BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Raggytash
Date: 08 May 16 - 07:06 AM

One of the ongoing problems is the "misinformation" that is often cited. For instance one poster suggested that Tim Pat Coogans book "1916 The Mornings After" had only sold just over 8,000 copies. What they omitted to say was that the book had been in print for a little over 2 months when the figures were compiled. They also omitted to say the Diarmaid Ferriters book (A Nation Not A Rabble)on the same subject had sold just 1,711 copies having been published some 8 months prior to Coogans and I suggest they may have got their figures from a article on Independent IE the headline of which read "COOGAN BLOWS FERRITER AWAY IN EXPLOSION OF 1916 BOOKS"

They also omitted to say there had been an ongoing feud between the two writers dating back to (I think) 1993.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 08 May 16 - 06:55 AM

Michael, Argentina, to my knowledge, merely tried to take back some small islands that we once took from them, and North Korea, for all its talk, does not attack other sovereign territories. Just thought I'd mention it. Not on-topic, but it did pop up and it's still running. No goading, just sayin'...

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Joe Offer
Date: 08 May 16 - 06:48 AM

Oh, and Teribus, you said: The round up and arrest of members and supporters of the IRB and IVF from all over Ireland numbered 3,509 Joe - ONLY ONE - Thomas Kent was executed and he was executed not for offences under the Treason Act but for the murder of a police officer, a charge he was undoubtedly guilty of. I'd blame Thomas Kent entirely.


What about the 15 who were executed by firing squad at Kilmainham Gaol between 3 and 12 May? I don't understand why they don't fit into your count. Weren't they just as dead as Kent was?

And wouldn't Kent have known that the others had been arrested and were likely to be executed?

In the court of world opinion, Britain would have gained much, if it had only refrained from executing these people. Instead, it created martyrs and lost its case completely.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Joe Offer
Date: 08 May 16 - 06:37 AM

Teribus says: There were two accounts posted regarding Thomas Kent - which account was the most complete and whose was the most factually honest? Answer please?

Joe's answer: I found your account and said what I thought about it. It seemed to be factual, with a pro-British slant. And it was interesting. I didn't find the other account. It must be in there someplace, mixed in with all the accusations from both sides that people are lying, but I didn't see it. And frankly, I don't have any reason to want to compare posts from two people. I read your post as you asked me to.

You people are really going to have to stop trying to prove each other to be liars. In the sport of boxing, they call it "infighting," boxing closer to an opponent than at arm's length. When a boxing match gets to that point, the referee has to break it up because the fight is going nowhere.

I don't really have a dog in this race. I'm interested in the subject and I want to learn about it. I want to know all perspectives, and I'm quite sure there was right and wrong on both sides of the issue. Since my favorite grandmother was Irish, I have been told since I was young that the British had no business being in Ireland, ever. My other grandmother was French Canadian. She didn't have an opinion on the matter.

But, despite my ancestral inclinations I AM open to hearing people who can come up with an explanation why it would be proper for the English to have a presence in Ireland. It would be interesting to hear such an explanation.

I'm still inclined to think that the Easter Rising was a tactical error on the part of the Irish rebels. It appears to me that Home Rule had been approved by Parliament, and was soon to become a reality. If that was the case, what sense did it make to organize this "Rising" that cost the Irish the lives of so many of their own people? Maybe somebody answered that question, and maybe it got lost amidst all the accusations of lying.

And on the other side, why did the British, who seemed to have the upper hand at the time, feel compelled to execute the rebels and make martyrs of them? That action, whether justified by law or not, made the British look like the cruel tyrants that they did not want to appear to be. So, again, another deadly tactical error that I just can't understand.

These are the things I want to learn in this thread. I really don't want to see all these accusations of lying, and these frantic searches to prove somebody said something two days ago and is saying something different now. All these silly accusations are what turn our threads into battlefields, and they are incredibly petty.

I have worked hard to keep this thread open, mostly by insisting that messages stay on topic. But if you people are going to keep up the lying accusations for another day, I'm going to have to close it, and I won't allow another discussion on the Easter Rising until I'm sure the current battle has calmed down.

Thank you.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Raggytash
Date: 08 May 16 - 04:19 AM

Au contraire.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Teribus
Date: 08 May 16 - 04:10 AM

You wear your "victimhood" like a shroud Raggy - enjoy.

GSS - meaningless apologies assuage nothing, it does not alter anything one iota.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Raggytash
Date: 08 May 16 - 04:03 AM

I think for me that could be extended back to 1170AD

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: The Sandman
Date: 08 May 16 - 03:19 AM

Although it is not my responsibilty Iwould like to apologise to the irish for the behaviour of the british during the easter rising, and the subsequent later behaviour of the black and tans.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Raggytash
Date: 08 May 16 - 03:04 AM

I suppose the main protagonists unconditionally surrendering and being in custody was a bit of a clue Terrikins even to someone such as yourself.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Teribus
Date: 08 May 16 - 02:58 AM

"Lastly, there was the Field General courts-martial, which could only be convened if the accused was on active service or was stationed overseas and it was therefore not practicable to try him in any other military court" - An apparent quote from somewhere cut-n-pasted by Raggy - who expects it to be taken as gospel. Unfortunately Raggy:

1: No such animal as a Field General Courts-Martial.

2: You have a Field Court-Martial whose sentencing powers are limited with fewer officers sitting.

3: Then you have a General Court-Martial which is the highest court in the armed forces

Given that other options were freely available after the surrender of the rising General Maxwell COULD and SHOULD have taken them.

Care to tell us all just exactly how General Maxwell KNEW that the rising was definitely over in the week to ten days after the 30th April Raggy. Were there IRB and IVF units still at large elsewhere in Ireland at this time? 20x20 hindsight is a great thing isn't it Raggy, unfortunately it is not available at the time when things are happening.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Teribus
Date: 08 May 16 - 02:36 AM

"The Royal Irish Constabulary (RIC) raided the Kent home on 22 April 1916, after the Easter Rising. I think it's clear that Thomas Kent had good reason to believe that he would be apprehended and executed."

If only the British had acted as advised by the Naval Intelligence on the 22nd April 1916 and rounded up all the leaders then there would have been no rising. But the date of the raid was the 2nd May wasn't it Joe? And the number of executions carried out of those held after the surrender on the 29th April by the 2nd of May 1916 numbered ZERO.

So tell me Joe why would Thomas Kent and his brothers have good reason to believe that that they would be apprehended and executed? Could it possibly be that they knew that as part of the reception committee for the German arms that were supposed to have been landed from the Aud they were guilty of treason?

In the USA Joe if an armed uprising occurred and it was thwarted are you honestly trying to tell us that the intelligence and law enforcement agencies would NOT raid the houses of known conspirators and supporters? The RIC had very good reason to raid the Kent house.

"One the raid happened, Kent had every reason to believe that his own death was inevitable...and history proved that to be correct. Sorry, but I can't place any blame on Thomas Kent."

1: The gun-fight that occurred was started by the four Kent brothers, their choice, the choice taken had consequences that the Kent brothers must have known. If you shoot at police officers they are most certainly going to shoot back - The fault here was entirely on the part of the Kent brothers NOT the RIC

2: The "inevitability of death" line that you have stated. Of the four Kent brothers, one died as a result of wounds received in a gun battle that they initiated - entirely his own fault, NOT that of the RIC, another attempted to escape after having surrendered - again entirely his own fault. Of the remaining two the person who shot and killed Rowe was tried, found guilty and executed and the other was tried and acquitted. The round up and arrest of members and supporters of the IRB and IVF from all over Ireland numbered 3,509 Joe - ONLY ONE - Thomas Kent was executed and he was executed not for offences under the Treason Act but for the murder of a police officer, a charge he was undoubtedly guilty of. I'd blame Thomas Kent entirely.

Now simple answer to a simple question, as you dodged it before Joe:

There were two accounts posted regarding Thomas Kent - which account was the most complete and whose was the most factually honest? Answer please?

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 08 May 16 - 01:41 AM

Just to second Joe's observation above that "I tend to agree with Steve Shaw, although I might have a more moderate tone..."

Don't always agree with Steve, but he seems to have nailed the main points in this instance. The US are our friends and allies, to be sure; but they do have a lamentable tendency to overreact and bully.

≈M≈

Though would add that "Israel, the most belligerent nation on earth" may be a bit hyperbolical. I am sure one could think of a few worthier candidates for the title (N Korea? Argentina? some entities of sub-Saharan Africa?), even tho I agree that "their mistreatment and repression of Palestinians" is indefensible.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Joe Offer
Date: 07 May 16 - 08:58 PM

I tend to agree with Steve Shaw, although I might have a more moderate tone....

Teribus asks for my solid opinion about the Thomas Kent arrest and execution. The Royal Irish Constabulary (RIC) raided the Kent home on 22 April 1916, after the Easter Rising. I think it's clear that Thomas Kent had good reason to believe that he would be apprehended and executed. In the course of this event, Kent killed an officer of the RIC; and he was subsequently charged with murder and executed.

Teribus, if the RIC had not raided Kent's home, no RIC officers would have been killed. One the raid happened, Kent had every reason to believe that his own death was inevitable...and history proved that to be correct. Sorry, but I can't place any blame on Thomas Kent.

On the other hand, I'm not at all sure that by 1916, the English were the "bad guys." In many ways, it seems that they got stuck between a rock and a hard place, and would much rather not have been involved in this situation at all. However, it appears to me that the local British commanders tended toward extremism, and they got the British into a situation where the British didn't really want to be.

And thus the tragedy.

Raggytash complained above about "pertinent posts" being deleted. I have a link that allows me to look at all the messages in a thread, including the deleted ones. I did that, and spent half an hour reviewing every deleted message. The only messages that were deleted, were the one that made no mention of the Easter Rising (posts like the ones from Steve Shaw and Greg F and HiLo and Dave the Gnome that were only meant to goad on the nastiness, without saying anything about the subject at hand). I did undelete one post from ollaimh. It was a little crazy, but it was on topic. Otherwise, the only messages in this thread that were deleted, were ones that had nothing at all to do with the Easter Rising.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 May 16 - 06:34 PM

"At the same time Joe it has been the most steadfast supporters and defenders of freedom the world has ever known."

Really? If only we could ask the tens of thousands of innocent civilians and their descendants of Hiroshima and Nagasaki what they think of the US support of their freedom. Or the people of Iran in 1953 as the US undermined the democratically-elected government in ruthless pursuit of its oil interests. Or the people of Guatemala who had a vicious dictator imposed by the US, resulting in a quarter of a million deaths. Or the people of Indonesia who were subjected to mass slaughter as the US provided aid to the right-wing military in their "communist purge." Or the people of Chile whose democratically-elected government was deposed by the CIA, resulting in decades of Pinochet's mass murder. Or the undermining for years of the Sandinistas in Nicaragua, because they were inconveniently leftie, by the CIA. Or the propping up of military dictatorships in God knows how many countries, let's just mention Spain, Portugal and Egypt. Or nearly pitching us into WW3 with extra nuclear teeth, or making us live in fear of Armageddon for three decades. Not to speak of their unconditional military support for Israel, the most belligerent nation on earth, in their mistreatment and repression of Palestinians. Unconditional? Sure. In the land of the free, any president or other politician who briefs against Israel is toast, as they are if they dare brief against the gun lobby or the multinationals. Yeah, defenders of freedom. Very limited freedom in sight, democracy turned into a laughing stock. I mean, what planet are you actually on?

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Raggytash
Date: 07 May 16 - 05:02 PM

I would suggest Terrikins that you do some reading I am correct in my post.

If you would like further reading try having a look at the following:

"Lastly, there was the Field General courts-martial, which could only be convened if the accused was on active service or was stationed overseas and it was therefore not practicable to try him in any other military court"

Given that other options were freely available after the surrender of the rising General Maxwell COULD and SHOULD have taken them.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Teribus
Date: 07 May 16 - 04:52 PM

"Field General Court Martials can only be convened if it is not practical to try a case in another court (military or otherwise)"

Ah Raggy definitely not a legal expert then, so in future please do not lecture us on legal matters.

Field Courts-Martial are one thing.

General Courts-Martial are another thing entirely.

Now toddle off do some googling and then come back and tell us all the difference.

If you need a compass I'll lend you one.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Teribus
Date: 07 May 16 - 04:47 PM

" I have no doubt that the US has been one of the most tyrannical nations in the world, especially in its political use of capital punishment."

At the same time Joe it has been the most steadfast supporters and defenders of freedom the world has ever known.

Now simple answer to a simple question, and from you Joe, unlike others on this forum I actually expect an honest reply:

There were two accounts posted regarding Thomas Kent - which account was the most complete whose was the most factually honest? Answer please you have sat on the fence for long enough.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Raggytash
Date: 07 May 16 - 04:10 PM

Hmmmmmmmm Some pertinent posts seem to have been deleted I wonder why?

---

Don't see any recent posts deleted, Raggytash. Maybe they didn't "take"? I'm still authorized by Max to protect this thread from excessive moderation. If it's on topic, it's protected.
-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Joe Offer
Date: 07 May 16 - 02:56 PM

Teribus says: What tyranny? Had the men executed in 1916 done anything like that in the USA, while the USA was at war their feet would not have touched the ground on the way to death row and the execution chamber - the US has executed a man (Brown) for organising armed resistance to slavery and one man (Mumford) for simply tearing down the union flag during the civil war.

Teribus, I have no doubt that the US has been one of the most tyrannical nations in the world, especially in its political use of capital punishment. Don't think that my being an American, implies that I have any support for capital punishment, armed civilians, or for the intolerance that is endemic in our society. And there is no doubt that the U.S. has a long and sordid history of imperialism that rivals that of the U.K.

And the fact that the US has long claimed a right to capital punishment, does not justify England doing the same. Both are wrong.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 May 16 - 02:31 PM

Yes, I condemn all war crimes. Would that you did the same apropos of your Israel hobby horse. As in the other thread, I won't call you a hypocrite, but you do sound awfully like one at times.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 May 16 - 02:26 PM

Do you also condemn the execution of Irishmen by other Irishmen in the civil war, either by firing squads or just shooting prisoners out of hand.

"these men (Free State Army)showed no mercy in their dealings with anti-treaty forces. "They were far worse than the Black and Tans" asserts Dan. "They murdered nineteen republican prisoners at Ballyseedy Cross, Countess's Bridge and elsewhere in Kerry in three days. The Tans never did anything as bad as that", he says. "It was
very easy to get killed at that time", remembers Dan." "

Dan was an IRA volunteer.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 May 16 - 02:20 PM

Agreed here also. It's so easy to defend actions because they were of their time. Or because they were just following the law, or just following orders. Where have we heard that one before...

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 May 16 - 02:17 PM

Rag,
You said all three were criticisms of the 1916 The Mornings After.

I did not.
Here is what I actually said,
"So three examples given of all the Irish historians who criticise his work."

Jim,
You claimed,
"By the way - you said the Easter Rising was substantially covered by all books on WW1."

I did not say any such thing.

I said,
"Rag, it is true I do not read books on Irish history, but I am very well read on the period 1914-1918 which of course includes the rising."

I stand by that.

I suggest that you all stop trying to smear me with false claims of lying and just discuss the issues.
Anything else to say about the rising, or are you desperate for any diversion from a difficult subject.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: The Sandman
Date: 07 May 16 - 02:17 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Joe Offer - PM
Date: 07 May 16 - 01:51 AM

But does martial law justify tyranny, Teribus? political executions?

I think that in the eyes of the world, the execution of the Irish rebels of 1916, was just wrong. Britain simply had no need to do that.

-Joe-
I agree Joe

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 07 May 16 - 01:55 PM

No Greg, that is the only example, and it there is no dishonesty in it.
Steve,
It just so happened that I'd read that Guardian article just before Keith misrepresented it so grossly.

And it just so happened that I had quoted the disputed passage in full, and provided a link to the whole article.

Rag,
When one contributor claims from the rooftops that there are 3 criticisms of a book when in reality is in fact one criticism of a book, which that contributor then claims to be criticisms of that author works, it has to be pointed out.

Your accusation about me is mistaken Rag.
Here is what I actually said,
"So three examples given of all the Irish historians who criticise his work."

I did not, and do not lie.

Jim,
"Jim's knowledge has been shown to be wrong"
Where and by whom

Jim, you denied that the Home Rule Act had been passed
I showed that you were wrong.

You also challenged the fact that the people supported British forces not the rebels.
I showed that you were wrong.

You have not put up a single historian to back your case,

yes I have.

you have refused to respond to and of the points made other than to repeat your inaccuracies.

If that is true, say what these points are and I will answer them.
I have asked you to do this many times.
What stops you Jim?

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Greg F.
Date: 07 May 16 - 12:31 PM

And the Wheatcroft business is but one example of many.

If it walks like a duck........

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Raggytash
Date: 07 May 16 - 10:57 AM

Field General Court Martials can only be convened if it is not practical to try a case in another court (military or otherwise) They were only used if the accused was on active military service overseas.

Given that the rising was over this was not the case and the due process of law COULD and SHOULD have been followed.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 07 May 16 - 10:47 AM

I rarely call people liars, Joe, but when I do my reasoning for reaching that conclusion is always crystal clear. I spent many posts and a good deal of time refuting what Keith said about Wheatcroft and stating what was actually in the article. One can do no more.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Teribus
Date: 07 May 16 - 10:40 AM

If my opinion counts for naught Raggy why did you ask for it?

The answer IN LAW you say. Are you a legal expert? I somehow doubt it.

But it wasn't just IN LAW was it Raggy? It was UNDER MARTIAL LAW - by the way it was the fact that you have not picked up on the difference that leads me to suspect that you are NOT a legal expert.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Raggytash
Date: 07 May 16 - 10:02 AM

Your opinion counts for naught.

You know that the answer to each of the question IN LAW (not your opinion) but IN LAW is yes, yes and yes.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Teribus
Date: 07 May 16 - 04:43 AM

"The pertinent question is "were they given a fair trial"

Some of the people conducting the trials has also been involved in suppressing the rising. This I believe is prohibited in the military manual.

So question 1. Is it prohibited in the Military Manual that an officer involved in an action cannot take part is any later legal proceedings. A simple yes or no answer will suffice.

So question 2. If the answer to question 1 is yes then should these people have been debarred from being involved in the trials. A simple yes or no answer will suffice.

General Maxwell took it upon himself to conduct the trials in secret and without a defence being allowed.

So question 3. Was this ruled illegal by Crown Law Officers, again a simple yes or no answer will suffice.

To answer your questions in reverse order and acknowledging the fact that Martial Law had been declared on the 25th April and therefore taking into account that that significantly altered the circumstances to the extent that peacetime and civil rules are dispensed with:

3: No, and there was no such ruling, it was the opinion of some Crown Law Officers, the subsequent Royal Commission into the Easter Rising did not rule that the Courts Martial held after the rising were illegal.

2: No, if under the circumstance these are the only officers of suitable rank immediately available, and that holds good irrespective if martial law has been declared

1: No, see 2 above.

Your pertinent quest "were they given a fair trial"?

David Kent certainly received a fair trial (IMHO he should have been executed as an accessory to murder).

William Kent certainly received a fair trial - he was acquitted (IMHO he should have been executed as an accessory to murder).

90 people court-martialled and sentenced to death - only 15 sentences actually carried out - So yes IMHO considering what they were guilty of they received a fair trial.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Teribus
Date: 07 May 16 - 03:11 AM

Joe Offer - 06 May 16 - 01:17 PM

Well, the discussion, though heated, continues to be interesting. I don't think anybody is lying here. Lies are false statements intentionally meant to mislead. I think people here are saying what they believe to be correct - even though it may be incorrect. Rather than respond with accusations of "lying," a factual, documented response would be helpful.

Two posts on Thomas Kent Joe, one very sanitised post from Jim Carroll, and another providing far more detail from me. Are you familiar Joe with the expression lying by omission?

Jim's post seeks to give the impression that Kent was selected at random and killed for taking part in the rising even although he was not even in Dublin at the time. In doing this does he seek to mislead? I certainly think so.

My contribution details that Kent was executed for the shooting of a policeman in the execution of his duty.

To answer your earlier question and subsequent comment:

What tyranny? Had the men executed in 1916 done anything like that in the USA, while the USA was at war their feet would not have touched the ground on the way to death row and the execution chamber - the US has executed a man (Brown) for organising armed resistance to slavery and one man (Mumford) for simply tearing down the union flag during the civil war.

I personally, would have kept them all alive, especially those who signed the proclamation. I would have paraded them through every town, village, parish and school hall in Ireland exposing their lies and their treachery to their own followers and to the Irish people (who they most certainly did not represent - they even had to keep their intentions secret from their own organisations FFS!!).

To expose and provide proof to the world of the extent of their treacherous collusion with Germany between 1914 and 1916 would have let the Germans know that their naval codes had been broken. Tell me Joe how closely was ENIGMA guarded during the Second World War? How closely guarded a secret was the Manhattan Project? The USA and Great Britain would have done anything to keep those secrets from their enemies. Great Britain was in the same situation in 1916.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Raggytash
Date: 07 May 16 - 02:58 AM

Hello Terrikins, where have you been. I've been hoping for a response to the three questions I put to you in my post that asked:

The pertinent question is "were they given a fair trial"

Some of the people conducting the trials has also been involved in suppressing the rising. This I believe is prohibited in the military manual.

So question 1. Is it prohibited in the Military Manual that an officer involved in an action cannot take part is any later legal proceedings. A simple yes or no answer will suffice.

So question 2. If the answer to question 1 is yes then should these people have been debarred from being involved in the trials. A simple yes or no answer will suffice.

General Maxwell took it upon himself to conduct the trials in secret and without a defence being allowed.

So question 3. Was this ruled illegal by Crown Law Officers, again a simple yes or no answer will suffice.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Teribus
Date: 07 May 16 - 02:06 AM

"You said all three were criticisms of the 1916 The Mornings After."

Don't think he did Raggy.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Teribus
Date: 07 May 16 - 01:57 AM

Thomas Kent - the whole story

(Tomás Ceannt in Irish)(1865 – 9 May 1916) was an Irish nationalist executed following a gunfight with the Royal Irish Constabulary (RIC) on 22 April 1916.
Kent was part of a prominent nationalist family who lived at Bawnard House, Castlelyons, County Cork. They were prepared to take part in the Easter Rising, but when the mobilization order was countermanded, they stayed home. The rising nevertheless went forward in Dublin, and the RIC was sent to arrest well-known sympathizers throughout the country including, but not limited to, known members of the Irish Republican Brotherhood, Sinn Féin, and the Irish Volunteers. When the Kent residence was raided they were met with resistance from Thomas and his brothers Richard, David, and William. A gunfight lasted for four hours, in which an RIC officer, Head Constable William Rowe, was killed and David Kent was seriously wounded. Eventually the Kents were forced to surrender, although Richard made a last minute dash for freedom and was fatally wounded.

Thomas and William were tried by court martial on the charge of murdering Head Constable Rowe. William was acquitted, but Thomas was sentenced to death and executed by firing squad in, Cork on 9 May 1916. David Kent was brought to Dublin where he was charged with the same offence, found guilty and sentenced to death, but the sentence was commuted and he was sentenced to five years penal servitude. Apart from the singular case of Roger Casement, Thomas Kent was the only person outside of Dublin to be executed for his role in the events of Easter Week. He is buried in the grounds of Collins Barracks, Cork (formerly Victoria Barracks).

So then Jom I can certainly see why even in 1916 without the imposition of Martial Law that all four of the Kent brothers would be charged and executed - killing a police officer in the execution of his duty would guarantee it - but they weren't were they?

David first wounded in the four hour long gunfight that they started, he was later tried, convicted, sentenced to death and then had his sentence commuted to five years penal servitude.

Richard shot and fatally wounded attempting to escape (,i.e. his own choice Jom - he knew precisely what risk he was taking)

William Kent was arrested, tried and acquitted

Thomas Kent who did kill Rowe was arrested, tried , convicted and executed.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Joe Offer
Date: 07 May 16 - 01:51 AM

But does martial law justify tyranny, Teribus? political executions?

I think that in the eyes of the world, the execution of the Irish rebels of 1916, was just wrong. Britain simply had no need to do that.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Teribus
Date: 07 May 16 - 01:37 AM

Raggytash - 05 May 16 - 06:59 AM

Martial Law having been declared on the 25th April 1916 means that General Maxwell could do pretty much as he liked.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Joe Offer
Date: 07 May 16 - 12:14 AM

Yeah, but when all we hear is that some poster is a liar, we don't learn anything. Better to lay off the accusations, and use the "lies" (if that is what they are) as an opportunity to further explain the truth. Accusations of lying, are just not interesting. I wish Mr. Trump would learn that.

I'm still trying to sort all this out. I think people are pretty accurate when trying to present their perspective of an issue. However, there's something in human nature that makes us unable to present the other party's perspective with similar accuracy. My tendency is to side with the Irish rebels, but I know that rebels tend toward absolutism in their belief in their cause. I also know the British to be extremely decent people, not likely to oppress if they actually realize that they're being oppressive. But still, the British played a major part in the Highland Clearances in Scotland, and in the oppression of the Irish. So, I'm still trying to make sense out of all this.

I cringe every time I hear the "liar" accusation. I really respect Barack Obama, and I was shocked when a Congressman shouted out "liar" during Obama's State of the Union address a few years ago. And the Republicans (and even some Bernie Sanders supporters) have had a concerted effort to label Hillary Clinton as a liar - and I just can't believe them. So, if I hear the term "liar," I'd rather see refuting information instead of just the accusation.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 06 May 16 - 07:34 PM

Sorry, Joe, but you really don't understand Keith, do you. It's a bit like when you've been reading and trusting your local paper for thirty years or so, then, one day, the paper reports something about you. It's inaccurate, it misquotes you and it misrepresents you in the extreme. After that, you can never again believe a word it says. Well that's how we are with Keith. My turning point, as if I needed one, was his gross misrepresentation of Geoffrey Wheatcroft. It just so happened that I'd read that Guardian article just before Keith misrepresented it so grossly. When I challenged him, he was unapologetic and would not admit to his glaring error, even in the face of the plain truth. Regrettably, but factually, that makes Keith a liar, Joe. Yes, there are liars on this forum. No need to be so nice about them. Having said all that, your post is otherwise reasonable and measured.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: An Pluiméir Ceolmhar
Date: 06 May 16 - 07:18 PM

Hmmm. Just looked in on this thread thinking it would probably be best to stay out of it. My initial judgement is confirmed.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Greg F.
Date: 06 May 16 - 05:55 PM

Yeah, but is Coogan alive or dead? That's the first thing we need to know.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Raggytash
Date: 06 May 16 - 04:15 PM

Joe, I know you are trying to pour oil and troubled waters but although we all often make mistakes I draw a line when someone deliberately lies and then continues to do so.

When one contributor claims from the rooftops that there are 3 criticisms of a book when in reality is in fact one criticism of a book, which that contributor then claims to be criticisms of that author works, it has to be pointed out.

If once pointed out that contributor had said Ooops my mistake, it would not have gone any further. However both you and I know said contributor will NEVER acknowledge they are in the wrong.

In one post that contributor actually libelled the author of the book in question. I would like to think the said author would take an action against the contributor and I've saved the offending posts just in case he does.

This one contributor is renowned for trying to "mislead" others. Some of us call that lying.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Joe Offer
Date: 06 May 16 - 01:17 PM

Well, the discussion, though heated, continues to be interesting. I don't think anybody is lying here. Lies are false statements intentionally meant to mislead. I think people here are saying what they believe to be correct - even though it may be incorrect. Rather than respond with accusations of "lying," a factual, documented response would be helpful.

It is my impression that the Irish rebels executed after the Easter Rising, were charged with and executed for treason. But I haven't seen credible documentation of these charges, and that would be interesting to me.

It seems to me that treason as a political offense. Many times, those who are charged with treason are people who truly believe they are doing something for the good of their society. But yet treason and other political offenses seem to be the most common reason for capital punishment. We humans don't execute people for public safety - we execute for political expediency.

It seems to me that both the British and the Irish rebels executed good people for purely political reasons.

I think that's wrong.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 May 16 - 10:30 AM

Re books on WW1
"No I did not."
"Rag, it is true I do not read books on Irish history, but I am very well read on the period 1914-1918 which of course includes the rising."
You gave the impression that The Easter Rising was an essential part of the history of WW1.
I sk again, in which books on WW1 are the events of Easter Week covered?
"Anything else to say about the rising, or are you grateful for any diversion from a difficult subject for you and Jim?"
You and your mate has been humiliated on this subject - you have displayed in glorious technicolour your attitude to the Irish people as a whole.
You witter on about historians, having boasted that you have never read one on the subject (and don't intend to) and you have not produced a single one who backs your contempt for a part of Irish history that is being celebrated at the present time.
There is a great deal more to be said on the subject, but not to you - you have proven your stated ignorance and disinterest over and over again.
You are still attempting to win prizes and have now resorted to posting your arguments on the Antisemitsim thread.
I have suggested you apologise to the posters on that thread - I suggets the same here, though I don't expect a decent response for either
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 06 May 16 - 07:23 AM

"Jim's knowledge has been shown to be wrong"
Where and by whom
You have not put up a single historian to back your case, you have refused to respond to and of the points made other than to repeat your inaccuracies.
You refuse to even substantiate your own claims only to deny you made them -you suggested that "of course" your WW1 books cover Easter week yet not only fail to name one, but deny having said so. "No I did not.
"
Your one hopeful historian crumbled in your face and you have now resorted to posting your failed arguments on the Antisemitism thread behind our backs.
Heving ruled The Famine out of bounds for everyone else, you have now resorted to a single critiscism of the author.
Your mate has obviously decided that discretion is the better part of valour and done a runner.
I have suggested to the posters to the Antisemitism thread for your behaviour - I suggest you do the same here for taking your arguments to another thread behind our backs.
I doubt you will do either
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Raggytash
Date: 06 May 16 - 07:01 AM

You said all three were criticisms of the 1916 The Mornings After.

Two of the three criticisms were relating to another book entirely.

You then said that all three were criticisms of him as a writer of history.

They were not they were criticisms of one book.

You then said the reviews showed he had been falsifying history for years, a libellous statement if ever I heard one. (Must point that out to Tim Pat Coogan, I've heard a rumour that he does enjoy legal actions)

You then repeated that they were criticisms of him as a historian.

No they were not, they criticised one book.

You have been proven once again to be a liar and as I suggested earlier you will continue to lie.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 May 16 - 06:42 AM

The Famine Plot was his book and it was criticised for historical inaccuracy in two of the three.
The third one was the book you recommended.

It is here clearly for everyone to see.
Yes. Here it is again.

"Well, I waited in this book to hear some great revelation and it just isn't there. It's anticlimactic. I could not see the great plot, and indeed there is no serious historian who ... I can't think of a single historian who has researched the Famine in depth – and Tim Pat has not researched it in depth" (The Famine Plot).
"This is far from his best: it rakes over ground already all too familiar, adds little that is new, and lacks an obvious narrative or logical structure" (The Famine Plot).
"Coogan is not remotely interested in looking at what others have written on 20th-century Irish history. ... he does not appear interested in context and shows scant regard for evidence. He does not attempt to offer any sustained analysis in relation to the challenges of state building, the meaning of sovereignty, economic and cultural transformations, or comparative perspectives on the evolution of Irish society. There is no indication whatsoever that Coogan has engaged with the abundant archival material relating to the subject matter he pronounces on. There is no rhyme or reason when it comes to the citation of the many quotations he uses; the vast majority are not referenced. For the 300-page text, 21 endnotes are cited and six of them relate to Coogan's previous books, a reminder that much of this tome consists of recycled material. ... Tim Pat Coogan ... he is a decent, compassionate man who has made a significant contribution to Irish life. But he has not read up on Irish history; indeed, such is the paucity of his research efforts that this book amounts to a travesty of 20th-century Irish history" (1916: The Mornings After)."

Anything else to say about the rising, or are you grateful for any diversion from a difficult subject for you and Jim?

Jim's knowledge has been shown to be wrong, you have not shown any at all, and neither of you can fault the historical facts produced by T and me.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Raggytash
Date: 06 May 16 - 05:29 AM

Absolutely not Keith YOU ARE A LIAR. You have been caught out once again and even when caught you continue to lie, as you will continue to lie about this.

Two of the three comments referred specifically to the FAMINE PLOT, nothing else. You LIED about them referring to Tim Pat Coogan himself.

It is here clearly for everyone to see.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 06 May 16 - 05:14 AM

I do not lie Rag.
Those criticisms were of him as an historian.

Anything else to say about the rising, or are you grateful for any diversion from a difficult subject for you and Jim?

Jim's knowledge has been shown to be wrong, you have not shown any at all, and neither of you can fault the historical facts produced by T and me.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Raggytash
Date: 06 May 16 - 05:07 AM

That is YOUR false interpretation.

However the comments refer to a single book THE FAMINE PLOT not to any other of his works.

Once again YOU have been caught out LYING and YOU are in no position to criticise an author who YOU haven't read, will probably never read and have clearly stated on many occasions YOU have no interest in his subject.