock for the English slave trade. A leading academic recently revealed that Irish immigrants and African Americans married more than other ethnic groups in the U.S. in the 19th century.

• cillowen | Jan 13, 2013, 11:16 PM EST

  who might thus be made English and of England type Christian, a great benefit to the West Indies sugar planters, who desired men and boys for their bondsmen, and the women and Irish girls to solace them''. Under James I, Cromwell burned the Irish forests to prevent people hiding from banishment as well as clearing the countryside, wood for ship building, and for pasture land to feed cattle for English beef. Emmet asserted, ``Over 100,000 young children who were orphans or had been taken from their Catholic parents, were sent abroad into slavery in the West Indies, Virginia, and New England, that they might lose their faith and all knowledge of their nationality, for in most instances even their names were changed.''

• cillowen | Jan 13, 2013, 11:14 PM EST

  English shipping of Irish slaves to the New World earlier in the 1600s has been documented in many works. In 1612 Irish people were sent to the Amazon River settlements. An English Proclamation of the year 1625 urges banishment overseas of dangerous rogues (Irish political prisoners). Ireland was already a prime source of supply for servants and by 1637 on Montserrat the Irish heavily outnumbered the English colonists; 69% of all white people on the island were Irish.

• cillowen | Jan 13, 2013, 11:12 PM EST

  LAST SHIPMENTS ­ 1800S -- It is estimated that somewhere between 30,000 and 80,000 Irish were shipped from Ireland. One of the last shipments was made in 1841 from Limerick aboard the Robert Kerr. The Gleaner noted of these arrivals: "They landed in Kingston wearing their best clothes and temperance medals," meaning they did not drink alcohol (as quoted in Mullally, 2003, part 2, pg. 1). The Gleaner also noted of another set of arrivals in 1842: "The Irish are repeatedly intoxicated, drink excessively, are seen emerging from grog shops very dissolute and abandoned and are of very intemperate habits" (as quoted in Mullally,

• cillowen | Jan 13, 2013, 11:12 PM EST

  St Kitts memorial in memory of Irish victims of the Irish Slave trade The reign of Elizabeth I, English privateers captured 300 African Negroes, sold them as slaves, and initiated the English slave trade. Few people know that the majority of Slaves in the Carribean, during the 17th Century, were actually Irish - Sir Alexander Bustamante, National Hero and first Prime Minister of Jamaica, used to boast that he was 50 per cent Irish, 50 per cent Jamaican and 10 per cent Arawak. Busta is not the only prominent Jamaican to claim Irish heritage. There's poet Claude McKay, Chris Blackwell, founder of Island Records, one of Jamaica's foremost historians and former UWI Vice Chancellor, Sir Philip Sherlock, writer John Hearne, and successful horse trainer, Phillip Feanny, whose mother is from County Cork, Ireland. In addition, surnames such as Burke, Collins, Mackey, Murphy and Madden, to name just a few, are common enough. Irish influence is also found in the names of places. There's St. Andrew's Irish Town, St. Mary's Kildare and Clonmel and St. Thomas' Belfast and Middleton among others.

• cillowen | Jan 13, 2013, 11:09 PM EST

  Cromwell drove Irish men and women, as threats to his new government, from their homes into the relatively barren and inhospitable province of Connaught. He created a system of arresting people for terribly minor infractions and forcing them onto ships headed to the Caribbean, providing the British planters there with "indentured laborers". Often times they actually just 'captured' the Irish for no reason at all. Did you know about Irish slavery? It seems that Irish slavery has escaped many texts, and therefore the entire education of many. Surprised to learn that there were Irish Slaves in the Caribbean?

• cillowen | Jan 13, 2013, 11:08 PM EST

  ordering that the Irish were to be transported overseas, starting with 12,000 Irish prisoners sold to aforementioned Barbados. Mention of these white slaves are often left completely out of history books, or sometimes sugar-coated as "voluntary indentured servants", however thousands were kidnapped from the streets and from their beds. That is not voluntary. And the term indentured servants is meant to describe a temporary situation, which for most this was not. Paintings to suit, as natural in a UK/US Anglo Empire, and as an in harmony story of US founding.

• cillowen | Jan 13, 2013, 11:07 PM EST

  the popes the popes figured too History prepping based on an ignorance of realities that the gathering folks need to be educated about. That truth will set you free, notion ...Oliver Cromwell Lord Protector of England from 1653 - 1658 Oliver Cromwell, in 1648, put down a rebellion in Ireland with such savagery and cruelty that is is nearly unimaginable. In his own words after the siege of Drogheda, "the officers were knocked on the head, every tenth man of the soldiers killed and the rest shipped to Barbados." On 14 August 1652, Cromwell began his Ethnic Cleansing of Ireland

• cillowen | Jan 13, 2013, 11:05 PM EST

  the pope is

• seanomelb | Jan 12, 2013, 12:58 AM EST

  What twisted logic falcon weaves

• eiriamach | Jan 11, 2013, 08:23 AM EST

  Fflash, "Soldiers, cops," fire fighters, "and nurses" have taken oaths to serve others. Their avowed duty and obedience to their captains and supervisors guide their actions. By contrast, pregnant women have freely CHOSEN to bring new life into the world. They do not do so out of obedience or duty to others, and they do not do so as a sacrifice of their own lives. Ages past have known the tragedies of women dying in pregnancy and childbirth and of children growing up without mothers. Medical science can avert many such tragedies if we will use it. Of course women take risks in becoming pregnant. But it is up to us to see that they never die needlessly and do not sacrifice their lives for the delusion that a fetus in miscarriage has a "right" to extension of its life for a few days while the pregnant woman slips into a coma and dies. The comparison you've drawn is a false analogy. Take a poll: how many women would become pregnant if they knew that doing so condemns them to death and, most often, their fetuses along with them?

• falconflash | Jan 10, 2013, 09:10 PM EST

  oh,eiriamach, this has been settle thousands of years ago... a mother will risk her life to give her unborn baby girl or boy it's life at the risk of dying herself...that is what Catholics (and all Christians) always have done... this includes soldiers, cops, firemen and nurses...As Jesus said: "Greater love has no one than this: that he lay down his life for his friends. Soldiers do it, pregnant women do it, the Irish do it, don't come in and change their culture with your athiestic attitude.

• howareya | Jan 10, 2013, 08:02 PM EST

  Eschetic...my daughter was born at 1.6 oz. Don't tell me she wasn't a person...I know of people that have had late term abortions at that stage.

• howareya | Jan 10, 2013, 07:56 PM EST

  alisaann...I guess you should be thankful your mother wasn't prochoice.

• seanomelb | Jan 10, 2013, 05:27 PM EST

  Falconflash with his pearl of wisdom "50% of babies who die in abortion are female" I hope the other 50% are male. No one is advocating a "carte blanche" abortion policy. Practical people can see when abortions are neccessary only the pro lifers lack common sense and logic in this debate

• eiriamach | Jan 10, 2013, 02:54 PM EST

  The IC filters won't allow me to post a reply to fflash, so I'll just restate what I said earlier. "Hateful" is exactly right, and hate-filled. What the Irish government is attempting to do is extremely difficult: to find a way to save the lives of pregnant women when pregnancy endangers their lives and doctors cannot save the fetus. Only barbaric, unthinking, uncaring people driven by ideology, surely not Christianity, would oppose such efforts. The govt cannot change the Constitution to allow abortion on demand or in circumstances that are not life-endangering. Only a complete disregard for the value of the lives of women can lead someone to oppose the government in this task. They should have the whole-hearted support of everyone who cares about life. Now FFlash calls this work to save lives "a ploy"? Whose soul hangs in jeopardy for allowing women needlessly to die? When the moral arguments are on the side of limited abortion rights, the zealots resort to threats, but consider the source!

• misneac | Jan 10, 2013, 02:30 PM EST

  StanJames ,you are an insulting uninformed bigot! We Catholics too tolerant of your likes ! You would not have the courage to comment unfavourably on any aspect of Islam .It would also be not politically correct to unfavourably comment on any of the Protestant churches .Why dont you just go back in to your cave ?

• stanJames | Jan 10, 2013, 01:17 PM EST

  The german pope has lost his marbles and needs to be put in a mental hospital. He rants about abortion while at the same time he UNexcommunciated biship williamson, a holocaust denier in 2009 There is an interesting book about him by David Gibson, a catholic writer. Its called Pope Benedict and his battle with the modern world. And of couse this is the same pope who is directly involved in the hiding of the endless molestation of children by his sex starved priests. the Pope is also gone off the deep end by second class civil unions for our gay friends , neighbors and family and is most likely horrified by the fact that per Irish times, 73% fo the Irish people - the most catholic nation in the world, support changing the constitution to allow gay people to marry as a civil only law, nothing to do with the church. Keep your money, stop going to church, not that many do so already. Perhaps God will take this extremist, the sooner the better.

• falconflash | Jan 10, 2013, 09:55 AM EST

  eiramach: 50% of the babies who die in abortions are baby girls. The life of the mother arguement is just a ploy to bring abortion to Ireland. You would easily find a doctor to approve the butchery in any case you could imagine. The Irish don't kill their babies --- that is something to be extremely proud of. Hollabuckgirl types will lose their immortal souls on this issue, no doubt about it.

• eiriamach | Jan 10, 2013, 08:34 AM EST

  Perhaps, after seeing this outpouring of sheer contempt for the lives of women in life-threatening medical emergencies, people will pay attention to those who say that the anti-choice movement is not about the sacredness of life. It's about keeping women obedient and powerless, without any choice in their reproductive lives because churchmen believe they are incapable of making moral choices. The legislation that the government is working on doesn't give ANY new choice to a woman. Panels of doctors or other experts will make the decision of whether or when to abort; the woman cannot make the decision. If the experts make the wrong decision, she dies. She's still helpless and dependent on others. Isn't that just what the anti-choice people want? But they haven't the sense to figure it out. Read the "Report of the Expert Group on the Judgment in A, B, and C v Ireland." Get informed before you make a comment that means you approve of women dying needlessly in crisis pregnancy!

• eiriamach | Jan 10, 2013, 07:39 AM EST

  "Hateful" is exactly right, and hate-filled. What the Irish government is attempting to do is extremely difficult: to find a way to save the lives of pregnant women when pregnancy endangers their lives and doctors cannot save the fetus. Only barbaric, unthinking, uncaring people driven by ideology, surely not Christianity, would oppose such efforts. The govt cannot change the Constitution to allow abortion on demand or in circumstances that are not life-endangering. Only a complete disregard for the value of the lives of women can lead someone to oppose the government in this task. They should have the whole-hearted support of everyone who cares about life.

• hollabackgurl | Jan 09, 2013, 11:58 PM EST

  It's hateful, holier than thou comments like the one below this (by falconflash) which is the reason that most thinking people reject the so-called pro-life movement. You know, the people who think life is sacred until you're actually born - then they want to outlaw health care and sell you assault weapons at WalMart.

• falconflash | Jan 09, 2013, 11:17 PM EST

  kubs, you're for the slaughter of children.

• Eschetic | Jan 09, 2013, 11:17 PM EST

  Gee! The Pope's statement on an issue he feels passionately (if unrealistically) about was not "helpful" in a real-world debate. What a surprise! Seriously, he didn't want to be helpful; he wanted to push his own radical agenda that a dwindling minority of his own church supports. We cannot let the superstitious no matter how well intentioned (as one assumes "christinao't" may be) control the dialog as science is all on the side of reform. No *baby* ever died in a safe, LEGAL abortion. A fetus has the potential to become a human life - a baby - when the ganglia of the brain start to come together, but it is not YET one regardless of how the right wing tries to move the "goal line." If we allow them to impose their superstitions on the rest of the world, they will be accusing masturbating teens of killing "babies."

• Ron | Jan 09, 2013, 10:23 PM EST

  It's incredible that this debate is still going on after all these years. It's even more incredible that any Govt. which relies on votes is negotiating anything with the Pope in Rome. What happened to indepence and national sovereignty? I wouldn't be voting for an weak, spongey political party that didn't tell the Pope to pull his head in.

• Happyhippo | Jan 09, 2013, 06:28 PM EST

  Abortion on demand in Ireland aint gonna happen,period,the Irish constitution says so,voted on by referendum by the majority of the people,and can only be reversed by them,its past time to give the scaremongering a rest.

• pilib04 | Jan 09, 2013, 05:58 PM EST

  christinao't, do you really think anyone cares about what narrow-minded bigots "want to hear?"

• christinao't | Jan 09, 2013, 05:17 PM EST

  I don't want to hear the Irish whine about any British oppression or famines if they start killing there own children.

• Smyrnian | Jan 09, 2013, 04:58 PM EST

  Katie - you are right, of course. Killing is killing and this is the worst kind. Killing defenseless babies out of egocentric driven convenience. First they made sure they dehumanized them (abortionists never call them babies: they call them embryos, fetuses, zygotes etc. even as they abort (kill) them during partial birth abortion and late term abortion of fully formed, thinking and feeling human beings. After they are dehumanized it is easy to take their rights away. A person with no rights can be killed and this is what they do. When life is done for these people ( who, I am certain are happy THEY were not aborted) they will have a lot of explaining to do to the Supreme Being. Medically necessary abortions are almost never necessary in this day and age.

• seanomelb | Jan 09, 2013, 04:43 PM EST

  Kenny stated there will be no abortion on demand the ignotant types like katieherk are over the top in their condemnation of abortion. The mothers life is sacrosanct and the choice is hers when a problem arises. LOve the irony Ireland north.

• christinao't | Jan 09, 2013, 04:42 PM EST

  The answer to what problem is the death penalty for millions Irish babies?

• christinao't | Jan 09, 2013, 04:41 PM EST

  Problem is socialized medicine. I am sure both would have lived here in U.S.A. at least until "Obama non care"

• katieherk | Jan 09, 2013, 03:50 PM EST

  Jim Treacy, you're an idiot! Katiemac,, you're a hero! Eiriamach... Savita died of a staff infection, not because she did not have an abortion. What JFK meant was that the Pope would not run the USA, but he still has the obligation to direct Catholics about all things moral & ethical. Abortion is out and out murder, don't forget that!

• IrelandNorth | Jan 09, 2013, 02:57 PM EST

  The Rt Hon Irish Taoseach is currently President of the European Union (EU), and consequently on a par with other world leaders. He is consequently de facto President of the United Kingdom (UK) of Great Britain (GB), and Northern Ireland (NI)also. As such, his call for dissident loyalists to stop rioting should be heeded, and humble obesience shown to their de facto President Kenny.

• Nicoletta | Jan 09, 2013, 02:40 PM EST

  Kenny and Gilmore, what a terrible twosome who will have the blood of thousands of innocent unborn children on their hands if they get their way.

• Gearoid4 | Jan 09, 2013, 02:06 PM EST

  The "rights" of the women are already preserved in the Constitution, Eiriamach, contrary to your distorted presentation of their status. The medical profession in Ireland is more than capable of preserving the life of the mother when it is danger and the life of the fetus/embryo as well. Anyone who desires abortion to enter Ireland are doing it for purely ideological reasons under the cover of such euphemisms as "pro-choice".

• Gearoid4 | Jan 09, 2013, 02:05 PM EST

  The issue at stake does not involve a toss-up between the life of the pregnant woman and that of the fetus/embryo, but rather is the evil of abortion strictly necessary in situations where doctors are already empowered to do everything within their expertise to save the life of the mother. Any neutral or right-thinking person would recognize that pro-abortion legislation should go no-where near the Irish statute books, as Ireland can manage very well without it. The maternal record of the country concerning mother and baby is second to none without any pro-abortion laws at present. Eiriamach, you refer to the fetus in terms as if he/she was a cancerous tumor only fit for destruction.."as long as the fetus that her body is trying to abort has an "equal" right to life". Most of the medical crises that arise during an abortion are not directly attributable during the fetus, but are rather underlying conditions/diseases such as cervix cancer that a woman may already have. In some instances the fetus/embryo may dies as an indirect result of invasive surgery but this is one of the unfortunate outcomes of such situations. Destroying the nascent life in the womb directly without concentrating wholly on the condition constitutes a grave breach of the moral order. In some instances, the fetus may be at the point of death or will not survive his/her own illness, and direct intervention to preserve the woman may be required. But this is an example of unavoidable action being taken to save a woman's life and is not abortion for loosely defined "mental" health or "social" reasons.

• eiriamach | Jan 09, 2013, 01:43 PM EST

  MichaelMcGrath, the only thing at stake now is whether the government will finally give guidelines for the "equal right to life" of a pregnant woman in a medical crisis, not whether abortion will be generally legalized. The Irish Constitution is anti-abortion, but gives "equal" rights to life to pregnant woman and fetus. I believe it is self-evident that a pregnant women in medical crisis can never have a true right to life as long as the fetus that her body is trying to abort has an "equal" right to life. The Constitution would have to change to allow abortion in cases where the fetus is not already dead or dying. So why do you oppose the government's action? Is it because you want women to die in situations like Savita's? Is it because you think a pregnancy in crisis is a convenient way of killing off women who do not successfully bring new life to birth? It is truly barbaric for anyone to oppose the minimal right that they're trying to work out for pregnant women under the current Constitution, which, without further policies, in effect deprives a woman of her right to life the moment she becomes pregnant.

• alisaann | Jan 09, 2013, 01:40 PM EST

  tell the POPE to mind his OWN DAMN MIND....and if a woman is for SURE going to LOSE her baby, and her life is at risk...and she asks for the ABORTION....it should be GRANTED....if a woman is UNABLE to afford a child, as well...she should NOT be forced to continue on with the pregancy...or if she's been RAPED.....i'm PRO-CHOICE. ALISA

• eiriamach | Jan 09, 2013, 01:34 PM EST

  katiemac, tell it to Savita Halappanavar, whose abortion was clearly "medically indicated" to save her life and would only have shortened the "life" of an already-dying four-month fetus. You can call saving the only life that can be saved a "convenience," but only medical quacks would back up such an irresponsible statement. Every civilized developed nation except Ireland has emergency abortion procedures and policies in place at hospitals (except at Catholic hospitals) to save the lives of women in crisis pregnancies. Believe what you like, but wishful thinking does not add up to medical reality, and it's deceitful to promulgate such views in a public forum.

• Smyrnian | Jan 09, 2013, 01:18 PM EST

  Katiemac - Very accurate statement, to the exact point and beautifully expressed. Thank you.

• kubs | Jan 09, 2013, 12:55 PM EST

  I thought JFK swore that the Vatican would not interfere with sovereign nations' policies,particularly speaking about the U.S., if he were to be elected President. I became Catholic in adulthood thru marriage. In recent years I am regretting that choice. I'm sure the Church would also like to have me & other thinking members out. I mean, how could anyone believe the good Lord would ever stoop to inspire, challenge, & embrace us, the Laity, instead of working only thru the tired old men in their Sanctum in the heart of Rome?

• katiemac | Jan 09, 2013, 12:44 PM EST

  Abortion is never medically indicated. It is purely a matter of choice and or convenience, neither of which are indications it should be legalized. In nations wjhere that has already been done, women are in no better position socially, economically or medically. It does not make women more equal. It just makes unborn children less equal.

• MichaelMcGrath | Jan 09, 2013, 12:42 PM EST

  It is not up to the vatican, it is for the irish people to decide - and not the irish government either as it is a constitutional issue that can only be decided by the Irish people in referendum. I am neither a catholic or a Christian but I oppose abortion, there is a widespread campaign at the moment to classify pro-life anti-abortion as catholic only and this is not so, as a poster here states quite correctly that the protestant population of Ireland also oppose abortion in the majority. It is only the bankrupt Irish government that wants abortion!( Mass immigration and gay marriage too)

• jim treacy | Jan 09, 2013, 12:27 PM EST

  I AM PULLING FOR THE IRISH GOVERMENT IN THIS WAR,ALL THE WAY FROM CANADA. THE MORAL AUTHORITY OF THE VATICAN IS LONG GONE. THE VATICAN IS THE SPOT WHERE WE KEEP THE MONIES AWAY FROM PRYING EYES

• falconflash | Jan 09, 2013, 10:51 AM EST

  Again, where is the IRA? Are they for/against the slaying of Irish children in the womb? No leadership from these guys is astounding. 2ndRepub: how stupid can you be? Many/most Loyalists would also be against abortion in Northeast Ireland.

• CavanAncestor | Jan 09, 2013, 10:20 AM EST

  Well, let's just tell the Pope to shove off! Enda no doubt speaks "ex cathedra" so I guess we have to call it a draw. A national debate on legalizing infanticide is entirely the business of the Papacy. And after all, it is alleged to be a debate.

• MichaelMcGrath | Jan 09, 2013, 09:26 AM EST

  Gilmore is a Marxist and he should admit this publicly instead of posing as a Labourite. He is a Commie who promotes mass immigratipon, abortion and gay marriage, he has gone off his head and is dragging Ireland along with his insanity.

• EamonnDublin | Jan 09, 2013, 08:51 AM EST

  Gilmore got into power by lying (yes, lying) to the electorate, so his integrity is way down the Swannee River at this stage. He is also an atheist, so of course he would be opposed to any input by a person who believes in God. Oh, and BTW, please don't tell me that Gilmore's pre-election promises were "just election talk" - that's the kind of rubbish attitude that continually gives Ireland the rubbish politicians with whom we are burdened. To gain power by deceit is one of the greatest frauds of all, and it should be treated as such. Éamonn, Dublin, Ireland.

• 2ndrepubalik | Jan 09, 2013, 07:59 AM EST

  Is this another overt attempt by the Vatican to interfere in the affairs of another State ? The Vatican has a long history of doing so ( successfully) with regards to the Republic of Ireland.The Unionists were right back in the early and middle parts of the 20th Centurey - "Home Rule means Rome Rule" , the facts speak for themselves.I do not want to see the introduction of abortion on demand but I do want to see the right to life of the Mother being weighed in favour above the right to an unborn child that is threatening Her life.You never see the Church or other pious "pro - liferes" picking up the pieces or helping when the Mother dies but the baby survives ? I am aware that there are over 200,000 abortions in the USA and 80,000 in the UK annually.I think I am right in saying ( I know this is politically INCORRECT) that the vast majority of these are Caucasian terminations.If you go back to the time when abortion was introduced as legal , then Millions of Caucasians have been aborted - it's like they ( Caucasions) have a death wish or are very selfish or both.The Irish legislation needs to address the relatively low number of cases where the pregnancy is a real threat to the Mothers life without opening the flood gates to wholesale abortion.Thisa will not be easy.It still will not deal with the estimated 10,000 abortions Irish Women have each year in the UK.So these 10,000 abortions are approx 12.5% of the UK total as they are included in UK figures.African and Asian Women do not seem , on average , to have the same pressures to abort for Family , Lifestyle or Economic reasons.I am NOT being RACIST but seeking to provoke debate on an aspect of abortion that is glossed or airbrushed over because it is deemed to be Politically Incorrect.Please challenge my view !