The magnetic history of sunspots.

"This discovery allows a journey to the past."

from TheSaltyCracker: TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/

by Martin Armstrong, Armstrong Economics: Friedrich Merz (born 1955) is a VERY dangerous Neocon who is the leader of Germany’s Christian Democratic Union (CDU), who is pushing to be the next chancellor in the face of the fallen government.  The government collapsed on the same day Mr. Trump was elected. The press says it was […]

  In the space of four years during the twilight of the 18th century, four noteworthy events with no apparent connection took place. In 1796, David Roberts was born in Scotland. In the same year, Alois Senefelder invented lithography in Germany. In 1798, Napoleon invaded Egypt, and in 1799, Frederick Catherwood was born in England. As time passed, fate conspired to bring these disparate occurrences together. Their coalescence would contribute to a monumental upsurge in the public interest and scholarly knowledge of two of humanity’s most impressive and enduring ancient civilizations, the ancient Egyptians and the Maya.   Historical Background – Expansion and Exploration Sandstorm approaching the sphinx at Gîza at sunset, colored lithograph by Louis Haghe after David Roberts, 1849. Source: Wellcome Collection   At the dawn of the 19th century, against the backdrop of the French Revolutionary Wars (1792-1802), European powers like Britain and France engaged in a flurry of surveying and mapmaking. As part of their scramble to outdo each other in the pursuit of conquest and colonization, they planned and carried out massive investigative projects. Their aim was to record and chart as much as they could of foreign lands. This activity sometimes included documenting and depicting their cultures and heritage.   A few years before Britain commenced the Great Trigonometrical Survey of India in 1802, Napoleon Bonaparte invaded Egypt (1798), which was still part of the Ottoman Empire. He knew that gaining control of the country would be an important strategic triumph in his war against Britain, providing him with easier access to the East. After a three-year battle against the British, Ottomans, and Egypt’s ruling Mamluks, Napoleon’s military endeavor ended in defeat. However, the campaign would result in a success of another kind, one of great academic and artistic merit.   A Grand Description of Egypt Description de l’Égypte, by C. L. F. Panckoucke, 1820. Source: Library of Congress   As part of his retinue, Napoleon took with him 150 experts whose task was to seek out and record Egypt’s past and present. Their fields of study ranged from history, cartography, and art to science, engineering, and architecture. After their finished work was combined and collated, it was published over the course of two decades (from 1809) in a series of seminal volumes called Description de l’Égypte. This behemoth of 19th-century printing was the first scholarly step along the road to rediscovering the magnificence of a civilization that was, until then, still largely unknown to most Europeans.   Raiders, Romanticists, and Realists Mode in which the young Memnon’s head (now in the British Museum) was removed by Belzoni, by Agostino Aglio, 1820. Source: New York Public Library   The illustrations and engravings that featured in the Description de l’Égypte helped fuel a fascination with all things Egyptian and inspired more people to visit. Some, like Jean-François Champollion, were serious scholars, while others acted more like treasure hunters, damaging sites and carrying off antiquities to European museums. Egypt’s biblical connections and exotic allure compelled artists to reproduce the mysterious ancient inscriptions and sketch scenes of local life. Such material was perfect subject matter for the adepts of Romanticism and Orientalism, movements that reached their peaks during the 19th century.   The Carpet Merchant of Cairo, by Jean-Léon Gérôme, 1869. Source: Brooklyn Museum   During this period, artists produced lavish, spectacular pieces that catered to the burgeoning Orientalist sentiments of the day. Their work was often highly detailed but lacked authenticity, being compromised by Western bias and liberal use of stereotyping. Sketches and paintings of life in Egypt and other Middle Eastern countries included a combination of real-world and fantasy elements, resulting in evocative and impactful pieces that were not particularly accurate. Many artists gave preference to depictions of modern life over the colossal temples and monuments of the pharaohs. Some didn’t even visit the places they depicted, forgoing firsthand travel and instead using their imaginations, mismatched props, and the accounts of others to produce their works.   A few artists did attempt to focus on Egypt’s ancient ruins rather than using them as mere decorative backgrounds to complement the human subjects that usually took the main stage. Although their works acted as a window through which outsiders could catch a glimpse of Egypt’s past splendor, quality varied, and depictions were often quite basic. It would not be until the visit of a professional painter from Edinburgh that the remarkable nature of the monuments would be represented with the attention to detail they deserved.   David Roberts – Scottish Painter Photograph of David Roberts, R. A., by Hill & Adamson, 1843–1847. Source: Getty Museum Collection   David Roberts (1796-1864) was a landscape, townscape, and Orientalist painter. He developed his craft as a stage scenery artist and produced drawings, watercolor sketches, and oil paintings throughout his career. Although some of his work shows a flair for the dramatic, the higher degree of accuracy he strived for set him apart from most of his Orientalist contemporaries. Roberts was also a keen traveler, making sure to go and see his subject matter in person. This habit would help him make more faithful and realistic reproductions of ancient Egyptian architecture and monuments. He had already made trips to other foreign countries, such as France, Spain, and Morocco before he undertook his most famous journey.   In August 1838, Roberts embarked on an eleven-month tour of Egypt and the “Holy Land.” In the same year, he was elected Associate Member of the Royal Academy, and his new project would cement his position and reputation as a first-class artist. Though aware that the rising interest in the region’s history and culture presented a commercial opportunity, he could hardly have anticipated just how successful his adventure would turn out.   Travels in Egypt and Nubia The Great Temple of Aboo Simble, color lithograph by Louis Haghe after David Roberts, 1846. Source: Cleveland Museum of Art   Travel in the 1800s was far from easy. After spending several weeks making his way to Alexandria, Roberts had to deal with the incredible heat and ever-present threat of disease. In 1835, just three years before he arrived in the country, an outbreak of bubonic plague had decimated the population of Cairo. Undeterred, the painter continued southwards up the Nile and started his work. Covering hundreds of miles of arid terrain, he visited sites that had also fallen victim to the ravages of nature over the centuries. Desert sand piled up against time-worn stone statues and temples, hinting at the grandeur of a long-forgotten power. Roberts’ awe-inspiring depictions of Egypt’s ancient architecture in that forlorn condition have a unique atmosphere and an almost tangible quality about them.   Remains of the Portico of the Temple of Kom Ombo, color lithograph by Louis Haghe after David Roberts, 1846. Source: Cleveland Museum of Art   During his wanderings throughout Egypt and the Middle East, Roberts’ artistic output was prodigious. He didn’t limit himself to ancient ruins; he also sketched and recorded the region’s landscapes, religious buildings, and people. Examples from his portfolio that show ancient monuments are especially significant because of the lengths he went to display their finer details. The intricacy of the hieroglyphs he included in his representations of Egyptian temple columns, obelisks, and other monoliths reveals his efforts and talent.   Obelisk of Luxor, color lithograph by Louis Haghe after David Roberts, 1846. Source: Cleveland Museum of Art   Roberts’ more grounded and meticulous approach to rendering such wondrous sights did not mean that he was completely unaffected by a romantic aesthetic perspective. He sometimes made minor adjustments to his subjects’ positioning and scale to create an even more spectacular version of the things he observed and illustrated. Despite these minor compositional alterations, his work shows a high level of accuracy. Moreover, the quality of the images he produced during his tour of 1838-39 was unmatched by anything that preceded them.   Return and Publication The Temple at Dandour, Nubia, watercolor and gouache by David Roberts, 1848. Source: Metropolitan Museum of Art   After almost a year of travel that also included visits to other historical sites outside Egypt (including Petra, Jerusalem, and Baalbec), Roberts returned home. He had amassed a huge collection of artwork, and his next task was to get it published. From 1842-49, he worked with master lithographer Louis Haghe to transform his drawings into plates. The versatile printmaking technique of lithography, which was still relatively new and advanced, enabled Roberts to reproduce his work in larger volumes. His sketches and watercolors would also benefit from Haghe’s technical skill and nuanced application of shade and tone adjustment.   Temple of Dandour, Nubia, color lithograph by Louis Haghe after David Roberts, 1848. Source: Cleveland Museum of Art   Although the enterprise was expensive (Roberts had to secure funding by advanced subscription), the two artisans collaborated to produce a six-volume masterpiece. Initially published separately as The Holy Land and Egypt and Nubia, the luxurious travelogue featured 247 high-quality lithographs based on Roberts’ drawings. Britain had never seen such a prolific and accurate representation of the land of the pharaohs. Queen Victoria had been Roberts’ first subscriber, and after others had followed, the Egyptomania that gripped the nation intensified.   From the pyramids of Giza to the temples of Luxor and Aswan, Roberts had succeeded in recording and sharing the magnificence of ancient Egypt’s architectural treasures in exciting new detail. Because some of the sites he cataloged would later be damaged, destroyed, or removed, his artwork would also become a valuable archeological reference over time.   From the “Old World” to the “New World” Temple at Tuloom, by Frederick Catherwood, 1844. Source: New York Public Library   “All was mystery, dark, impenetrable mystery, and every circumstance increased it. In Egypt the colossal skeletons of gigantic temples stand in the unwatered sands in all the nakedness of desolation; here an immense forest shrouded the ruins, hiding them from sight, heightening the impression and moral effect, and giving an intensity and almost wildness to the interest.” (John Lloyd Stephens, 1841, p. 105)   In the first half of the 19th century, the history and culture of the Maya were even more mysterious than those of the ancient Egyptians. King Charles IV of Spain had instigated an antiquarian survey of Mesoamerica that included some Maya sites (1805-08), but it would take decades before scholars began to understand them. Explorers and artists from a wide range of backgrounds visited the ruins, trying to comprehend the strange structures that peered out through the dense jungle vegetation. Many refused to consider the possibility that the striking architecture and complex designs could be the work of indigenous peoples. Instead, they theorized that the buildings and monuments must have a connection to the civilizations they were more familiar with.   Idol at Copan, by Frederick Catherwood, 1844. Source: New York Public Library   Some people suggested Greek or Roman influence. Artist Jean-Frédéric Maximilien de Waldeck produced images that included fabricated features like elephant heads and the cross-armed postures of ancient Egyptian statuary. Misinterpretations and embellishments like these (that sometimes even touched on the myth of Atlantis) exemplified a failure to decipher the evidence. The complicated and stylized art of the Maya made it very difficult to discern and identify, which exacerbated early artists’ tendencies to veer away from objectivity. It would take a more rational study of the vestiges of the civilization spread across Central America, Chiapas, and the Yucatán Peninsula to get closer to the truth.   Frederick Catherwood – English Artist and Architect Engraving of Monjas, Chichen Izta, from Incidents of Travel in Yucatan, after watercolor by Frederick Catherwood, 1843. Source: Metropolitan Museum of Art   The man responsible for the timeless engravings and lithographs that helped lift the veil of ignorance covering the Maya is almost as enigmatic as the structures he recorded. His name was Frederick Catherwood. Unlike Roberts, there are no photographs or confirmed portraits of him. He was born in Hoxton (London) and established himself as an architect, draftsman, and traveler. He visited the Middle East before Roberts, but he is most well known for his exquisite depictions of the art and architecture of the ancient Maya.   Catherwood seems to have had a voracious appetite for travel to parts of the world with ancient architecture. During the 1820s and 1830s, he had journeyed to Rome, Greece, and the “Holy Land.” He had also been to Egypt twice. The studies and sketches he made of the remnants of ancient cultures that dotted those lands would stand him in excellent stead. Although many of his drawings remain unpublished, some of the work he undertook in the humid jungles of Central America and present-day Mexico would be. Catherwood’s illuminating illustrations constituted an essential element of John Lloyd Stephens’ groundbreaking archeological travel books.   Travels in Central America, Chiapas, and Yucatán Incidents of Travel in Central America, Chiapas, and Yucatan, by John Lloyd Stephens, 1842. Source: Metropolitan Museum of Art   After first meeting in London, Stephens and Catherwood formed a partnership based on their mutual interests in travel and antiquity that led them on trailblazing expeditions together. Their scientific approach to research, which rejected the implausible theories of earlier explorers, made them pioneers of Mesoamerican archeology. Stephens recounted the pair’s adventures and presented their discoveries in his insightful travelogues. Incidents of travel in Central America, Chiapas, and Yucatan (1841) and Incidents of travel in Yucatan (1843) are exciting reads and proved very popular upon release. Not only did they sell well, but they also shone a light on the politics, society, and history of the places the scholarly companions visited.   Archway, Casa del Gobernador, Uxmal, Yucatan, by Frederick Catherwood, 1843. Source: Brooklyn Museum   Stephens and Catherwood commenced their initial expedition in 1839 during a time of civil war. The circumstances and conditions under which they worked were dreadful. They were assaulted by tropical downpours and under constant attack from biting, disease-carrying insects. They both contracted malaria, and Catherwood became so ill that the pair had to bring their first trip to an early close the following year. However, they would return to the region and, despite the challenges, managed to visit more than 40 sites. Their determination and fortitude enabled them to study ruins of enormous archeological importance, such as Copán, Quiriguá, Palenque, Uxmal, and Chichén Itzá.   Engraving after sketch by Frederick Catherwood in Incidents of Travel in Central America, Chiapas, and Yucatan, by John Lloyd Stephens, 1841. Source: Wellcome Collection   During their journeys, the two friends documented and recorded the architecture and monuments they came across with great stoicism and skill. Catherwood’s meticulous drawings show the keen eye and technical precision of a professional draftsman. In order to enhance the accuracy with which he already worked, he employed a device called a camera lucida. With this, Catherwood was able to superimpose an image of a subject onto his drawing surface. The method helped him better ascertain the correct proportions of the objects and structures he cataloged for Stephen’s influential publications.   Catherwood’s Contributions Engraving after a sketch by Frederick Catherwood in Incidents of Travel in Central America, Chiapas, and Yucatan, by John Lloyd Stephens, 1841. Source: Wellcome Collection   History has given much more attention to the writer of the Incidents of Travel books than to the man who illustrated them. Although Stephens is usually credited with “rediscovering” the ancient Maya, it was Catherwood’s drawings that provided the public with a tantalizing visual insight into the legacy they left behind. In total, more than 200 of his engravings are featured in Stephens’ volumes. In addition to his architectural drawings, Catherwood also attempted detailed reproductions of the confusing Maya glyphs. His renderings of the symbols were not perfect, but at the time, they were the most faithful portrayals anyone had created.   It wasn’t just the draftsman’s ability to draw the baffling artifacts and carvings that defined his contribution to the study of the Maya. His previous travel and work experience bolstered objective reasoning that was essential to recognizing that the remains he came across were indigenous. After his firsthand studies of the ancient art and architecture of other lands, Catherwood had seen enough to believe that those he sketched in Mesoamerica were unrelated. Time would prove him correct.   Gateway of the Great Teocallis, Uxmal, Frederick Catherwood, date unknown. Source: Cleveland Museum of Art   Even though it was the most widely viewed, the collection of engravings that Catherwood supplied for the Incidents of Travel series was not his ultimate work on the Maya. In 1844, he published his own book, Views of Ancient Monuments in Central America, Chiapas, and Yucatan. For his magnum opus, Catherwood worked with several lithographers to produce 26 plates that are of higher quality than those included with Stephens’ accounts. The color and vibrancy of the lithographs accentuate the details Catherwood captured and show the dramatic lighting he used to convey the atmosphere of the mysterious, neglected ruins he visited.   Roberts and Catherwood – Two Artistic Giants of Antiquity Thebes, color lithograph by Louis Haghe after David Roberts, 1846. Source: Cleveland Museum of Art: Cleveland   Through their tenacious dedication and skill, David Roberts and Frederick Catherwood played crucial roles in educating the public about the history, culture, and architecture of the ancient Egyptians and Maya. Their accurate and realistic representations of the stupendous sites and monuments they recorded also contributed to the advancement of archeological and ethnographic studies.   Roberts and Catherwood emerged as artists at a time when Europe was fascinated with the ancient world. The quality and beauty of their pieces added to the frenzy that Napoleon’s invasion of Egypt started. However, the precision and discernment with which they worked also introduced a grounding factor. Their art helped to dispel incorrect interpretations and offered an alternative to the stereotypical Eurocentric images and ideas that were en vogue.   By utilizing the best printmaking technology of the day, they each created exceptional lithographs from their drawings and paintings that have as much power to inspire now as they did in the 1840s. It was not long after that the new invention of photography superseded the work of painters and draftsmen. In spite of that, one may argue that the images the two adventurous artists produced are even more impressive and timeless than those that others captured later.

  The Good Friday Agreement is arguably one of the most important documents in recent European history. It represents the culmination of years of (mostly secret) talks, compromises, and negotiations between the major parties involved in the Troubles, the conflict that for 30 years, from 1969 to 1998, upended Northern Irish society and drew a clear line between the Protestant and Catholic communities.   Some of the negotiators of the Agreement were closely linked to the armed groups responsible for most of the deaths, on both the Protestant and Catholic sides. Nonetheless, they managed to overcome their differences and drafted an agreement that, 30 years later, remains a guarantee of peace for the people of Northern Ireland.   The Protagonists of the Troubles Bill Clinton and John Humes, 1995. Source: Clinton Digital Library   To understand the Good Friday Agreement, we need to understand what caused the Troubles and who was involved in the conflict. Here is a list of five terms that the reader will find useful to pinpoint the various paramilitary groups involved in the Northern Irish conflict:   1. Nationalist – Someone (usually a Catholic) who advocates for a united Ireland. The term “republican” is often used as synonymous with “nationalist,” but it’s not that simple: “republican” indicates someone willing to accept and embrace violence to achieve the goal of a united Ireland. The IRA, for instance, is a republican paramilitary group. The Social Democratic and Labour Party, whose leader in 1998, John Hume (1937-2020), played a key role in the peace process is the main nationalist political party in Northern Ireland.   Ulster Banner is a heraldic banner taken from the former coat of arms of Northern Ireland, used by the Northern Ireland government in 1953-1973. Source: Wikimedia Commons   2. Unionist – Someone (usually a Protestant) who believes that Northern Ireland should remain a part of the United Kingdom. The term “unionist” is often used interchangeably with “loyalist,” but this is not exact: since the onset of the Troubles, the term “loyalist” tends to be used to identify unionists who advocate for armed struggle. Paramilitary groups, such as the UDA and the UVF, consider themselves loyalists. Members of the Ulster Unionist Party, on the contrary, tend to call themselves unionists. David Trimble (1944-2022), the leader of the Ulster Unionist Party in 1998, is one of the key players in the drafting and signing of the Good Friday Agreement. In that same year, he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize alongside John Hume.     3. Irish Republican Army (IRA) – A republican paramilitary organization created in 1919 and led, during the Irish War of Independence, by Michael Collins. Popular support for the IRA waxed and waned during the 1970s and 1980s. Especially in the 1970s many joined the IRA to hit back after events such as the Bloody Sunday, house searches conducted by the RUC, the internment without trial policy, etc. The IRA’s political wing is the Sinn Féin: often accused of being subordinate to the IRA during the Troubles, it played an important role during the peace process and its history is inseparable from the figures of Gerry Adams (1948- ) and Martin McGuinness (1950-2017).   UVF Mural, Carrickfergus. Source: Wikimedia Commons   4. Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF) – One of the most important loyalist paramilitary groups, it was established in 1966 in Belfast, in the Shankill neighborhood, and it was responsible for the first killings of the Troubles. Lenny Murphy, the leader of the Shankill Butchers, was a member of the UVF. Leader of the Progressive Unionist Party (and former member of the UVF), David Ervine (1953-2007) argued in favor of the Good Friday Agreement. A similarly important loyalist organisation was the Ulster Defence Association (UDA), established in 1971.     5. Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC) – The (overwhelmingly Protestant) police force for Northern Ireland first came into being in 1921, after the end of the War of Independence, and it lasted until 2001 when it was replaced by the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI). It is worth remembering that the RUC’s members were overwhelmingly Protestant and that the RUC was often accused by Catholics of sectarianism and collusion with loyalist groups. As a result, it was one of the IRA’s main targets: according to Making Sense of the Troubles, 319 RUC officers were killed during the Troubles (with a peak between 1971 and 1987).   An Overview of the Good Friday Agreement Freedom ‘74, IRA Propaganda Poster. Source: The National Army Museum   Peace in Northern Ireland didn’t happen out of the blue. In April 1994, amid the peace talks that would lead to the Good Friday Agreement, the Provisional Irish Republican Army (IRA) announced a ceasefire, which was to run from April 6th to April 8th. Four months later, on August 31st, the IRA declared yet another “cessation of military operations.” This time it lasted until February 1996, when it was called off because the IRA was dissatisfied with the ongoing peace talks. It was reinstated in July 1997, shortly before the signing of the Good Friday Agreement. Seven years later, in 2004, the IRA officially announced the end of its armed campaign.   A bomb disposal officer and infantry officer patrolling the streets of West Belfast, 1982. Source: National Army Museum   “A truly historic opportunity for a new beginning,” the Good Friday Agreement was signed on April 10, 1998, in Belfast, Northern Ireland. Hence, the name by which it is colloquially known is the Belfast Agreement.   The Agreement is known by different names among the Protestant and Catholic communities. In Irish, for instance, it is called Comhaontú Aoine an Chéasta and Comhaontú Bhéal Feirste, while in Ulster Scots, the language brought to Ireland by the Scottish settlers in the 15th century, it translates as Guid Friday Greeance or Bilfawst Greeance. The Agreement itself recognizes “the importance of respect, understanding and tolerance in relation to linguistic diversity, including in Northern Ireland, the Irish language, Ulster-Scots and the languages of the various ethnic communities, all of which are part of the cultural wealth of the island of Ireland” (p. 21).   Vote Yes, Referendum Poster from the Good Friday Agreement. Source: Wikimedia Commons   The agreement saw representatives of the British and Irish governments and eight political parties from Northern Ireland coming together to ensure peace on Northern Irish soil. The Northern Irish side included representatives from the two opposing factions, the unionists and nationalists, as well as, most importantly perhaps, their armed groups. Among the unionists, the Ulster Unionist Party, the Progressive Unionist Party, and the Ulster Democratic Party took part in the drafting, with the latter two directly connected to the UVF and the UDA respectively. The same goes for the nationalist groupings: in addition to the Social Democratic and Labour Party, the Sinn Féin, the political wing of the IRA, also took part in the signing of the agreement.   The Good Friday Agreement was signed on April 10, 1998, but it didn’t come into effect until more than a year later, on December 2, 1999. Before this could happen, the people of Ireland and Northern Ireland had to approve it. On May 22, 1998, a referendum was held in Northern Ireland where both Catholic and Protestant populations were called to vote. The majority (71%) of those who voted were in favor of the Agreement. On the same day, another referendum was also held in the Republic of Ireland, where more than 94% of those who voted approved the Agreement.   The Three Strands  One of many “Peace Walls” dividing Belfast, by Duke Human Rights Center. Source: Flickr   The Agreement is written in clear, accessible language that can be easily understood by anyone, regardless of their education level. It is relatively brief, consisting of 32 pages, and is divided into three sections called strands:   1. The first strand is concerned with the establishment and safeguarding of “democratic institutions in Northern Ireland.” This involves creating a democratically elected Assembly comprising 108 members elected from existing Westminster constituencies which will operate “where appropriate on a cross-community basis” (p.7), thus restoring self-government to Northern Ireland and paving the way for power sharing between republicans and unionists. Additionally, the agreement provides for an Equality Commission in charge of monitoring, promoting, and safeguarding equality of opportunities between the Catholic and Protestant communities;   2. The second strand concerns the creation of a North/South Ministerial Council (p. 13), which will bring together the government of Ireland, represented by the Taoiseach and its ministers, with that of Northern Ireland. The North/South Ministerial Council and the Northern Ireland Assembly are expected to be mutually interdependent, “and that one cannot successfully function without the other” (p. 14).   3. The third strand ensures the establishment of a British-Irish Council (BIC), which will include representatives of the British and Irish governments, as well as “devolved institutions in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales” to “promote the harmonious and mutually beneficial development of the totality of relationships among the peoples of these islands” (p. 16).   Freely & Democratically Irish Counties and districts of Northern Ireland, by Ulamm. Source: Wikimedia Commons   The Good Friday Agreement commences with a Declaration of Support which states that the “participants in the multi-party negotiations believe that the agreement we have negotiated offers a truly historic opportunity for a new beginning.” As they reaffirm their absolute “commitment to exclusively democratic and peaceful means of resolving differences on political issues and our opposition to any use or threat of force by others for any political purpose,” they also affirm “against the background of the recent history of communal conflict” (p. 18) there are eight basic human rights everyone in Northern Ireland should enjoy, regardless of class or religion.   Words like “democratically,” “peaceful,” “freely,” and “equal” abound. In this regard, the Agreement also guarantees the establishment of a new, cross-communal, and independent Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission.   The Agreement condemns any (past, present, or future) attempt at creating a unified Ireland through violence and non-democratic means. As per the Declaration of Support, “it is for the people of the island of Ireland alone, by agreement between the two parts respectively and without external impediment, to exercise their right of self-determination on the basis of consent, freely and concurrently given, North and South, to bring about a united Ireland, if that is their wish, accepting that this right must be achieved and exercised with an subject to the agreement and consent of a majority of the people of Northern Ireland.”   A united Ireland can be achieved only through peaceful and democratic means, with the consent of the majority of both Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.   Reconciliation & Decommissioning British soldiers on patrol with members of the RUC, 1992. Source: National Army Museum   The Agreement doesn’t fail to address the complex issue of reconciliation and it doesn’t downplay it either. It recognizes that “victims have a right to remember as well as to contribute to a changed society,” which would be “the true memorial to the victims of violence” (p. 20). The path toward reconciliation and peace in Northern Ireland can only begin with acknowledging the suffering of the victims of the Troubles and their families, especially the young.   The second step is decommissioning. After 30 years of conflict which saw heavily armed paramilitary groups directly or indirectly controlling the lives of people through violence, Northern Ireland was a society built on the possession of illegally held weapons of all sorts. All participants in the signing of the Agreement “accordingly reaffirm their commitment to the total disarmament of all paramilitary organisations” (p. 22) within two years from the coming into effect of the Agreement.   As mentioned above, the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC), the police force for Northern Ireland, was overwhelmingly Protestant. While recognizing the “great suffered and sacrifices” (p. 23) made by RUC members and their families, the Agreement dictates that the new police force for Northern Ireland should be “professional, effective and efficient, fair and impartial, free from partisan political control; accountable, both under the law for its actions and to the community it serves; representatives of the society it polices” (p. 23). It is crucial that the people it aims to protect, both Catholics and Protestants, trust and support it.   The Good Friday Agreement not only brought an end to decades of sectarian violence in Northern Ireland, but in its commitment to human rights, the principle of consent, and reconciliation, it also represents a model for conflict resolution in other war-torn regions around the world.

President Trump on Wednesday confirmed his selection of Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) as his secretary of state. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis will now have the task of appointing a new senator from the Sunshine State. There is much speculation one of the leading candidates is Lara Trump, President Trump’s daughter-in-law. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL) and Sen. Katie Britt (R-AL) both suggested tapping the 42-year-old mother of two for the job. BREAKING: Sen. Katie Britt and Rep. Anna Paulina Luna want Lara Trump to be appointed to the Senate by Gov. Ron DeSantis when Rubio becomes Secretary of State. — Leading Report (@LeadingReport) November 12, 2024 “I think she is the best fit,” Luna said. WATCH: BREAKING: FL Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna calls on Gov. DeSantis to fill Marco Rubio's Senate vacancy after being named Trump's Secretary of State with current RNC Co-Chair Lara Trump "I think she is the best fit." pic.twitter.com/T9ojcYMBpD — Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) November 12, 2024 “She understands the America First agenda. For me, I think she would be a tremendous pick, a voice for hard working families and another mom of school aged kids that understands what we’re up against, and that’s to fight to protect the American dream,” Britt said, according to Axios. Scoop: Katie Britt pitches Lara Trump to fill Rubio's Florida Senate seat https://t.co/WKdc2l1xow — Axios (@axios) November 12, 2024 Per Axios: Sources tell us that other possible contenders for the seat include DeSantis’ chief of staff James Uthmeier and the state’s attorney general, Ashley Moody. DeSantis and Trump have had an at-times fraught relationship since trading barbs during the primary season. Now, DeSantis could find himself being pressured to appoint Trump’s daughter-in-law over one of his long-time aides. “If I am able to serve, I would love to serve the people of Florida,” Trump said. “Truly to have that opportunity I think would be incredible,” she added. WATCH: BREAKING: Lara Trump responds to calls for Governor Ron DeSantis to appoint her U.S. Senator of Florida to fill Marco Rubio’s seat: “If I am able to serve, I would love to serve the people of Florida… Truly to have that opportunity I think would be incredible” pic.twitter.com/F3dOvfjed7 — Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) November 14, 2024 Benny Johnson made the case for Lara Trump to become the next U.S. Senator from Florida: Marco Rubio’s long-held Florida Senate seat is open after an appointment to the Trump Cabinet. Lara Trump is the right person to fill it. Here is why… – Lara is an active, young mother who resonates with the dynamic Trump coalition of 18-40 year olds who want REAL change in America – Lara has a killer instinct for reform of broken systems. Without her sharp leadership at the RNC, Trump would not have won the 2024 election in a landslide – Lara is laser-focused on the issues that Americans care most about: Economics, family preservation, health for our children, secure borders and free, fair elections – Lara has personally sacrificed and suffered under the withering persecution of DC elites in corrupt Federal Agencies. What better motivation to dismantle them? – Lara can protect Trump’s agenda in the Senate. This chamber is an old-mans club of backroom deals and secret votes. Lara represents the generation of transparency and accountability mandated by the American people – Lara’s family brings great pride, respect and power to the State of Florida. She would be a commanding voice representing the young, energetic, entrepreneurial spirit of Florida. As a Florida resident, I know my voice would be represented in the US Senate best by Lara Trump. Judging by the number of calls I’m receiving about it — I’m not alone. The Case For Lara Trump to be the Next US Senator from Florida Marco Rubio's long-held Florida Senate seat is open after an appointment to the Trump Cabinet. Lara Trump is the right person to fill it. Here is why… – Lara is an active, young mother who resonates with the… pic.twitter.com/6BUhH7uE5h — Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) November 12, 2024 From the New York Post: Those close to the 42-year-old mother of two say she is Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ definitive top choice to replace Rubio in the DC trenches. “That’s a fact,” one source near Trump and her political career told The Post. And even Tesla CEO and Trump administration adviser Elon Musk is talking to her about the career move. “But she needs to make a decision. That’s hard when Elon and everyone else is encouraging you to do it,” the source said. Lara, who’s married to Trump’s second son and Trump Organization boss Eric, is Republican National Committee co-chair, and she’s been receiving serious internal GOP recognition after her father-in-law’s stunning Election Day victory. She would join Sen. Rick Scott on Capitol Hill in a new GOP majority that’s reportedly laser-focused on tax cuts and immigration reform. At her very first campaign speech in northern Michigan months ago, she told The Post she’d “consider” her post-election future only after she secured Republicans the White House and Senate majority.