Delighted to be of assistance, aqvarivs.

Being on the other side of the world makes it difficult sometimes to keep track of these things, so it is gratifying to be able to straighten you out on the detail.

Your arguments are convincing.

>>the Protestant British invaded and took administrative control from a predominately Catholic Irish people. Ipso facto it is all about religion<<

Makes sense to me.

>>Had the British been Catholic I suppose, following your view, not a word or act would have been said or done against the marginalisation of Irish society and eradication of self-government<<

Close. Had they been Catholic, marginalisation would by definition (since it was on religious grounds) not have occurred. If you follow the bouncing ball of Irish history from the twelfth to the twentyfirst century, you'll find that religion was behind every political move.

In fact it was Pope Adrian (a Catholic, as I recall) in the middle of the twelfth century who invested Henry II and his successors the right to rule Ireland and to bring about religious reformation. As a result, until 1922, Ireland - all of it - was officially part of the United Kingdom.

>>Why, why couldn't I just see it was all about religion. I'm such a fool. Thank you Pericles. You've opened or rather closed my eyes to the real issues and abuses faced by the Irish during their occupation by the English<<

Oh come now, don't be so hard on yourself. Just thank goodness you won't have to make that silly mistake again, eh?

Take a look at this site for more detail. It's actually quite good.

http://www.rootsweb.com/~irlkik/ihm/invasion.htm

You will note that the article also points out prior to the good Pope's intervention, the "political climate in Ireland at the time [twelfth century] was one of inter-tribal rivalries, as it had been for centuries".

So even the unification of the tribes had its roots in religion.

Do check out the rest of the history while you are about it - you will find that it confirms your view that religion was at the heart of all.

Interestingly, the chief architect of the Northern Ireland peace process is the politician Tony Blair who is not a religious cleric but a well-meaning politician. A political solution to a religious problem?

The conflict between Catholics and the Protestants started off as a religious one and was later politicized by people who made use of religion to gain power. Roman Catholicism was and, still is largely a political Christian institution. The Catholics are the spiritual descendants of the church started by Emperor Constantine who made Christianity a “state religion” of the Roman Empire
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_was_the_conflict_between_the_Catholics_and_Protestants_in_Ireland

The Communist Chinese government recognised the political nature of the Roman Catholic Church. It severed relations with Rome in the 1950’s because it knew that the Roman Catholic Church had a hidden “imperialist” agenda (“…the Patriotic Association voted to sever all political and economic ties with the Vatican and to obey the pope only in matters pertaining to faith and church law.”, Understanding the Roman Catholic Church in China, p.2, Jean-Paul Wiest)
http://www.usccb.net/church-updates/UnderstandingRCCinChina.pdf

Religion can be a danger to mankind when it has been misinterpreted by its faithful. This is especially true when it has as its focus the building of the god’s kingdom on earth. A belief that you can have 1000 years of peace in a chaotic world.

This was what happened in China during the Taiping Rebellion (1850 to 1865) that claimed about 50 million lives. Hong Xiuquan was an unorthodox Christian convert who declared himself the new Messiah and younger brother of Jesus Christ. Hong and his followers established the Heavenly Kingdom of Great Peace ( Tàipíng Tian Guó) and attained control of significant parts of southern China.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiping_Rebellion

During the Christian Reformation the extreme Anabaptists came to a disastrous end in Munster which they believed it to be the New Jerusalem. Melchoir Hoffman's preaching on a literal millennial reign of Jesus Christ on earth gripped the imagination of the Anabaptist movement. It propelled the radical wing towards polygamy and terrorism of those who did not join them.
http://ctlibrary.com/4324
http://etext.virginia.edu/journals/EH/EH35/howard1.html

Pericles, I appreciate my own study of history and not reduce every thing down to a single cause and effect proposition. Your no different than those others who say things like, Iraq is all about oil, Iraq is a war of religion, or the Palestinian/Israeli conflict is all about Israeli hegemony, or South American politics is a response to American hegemony, or Islam is all about world domination, or Islam is a terrorist movement, or the Howard government is all about removing human rights from Australia. There is much more going on in life than religion that lead to situations instigating war. Single explanations hide the truth of political desires, cultural motivations, financial acquisition, barriers to trade, internal strife, massive unemployment, national expansionism, national security, liberating oppressive government, agreement violations. Etc., Etc.. Does this preclude religion? No it doesn't but, should religion then becomes casus belli, and the scapegoat of aggressive political machination? Religion has it's faults but, it's run by man and politics and religion have always walked hand in hand. To focus on religion and omit the politics is sloppy coverage of a complex situation and at best such myopic focus left to those who have picked a team. Thanks again Pericles but, I prefer to travel with my eyes wide open.

Philip Tang, I agree religion can be used for some most horrendous acts against mankind. My question is, is that the nature of religion or done in the name of religion according to mans nature. Is Islamist terrorism according to the nature of Islam per se or according to the nature of the individual or group of individuals using Islam in a very negative and damaging fashion against both innocent targets and Islam itself? A religious policy of self-destruction doesn't seem a viable continuance and affirmation of the miracle of life. If a woman puts a poisonous snake into her husbands bed do we blame the snake for biting and killing the husband? Or do we blame the wife and try to understand other motivating factors, including the husband?

Errrr... I know that it is your hobby-horse and all that, aqvarivs, but we were talking about Ireland.

This is not about Iraq and oil, Iraq and religion, the Palestinian/Israeli conflict, South American politics, Islam and world domination, Islam as a terrorist movement, or the Howard government.

I responded to your fundamentally incorrect assertion:

>>The Irish Rebellion was anti-English, anti- feudalism, and Ireland for the Irish. Religion was coincidental to everything else<<

Religion was coincidental, aqvarivs?

Coincidental?

You're kidding. Take a walk along Falls Road or Shankill Road sometime, talk to the people, and tell me that religion is "coincidental" to what has happened there. They still talk of King Billy and the battle of the Boyne, and of Cromwell.

Here's a surprising little snippet about Cromwell that might interest you, by the way.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLvzGT4DAxQ

>>To focus on religion and omit the politics is sloppy coverage of a complex situation and at best such myopic focus left to those who have picked a team<<

No argument with that.

But it is equally sloppy to pretend that religion is somehow subservient to politics. And in the case of Ireland, it is an absolute fact that religion has been front and centre since St Patrick. Read the history of Ireland with an open mind, and see how Armagh leveraged the cult of Patrick to gain supremacy - and power - over the other churches and monasteries. Classic political spin, fifteen hundred years ago, firmly based in religion and its hold over the people. The process accelerated in the new millennium, and has certainly driven every single political decision in Ireland since Brian Boru.

>>I prefer to travel with my eyes wide open<<

Then start doing so, instead of being blind to the sad realities of what happens when religions collide.

Pericles, religion has always been subservient to the political agenda. The King or Queen of England is the political head of the Protestant Church. In essence every decision made by the British government can be classed as a religious decision. Remember Henry VIII when he wanted to kill off his wives and get new ones as he liked and the Pope said, No Henry that's not proper and we can not sanctify such behavior, and old Henry said, stuff it I'll rewrite the religious text so I can and I'll be head of the Church.
Riiiight. It's all religions fault. And I should vilify religion and then the religious, and next I should reject and vilify other thinkers like philosophy or psychology because both of these sciences are linked to violence. but we wont stop there because there are even more villainous text out there controlling the minds of the people, not counting the video games and fictional novels. Some people are always seeking to blame something or some one for their singular or collective actions. It wasn't English religion that invaded Ireland it was an English political decision, and English people, naturally they brought their English religion. Could they have left it at home. No. Because Henry VIII determined religion would be a mechanism of government. So please Pericles no more B.S. on Ireland. No ones denying religion isn't an element. I'm saying religion is not the driving force and usually it is an abuse of religion. Especially in Ireland because Protestant and Catholic are both Christian and the differences are not that extreme to be the sole cause of that protracted strife regardless of what is written on the walls along Fall Road, Belfast. It's more to do with being ruled by England. if England left tomorrow there would be no strife between Catholics and Protestants.

Are all religions the same, i.e. do they preach peace and non-violence? No, Islam is a religion that is inseparable from its political structure.(The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam by Dr. Muhammad Iqbal). In all countries where Muslims are a majority, non-Muslim religions face discrimination or are persecuted. It is an offence for a Muslim to leave Islam. This practice can be traced to Islam itself.

The Muslim calendar marks the important event (Hijrah) when Muhammad and his followers migrated to the city of Medina from Mecca in 622 CE. Hence 2007 CE is 1428 AH, 1428 years after this famous event.

Muslims celebrate this event because Mohammed became successful at Medina after forming an Islamic state and using the sword. Before that, Mohammed preached for 13 years in Mecca and won only a handful of converts. But after having established an Islamic state in Medina, he became Al-Nabiyyussaif, ‘the sword-wielding Prophet’ and ‘won’ many converts to Islam. At the same time the Jewish population in Medina was exterminated to a trickle.
http://www.sullivan-county.com/x/medina.htm
http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/sina/jews.htm

The point is succinctly put across by a Muslim scholar, “…full success in true Islamisation is solely dependent on the establishment of a full-fledged Islamic State known as The Kingdom of God on earth”

Muslims are kept in checked in many Islamic countries by force, threats, the religious police, public hanging, stoning and barbaric practices advocated by the Koran and the Hadiths.

Below are compelling evidences from two ex-Muslim Arabs medical doctors why they are not Muslims.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2wPglHZQf-0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Negt6IzxPTo&mode=related&search=
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxfo11A7XuA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OUJErMA4d9Q

ctd