|
17 May 07 - 08:33 PM (#2055066) Subject: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST The Turner prize winning artist Steve McQueen has announced his first feature film, a film about the IRA hunger striker Bobby Sands. The story will look at his last six weeks as he starved himself to death in the Maze prison. The film is to be called Hunger. Of the film the Director and co-writer says: "What I want to convey is something you can't find in books or archive, the ordinariness and extraordinariness of life in this prison. Yet also the film is an abstraction in a certain way, a meditation on what it is like to die for a cause." His comments do concern me because they give the feeling of an extremely romanticised story, something akin to Ghandi's hunger strike. Sands was a member of the Provisional Irish Republican Army and was implicated, although never convicted, of the bombing of the Balmoral Furniture Company and of a shoot out with the Police. It was after the shoot out he was caught trying to flee the scene with handguns in his car, one of which had been fired at the Police. During his time in prison he led protests to try and have the prisoners political status recognised, rather than being treated as straight criminals. The protests led to the hunger strikes, during which Sands was even elected as an MP, which then caused the Government to push through an act stating that people who served more than a years jail time could not become Politicians. Nine other IRA and INLA members who were involved in the hunger strikes also died after him. After these events the IRA received new funds and escalated their campaigns of terror. What concerns me is that in bringing a story like this to film, if it's not handled with care and an unbiased view, that it may just spark some of the feelings that caused riots and the increased IRA activities of the time. Of course McQueen could be heading in a more level headed manner, but the comments here do seem rather romanticised.
-Joe Offer- |
|
17 May 07 - 09:28 PM (#2055088) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Ebbie As an ignorant amurrican, I'm not sure, but if the British government had capitulated and recognized the cause as being political rather than criminal, mightn't the whole thing have turned out differently? |
|
17 May 07 - 10:52 PM (#2055143) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Mick I am anxious to see the movie about this brave man, a man of conviction. Mick |
|
18 May 07 - 03:07 AM (#2055263) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Jean(eanjay) Thanks for reminding us about this. I also am very keen to see this film. It is about an important part of history and I don't think that it will cause any problems. |
|
18 May 07 - 06:05 AM (#2055347) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: skipy What a STUPID time to make a film on this subject! Skipy |
|
18 May 07 - 07:23 AM (#2055380) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: guitar I couldn't care less about this dickhead, I bet his last words were "I could MURDER a sandwich", I don't feel sorry for dickheads like or his ilk on either side of terroristism, because that what these people are/were murders, I mean you don't need to point a gun or use a bomb to kill someone. |
|
18 May 07 - 07:35 AM (#2055388) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: guitar here's a wee song about these 'people' it's called 'what kind of man' What kind of man is he and which cause did he use when he placed the bomb and set the fuse did he walk away crying 'liberty' and if he did what kind of man is he did he sleep well that night deaf to to the dying last screams did no bloody ghosts walk through his dreams does he shed innocent blood as part of a grand strategy and if he does what kind of man is he CH FOR ALL THE TEARS AND MOURNING FOR ALL THOSE YOU'VE MAINED AND KILLED FOR ALL THE MURDERED CHILDREN GOD DAMN YOUR SOUL TO HELL Is he a faimly man does he have any kids will they ever understand what their father did does he use noble wards like 'freedom from tyranny' and if he does what kind of man is he are you out there tonight wearing your everyman's face do you still see yourself as part of the human race in spite of the murders you've done and the killinf that you've yet to do and that's why I ask what kind of man are you From Gethsemane to Auchwitz the man with the gun has stood between us and what we could of become shall we be dragged back once again into barbarity if we let them do that what kind of men are we By Eric Bogle |
|
18 May 07 - 09:00 AM (#2055432) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: pirandello I couldn't think of a less appropriate subject for a feature film than this non-entity. Someone above called him 'brave'. He was a murdering thug, nothing more, nothing less and the sooner he is forgotten the better for everyone. |
|
18 May 07 - 09:13 AM (#2055444) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: SINSULL With no comment on the politics of the situation, I have always felt that this was a foolish and cowardly waste of life. |
|
18 May 07 - 09:20 AM (#2055449) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Jean(eanjay) Jan Younghusband, Channel 4 Commissioning Editor for Arts, said: "Channel 4 regularly commissions new work from artists for the screen, galleries, public spaces and theatre. Steve McQueen is an exceptional artist and filmmaker whose work in galleries has transformed our experience of the visual arts. I am delighted to commission his first feature film which revisits, through the unique perspective of an artist, this crucial moment in Anglo-Irish history." |
|
18 May 07 - 09:34 AM (#2055463) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: skipy Will he get his bike over the fence this time? Skipy |
|
18 May 07 - 09:44 AM (#2055478) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Jean(eanjay) It's a long time since I saw that film, Skipy. |
|
18 May 07 - 09:45 AM (#2055480) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: catspaw49 Yes Skipy but he'll knock the crap out of Delgetti for getting him out of bed............ Spaw |
|
18 May 07 - 09:47 AM (#2055483) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Jean(eanjay) The film maker said the story had modern relevance. He said: "Hunger will be a film with international contemporary resonance. The body as site of political warfare is becoming a more familiar phenomenon. It is the final act of desperation, your own body is your last resource for protest. One uses what one has, rightly or wrongly." |
|
18 May 07 - 09:50 AM (#2055489) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: guitar there was nothing political about it, the guy and his ilk on both sides of the 'war' were and are still murderers no more to be said I think. |
|
18 May 07 - 09:53 AM (#2055494) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Mr Red armalite rifles have modern relevance? or will the lead up to the popular facts be glossed over? balance and perspective? - hmmm. |
|
18 May 07 - 10:18 AM (#2055510) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: guitar the nxt post is what I think of Bobby Sands |
|
18 May 07 - 10:18 AM (#2055511) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: guitar |
|
18 May 07 - 10:45 AM (#2055536) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: guitar you're right he was a man of conviction aye flung into to jail |
|
18 May 07 - 10:47 AM (#2055539) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Den Well, well, well. Just dangle the carrot and out come the bigots. Just who did Bobby Sands murder? Several posters (for want of a better title) have called him a murderer. Produce your evidence, put up or shut up. It never ceases to amaze me the ammount of vitriol directed at this young man. I think a lot of you need to educate yourselves. I know for a few that's asking a lot. |
|
18 May 07 - 11:53 AM (#2055593) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: guitar have you never heard of being an accomplice to Murder, you just need to be part of the terrorist group that's all. but why should I even talk to you because you just don't even listen. so goodbye |
|
18 May 07 - 11:55 AM (#2055597) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: guitar oh if he hadn't done that then why was he put into prison then. |
|
18 May 07 - 11:57 AM (#2055599) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: guitar the next post after this is like the inside of your head (empty) goodbye |
|
18 May 07 - 11:57 AM (#2055600) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: guitar |
|
18 May 07 - 12:02 PM (#2055603) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: guitar I copied this from a website, some friendYour continued donations keep Wikipedia running! Bobby Sands From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Cut and paste articles are limited to the amount of text that will fill one computer screen of average size. Please learn and use links. There are instructions in the FAQ. Mudleprechuan |
|
18 May 07 - 12:19 PM (#2055618) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: guitar let me ask you one more question and that why if he a member of a terroist group then why do he have guns in his house, unless he was intending to us them, I mean not to go and shoot birds. Anyway let bygones be bygones. let's not argue over this I know your view and I know my view let's agree to disagree |
|
18 May 07 - 12:29 PM (#2055627) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle Some peoples computers should have the cut and paste key confiscated - til they can use it responsibly. Every cause is allowed its ikons and martyrs and Bobby Sands will always be an important one for Irish republicans of a certain turn of mind. People opposed to these views should show some respect for what was a tragic, albeit history changing death of a young man. Sands supporters (particularly those outside the UK) should understand that his death lead to the murder of dozens of people in Northern Ireland in the immediate aftermath - reprisals, and reprisals for reprisals. These people all had families who loved them - just occasionally a degree of sensitivity would not not go amiss. |
|
18 May 07 - 01:12 PM (#2055672) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Den Six posts and still no evidence of murder. Did you even read any of the information you cluttered the place up with. Finally if Wikipedia is the extent of your research capabilities then that says more about your empty head than mine. |
|
18 May 07 - 01:18 PM (#2055677) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Greg B If Gerry and Ian had just done 30 years earlier what they did in the last few weeks, this whole discussion might not have happened and Bobby Sands might be a panel beater who found his way into local politics and whose greatest worry was whether or not to put a roundabout at the north end of town. |
|
18 May 07 - 01:22 PM (#2055682) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Den Ah but Greg B, if if's, and and's were pots and pans, there be no need for tinkers. |
|
18 May 07 - 04:07 PM (#2055826) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle Den - even if he had killed someone, it would claimed as a legitimate target. It didn't seem to make much difference in those days to the interested parties - except when the other side did it and then it was bloody murder. The Hunger Strike was seen as an exercise rather like 1916, probably a failure but some thing which would change things forever. It must have been obvious to Bobby Sands that innocent people were going to be killed in the wake of his death. That may not be murder, but then Thatcher didn't actually squeeze any triggers. |
|
18 May 07 - 04:08 PM (#2055828) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Den, Guitar is a very easy target for your wit. His views are blunt and simplistic, but he is not the bigot you say he is. He did make clear that he felt the same about both sides. B.S. was not convicted of murder, but you will not dispute that he was a very active IRA volunteer. As a volunteer he would expect to be ordered to kill people from time to time. You would not regard that as murder Den, but many do. |
|
18 May 07 - 05:53 PM (#2055900) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Den WLD there's the "if" word again. Several people above accused Sands of murder outright, no if's and's, or but's. I merely asked for proof. There is none. Unlike his detractors I know people who knew Sands, well. Of the two camps, and bearing in mind the tone of the discussion here to date I prefer to take the word of the latter. How could Sands possibly know what would transpire after he was dead? That would appear to be conjecture. I was waiting for your arrival Keith. What took you so long? Now where do we start with your post? Please define, "very active IRA volunteer." Now be careful with your answer Keith your track record on here is questionable in matters pertaining to our wee province you won't get all your answers on google and please what do you know about my beliefs in regard to what is or isn't murder? Wit or no Mr. Guitar certainly nails his colours to the mast. You don't see them the way I do. Does that make me wrong? And now I am off out to a wine tasting. I hope everyone has a pleasant evening in my absence. |
|
18 May 07 - 05:58 PM (#2055907) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Den Good thing I checked my post before I left or I would have missed the two enlightened posts after Keith's. Now I wonder which particular Guest, of the many that regularly post here, could this be? LOL |
|
18 May 07 - 07:18 PM (#2055977) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle I'd say it was a pretty safe conjecture, Den. he knew he was making history. He must have had some inkling of what was going to happen. He would hardly have given his life if the whole thing had not been orchestrated. He knew what that involved. He wasn't a naive. You're absolutely right about one thing though. No one should be accused of stuff they just MIGHT have done in this fashion. Mind you that would bring the Jack the Ripper industry grinding to a standstill. No more books, documentaries etc. I suppose its in the nature of things that guerilla warriors activities are shrouded in mystery. In the recent TV documentary about Padraig Pearse, the presenter of the programme was saying that we know remarkably little about many of the leaders of 1916 because their activities were secret. Perhaps the happenings of more recent times will turn out to have been better documented. |
|
19 May 07 - 03:32 AM (#2056213) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: guitar Den why don't you put up or shut up, because that two times you have been asked, and I'll ask you one more time and then I'll stop because I'll know that I won't get an answer why then if Bobby Sands a member of the IRA have guns in his house if he wasn't going to use them if ordered. |
|
19 May 07 - 05:23 AM (#2056260) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Den, some people call all IRA killings murder, and some regard them as legal executions and accidents. I did assume that you were with the latter. I am sorry for that. I also did assume that B.S. was an IRA fighter and so a participator in the armed struggle. What do I know? Are you correcting me on that? |
|
19 May 07 - 05:24 AM (#2056261) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle you've got the equipment guitar - it doesn't mean you're guilty of rape. I bet you intend to use it now and then. |
|
19 May 07 - 06:37 AM (#2056290) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: guitar I'm a eunoch so I can't really can I, anyway what has this got to do with IRA 'man'Bobby sands |
|
19 May 07 - 06:40 AM (#2056291) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: guitar Only kidding, but I don't devaulge in having sex, because I just don't really not that kind of guy really and I suppose it's true wrong again sorry. I just don't like the Republican or Loyalist terrorist groups or any other terrorist groups for that matter please ignore te last post I made now I'll leaving this post because it's becoming a bit personal. so let us all agree to disagree |
|
19 May 07 - 07:13 AM (#2056309) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Den, I know you do not approve of Google searches, but this is relevant. At eighteen years of age Bobby joined the Republican Movement. In an article he wrote for Republican News he said: "My life now centred around sleepless nights and stand-bys, dodging the Brits and calming nerves to go out on operations. |
|
19 May 07 - 07:51 AM (#2056320) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle Keith, what exactly are you hoping for? You are tearing yourself to bits looking for an admission of guilt that is not going to come. a) they don't feel guilty b) yielding ground isn't in the battle orders for the day Whatever the truth is, we are not privvy to it. End of story. We can have our private suspicions, but that's what they must remain. |
|
19 May 07 - 08:18 AM (#2056335) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Mick Why would they feel guilty. You may not approve of the guerilla tactics, but where the North of Ireland is today did not come about because Her Majesty's government woke up one morning and decided they would end centuries worth of oppression. Whether we like it or not, these things happen because someone had the stones to continue the fight until it became necessary to deal with them. Many mistakes were made, many sad stories written. But that is the way of it. Now it is time to move this process forward. Sinn Fein will continue on with the next step which is the reunification of Ireland. Can you not applaud the actions of McGuinness and Adams in changing the course and getting us to this point? Paisley had to be dragged to it. But these two men had to walk the thin line between radicals in their own constituency and the politics of the North. Ramble off, Mick |
|
19 May 07 - 08:37 AM (#2056341) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle A lot of innocent (many uninvolved) people were murdered, as a totally predictable direct result. Some people would find that a source of guilt. In fact it says quite a lot about you in my book, if you don't. |
|
19 May 07 - 08:49 AM (#2056347) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: guitar I don't even talk to these people because I ahve no time for them on both sides of the 'war' in Northern Ireland, be they protestant or Catholic I could care because to many people have been killed. 3000 people have been killed because prtestants and Catholics don't sit down and talk. |
|
19 May 07 - 09:03 AM (#2056348) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: guitar this is a song by Bobby Darin I like it because it is an anti-war song and also the last verse which is I dedicate to Gerry Adams and Ian Paisley. Come and sing a simple song of freedom Sing it like you've never sung before Let it fill the air Tell the people everywhere We, the people here, don't want a war. Hey, there, mister black man, can you hear me? I don't want your diamonds or your game I just want to be someone known to you as me And I will bet my life you want the same. Come and sing a simple song of freedom Sing it like you've never sung before Let it fill the air Tell the people everywhere We, the people here, don't want a war. Seven hundred million are ya list'nin'? Most of what you read is made of lies But, speakin' one to one ain't it everybody's sun To wake to in the mornin' when we rise? Come and sing a simple song of freedom Sing it like you've never sung before Let it fill the air Tell the people everywhere We, the people here, don't want a war. Brother Solzhenitsyn, are you busy? If not, won't you drop this friend a line Tell me if the man who is plowin' up your land Has got the war machine upon his mind? Come and sing a simple song of freedom Sing it like you've never sung before Let it fill the air Tell the people everywhere We, the people here, don't want a war. Now, no doubt some folks enjoy doin' battle Like presidents, prime ministers and kings So, let's all build them shelves Where they can fight among themselves Leave the people be who love to sing. Come and sing a simple song of freedom Sing it like you've never sung before Let it fill the air Tell the people everywhere We, the people here, don't want a war. I say … let it fill the air … Tellin' people everywhere … We, the people here, don't want a war. |
|
19 May 07 - 10:12 AM (#2056390) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Jean(eanjay) Guitar, I always liked Bobby Darin but I've never heard that song before. Thanks for posting it. |
|
19 May 07 - 10:13 AM (#2056393) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Mick WLD, then I am sure you will condemn the killing of Carol Ann Kelly, 12, who was deliberately shot in the head and murdered with a plastic bullet fired by a British soldier. She was walking back from a house shop no more than 100 yards from her home with a pint of milk for her mother. She was less than 20 yards from her front door when a British soldier, about 15 yards away, aimed and shot her in the head. She died three days later on 22 May 1981. The point is that many sad stories have been written during this time. Many of you folks want the IRA soldiers to express guilt and remorse. I have yet to hear many of you ask the same of the British military. Pat Finucane ring a bell? Peace has arrived in the North OF Ireland. Renunification will follow soon. Slan abhaile, Mick |
|
19 May 07 - 10:26 AM (#2056405) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Jean(eanjay) Peace has arrived in the North of Ireland and things are looking very positve. I cannot see that this film will jeopardise that and it will be of interest to many people. In the Maze prison thread it was difficult to convince some that it was an important part of history. This film is about a piece of that history and whether we agree with what went on or not it is still of interest. |
|
19 May 07 - 01:44 PM (#2056513) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford WLD, I was not hoping for anything. I was trying to say that BS was a hero or a murderer depending on your perspective. My last was in reply to Den who challenged that BS was even an IRA activist at all. Big Mick, do you remember that we discussed this before? About why the army was there at all? About which side killed thousands more innocents like Carol Ann than the other? Let us not go there again. All the best, keith. |
|
19 May 07 - 02:34 PM (#2056538) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Mick Keith, the point is that scorekeeping isn't appropriate right now. Each side is steeped in their convictions, each can pull out stories of the horrendous behaviour of the other. The parties have decided to go the appropriate route. Did you ever, in your entire lifetime, think you would see Paisley and McGuinness together? Now is the time to stop the stories and let the politics work thier cure. Mick |
|
19 May 07 - 03:13 PM (#2056568) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford We can agree on that Mick. Let's hope for better times. Keith. |
|
19 May 07 - 10:14 PM (#2056749) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: InOBU Well, friends, I will tell you why I think this is an important time for such a film. The US and Britain are once again using torture in prisons in order to spark what they hoped would be a controllable war, as they did in Ireland, for reasons about which they are telling untruths. The war in Ireland was to keep NATO forces on the soil of a non aligned nation, and as soon as the USSR broke up, and Ireland put aside neutrality in the first gulf war, suddenly, Britain found they could negotiate with the IRA. Bobby Sands was not political, until he was dragged from his job, when his Protestant fellow workers found he was Catholic, and knifed him. He went to the police and was told, you should not have worked in a Protestant's job. Bobby Sands was no terrorist. In fact, every time the British government tried to make the point in a neutral court, in Geneva or the US, they failed. We toss about the term terrorist so that the world can fight wars designed by sociopaths the like of George Bush and Paul Wolfowitz. The hunger strike came about because the conditions in British jails in Ireland made Abu Greb look civilized. You toss terms around like ignorant and insults. Well, friends if you had seen the inside of the Maidstone and the Maze, well, few of you would have called those who opposed such inhumanity ignorant, unless you were driven by the same prejudice which guided so many in Ireland. Don't ask me, seek out members of the Troops Out movement, British soldiers who saw too much, ask Frank Holroid... well, it is whistling in the wind ... there is little one can say to the patriot, who will follow the guns into a gave for the benefit of a government who in the end, laughs at him all the way to the bank. I had the great honnor of knowing Bobby Sands' cell mate, Tony O'Hara, whose brother died on hunger strike as well. Sands was a remarkable young man, and a loss to the formation of Ireland's future. Those who ask why he had guns, might well ask, why your government brought the guns your tax money bought into Ireland? Is mise, le meas, Lorcan Otway |
|
19 May 07 - 10:24 PM (#2056751) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: InOBU PS If you wonder why Member of Parliament Robert Sands had guns in his house, I could tell you about 800 years of Irish history, I could tell you about Bloody Sunday, I could tell you even about Jillianwalla Bahd... but instead, watch the scene in Casablanca when the nazis are singing in Rick's place, and everyone begins to sing the La Marseillaise Let's go children of the fatherland, The day of glory has arrived! Against us tyranny's Bloody flag is raised! (repeat) In the countryside, do you hear The roaring of these fierce soldiers? They come right to our arms To slit the throats of our sons, our friends! Refrain Grab your weapons, citizens! Form your batallions! Let us march! Let us march! May impure blood Water our fields! This horde of slaves, traitors, plotting kings, What do they want? For whom these vile shackles, These long-prepared irons? (repeat) Frenchmen, for us, oh! what an insult! What emotions that must excite! It is us that they dare to consider Returning to ancient slavery!What! These foreign troops Would make laws in our home! What! These mercenary phalanxes Would bring down our proud warriors! (repeat) Good Lord! By chained hands Our brows would bend beneath the yoke! Vile despots would become The masters of our fate! Tremble, tyrants! and you, traitors, The disgrace of all groups, Tremble! Your parricidal plans Will finally pay the price! (repeat) Everyone is a soldier to fight you, If they fall, our young heros, France will make more, Ready to battle you!Frenchmen, as magnanimous warriors, Bear or hold back your blows! Spare these sad victims, Regretfully arming against us. (repeat) But not these bloodthirsty despots, But not these accomplices of Bouillé, All of these animals who, without pity, Tear their mother's breast to pieces! Sacred love of France, Lead, support our avenging arms! Liberty, beloved Liberty, Fight with your defenders! (repeat) Under our flags, let victory Hasten to your manly tones! May your dying enemies See your triumph and our glory! |
|
19 May 07 - 10:29 PM (#2056754) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: InOBU PPS I might add, what Robert Sands M.P. fought for, was fought for for quite awhile... here is another anthem for you... A Soldier's Song Soldiers are we, whose lives are pledged to Ireland Some have come from a land beyond the wave, Sworn to be free, no more our ancient sireland Shall shelter the despot or the slave; tonight we man the Bearna Baoghal In Erin's cause. come woe or weal; 'Mid cannon's roar and rifle's peal We'll chant a soldier's song. We'll sing a song, a soldier's song With cheering, rousing chorus As round our blazing fires we thong, The starry heavens o'er us; Impatient for the coming fight, And as we wait the mornings light here in the silence of the night We'll sing a soldier's song CHORUS In valley green or towering crag Our fathers fought before us, And conquered 'neath the same old flag That's floating o'er us, We're children of a fighting race That never yet has known disgrace, And as we march the foe to face, We'll sing a soldier's song CHORUS Sons of the Gael! Men of the Pale! The Long watched day is breaking; The serried ranks of Innisfail Shall set the tyrant quaking. Our camp fires now are burning low; See in the east a silvery glow, Out yonder waits the saxon foe, So sing a soldier's song. Hmmm... Saxon foe... not a lot new in Sands' day. |
|
20 May 07 - 03:50 AM (#2056837) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: guitar Oh by the way did you know that Ian Paisley doesn't like loylist or republican terrorist |
|
20 May 07 - 04:18 AM (#2056847) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: guitar you still haven't answered the question WHY DID BOBBY SANDS HAVE GUNS IN HIS HOUSE IF HE WASN'T GOING TO USE THEM? but as I said you lot don't want to give the answer, you're like just politictions (spelling) they don't tell the truth either. but hey why get into a fight, anyway let bygones be bygone and lets live in peace |
|
20 May 07 - 06:25 AM (#2056893) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: guitar here's another song by Eric Bogle it's called 'my youngest son' My youngest son came home today his friends marched with him all the way the pipes and drums beat out the time as in his box of polished pine like dead meat on a butcher's tray my youngest son came home to stay my youngest son was a fine young man with a wife a daughter and two sons a man he could of lived a died till by a bullet's sign to fight now he's a saint or so they say they brought their saint home today above the narrow Belfast streets an Irish sky looks down and weeps as children blood in gutter spilled in dreams of freedom unfilled as part of freedom's price to pay my youngest son came home to stay My youngest son came home today his friends marched with him all the way the pipes and drums beat out the time as in his box of polished pine like dead meat on a butcher's tray my youngest son came home to stay and this time he's home to stay That is for all the terrorist groups out there in the world |
|
20 May 07 - 06:27 AM (#2056895) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: guitar But as i said let bygones be bygones and hope that there is real peace in Northern ireland this time now that Ian and Martin are in control of your country, |
|
20 May 07 - 07:25 AM (#2056909) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: InOBU Hi Guitar I actually did answer your question. He had guns in his house because the British government invaded his country, and has committed murder of civilians to maintain that invasion in every generation until it did not serve their political ends to so do. I covered the war in Ireland, in the late seventies as a photo journalist and found that I, as an Anglo Irish Protestant had nothing to fear from Republican forces. Rather, both Loyalist and Crown armed forces where intent on killing people to keep the truth of the politics and prejudice being brought to the rest of the world. Another photo journalist, as an example, that year was shot at by crown forces, she was the daughter of the governor of New York, Mario Cuomo. What I found interesting is that the so called terrorists wanted the world to see, deep into their actions and communities, while England had remarkably aggressive censorship laws concerning what was being done in Ireland. In fact, you might read the Stalker Affair, by Manchester police commissioner John Stalker, about what happened to a loyal subject when trying to honestly investigate the murder of Irish civilians by the British army. I agree, let by gones be by gones. In fact, if you are ever in New York, I'd be the first one to show you around and buy you a pint. However, if you don't understand and study your history you are bound to repeat it and repeat it the US and Britain are doing in Iraq. Slan agus beannacht lor PS I am very fond of Eric Bogle's music... the flaw in this song is that it presents the events as if Britain has no role in the war in the northern counties of Ireland, not one of his best songs, I am afraid. |
|
20 May 07 - 07:31 AM (#2056912) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: guitar OK. |
|
20 May 07 - 07:35 AM (#2056914) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: guitar peace |
|
20 May 07 - 07:58 AM (#2056921) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford inOBU, Why do you say that our prisons were worse than Abu Greb? I think that they compared favorably with US jails. The hunger strike was not about prison conditions, but the loss of political status for paramilitary prisoners. (I disagree with everything else as well.) |
|
20 May 07 - 08:12 AM (#2056927) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Dave the Gnome Peace in Ireland thread - Just over 40 posts. This thread? Gone over 60 and still counting. Look at who is posting on both threads as well. I am not saying that some posters here are not interseted in Peace, only in fighting, arguing and keeping the hatred going but the figures do make you think don't they. Yours, sadly, Dave |
|
20 May 07 - 05:25 PM (#2057185) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,An Irishman Rest in peace, Bobby Sands. You made the ultimate sacrifice for your country. |
|
20 May 07 - 05:50 PM (#2057200) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Jean(eanjay) I remember that some of the hunger strikers asked their families to promise that they would not intervene once they went into a coma. I kept hoping that they would intervene and that somehow it would all get resolved - and I'm British. Very sad. |
|
20 May 07 - 08:26 PM (#2057291) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: InOBU Dear Keith: Conditions were in fact worse. The prisoners, as they did not get trials, and were held as POWs demanded not to do prison work, or wear prison clothes, rights guaranteed under the Geneva Convention. So, if they were not wearing prison clothes they were not allowed clothes at all. They were not allowed to empty the buckets in which they defecated unless they put on prison clothes. So, they found that the only way to cut down on the stench was to smear the feces on the walls of their cells so it would dry faster. They beds, and all furniture were taken out of the cells, and so they had to sleep naked on concrete floors in their own filth. Now, it is true, that once they had been "convicted" there was less torture, but there still was a lot of beatings and brutality. I am not saying this to keep the past alive, but in order to understand what our nations are doing today, we need to understand what we did in the not to distant past. I know many former prisoners of the British army, many are still suffering from the effects of torture and beatings. We might find that Abu Greb is worse then so far has been reported, and it is not important to say which was in fact worse, both are horrific and a stain on our national reputations. Peace lor |
|
21 May 07 - 03:12 AM (#2057412) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST SOLDIER (Harvey Andrews) In a station in the city a British soldier stood Talking to the people there if the people would Some just stared in hatred, and others turned in pain And the lonely British soldier wished he was back home again Come join the British Army! said the posters in his town See the world and have your fun come serve before the Crown The jobs were hard to come by and he could not face the dole So he took his country's shilling and enlisted on the roll For there was no fear of fighting, the Empire long was lost Just ten years in the army getting paid for being bossed Then leave a man experienced a man who's made the grade A medal and a pension some mem'ries and a trade Then came the call for Ireland as the call had come before Another bloody chapter in an endless civil war The priests they stood on both sides the priests they stood behind Another fight in Jesus's name the blind against the blind The soldier stood between them between the whistling stones And then the broken bottles that led to broken bones The petrol bombs that burnt his hands the nails that pierced his skin And wished that he had stayed at home surrounded by his kin The station filled with people the soldier soon was bored But better in the station than where the people warred The room filled up with mothers with daughters and with sons Who stared with itchy fingers at the soldier and his gun A yell of fear a screech of brakes the shattering of glass The window of the station broke to let the package pass A scream came from the mothers as they ran towards the door Dragging their children crying from the bomb upon the floor The soldier stood and could not move his gun he could not use He knew the bomb had seconds and not minutes on the fuse He could not run and pick it up and throw it in the street There were far too many people there too many running feet Take cover! yelled the soldier, Take cover for your lives And the Irishmen threw down their young and stood before their wives They turned towards the soldier their eyes alive with fear For God's sake save our children or they'll end their short lives here The soldier moved towards the bomb his stomach like a stone Why was this his battle God why was he alone He lay down on the package and he murmured one farewell To those at home in England to those he loved so well He saw the sights of summer felt the wind upon his brow The young girls in the city parks how precious were they now The soaring of the swallow the beauty of the swan The music of the turning world so soon would it be gone A muffled soft explosion and the room began to quake The soldier blown across the floor his blood a crimson lake There was no time to cry or shout there was no time to moan And they turned their children's faces from the blood and from the bones The crowd outside soon gathered and the ambulances came To carry off the body of a pawn lost in the game And the crowd they clapped and cheered and they sang their rebel song One soldier less to interfere where he did not belong And will the children growing up learn at their mothers' knees The story of the soldier who bought their liberty Who used his youthful body as a means towards an end Who gave his life to those who called him murderer not friend [1972:] If you can con an ordinary man into protecting your interests, he gets done when the crisis comes, not you. Many soldiers are not professional killers, they're kids who couldn't get a job, and as unemployment has soared, recruiting for the army has increased by over 60% in three years. The average soldier is unimportant in the final analysis, it's the ones who shelter behind him that count [...] and they always seem to survive! (Notes Harvey Andrews, 'Writer of Songs') [1973:] Written from newspaper clippings. (Forces Folk 11/73, p 10) [1979:] His next major song, however, inadvertently created a controversy which, for a while, clearly damaged Andrews' standing and viability. 'Soldier', in spite of an unambiguous sleevenote, was widely interpreted as a pro-establishment glorification of military heroism and, therefore, by left-wing logical extension, of authoritarian violence; whereas in fact it was a simple (if lyrically somewhat overwritten) story of a young man caught in an impossible situation. The song was neither for the British authorities nor against the Irish rebels; it was about the senselessness of violence, applied on a personal level. [...] Harvey Andrews' Belfast song ('Soldier') was not a lasting success (though it remains popular, for obvious reasons, with army audiences in Ulster and Germany). (Woods, Revival 115f) [1990:] In Northern Ireland, this song written in 1972 by a professional songwriter, Harvey Andrews, has become very widely known among soldiers, and at the same time divorced in classic folk-song style from its author. (Palmer, Lovely War 18) In 1971 in Belfast a soldier called Sergeant Willis cleared a room of civilians because of a bomb. As he went to close the door afterwards, the charge exploded, and he was killed. [...] Harvey Andrews, was so struck by the incident that he wrote the song to make the point that soldiers, too, are human. (The incident of the soldier's embracing the bomb was poetic licence.) Broadcasts of Andrews' record were banned for some time by the BBC lest feelings be exacerbated in the nationalist community of Northern Ireland. The Ministry of Defence advised (and still advises) soldiers not to sing the song in pubs where it might cause trouble. Some have interpreted this as a ban. Nevertheless, they sing it 'all the time', according to one source, on military transport and in messes and canteens. It has been said that some units require newcomers to learn to sing or recite the song before they become fully accepted. Andrews' authorship is not widely known, and many different stories about the song's origin circulate. [...] The text has appeared in the 'Soldier', the 'Methodist' magazine, and the 'Manchester Evening News' (where in 1988 it won a poetry competition for a youth who sent it in over his own name). (Palmer, Lovely War 199) Some years ago I asked Harvey about this song, and he told me: "Someone told me my song was banned in the army, so I thought the ones to know would be the Ministry of Defence, and asked them. They even had it in their files that the song was 'written by Harvey Andrews, who'd been in 2nd Para'. I never was in the army in my life!" Harvey is a nice guy, and always ready to talk to you, and I love many of his songs. But I'd agree with Woods this one is somewhat overwritten. Try 'Hello Hans' instead! ^^ |
|
21 May 07 - 03:16 AM (#2057414) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,devonshireee Yes I agree, I think it is sad that when a prisoner dies, even for his country it is a shame. |
|
21 May 07 - 03:42 AM (#2057428) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Declan Whatever you think about Bobby Sands and his organisation (of which I was not a supporter), the line being taken by a number of people here - "A crime is a crime is a crime" - "No negotiation with Terrorists" is remarkably similar to the response of Thatcher and her Government to the hunger strikes. By refusing to address the issues which gave rise to the hunger strikes, she handed a massive propaganda victory to the IRA - one which ultimately lead to Sinn Fein now being in Government in Northern Ireland. I don't understand why people think we need another movie about the hunger strikes at this point. Maybe if it is a reflective and balanced film looking back over something that 26 years on, and is now a part of history, it will be a good thing. If people were constrained from making films about war and killing and crime and criminals and freedom fighters and terrorists (you choose the labels) the volume of movies made each year would be considerably reduced. Just a note to the clones, This thread is about Bobby Sands. The links above refer to Tommy Sands. While I think they might actually be related (distant cousins maybe) there is a world of difference between the two in terms of there approach to life and politics. I think it is not appropriate to have the Tommy Sands links in this thread, although posters on both sides of this argument would do well to listen to Tommy's songs. |
|
21 May 07 - 03:57 AM (#2057431) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford INobu, Hi Larry, All the hunger strikers had been tried and convicted. For the record, I am not saying BS was a criminal, end of discussion. I am just clarifying errors of fact. |
|
21 May 07 - 05:37 AM (#2057477) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Dave the Gnome I find it a little odd that the guest who took the trouble to read my last post and point out where the different posters were from had his post deleted. I am awaiting the same treatment of the posting of Harveys wonderful song. Surely there is no pro-republican bias amongst our American moderators is there? Maybe Roger Gall had it right... Cheers Dave |
|
21 May 07 - 08:14 AM (#2057550) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: InOBU Kieth, dear friend (truly) I would not agree that the hungerstrikers were "tried and convicted" They were convicted without trial by most civil standards. The Diplock courts are hardly courts. My friend Tony O'Hara was given five years for driving a car in a bank robbery. At the time (and possibly presently, I have to ask him next time we speak) he never learned to drive. At the time of his "conviction," he did not know how to drive, after the beatings while being tortured by the British government's police and soldiers, the resulting brain damage made it impossible for him to drive. This brain damage was diagnosed in the United States in the late 1980s, and was typical of victims of torture who came to the US for treatment. The Diplock courts accepted "evidence" gained under torture, from tortured defendants, or from "super grasses" who often after torture were paid large sums to inform on others. The "judiciary" in the northern counties of Ireland went on strike when it was suggested that the hearings would be more fair if three magistrates sat on each case. There were no juries, nor was there a right to a jury trial. In the case of Tony O'Hara, in small letters over his "confession" after weeks of torture, he wrote in small letters "This was signed under duress." Tony pointed this out to the magistrate, in hopes that even in a jury court, there would be some way of exposing the torture to which he had been subjected. Besides sleep deprivation and constant beatings to the head, Tony was placed by the Army in a helicopter, blindfolded. The helicopter took off at a high rate of speed, so he could feel the acceleration, and knew they had lifted off. It eased down to a few feet over the ground, where questions continued to be shouted out him. He was then thrown from the copter. The effect of this experience, such as guns being dry fired, or fired near to the head, has been seen to cause long term damage, sometimes life long damage. To call this a conviction after trial is an obscenity. I agree with the earlier comment on the state of American prisons and jails. I would hold my juris doctorate very cheep indeed, if I did not say that the state of American justice is abominable and needs systemic change. However, that happened in Ireland is a different kind of wrong. At least, in spite of the assaults on basic rights here, such as Habeas Corpus, there is a right to see a jury, though of late this administration has eroded that by setting up island in our legal system where law does not apply ... not only in Cuba, but in the secret detention centers in other countries, and the acceptence of secret evidence withheld from defendants. This does not justify the support of the systemic use of torture and "courts" without due process in the northern counties of Ireland. And in that, I stand by my comments, that if well done, this is an important film, as we live in times when the basic concepts of rights and justice are in danger of being lost forever. All the best lor |
|
21 May 07 - 08:56 AM (#2057579) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,scurvy bobby sands was an arse, |
|
21 May 07 - 08:56 AM (#2057580) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Folk Form # 1 Be grateful that it is not being made by Mel Gibson. Oh JESUS, just imagine. A load of shit like Braveheart or the Patriot. |
|
21 May 07 - 09:00 AM (#2057587) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,ib48 all ultra religious nuts and militant disruptive gits can all starve to death as far as i am concerned.Will i watch the film,i would rather watch a replay of the cup final |
|
21 May 07 - 09:30 AM (#2057612) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Shaneo To the cowards above who are afraid to log in and instead use the Guest label. If you put yourself forward for election in whatever country you live in , who many people would vote for you ? not many is the answer. Say what you will about Bobby Sands ,he will go down in history as a patriot , at least in Ireland. How many poems or songs or books have you written ? sweet feck all I would say. Babby Sands has written at least three fine songs which are still being played today by ballad singers throughout the world. 'Back Home In Derry' ,which was originally called 'The Voyage ' ,McIlhatton' and 'Sad Song For Susan' with the help of Brendan McFarlane. Christy Moore thought so much about the songs that he includes them at most of his gigs. Also Guest ,God forbid ,but if you were to die today how many would attend your funeral ? 80,000 attended the burial of Bobby Sands , that's how much respect the man han here in Ireland. |
|
21 May 07 - 10:21 AM (#2057647) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST I come from Scotland and I liked braveheart, as a matter of fact durning our parliment elctions their was a candidate called Braveheart |
|
21 May 07 - 11:19 AM (#2057690) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Shaneo, I am not disputing the stature of the man, but I do question the view taken by old friend InOBU. The Diplock Courts had to be instigated because no juror dared find an IRA man guilty. BS's judge fairly refused to convict him of the bombing and shooting, though few would doubt his involvement. All the hunger strikers were open about being IRA activists and so accepted involvement in bombings and shootings. They did not dispute the justification of their imprisonment, just the lack of political status. |
|
21 May 07 - 11:23 AM (#2057697) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,ib48 SHANEO,what absolute bullshit,are you a bigot? Just forgive and forget and live in bloody peace for gods sake,if there is one. |
|
21 May 07 - 11:23 AM (#2057698) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford I meant to add that I share your disgust at the mistreatment of prisoners. Do you share my disgust that IRA tortured most and murdered all of their prisoners? |
|
21 May 07 - 11:28 AM (#2057702) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,ib48 Are you all sure that there is a god,cos if there isnt you have all wasted your precious time hating for no reason.What a waste |
|
21 May 07 - 11:31 AM (#2057704) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,sinky does I R A stand for ignorant religious arse? |
|
21 May 07 - 11:35 AM (#2057708) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Shaneo I have moved on alright and I fully support the peace process , there is no denying the talent the man had. As for there being a God. I believe , but if I choose not to believe then I would be admitting that my ancestors were monkeys. |
|
21 May 07 - 11:49 AM (#2057724) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,ib48 Okay shaneo,i hope we can all live in peace.I wish ireland peace and prosperity,its a beautiful place |
|
21 May 07 - 11:52 AM (#2057726) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Teribus "The war in Ireland was to keep NATO forces on the soil of a non aligned nation, and as soon as the USSR broke up, and Ireland put aside neutrality in the first gulf war, suddenly, Britain found they could negotiate with the IRA." - InOBU, 19 May 07 - 10:14 PM On the above - Point 1. NATO forces have never been stationed in the Republic of Ireland Point 2. I cannot recall Eire putting aside it's neutrality during the first gulf war. It did honour it's long standing bi-lateral agreement with the United States of America with regard to staging transport flights through Shannon Airport Point 3. On the three occasions throughout the "Troubles" when the Provisional IRA approached the UK Government with regard to the possibility of arranging a "ceasefire" the UK Government has always talked to them. On all three occasions the PIRA broke the "ceasefire". The "Downing Street Declaration" was made in response to an offer made by the PIRA, that ultimately lead to the signing of the GFA, it then took the PIRA 10 years to decommission its weapons and abandon the "armed struggle". All of the above had absolutely sweet FA to do with the break-up of the Soviet Union. "He had guns in his house because the British government invaded his country, and has committed murder of civilians to maintain that invasion in every generation until it did not serve their political ends to so do." - InOBU, 20 May 07 - 07:25 AM Point 1. Under the laws pertinent to Northern Ireland at the time he should not have had any firearms in his possession. The guns he was in possession of were examined forensically and proved to have been guns used in attacks upon the police. Point 2. Bobby Sands was born in Abbots Cross, Newtownabbey, County Antrim, Northern Ireland, on 9 March 1954. He was therefore born in the United Kingdom. Perhaps InOBU can explain how it would therefore be possible for the British Government to invade it's own territory? Point 3. Perhaps InOBU can provide some evidence regarding the murder of civilians perpetrated by the Government of the United Kingdom to - "maintain that invasion in every generation until it did not serve their political ends to so do." Please don't count periods of armed civil unrest or rebellion. Now on the other hand looking at "The Troubles", financed so willingly by the "plastic Paddies" of the USA, perhaps InOBU or his good friend can explain why in their so-called role of protecting the Catholic/Nationalist community of Northern Ireland they managed to be responsible for 2/3rds of the fatalities and a far higher percentage of those maimed and injured. "I know many former prisoners of the British army, many are still suffering from the effects of torture and beatings." - InOBU, 20 May 07 - 08:26 PM There are far, far many more victims of paramilitary violence who did not get the benefit of NORAID money to go to the US for treatment and councilling - probably because they would spread the word as to who was responsible for their injuries - not good publicity, not good for the fund raising' round those "Boston Bars". Point from the same post, they were not held as POW's, that was their principal demand - to be treated as POW's. With regard to InOBU's post of 21 May 07 - 08:14 AM. Non-Jury Trials and Internment could hardly have come as a surprise to the "bold IRA". They had been subjected to both before in Eire in 1938 on the orders of DeValera, who at the time was shit scared the clowns of the IRA were going to drag Ireland into the Second World War. The reason for the Non-Jury Trials was the same in both instances. To have a trial by jury you must first have a jury. Juries and their families are notoriously vulnerable, particularly to the type of threats that could be carried out by paramilitary groups. Rules of evidence however were never compromised. I would rather hope in the interests of balance and justice that Mr. MacQueen comes out with a film about Mrs Jean McConville and that as someone interested in justice that InOBU would support such a project. |
|
21 May 07 - 01:42 PM (#2057794) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: InOBU Well, hello, dear friendTeribus: In spite of the use of insults, which I don't think add to your points, you do approach this from a stand point which is informed and well put. It makes for a good way to organize a response, and thank you. I'd have another point of view on most, but as me da used to say, "that's what makes for horse racing," which is a better way to deal with all this than war ... but I will start with the last point first. I would hope to see a film about Mrs. Jean McConville, well researched and with input from all sides. I think the only way forward is a truth and reconciliation process that begins with talk. A short aside, I was being interviewed on a radio station, on some subject or another, not Ireland, in fact ... and just before me there was a member of a loyalist paramilitary group, so we were in the greenroom together. No one would go over to him, so I brought him a cup of tea, and we sat down together. He and I chatted about the weather and New York, and he told me that he felt in a place that was not very friendly, as the radio station was progressive and he had no one there who felt as he did, and he was glad to meet an Irish Protestant to make him feel at home. I explained that he and I had very different politics, but welcome anyway. He was rather surprised and asked why I came over to welcome him, and I told him peace has to start with a cup of tea together, at least. To speak to your points: Point One and Two: The laws of the northern counties of Ireland of which you speak, were in violation of the Irish constitution at the time Robert Sands was alive. The constitution of Ireland came about due to a war resulting from the 1911 election, and did not recognize six of the nine counties of Ulster, as by the treaty with Britain, which ended the 1919 Anglo Irish war, after two years, the occupation of any part of Ireland by Britain was illegal. In short, in the treaty ended that war, Britain was to withdraw from the six northern counties in two years, and did not. Sands was a member of an insurgent group with an unbroken chain of command to that war which established the Irish Republic. Even after the 1922 civil war, the Irish Republic continued to recognize the northern counties as legally a part of Ireland, and Sands could have held an Irish passport. Point Three: There has been armed resistance to British occupation of Ireland in every generation since Strongbow, and so to exclude times of "armed civil unrest or rebellion" would be impossible, there has never been peace in Ireland. So, to not include the murder, by Arthur Chitchester of hundreds of men woman and children around Dungannon during the Nine Years War, or the murder of Carol Ann Kelly during the 1980s, would give a distorted view of Irish history. Every generation has watched British soldiers kill Irish people to maintain control in Ireland. The period from the nineteen sixties to the nineteen eighties has been carefully examined in the United States, not in the "bars of Boston," but in the federal courts of the United States. I would have you read the trial record of the case of Joseph Patrick Doherty. In that case, the Executive Branch of the US government, and the government of Great Britain, with virtually unlimited resources sought the extradition of Doherty, on the claim that he was a terrorist who had committed murder in the death of Captain Westmacott of the SAS. Joe Dohert'y legal representation had almost no resources, and in the end the fight bankrupted the small firm. What they had on their side was the evidence. Pay records of the IRA where presented as well as witnesses to Irish history, IRA training manuals, and newspaper accounts. The US courts, who were bias against Doherty, but where, in fact, neutral, in the end found that the IRA did not target civilians as a primary target of war, but that loyalists and the British army did. In the end, the executive branch of the US government changed the laws governing extradition to Britain, to deny the ability to respondents to extradition to put British actions on trial. It should be noted that this change in the ability to access courts was done, not because anyone was threatened, but because our two nations wished to keep certain truths under wraps. Point four (the numeration systems ends here) ? Tony O'Hara got no benefit from NORAID, which only served the PIRA, Tony was a member of the INLA, which had its roots separately in the OIRA. But, yes, you are right, NORAID did not aid all victims of violence in the war. I agree it would be a good thing if there was such an organization, as part of a truth and reconciliation process, as all victims of violence need a lot of support. Point Five (ish) I'm not sure of your point about DeValera. As you say, he carried neutrality to the point of the ridiculous, when he sent condolences to the German government at the death of hitler. Where I believe in expressing human sympathy for the death of the worst of us, he did not do so with an even hand. During the Civil War, there were terrible atrocities on both sides, the Free State forces, for example, tied a number of republicans to a land mine in Balliseedy, in Kerry and detonated it, killing most. I believe the civil war could have, and should have been avoided, but there was a complex political dynamic, not free of involvement by British pressure in that event. In the US, when there is a trial where there is a threat, even a hint of a threat to the jury, in Mob trials and now in political trials, the identities of the jury are held secrete. It would not have been impossible to have juries behind a screen, and brought from secrete locations to insure justice. But, as I said, the magistrates in the northern counties would not even agree to three judge panels. As to, "Rules of evidence however were never compromised," that is simply not the case. Evidence taken under torture is the most untrustworthy of any evidence and one could be convicted on the unsupported testimony of a single police officer. Most civil jurisdictions would say, that in such a case, rules of evidence where nonexistent in the diplock courts. All the best, slan, Is mise, le meas lor |
|
21 May 07 - 01:59 PM (#2057806) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: InOBU PS Continued from directly above.... Hello, again... I thought there were points missing... I see there is a first half with numbered points ... so let's see... Point one (upper half...) NATO forces where stationed in the occupied counties of the Irish Republic, recognized as part of the nation by both the 1922 treaty ending the Anglo Irish War, and the constitution of the Republic of Ireland at the time Robert Sands was alive. Point Two: Many people in Ireland felt this agreement violated the neutrality provision of the Irish Constitution, hence the cartoon in the Irish Times which showed a child and mother watching the US planes taking off for Iraq. The kid says, "Let me understand this neutrality thing, if Sadam wants to bomb New York, he can land here too?" Further evidence of the feelings of the Irish people was witnessed in the sentencing of (was it Mary)? Kelly, who took an ax to a US plane inflicting millions of dollars in damage. The US wanted her put away for life, she was found guilty and given no jail time. A small victory for neutrality. Point Three At any number of times, when there was forward motion for peace in Ireland British military intelligence committed or sponsored sectarian killings in order to keep the war alive. You may wish to find anything written by Fred (or is it Frank) Holroyed, who left Military Intelligence over his disgust at the use of loyalist paramilitaries to commit murder for the organization in which he served. He has lectured about, for example, the Icarus plan, the plan to use Irish airbases if the USSR had moved on western Germany. I will try and find you the spelling of his name. I sponsored a talk by him at NYU law school many years ago, he was one of the sources for the film, Hidden Agenda, which, after it won an award in Cannes, was banned in Britain until the cease fire. The IRA, at the outset of the present troubles sought peace talks, but the secret negotiations began the year of the break up of the Soviet Union, and at that point, there is a perceivable change in attitude towards loyalists by the British government. |
|
21 May 07 - 04:24 PM (#2057898) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford The film Hidden Agenda was released in Britain. It was never banned, but a screening on Channel 4 TV was pulled because it was in the immediate aftermath of an IRA bomb on an English shopping centre that injured 50 people and killed a 3 year old boy who was buying a Mothers Day card. |
|
21 May 07 - 05:15 PM (#2057932) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Teribus "NATO forces where stationed in the occupied counties of the Irish Republic, recognized as part of the nation by both the 1922 treaty ending the Anglo Irish War, and the constitution of the Republic of Ireland at the time Robert Sands was alive." - InOBU Ah! "..the occupied counties of the Irish Republic,.." By this fantasy I take it you mean the physical and political entity known throughout the world as Northern Ireland. Internationally recognised as being part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Unfortunately for the Republicans in 1922, having just fought an extremely bloody civil war of their own in order to establish Eire, nobody really had the stomach to fight an even bloodier civil war to "conquer" the North against the will of the people who lived there - InOBU all your talk of recognition and mentions in Constitutions amount to aspirations not fact. The actual facts are that Bobby Sands was born a British Subject in an integral part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. The last poll held on the subject still records about 62% of the population wish it to remain so. Even with all of that taken into account there have never been NATO forces stationed in Northern Ireland. NATO force deployments within Europe were: - Iceland - Greenland - Norway (Northern Flank) - Belgium (SHAPE HQ) - Germany (Center) - Spain - Italy - Malta - Turkey (Southern Flank) "The US courts, who were bias against Doherty, but where, in fact, neutral, in the end found that the IRA did not target civilians as a primary target of war, but that loyalists and the British army did." - InOBU. You are behind the times InOBU even the PIRA has admitted that that is a load of horseshit and apologised for the civilian deaths they deliberately caused. If you don't believe me InOBU, perhaps you can tell me please just who the Provisional IRA were targeting in Belfast city centre on the 21st July, 1972. Between 14:09hrs and 15:30hrs on that horrendous afternoon 22 bombs were detonated by the PIRA in a city centre packed with Irish shoppers. That equates to one bomb every 3 minutes 40 seconds InOBU - How do you reckon New York's finest would have coped? What would have been the result? How efficient do you think they would have been had they had to have coped with the added twist of hoax calls phoned in along with real ones? PIRA Commander in Belfast at the time was one Gerry Adams, same person that sanctioned the abduction, torture and murder of Mrs Jean McConville a completely innocent, widowed mother of ten. Unlike you InOBU I have got absolutely no respect or admiration for any of the paramilitary groups that were active in Northern Ireland, or their supporters/apologists. By their actions they considered themselves to be above the law of the land, that is where they placed themselves, they should therefore not be surprised in the least when unorthodox means are used to curb their activities. Oh, by the bye, InOBU the "butcher's bill" for "Bloody Friday" as it came to be known was nine dead, 130 injured. Those figures were as low as they were due to the magnificent work done by Belfast City's Emergency Services, the RUC and the British Army - Gerry Adams and the PIRA had a completely different scenario and outcome in mind. INLA eh? Members of that organisation had more to fear from factions within their own organisation and PIRA than from the Security Forces, according to the statistics. |
|
21 May 07 - 05:22 PM (#2057935) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: InOBU Here is part of an interview with Ken Loach, which I think speaks to the value of films about folks such as Bobby Sands. Keith, you might be right, I think I was thinking of his film about the coal miners which was banned under Thatcher. There is a link to the whole interview. All the best lor http://www.netribution.co.uk/2/content/view/632/267/ Both brothers, Damien and Teddy, would be labelled terrorists today, wouldn't they? (PL) "This is a fascinating question when you think about it, isn't it? The notion of terrorists and how it's been defined and how it's been constructed, because if anyone took an objective view from a human rights point of view of how many innocent people have been killed, by far the majority have been killed by state terrorism. That shouldn't really be contentious but it's almost impossible to say. But look at Columbia just now, look what's happening in Iraq. All you have to do is look at the history of Latin America and Central America, which I had lived through and I had seen - it was actually financed by states. Now it's been defined as Bush's 'war on terror'. It's really quite fascinating how they got away with it and I think it really shows a lack of critical thinking. "But going back to your question in relation to the brothers, this is why we were very keen to place it just after that vital election in 1918. It was the last all Ireland, all British election; Sinn Fein won 72 out of 105 seats, they had a democratic mandate for complete independence from the British Empire, they set up a parliament in consequence of their mandate, Lord French banned that parliament, when they complained they were put in prison, when they wrote about it they banned their newspapers, so what do they do in those circumstances? All peaceful methods were actually barred to them. There was violence perpetrated against those people who tried to follow the democratic wishes. So out of that came the war of independence. But it's fascinating that the people who opposed the British state are always deemed to be the terrorists. I think it's worth unravelling and going back and examining that." What is the human cost of violent revolution? (KL) "Well you can count the cost in many ways. First of all trying to establish a peaceful independent country the cost was brutal oppression by the British. And then once that has happened, it is inevitable that people will resist, because they always do. So I guess the cost is the exposure of the hypocrisy of empires in this case. You can count it in all kinds of ways but it just exposes the hypocrisy of empires, in this case the British Empire, which claimed to be exporting civilisation and tolerance but was actually exporting violence, brutality and oppression." There was a critic on British TV yesterday who said that while he really liked the film he felt we had to be careful not to glorify the IRA. [Loach bursts into laughter] "Oh God preserve us! God preserve us! It is amazing! It is amazing!" But do you differentiate between the IRA of the 1920s and the IRA who years later carried out bombing campaigns in London, Birmingham, and so on? (KL) "I think this is an outrageous question and an outrageous point to make. The brutality is on record. We could have made a whole film of brutal acts and gone on for twenty-four hours. I mean just imagine it: they slit a man's throat, they tie him to a cart, they drag him for a mile and kill him. They beat a man's skull in. A woman comes to the door with a child in her arms, they shoot the mother. I mean how much brutality do you have to show for someone to actually take it and say, 'Yes, we did that', without trying to get a sort of dagger in underneath? "The IRA of the 60s and 70s was a product of the despicable treaty that the British imposed at the point of a gun. If the British hadn't imposed partition, there would be no Provisional IRA. The entire responsibility lies with the British state. The entire responsibility. Everything that has emerged has been a protest, sometimes a violent protest, sometimes an aberrant protest, but nevertheless a protest, from the brutality of the British and the brutality of the British Empire embodied in bastards like Churchill, who not only sent the troops into Ireland, he sent the troops against Welsh miners in his own country when they wanted a decent wage. So I mean we should have no tolerance at all for these questions that try to indicate that somehow the resistance to British brutality is not acceptable." Post-9/11 most resistance is now classified as terrorism, isn't it? (PL) "Actually, it's funny how the language and the psychology hasn't changed very much. There was that great phrase by Churchill, talking about Ireland, 'We have terror by the throat'. It doesn't really change very much." |
|
21 May 07 - 05:46 PM (#2057949) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: InOBU Hello again, Teribus: The problem with war, is that often folks accept the same facts and draw differing conclusions ... and then fight each other to convince the other, not of the facts but the conclusions ... so ... well, thank God for pubs, pints and computers ... much better ways to look at the conclusions. Your cultural context leads you to one set of conclusions from what you have read or saw, mine leads to another from what I lived through in the northern counties of Ireland in the seventies... You write "By this fantasy I take it you mean the physical and political entity known throughout the world as Northern Ireland. Internationally recognised as being part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Unfortunately for the Republicans in 1922, having just fought an extremely bloody civil war of their own in order to establish Eire..." That is one way to look at it. Many see the Irish Republic coming into existence after the elections of 1911. Or, if you will, international treaties are law. So, when Britain signed a treaty in 1921, which they reneged upon, then the occupation of the northern counties became illegal. The civil war began, when Michael Collins negotiated a treaty with Britain, after the successful 1919-21 Anglo Irish war. From memory, I think it was Lloyd George, who threatened him with the "Orange Card" that is to say, if they did not accept a two year period of transition on the issue of the northern most counties of the nine counties of Ulster, then Britain would arm the loyalists. Collins saw this as a step towards an end to the struggle. Others felt, they had won a horrible struggle, where British troops such as the Essex Brigade who pretended to surrender to fire on the West Cork Brigade members under a flag of truce ... and felt they should not accept a conditional end to the struggle. Britain had a heavy hand in forcing the split which led to the civil war, and then armed the Free State helping to insure that the split would be violently decided. Frankly, it is a great shame that Ireland did not fall for the division Britain fostered, but, it is hard for people living at peace to judge the behavior of people who had been through a brutal war in their own villages and towns. The British atrocities in Ireland where extreme and led to extreme feelings and actions. There is a difference between saying that civilians were a target of war, and that civilians were killed. The history of civilian deaths in the war in the North is very complex and Britain cannot be held innocent in weighing that process. wither or not you believe it was British policy to continue a war as a way of keeping a nonaligned nation destabilized ... well, I must leave for a committee meeting in a mo, and I do want to answer as much of your points as possible ... I will write more on this, perhaps tomorrow... As to the low injuries during Bloody Sunday, due to the actions of the RUC, British Army etc... would there have been fewer still, if the army had not fired on unarmed demonstrators in the first place? Must run, more latter all the best Lorcan |
|
22 May 07 - 01:55 AM (#2058176) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Teribus "The IRA of the 60s and 70s was a product of the despicable treaty that the British imposed at the point of a gun. If the British hadn't imposed partition, there would be no Provisional IRA. The entire responsibility lies with the British state. The entire responsibility." - Ken Loach Ireland was partitioned in 1921 under the terms of the Government of Ireland Act 1920. Six of the nine Ulster counties in the north-east formed Northern Ireland and the remaining three counties joined those of Leinster, Munster and Connacht to form Southern Ireland. Whilst the former came into being, the latter had only a momentary existence to ratify (in United Kingdom law) the Anglo-Irish Treaty that ended the Anglo-Irish War. Under the Anglo-Irish Treaty, Northern Ireland was provisionally scheduled to be included in the Irish Free State, though it could opt out should the Parliament of Northern Ireland elect so to do. As expected, it did so immediately. Once that happened, as provided for, an Irish Boundary Commission came into being, to decide on the territorial boundaries between the Irish Free State and Northern Ireland. Though leaders in Dublin expected a substantial reduction in the territory of Northern Ireland, with nationalist areas like south Armagh, Tyrone, southern Londonderry and urban territories like Derry and Newry moving to the Free State, it appears that the Boundary Commission decided against this. The British and Irish governments agreed to leave the boundaries as they were defined in the 1920 Act. The Council of Ireland provided for in the Treaty, to link Northern Ireland and the Irish Free State, did not come into being. The above from Wikipedia It would appear that nothing was "imposed at the point of a gun" by anybody. If you take a look at British politics you will find that the Liberal Party had been trying to shake Ireland lose and give it Home Rule from the 1870's, contested within Parliament by the Conservatives and by the Lords, and resisted in Ulster by the Protestants, they (the Liberals) almost suceeded in 1914, unfortunately the First World War got in the way. Maybe Mr. Loach did not research about the "provisional" scheduling of the North joining the South, or of the opt out clause granted to the Parliament of Northern Ireland and agreed to by both parties (British and Irish Governments). The Council of Ireland did not come into being because DeValera wanted no contact with Britain, It has been such a defacto Council of Ireland that has been guiding the Peace Process since the signing of the GFA in 1998. |
|
22 May 07 - 02:09 AM (#2058180) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford The reference was to Bloody Friday, not Sunday. |
|
22 May 07 - 06:58 AM (#2058258) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: InOBU Hi Friends: Doing a bit of back filling, there has been so much raised here, in a single thread trying to set out an understanding of at least seventy years of history, with emphasis on the past forty years... Teribus' question about what the NYPD would have done if there was a bombing campaign in New York brings up a good point, and speaks to the value of a film about Bobby Sands. We had a bombing campain in New York, and other parts of the US for a number of decades which had the potential of becoming very like the situation in Ireland. A small number of communities during the seventies (Puerto Rican Nationalists, the American Indian Movement, SDS Weathermen, Black Panthers and a few others) were involved in violent response to the COINTELPRO policies of the Federal Government, which nearly drove the US into urban violent unrest, what was the difference? Well, let us look at Puerto Rico. The history of Puerto Rico has a number of similarities to Ireland. In the light of growing political success in organizing to free the island from domination by the US, the US began a program of encouraging islanders to leave and come to mainland cities (resulting in Ned Valero, or Eamon DeValera being born in New York) while bringing large numbers of Cubans to change the voting patterns in Puerto Rico. During the Truman administration, in the 1950s, Puerto Rican nationalists shot at senators from the gallery of Congress. For the most part, the US underplayed the danger of the violent resistance, and as a result, it did not grow in violence, until, during the Nixon years, and the COINTELPRO days, the Federal government took offensive actions against a number of armed, but not very violent groups. Prior to this, for example, the Black Panthers were armed against police violence in their neighborhoods, but were there to observe arrests, start food programs, but the murder in their beds of the leadership of the Chicago Black Panther party sparked a huge escalation in violence in response. The same was true in FLAN and other Puerto Rican groups. Unlike the British response in the northern counties of Ireland, however, there was much less lethal violence against the peaceful protests against COINTELPRO. There was potential for that, however. When, at Kent State, the National Guard, opened fire on a student protest killing four students, there was both national outrage and increased sense that the Federal Government was at war with those calling for change in the US. But, the US had no interest in a war with progressives in the US and policies were changed. So, after these times gave rise to armored car robberies, bombings, without the Federal Government, or local police forces being provoked into arrest without warrant, roundups and torture for information, and all the other package of responses we saw in the six counties, the violence grew more sporadic and melted away. So, without writing a book, what is the germ of the story about NATO and Ireland, and its relationship to the "controllable" war in Ireland? As France and Spain withdrew from NATO, we began to see, off the coast of Ireland, each fishing season, trawlers being towed under by their nets as British subs planted listening devices to monitor Soviet Subs which were using Ireland as a lee to lie of the coast of Britain. Irish politics were rather complicated at the time, Sinn Fein had been getting some votes, but not taking seats in the Dail. Fine Gael was descended from the extreme right wing of the 1930s, the Blue Shirts, who had been opposed to Irish independence in the first place, and then there was Finna Fail, whose public face was in support of nationalism, but with a wink and a nod. So ... after the IRA in the North disarmed, and the violence against the republican and civil rights movement persisted, Jack Lynch and Charlie Haughie funneled money to the IRA units in the North on the condition that they would split with the then unified IRA led by Cathal Goulding in Dublin. This formed the Provisional IRA. Some believed that it was to amalgamate more political support from republicans in the South, who were voting for republican candidates but not being represented ... making Finna Fail the party of southern republicanism. But, there were those pesky subs... Before the modern satellite system, one relied on listening alone for subs. Now, there is a split in the IRA ... and trawlers are being dragged down off the South west ... and oddly enough, a priest in Mayo announces that the statues in his parish are moving, and Knock will be the Lourdes of Ireland. This causes some mirth in Ireland ... but, suddenly, American businessmen are buying up farms in Mayo, and building an international airport. Many are scratching their heads. Then, a NATO document is stolen from an office in Europe. The document describes the "Icarus Plan" and it seems a bit far fetched at the time. It holds that if the USSR crosses into western Europe, say Western Germany, NATO will demand an end to Irish neutrality, an event that would likely happen, but, who is to say? If Ireland has another DeValera in power at the time, NATO will take Irish airports and use them as staging grounds for US air attacks. Well, as much as this seems like a spy novel, it explains why Finna Fail would rearm the northern republicans, not to support northern nationalism, in opposition to Whitehall, but, in support of British plans to destabilize the North, while not destabilizing the South, in order to keep Ireland from being a unified nonaligned nation. Well, this might seem a little too complicated to work. But, well, then again the army council of the IRA was infiltrated right up to the top, we find, and British Intelligence has been found to have led loyalist hit squads ... and then, the same year that the Soviet Union breaks up, three years of secret negotiations with the IRA begin. Ireland sets aside any worries about neutrality, during the first Gulf War, and suddenly, as if by magic, peace is possible in Ireland. Sinn Fein breaks ties with progressive causes from support of Black Panther prisoners in the US, to well ... you name it. The point of all this, is that wars are never fought for the reasons that are apparent on the surface. That is why, I don't make heroes out of either side, or villains out of one side and not the other. War is the problem. It is simply a poor choice to vilify the IRA or make heroes out of them, or doing the same to the British soldier. Both fought in a conflict which was against their personal and class interest, and were led into it, not by history as written in the books, but history as written in the back rooms of government offices. So, can films begin to tell these stories, maybe, hopefully as part of a greater truth and reconciliation process. |
|
22 May 07 - 08:27 AM (#2058293) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST Was Sands a terrorist or hero ? |
|
22 May 07 - 10:03 AM (#2058347) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST all depends on who you ask, his followers will say hero and his enemies will say terrorist, I'm with the latter sorry to say, but i hate anyone i don't who are what their campign is for I jsut don't believe that violance gets you anywhere except dead |
|
22 May 07 - 10:09 AM (#2058348) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Mick GUEST, there is wisdom in what you have said. What makes Sands a hero to his followers is his absolute committment to his cause, and to righting the wrongs being committed against his people. The obvious evidence of his committment lies in his willingness to starve himself to death. Another reason he is revered was for his ability to couch the suffering of his people in such eloquent terms. The film is important so long as it is done right. The most important thing on the ground in the North of Ireland is that the parties are sitting at the same table, choosing politics instead of the gun. God grant them the forebearance to succeed at their task. Mick |
|
22 May 07 - 10:24 AM (#2058358) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: InOBU Hi Guest, As a commonly accepted fact, neither. He was a soldier, a poet, brilliant thoughtful young man. I knew people who knew him, and I knew a few people who were also called terrorists. For example Joe Doherty, a thoughtful, kind young man, like many soldiers on both sides. The heroism of Sand's actions, especially during the hunger strike, we wont all agree upon. I think his intellect is visible in his writings. Keith points out the actions of British soldiers who saved lives in Ireland, and I agree. It was a military doctor who saved the life of a friend of mine, Bernadette Devlin McAlisky, and she would say so herself, he was an honorable man, who did the right thing. However, it was also British soldiers and police and prison guards who attempted to frame, and who tortured her daughter Rosin while she was expecting her first baby. The sad fact is that governments type and charicature the "enemy" and "friend" What is interesting, and I am at a loss to understand, is that most folks, like Teribus, Keith, most of us here on Mudcat, are pretty well adjusted folks, who if we faced the problems our nations faced, would be able to work things out without killing each other. However, we elect a small group with a high instance of sociopathic behavior, LBJ, Nixon, Lynch, Haughie, Thatcher, Bush, Hitler, Musolini, and the list goes on of people with deep sociopathic tendancies who would kill for their politic, or more to the point, get others to kill, to keep them in power. I'd add Gerry Adams to that list, as his questionable dedication to the progressive goals of young men and woman in the republican community is in the way he moved Sin Fein to the middle of the road, as soon as it suited his aims. I've always consider Adams as a politician with all the faults that often accompanies that choice in life. What is interesting, is the predictions that IRA men and women would turn to crime if the war was not being waged. That hasn't happened in most cases. Like all militaries, there are lots of different folks who go to war. But, for example, Joe Doherty, after decades in prison, became a teacher, and a very good one. Many former IRA men became statesmen, for example Sean McBride, who became the Assistant Secretary General of the U.N. and was the founder of Amnesty International. I don't think we would ever agree on the histories of our nations, but to oppose making films does not help each other understand the conclusions we both draw from our shared histories. I would also say, that calling each other names does not help very much either, it feeds the whole mess of the politics of stereotypes, which I don't think ever made much sense, or spread much light. All the best is mise, le meas lor |
|
22 May 07 - 10:38 AM (#2058369) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Teribus According to InOBU, the germ of the story about NATO and Ireland, and its relationship to the "controllable" war in Ireland? As France and Spain withdrew from NATO, we began to see, off the coast of Ireland, each fishing season, trawlers being towed under by their nets as British subs planted listening devices to monitor Soviet Subs which were using Ireland as a lee to lie of the coast of Britain. Some factual points worthy of consideration having read the above: 1. France never withdrew from NATO. From 1966 until 1993 it partially withdrew from the combined military command of NATO, it still remained a full political member of the alliance. 2. Spain only joined NATO in 1982 and has never withdrawn from it. 3. Trawler/MFV/Submarine incidents. As presented by InOBU all ocuring off the coast of Ireland with, presumably, Irish fishing boats being towed under by evil 'Brit' subs. Well not according to the Celtic League reports, here is what they say on the matter: **The Celtic League monitors military activity and, over twenty years up to 1993, we have built up the most comprehensive dossier of over 150 incidents involving submarines and MFVs. Included in this total were twenty suspicious sinkings and disappearances and over 150 deaths. What was clear to us in relation to most of these incidents was that the vessels, from Scotland, Wales, Ireland, Cornwall & Brittany, were solid, seaworthy and crewed by experienced men. More pointedly, when the Cold war ended and the US and Soviet navies left waters around the British Isles, the number of incidents involving MFVs and submarines dramatically declined. In 1993 the Celtic League ended its campaign for International action to close waters around the British Isles to submerged exercise activity. By this time, considerable action by both the Royal Navy and Internationally had been taken to address the problem. The campaign "ended" with the laying of a wreath in a submarine exercise area in the Irish sea, the scene of many of the sinkings. The wreath contained the names of the twenty vessels and though our campaign is over the mystery of their loss and the many deaths remains.** Obviously InOBU knows more about this than those who have been studying it for years, as according to him all these sinkings were in Irish waters (which they were not) and all were caused by British Submarines (which they were not). Over a period of investigation and monitoring covering twenty years there are 20 incidents involving the loss of fishing vessels that MAY, or MAY NOT, have been due to activity involving submarines. Short sea story for you InOBU. In my time with the RN I did two training trips and operational patrols on 'A-Class' and 'P&O-Class' submarines. In both subs they took great pains to avoid fishing vessels at all costs even to the extent of abandoning exercises and surfacing if need be, to get out of their way. That was in the mid-60's to mid-70's InOBU. Can you offer any explanation as to why those practices would change subsequent to that period? I can't. 4. Now what were those 'evil Brit subs' doing according to InOBU? Laying 'listening devices' to listen to Soviet submarines. Unfortunately for InOBU's story, such listening was done by US Navy SOSUS chains, and guess what? Not a single one was laid or operated by the British and none were located off the coast of Ireland. In any event commercial cable laying ships were used to install them - not submarines, British or otherwise. I have a question - Just what the hell as any of the above got to do with what was happening in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland - Sweet FA as far as I can see. InOBU's original contention was that NATO forces were stationed in a non-aligned country which would be Eire. If such was the case then he should have no problem in stipulating the units and the occasions they were stationed in Eire. If on the other hand he cannot he should stop wittering on about something that did not happen, claiming it to be a reason for other things that did. Oh InOBU, the reason that the PIRA came into existance was because the Official IRA took one look at what was happening up North and rather sensibly decided that it required no action as left to take it's own course the 'Civil Rights Movement' would win. The 'Brits' had already moved in to disband and disarm the B-Specials (my first tour) and public opinion throughout Ireland and the UK was firmly on the side of the Civil Rights Movement. Within the ranks of the IRA, having British soldiers protecting Catholic/Nationalist areas was unacceptable and the PIRA was formed and waded in. Great pity if they hadn't, there would have been 3500 more Irish men, women and children who would have got a shot at life and a further 33,000 who would not have been beaten, broken and maimed. |
|
22 May 07 - 11:25 AM (#2058396) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Den Just back to this after a long weekend away with my family. Long walks with my wife, the boys and our dogs on the beach. A much needed break. Anyway, I see that this NI related thread has done its usual meandering. Keith if I may I'd like to take up a point with you and it is to do with this statement of yours: "My last was in reply to Den who challenged that BS was even an IRA activist at all." Really, at what point did I remotely suggest that? That would indeed be an ubsurd thing for me to say. I've looked at my posts and can find nothing that I said that would support that statement. Unless you are talking about when I asked for your definition of your statement that Sands was a "very active volunteer". I asked for clarification because Sands spent most of the last nine years of his life locked up in the maze prison. Since we know that he died aged 27, that he joined the IRA aged 18 that would give him about six months of freedom give or take, between prison sentences. In that, he was actively involved in working with his local community Twinbrook, as a tenant association and youth club organizer during the period of his release after serving his first sentence he must have been very busy. Guitar has made a number of references about birds in conjunction with Bobby Sands. He was a fairly keen amateur ornithologist as it happens. Something else people may not know about him is that he was not sectarian in his views, even after his much maligned treatment at the hands of loyalists. Sands was born in Rathcoole, a predominantly loyalist area of Belfast. He was a keen athlete and ran for a well known protestant club, "the Willowfield Temperance Harriers." It would be nice if the proposed film were to focus on the events that shaped the life of Bobby Sands. In that way I think it would give us a much better insight into the man be became. Much can be gleaned from his writing if anyone took the trouble to read it. I know there are some pieces available online and many more in print. |
|
22 May 07 - 11:44 AM (#2058403) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Den, when I said he was a very active IRA volunteer, I thought it obvious that I meant when he was not in jail. As such he would have been armed, so his conviction for posession seems fair to me. |
|
22 May 07 - 12:10 PM (#2058420) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Den There was next to no support for the civil rights movement outside of the nationalists communities of the north of Ireland. The greater UK community has never given a shit (pardon my language) about events pertaining to the plight of nationalists in Ulster. The turning point for the troubles was the murder of 13 innocent civilians in Derry on Bloody Sunday. Up to that point the IRA were a non-force with little to no support. The British army's job has always been to help prop up the protestant state for a protestant people. But this is way of topic. Keith, Sands was more active in prison than he ever was outside of it. He was convicted with four others on a weapons charge. It has never been proved that Sands was in actual posession of the particular weapon. You still haven't addressed my other point. The point about you misrepresenting what I said above. |
|
22 May 07 - 02:01 PM (#2058507) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Den, you wrote to me, Now where do we start with your post? Please define, "very active IRA volunteer." I took that to mean that you did not agree, or why say it? (And by very active volunteer I meant one who spent many sleepless nights on standby, going on IRA operations, dodging security forces etc.) I hope you are clear now. Seems like a pointless quible to me. |
|
22 May 07 - 02:11 PM (#2058513) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Den, I dispute your statement that the greater UK community never gave a shit... My experience was different. There was universal support for the US Civil Rights movement and when the NI movement emerged with the same demands, that support naturally went to themm too. And did not the UK government meet all the demands of that peaceful movement? |
|
22 May 07 - 02:46 PM (#2058533) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,William I'm a Scotish Presbeterian; I support the 'Gers and some would call me a bigot. I mention these things because I WILL go and see this movie, because want to know what drives a man (or a woman, in the case of the sufferagettes) to kill themselves in this horrific, degrading fashion for a cause - however misguided they seem to me. I watched "The Last King of Scotland" to try to understand why Europeans thought Idi Amin was a jocular buffoon and not the psychopathic killer that he was. I was one of those who, at the time, thought his antics were funny until I knew the horrendous truth - I was trying to understand myself! |
|
22 May 07 - 02:58 PM (#2058540) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Den I was questioning "very active." Do you have information the rest of us don't? The UK government's answer to that peaceful movement was to send the Para's to Derry on what became known as Bloody Sunday. |
|
22 May 07 - 03:10 PM (#2058549) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Let it go Den. I listed the things he was engaged in that met the criteria of a very active volunteer. What is your problem with that description? The UK government's answer to the Civil Rights movement WAS to meet all their demands. The Paras were there on peacekeeping duty, and it went horribly wrong on Bloody Sunday. |
|
22 May 07 - 03:17 PM (#2058553) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Shaneo If the movie only concentrates on the last few weeks of his life ,then it's going to make pretty grim viewing , as this was the time of the dirty/blanket protest , |
|
22 May 07 - 03:57 PM (#2058572) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Jean(eanjay) You're right there - I'm hoping for more than that. Den said: It would be nice if the proposed film were to focus on the events that shaped the life of Bobby Sands. There are lots of things that a lot of us don't know about Bobby Sands and I, for one, would like to know more about him as a person and about the events that led to such commitment (whether we consider it misguided or not) to a cause. |
|
22 May 07 - 06:45 PM (#2058685) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: InOBU Well, Teribus, as I see it, we differ on this, I believe the war in Ireland was part of the cold war in the later 20th century, and that it was fought by many well intentioned people on both sides, most of whom had no idea of the real politic behind the violence. You, (correct me if I am wrong) believe that the Irish are simply evil minded and murderous, as the Zulu were barbaric, the people of India where murderous and evil except for little devoted Gunga Din, and the stalwart British soldier faced all with the rules of the cricket pitch, and every so often Irish trawlers suddenly - nets taught, began to speed backwards on their own through he ocean and dive, killing their crews... I am not convinced of this. I also believe that British subs DID try and avoid Irish trawler nets, but I also believe they violated Irish territorial waters for the same reason Britain violated international conventions against torture in Ireland. Perhaps I believe in a more balanced world than you do ... but as I said before that makes horse races. I promise not to force you to see the Bobby Sands film... Sin e doigh Is mise, le meas lor |
|
23 May 07 - 06:20 AM (#2058862) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Teribus "There was next to no support for the civil rights movement outside of the nationalists communities of the north of Ireland." - Den, 22 May 07 - 12:10 PM I don't know where you were at the time Den, certainly in the UK there was widespread support for the NICRM and the hardline "Unionsts", Ian Paisley in particular, were treated as a bit of a joke and objects of derision. Mind you I can only speak for myself and those I knew at that time. InOBU please do not put words into my mouth then attempt to take me to task over them. "You, (correct me if I am wrong) believe that the Irish are simply evil minded and murderous" - InOBU I will correct you InOBU. When have I EVER made such a statement or claim - If you cannot find an example of me having done so, you at least should retract that statement and apologise for having made it. I certainly do believe that the paramilitaries who were active in Northern Ireland, mainland UK and elsewhere were evil minded, murderous bastards and evidence to support that point of view is plain to see. I do not believe that I have ever stated an opinion on the Zulu nation. In their heyday they were regarded, by many, as being barbaric, they actually traded on that reputation. Maybe you should read a little of their history, particularly that of their founder Shaka Zulu, read about what he did in the aftermath of his favourite wife's death (It most certainly was not pleasant, or the action of any civilised human being). Also take a good look at his attitude to vanquished foes born from his own experiences when he and his mother evaded an attempt on his life. India, again I have not mentioned India in this thread, but you and other Americans that I have heard on the subject, seem rather ill informed. For a start India was never a British colony, your original thirteen states were, take a look at the differences. India was not brutally suppressed by the British, if you believe that it was, can you please explain how less than one thousand civil servants were able to administer the entire sub-continent of more than 350 million people for the best part of 200 years. India at the moment is poised to become a world super-power, it is debatable that it (India) economically will surpass the Chinese purely by dint of the fact that more Indians speak what is commonly accepted as being the international language. The foundation of India's economic potential was British investment in India during the days of the Raj. On the Irish trawlers, I believe that it was you who tried to convey that they were being pulled under by the dozen by evil 'Brit' submarines placing "listening devices" on the seabed to keep track of Soviet submarines. I, on the other hand, referred you to, and quoted from, a report issued by an independent body who had studied the issue (Celtic League) which concluded that in total over a period of 20 years there were twenty incidents where submarines may, or may not, have been involved in the disappearance of fishing vessels from Ireland, Scotland, Wales, Cornwall and Brittany. Those twenty incidents did not all occur in Irish waters. As to violating Irish territorial waters I would be interested in hearing why they would do such a thing? I know for certain that we (The RN) did violate Russian territorial waters during the "Cold War" having been there and done that, but that was because there, there were things we wanted to look at and listen to. Hell's teeth anything similar in Ireland all one would have to do would be to buy a ferry ticket and go off as a tourist. The Celtic League's report however did draw attention to the fact that at the end of the Cold War and the dismemberment of the USSR and the subsequent withdrawal of US and Soviet submarines from the waters of the British Isles the number of incidents declined "dramatically" (Their expression). On torture, holding ones feet to the fire, you claim to know people who were tortured by the 'Brits', people who have told you of their experiences - Good for them. Now do you know any who were tortured by any of the paramilitary organisations who were active during "The Troubles", they all most certainly did torture people, but the main difference was that people tended not to survive the process. At the time the UK Government could be hauled to the court at Strazbourg, the paramilitaries could not. But as a lawyer InOBU you should be aware that things have changed, and that now members of the likes of the INLA, PIRA, UDF, et al, can. Which explains SF and the PIRA's stance regarding the abduction, torture and murder of Mrs Jean McConville - you see that is not covered by the GFA, her murder is still on the books and Mr Adams may yet be brought to account for it as I believe that he most certainly gave the order sanctioning the "operation". A more balanced world Lorcan? From what you have written you wouldn't know one if it jumped up and bit you on the arse. |
|
23 May 07 - 08:00 AM (#2058928) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: InOBU Dear Teribus Well ... to bring this back to value of film as communication... I see we need a film, not only about Bobby Sands, but about Jillianwalla Baud, where the India which was not brutally suppressed by the British was the site of the unprovoked murder of Shiks by members of the British army, who, following orders machine-gunned a crowd in a plaza ... well, maybe it was provoked, the British had ordered the Shiks to crawl on their bellies in the plaza, and when they did not they were shot. Bangladesh was, once part of the Indian subcontinent, and there in what was India at the time, Lord Ridley, Trivellian (same Trivellian who did not allow famine relief to be given freely in Ireland during the famine) and others gently administered the territory. They burned the cotton fields and destroyed the seeds of the Bangladeshi cotton, a unique cotton, compared to silk, and the source of Bangladesh being the riches territory on the subcontinent. They replaced it with jute, and destroyed the weaving industry, to make sure that the jute was rased to be worked elsewhere, under British control, reducing Bangladesh to the poverty from which it has never recovered. Ridley stated that a united Bangladesh was a threat to British economic domination, and he partitioned Bangladesh, the first time, it was later partitioned by the British again ... gently mind you... Britain behaved in India, very much as they did in Ireland, beginning with the supposition that they were always both right and well intentioned. The argument that torture justifies torture is simply wrongheaded. It leads to the argument, who started it first? Rather than creating a world where no one tortures, we spend years in fighting the struggle of the last outrage. One does not look at one's own nations role in creating the environment which torture occurred, and does one's duty without thought that you might be serving a government which is committing crime rather than legitimate statesmanship. This is one reason why, I never joined any military, not would I. I went to war with a camera and met with, and spoke to both sides with equal love and attention. I never met the "mad dog" IRA man, bent on killing out of hatred. Rather, I met many young men and women, who were picked up and tortured under the special powers act, and sought a way to end a host of injustices in their nation. I met British soldiers, in the "Troops Out Movement" who for a variety of reasons, worked to end British military involvement in Ireland, some who felt outrages were being committed by their comrades, others who simply felt it was a policy which could not work. I met at least one former Military Intelligence officer, who lost faith in what he was doing, felt it was immoral and based in lies, I met British soldiers who felt they were there, doing the right thing for the right reasons, and desperately wanted to put their lives in the way to bring about peace and kill if they had to, I met Loyalists who felt the violence of other loyalists was wrong, and others who felt it was right. What I have never seen, is a war which was fought for the reasons expressed, including WWII. Not a single death camp was liberated as part of the war plan ... and as soon as the war ended, the US began to protect highly placed nazis to help in the cold war. Film seems a much better way to bring about understanding and social change, than using bombs, torture, guns, submarines, and all the other tools of war including censorship. All the best lor PS You are right, it was wrong of me to put words in your mouth, and I apologize for that. |
|
23 May 07 - 08:28 AM (#2058943) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Dave the Gnome Nice to see that the US has learned by what they accuse Britain of in it's running of a particular holiday camp in Cuba. I could make comments about black kettles and pans but I can fully understand the needs of the armchair generals and fundraisers in Boston and New York to justify the continued animosity towards Britain. Blame Britain for all the worlds ills and you can sit smugly in those Irish bars and clubs while your own administration continue the imperialist legacy elsewhere. It still seems rather funny to me that none of the Old Country supporters on this thread chose to support or comment on a thread on the peace process. That's tha way of the world I guess... D. |
|
23 May 07 - 10:33 AM (#2059029) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: InOBU Hi Dave: I read the peace process thread, and I think I might have commented on it... have to look back. As to US torture, I have not only spoken out about it in US political forums, I spoke out about it on this thread. The topic of this thread is about a film about Bobby Sands, if you look back, you will find I said there should be such a film for the very reason you mention, that we learn from the past to inform the present and the future. All the best lor |
|
23 May 07 - 10:42 AM (#2059038) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: InOBU Bye the bye, Dave, I have no animosity towards Britain. I spend a lot of time in England, and am quite happy there. This does not mean I believe the British Government is without fault, anymore than I think the government of the US or Ireland is without fault. I love my country quite a bit, and because of that, I often hold my country up to the light, when the government commits illegal and inhuman acts. I am Anglo Irish and proud of our often troubled past. We did terrible things, but, we also did some great things, that is what human history is about. I don't say Britain is responsible for all the ills of the world, there is plenty of blame to go around, and the US has more than its share, as does, Russia, Belgium, China, Japan, Germany, Denmark, even mild old Canada... a place very dear to my heart. It seems there is a sense that if you don't say that Bobby Sands was a blood thirsty mad dog killer, that you are a support of NORAID and more. The world is much more complex than that. You might be surprised if you met some of the people who you assume so much about here. All the best lor |
|
23 May 07 - 11:30 AM (#2059071) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Dave the Gnome Good man, Lorcan. At least you accept that most governments seem to be the same. Shame not everyone can see it is the administration rather than the people of a country that is most often at fault. By your own argument though there are also people who seem to believe that if you don't agree that Bobby Sands was a hero you are a bastard brit who would like nothing better than to enslave the world under the imperialist yoke once more. I don't think that either perspective is true. What, by the way, do you think I am assuming so much about people here? I have not assumed anything, just pointed out that a thread about the troubles attracts more than double the contributions than a thread about peace attracted. I would rather people draw their own conclusions but mine is simply that people in general would rather talk about violence than peace. I find that very sad. Good luck with your quest to educate us all anyway:-) Cheers Dave |
|
23 May 07 - 11:35 AM (#2059076) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Dave the Gnome Oh - and by the way - You did not contribute to the peace thread. I could be wrong but I don't think there was a single contribution from the pro-republicans across the water. D. |
|
23 May 07 - 11:50 AM (#2059087) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: InOBU Hi Dave: Good man, yourself. I'd say we are pretty much in agreement on your latest points. I think there are things which are maters of fact, a person's intellect, etc., and others that depend on where one stands, one person's hero is another person's fool. I believe there are well meaning British people who think Sands was not a hero. I think if many of them had a chance to have met him, they might have had a more complex view of the man, they might not, where we grow up has a lot to do with shaping how we look at the same event, the old Rashamon syndrome. I rather approach things with an open mind ... part of being a Quaker is to really listen to someone, with as little judgementalism as one can muster ... not always easy. As to the thread about peace in Ireland. I really must look back and see if I commented on it. I lived in Ireland in the seventies, and part of the eighties, and so my knowledge of the people who lived and fought then is more a matter of comment from experience than my knowledge of the present peace progress, which I know of from reading others, rather than my own witness. During the eighties and into the nineties, I worked on cases involving extradition to Britain, and that kept me up to date with stories presented by the British and US government and the responses of individuals and organizations -- and so my knowledge of those times was rather up to date. I have great hopes for peace, but more, peace that informs the future so that we don't make the same mistakes again. We seem not to be able to do that well ... learning from our past. South Africa seems to be doing that very well, though not perfectly -- we are, after all human ... most of us. So, I don't even think one is a "bastard brit who would like nothing better than to enslave the world under the imperialist yoke" if you don't wish to see a film about Bobby Sands. I tend to watch films which reflect a variety of points of view, and give them their due ... for example, "Dances With Wolves," which I watched with Lacota friends who found it racist and at times funny when it did not mean to be ... but, I would say it was a great piece of film making, a ripping yarn, but that it did not really inform much about the reality of interaction between the Lacota and White Americas. Others came to wish to learn more about the Lacota from seeing it, and in that, it was a good thing the film was made. Cheers back at ya Dave, and if you get to New York, give me a shout and we'll go out for a pint, and as you're the guest, talk music or politics, your choice... Lor PS, and if me bands playing someplace, and you can stand the Uilleann pipes, you're on for a night of music |
|
23 May 07 - 12:04 PM (#2059094) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: InOBU Hi Dave: I looked up the peace thread. Well, there was one, pro-republican, though I would not have put things the way he did... You'll notice that when I wrote of Irish law, as to the North being part of Ireland, I was writing about the time that Sands was arrested. I delivered a paper in Ireland about Irish American Travellers (Pavees - "Gypsies") at Trinity Law School, (The Racialization of American Irish Travellers as Gypsie) a few years ago, and found, as I had heard, Ireland to have changed dramatically in the past decade. What effect this will have on potential for reunification, we will see. It is a different Europe today, and even though Britain holds on to the Pound while Ireland has abandoned the Punt, it is a different Britain as well. In point of fact, in the past ten years, I spent much more time in England than in Ireland, and have seen the differing attitudes towards Ireland as the peace process evolves. Even so, I don't feel called on to write about the peace process ... other than to say, I don't feel as some who commented from the States, that religion played a big part on the republican side, most Republican volunteers I met, were not very devout in their faith, though some were. All accepted me, as a Quaker with family Protestant roots, for myself without any thought to my religion (as did my Irish American Catholic wife ). So, there it is... I have great hopes for peace, but I have little in the way of expectation of how that peace will look. All the best slan lor |
|
23 May 07 - 12:47 PM (#2059122) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,Big Mick Dave, I have posted on the peace thread today. Thanks for pointing that out. All the best, Mick |
|
23 May 07 - 12:56 PM (#2059134) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Den "I listed the things he was engaged in that met the criteria of a very active volunteer. What is your problem with that description"? A charge of possession of a weapon doesn't equate to very active in my book. "The UK government's answer to the Civil Rights movement WAS to meet all their demands". Unbelievable. Of course you fail to mention that in order for NI nationalists to be treated equitably in terms of a fair election system, an end to gerrymandering of electoral boundaries, an end to the perceived discrimination in the allocation of public sector housing, the repeal of the Special Powers Act etc. They would have to hold public demonstrations, be beaten and killed in some instances and all to have a piece of what the rest of the UK population has always enjoyed. And then have internment without trial visited on them. And finally the coup de gráce. Your interpretation of the targeting and systematic killing and maiming of unarmed innocent men women and children is a peace keeping mission that went wrong. You know folks I think that, that will be it for me. This place has taken enough of my time over the last while. I think its time to pull the plug, there's a lot more interesting things going on in the world and I should go do them. |
|
23 May 07 - 03:13 PM (#2059232) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford No Den, a charge of posession does not say much, but one who spent many sleepless nights on standby, going on IRA operations, dodging security forces etc. says it all. Bobby Sands was an IRA fighting man. A soldier of Ireland. Of course he posessed a gun. Did you think he was more a shillelagh man? A rolled up newspaper? Yes, the Civil rights movement had a struggle, as did the US movement. And yes, their struggle should never have been needed. And yes it took much longer than it should. Internment was nothing to do with it though. That was a disastrous reaction to PIRA's armed struggle for a unified Ireland. Finally, Bloody Sunday was as I said , horrible, but it was not "the targeting and systematic killing and maiming of unarmed innocent men women and children " |
|
24 May 07 - 03:47 AM (#2059592) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: guitar Don't argue with these people, they are not interested in the truth |
|
24 May 07 - 07:24 AM (#2059706) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: InOBU Hi Guitar: That is a rather interesting comment. I went into a war zone with a camera, spoke to soldiers and paramilitaries, civilians on all sides, tried to being the story of what I found to a nation where there was no press censorship from a nation where press censorship was enforced at the point of a gun - several press photographers were shot at by the British army - warning shots over their heads, well... it it was not an interest in the truth, what do you think I was doing there? Truths don't just sit on the surface of any situation, one must dig, search out, and in doing so one learns that there is not a single truth, there are truths and there is honesty. All any of us can hope for is honesty. So, if you think my repeted call here for a truth and reconcilliation process is a lack of interest in THE truth, as it might not yet by YOUR truth... well, what can I say? All the best lor |
|
24 May 07 - 08:14 AM (#2059743) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Jean(eanjay) I always remember one article I read about Bobby Sands which stated "This IRA gunman from................................." - it just stuck in my mind. |
|
24 May 07 - 10:36 AM (#2059874) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: guitar fine |
|
24 May 07 - 10:36 AM (#2059875) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: guitar OK Peace |
|
24 May 07 - 11:22 AM (#2059890) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Guitar, saying things like "Don't argue with these people..." makes it even harder to have a reasoned debate. There are always reasons why people feel as they do. I know that you always say sorry afterwards, but the damage is done by then. InOBU, I think that you got things mixed up again. There has been no press censorship here since WW2. Misguidedly, for a time certain voices could not be broadcast, but all the words were still broadcast and published. In all the years of the Troubles, I do not recall any journalist being shot. |
|
24 May 07 - 11:31 AM (#2059896) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Teribus All my experience with the media, journalists including photo-journalists is that they usually have their copy all weighed off before they leave the office - to hell with all the bullshit about "seeking truth", the only version of the truth that they seek is the one their editors told them to go out and find. |
|
25 May 07 - 05:52 AM (#2060513) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Wolfgang "Renunification will follow soon" (I'm sorry, I know it is just one of those typos that happen to all of us at least twice daily, but I can't resist laughing.) Isn't that exactly what all the loyalists and unionists feared when Martin McGuinnes became minister of education in 1999: All their children in school being educated by nuns? Wolfgang |
|
25 May 07 - 08:33 AM (#2060578) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: InOBU Hi Teribus: It was not legal to photograph the troops in the North of Ireland while I was working there... warning shots were sometimes fired over the heads of journalists... as to censorship here is a part of an article, and the URL, do read the whole thing, but I included some quote, followed by my own experiences... http://www.newstatesman.com/200010160026 You think there is no pre-publication censorship in Britain? Tony Geraghty's experience suggests otherwise "A British civil servant in the Ministry of Defence writes a letter to the UK's biggest publisher, "strongly urging" him not to release the paperback version of a book already on the shelves in hardback. The publisher complies, even though the request is just that: an invitation to change course, with no legal backing.The MoD writes again two months later: "We do not feel we can condone paperback publication . . . Having made our concerns known . . . we do not intend to take any further action." A grateful publisher then prepares to release the paperback, a year later than expected. It has just appeared. The British, with no written constitution or First Amendment (short of the European Human Rights Act) to safeguard freedom of expression, hardly noticed this extraordinary exercise of censorship.The book in question is The Irish War, of which I am the author. My experience is a chilling lesson in the use - or, rather, misuse - of the judicial process to bully publishers, editors and authors in the UK. The trouble started two months before the hardback edition appeared in October 1998. The legal department of HarperCollins (my publishers) received a telephone call from a retired rear-admiral occupying room 2235 in the MoD's main Whitehall building. He would later claim that, although on the ministry's payroll, he was not an MoD official. He was acting, he said, as secretary of a committee known as the Defence Advisory Notice Committee (a unit answerable to no one in particular, created ostensibly to advise writers and publishers about security issues). The committee, an official study concedes, "is, in effect, one man - its secretary" The admiral did not reveal that he was also working on behalf of a shadowy MoD department known as the Secretariat, Home & Special Forces, run from rooms 5106 and 5107 in the same building. His concern was that my references to the work of the SAS and other special forces in Northern Ireland might jeopardise security. He requested sight of the unpublished manuscript.I vetoed that suggestion, conscious that the D-Notice office has a disreputable history of betraying writers innocent enough to trust it. Its former secretaries include Colonel Sammy Lohan, paid £500 a year by MI5 for passing on "titbits" from the Fleet Street newspapers. I myself had received the uncensored, unpublished proof copy of Mark Urban's book Big Boys' Rules - another analysis of special forces' operations in Northern Ireland - after he had entrusted it to the D-Notice team for vetting. ... The search, by six MoD police detectives (including a woman to keep an eye on my wife) lasted almost eight hours. Everything, including the dirty washing, was examined. The computer, my diary, many of my files (some unrelated to defence) were removed. We then set off for the local police station, in rural Herefordshire. The arresting officers did not know where to find the station, so I found myself guiding them. The station officer did not know how to record my arrest on his computer. As he explained: "We don't get many official secrets cases in Leominster." "Try 'Miscellaneous'," I suggested. It worked. I could now be safely locked in a cell, between long periods of interrogation. I was released after five hours.About 150 miles away, HarperCollins's west London office was also being raided and searched, but no arrests were made. In Surrey, Nigel Wylde, a friend who had won the Queen's Gallantry Medal for defusing IRA bombs in Northern Ireland, was also lifted and questioned, as my alleged source.For the next 360 days or so, I was on police bail. In May 1999, I was charged with breaching Section 5 of the 1989 Official Secrets Act: the first time this law had been exercised. I made a single appearance at Bow Street and faced an Old Bailey trial, plus two years' imprisonment and financial ruin. _________________________________ Back in the late 80s, if I remember, I was co-producer of a TV news program, "Behind the Headlines, on WNYC, with a fellow George Augustine. One of the episodes received calls from the British consulate, when civil rights lawyer and former president of the New York City council, Paul O'Dywer, interviewed NORAID organizer Martin Galvin. He promised pressure to get the show pulled, warning that WNYC would not get access to British media. Censorship happens (even in the US) through a number of methods, some of them by government pressure, some of them by application of law. |
|
25 May 07 - 10:19 AM (#2060665) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford So we are talking about requests to delay publishing in soft back what was already freely available in hardback. Requests not to give publicity to a fundraiser for guerrilla fighters against an ally (No one has the power to deny access to British media) Polite, unenforcible requests. To describe that as "a nation where press censorship was enforced at the point of a gun " is dishonest and unworthy. There was a reason why soldiers did not like to be photographed. The IRA had a policy of identifying individuals, tracking them down and executing them in their homes in front of their families. Remember, UDR soldiers were local men and many died in those terrible circumstances. Soldiers might threaten to confiscate film, but they were not allowed to fire warning shots in such circumstances. |
|
25 May 07 - 10:34 AM (#2060682) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: InOBU Hi Keith: No, we are talking about arresting journalists and turning their homes inside out, going through their notes, and everything else they own... here in the US, not only do we have press freedom under the 1st amendment of the Constitution, but we have a right not be be arrested by the state under the circumstances mentioned in the artical above, the fourth amendment - rather under siege by the present administration, I am afraid. I don't I have heard of the IRA tracking down British soldiers in their homes, on the other hand, Irish lawyers such as Patrick Finucane and Rosemary Nelson where killed under circumstances very like those you mention above. All the best lor |
|
25 May 07 - 10:51 AM (#2060689) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford US journalists can not be arrested when suspected of crime or consorting with criminals? (The activities of the paramilitaries were regarded as crimes here) |
|
25 May 07 - 01:06 PM (#2060807) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: InOBU No they can't for consorting, suspected of a crime is a different matter. Interviewing anyone is not seen as a criminal activity. The gray zone is around protecting sourses. But, recieving state secrets, for example, there is a lot of protection, traditionally, under the protection against prior censorship. So, for example, the pentigon papers, which were published revieling secrets about the Vietnam war, and help end out involvement by showing the illegal invation of Cambodia, among other secrets, were protected by the first amendment. The harm government secrets can do, often outweighs the good... as we are finding out in the present war. |
|
25 May 07 - 02:43 PM (#2060876) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Just the same as here then. To search through your stuff like that they would need a warrant for which they would have to convince a judge that there were reasonable grounds for suspicion. And our judiciary is even more independent than yours is. And all this is nothing to do with press censorship so will you now take back that nonsense about censorship at gunpoint. |
|
25 May 07 - 03:51 PM (#2060924) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: ard mhacha InOBU, The nationalist people in the north of Ireland believe you, after all we have had our homes pulled asunder for being on Gaelic Football committees, all it needed was a word from the RUC and the jack-boot brigade arrived with their incomprehensible accents while their light-fingered squaddies helped themselves to whatever took their fancy. My advice to you InOBU would be, let them dwell in their ignorance. |
|
25 May 07 - 04:19 PM (#2060937) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Mick My thoughts exactly, Ard. One of the expatriate folks that live in my area was a Catholic woman from Newry. She presents an entirely different view from what the British apologists do. |
|
25 May 07 - 05:45 PM (#2060999) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Ard, please don't leave us to dwell in ignorance. If there was press censorship I would like to know about it. Was that your experience? Were no Republican publications available in the North? (Unfortunately I will be off line for a few days, but I will read all about those armed censors when I get back) |
|
26 May 07 - 01:07 AM (#2061175) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: ard mhacha I REALLY DO GIVE UP. |
|
26 May 07 - 06:19 AM (#2061250) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: guitar now come on Guest now you mustn't upset people now |
|
26 May 07 - 07:21 AM (#2061271) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Raptor Yeah guitar good for you not wanting to upset people. This whole thing reminds me of the Gibson film about the Christ. Yeah it did happen but we don't want to acknowledge it because we might be seen unfavorably. I wonder what reation would arise from a new apartheid film. If you don't want to see the film then don't but quit letting this be the reason that we start fighting on the cat further. The troubles were terrible. Quit keeping score! The hatred you still hold is the same hatred that got so many killed. Enough with the sniping |
|
02 Jun 07 - 12:08 PM (#2066551) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford I will answer my own questions then, since no one else will. There was no press censorship in the UK, including NI, enforced at the barrel of a gun or anything else. The Republican publications, An Phloblacht and Republican News were published and were freely available in the North(they had more problems publishing in the South) even though they were used as a mouthpiece by PIRA, and for Army Council announcements. |
|
28 Apr 08 - 07:22 PM (#2328166) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST I love you, Bobby. |
|
16 May 08 - 11:24 AM (#2342168) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Jean(eanjay) screened in Cannes A year after the start of this thread the film has now been screened in Cannes. |
|
16 May 08 - 12:06 PM (#2342200) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,Boulder D. Seems to be a hard hitting film set in an turbulent era. I see Over 100,000 people attended his funeral. He was also elected to the Westminster Parliament. Margaret Thatcher seemed to hit the ball into her own net over this one. At the time of his death there were memorial services held in almost every state in America. He has become an icon among a younger generation. He appears on as many shirts as Che Guevara ! Would really like to see the film, I enjoyed Michael Collins, The wind in the barley and another one about the Irish troubles which I can't recall the title of. |
|
16 May 08 - 12:58 PM (#2342228) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: maire-aine Thanks for the link about Cannes. Maybe some day it will make it to the US. M |
|
16 May 08 - 01:04 PM (#2342232) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Stu "There was no press censorship in the UK, including NI, enforced at the barrel of a gun or anything else." There certainly was. Thatcher banned the broadcasting of Sinn Fein leader's voices I seem to remember. It was exposed for the farce it was when they had a bloke who sounded just like Gerry Adams syncing to your man on the telly - the words could be broadcast, Just not the sound of Adams' voice. |
|
16 May 08 - 01:16 PM (#2342239) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Bonnie Shaljean Yes, I remember that. I was living in England at the time. The telly got around it by using actor's voices, and all it did was make everyone listen REALLY CAREFULLY AND PAY CLOSE ATTENTION to this stuff we weren't supposed to be hearing. Talk about a censorship campaign backfiring... |
|
21 May 08 - 03:25 PM (#2346308) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Gulliver From today's Irish Times: It was announced in Cannes yesterday that Pathe Distribution had won the distribution rights for Ireland and the UK for this film. Pathe enjoyed huge success on the Irish market with Ken Loach's The Wind That Shakes The Barley, which won the Palme d'Or at Cannes two years ago. Given the positive critical reaction to the film at Cannes, it has been sold to a number of distributors in other countries in the past two days, including Australia, New Zealand, Greece, Portugal, etc. A number of companies are competing to to acquire the US rights--a US deal is anticipated later this week. Don |
|
21 May 08 - 03:37 PM (#2346313) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle its very weird how important films never get to the multiplexes. its all very well all those other countries getting the film, this is one of the main countries where it really affected everybody and has resonance. In fact, if you count NI as part of the UK - it is THE country where it all happened. I wouldn't give a stuff if it were just this one film - but lots of important films don't get to the only cinemas that are accessible for the disabled, and aren't in some inaccessible part of a city where no one has found a parking spot for decades. |
|
22 May 08 - 03:43 AM (#2346664) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Stigweard, there was a ban on certain voices but no censorship of the words spoken or written There was no censorship. As I said,the Republican publications, An Phloblacht and Republican News were published and were freely available in the North(they had more problems publishing in the South) even though they were used as a mouthpiece by PIRA, and for PIRA Army Council announcements. |
|
22 May 08 - 04:30 AM (#2346678) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle Well it was censorship of a sort. Adams and McGuinness never had to come on Panorama and be interviewed by Paxman - like every other political leader. And Paxman has faced down bigger assholes. (Thatcher for starters.....) I suppose what it saved us from was a load of self justifying bluster and bollocks - which might have been hard to take if your kids were in a box or had their arms and legs blown off, cos of them. But on the whole that cack handed attempt at suppression afforded them more relief than it did us. Looking back such censorship as there was, really did them a terrific favour. You might quibble about the terms Keith, but there was a quite definite attempt at suppression of an point of view that was uncongenial to the establishment, and many of us felt uncomfortable about it. |
|
22 May 08 - 04:33 AM (#2346680) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Stu "Stigweard, there was a ban on certain voices but no censorship of the words spoken or written" It's censorship of a sort Keith, albeit a clumsy and misguided attempt to further alienate a large part of the community of the North by silencing the people who spoke for many of them. censorship |ˈsensərˌ sh ip| noun the practice of officially examining books, movies, etc., and suppressing unacceptable parts : details of the visit were subject to military censorship. In this case, the voice. |
|
22 May 08 - 05:54 AM (#2346715) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford OK guys, but I was responding to these untruths to a nation where there was no press censorship (USA) from a nation where press censorship was enforced at the point of a gun (UK)- several press photographers were shot at by the British army - warning shots over their heads, |
|
22 May 08 - 06:17 AM (#2346724) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Stu "McGuinness never had to come on Panorama and be interviewed by Paxman - like every other political leader" Good cross-post WLD - great minds think alike (or fools never differ). I think McGuinness was interviewed by Paxman once (but it might have been Jon Snow), and Paxman gave him a right drubbing. McGuinness was struggling to answer the usual accusations and came across as an inarticulate goon, but then I get the impression he never was the brains in the organisation. |
|
22 May 08 - 06:30 AM (#2346727) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Here is a list of British TV programmes about the troubles form 1968 to 1978. There are many interviews with IRA officers. http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/othelem/media/tv10yrs.htm |
|
22 May 08 - 06:39 AM (#2346728) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford "One of the most remarkable aspects of the documentary is the amount of access you had with the IRA. We're behind IRA guns, at private meetings, witnessing a training session in bomb-building, inside the Maze prison, watching an FBI videotape of a sting involving IRA arms buyers. Have viewers in Britain or the U.S. ever seen this detail before? No, never. I made a documentary inside the Maze prison in 1990, which was the first time people had seen IRA members talk the way they really did, and without their masks on. Most of the people on "Behind the Mask" had never been interviewed before. The Republican movement was, to say the least, a little nervous they would say something they shouldn't. But in fact what they did was absolutely straight. Which is the great strength of the series." http://www.salon.com/news/1997/10/21news.html |
|
22 May 08 - 12:53 PM (#2346944) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,AlanA Martin McGuinness and Gerry Adams are now both declared millionaires through the sales of their autobiographies and property investment. M.McG is now the deputy first minister in the Ulster government. Some goons ! |
|
22 May 08 - 02:22 PM (#2347026) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle Don't believe all you read. Before the Dawn, the Adams autobiography (not a bad read actually) was in the remaindered bin in Words next to my line dance record, almost the week it came out. If he's become a millionaire, it wasn't financed by his book in the remaindered bin. |
|
23 May 08 - 01:14 AM (#2347394) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Teribus With their obvious connections could the money made by Adams and McGuinness through property investment be construed as having been obtained due to insider dealing or knowledge? |
|
23 May 08 - 02:44 AM (#2347421) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: quokka Christy Moore's song 'Section 31', written by his brother Barry, is about the "piece of legislation which prohibits Sinn Fein's elected representatives from putting forward their views on radio and TV." From the Christy Moore Songbook, p. 105. |
|
23 May 08 - 03:01 AM (#2347427) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Stu "With their obvious connections could the money made by Adams and McGuinness through property investment be construed as having been obtained due to insider dealing or knowledge?" If it did, they'd be right at home in the company of most other politicians, who virtually all use their position to their own ends. |
|
23 May 08 - 08:51 AM (#2347566) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Mick You louts show your prejudices very clearly. You have turned a thread on Bobby Sands into a litter box for you to spout about whether McGuinness and Adams made money or not, which as best I can tell has nothing to do with the subject. Despite your lame attempts to appear as though you are just engaging in fair discussion, your biases just shine through. Did you bother to see the movie? I think I will just start a thread with the title of, "Slag Adams and McGuinness, and other Irish Republicans, here......". That should keep you children happy. |
|
23 May 08 - 09:00 AM (#2347568) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle I think that was the point we were discussing - the fact that its not all that easy to get to see the movie. As for Irish Republicans. Most of us here (even Keith and Teribus) would like to see all of Ireland a republic. The real difference between us is that your cities haven't been on the receiving end of the bombs and (in one of the worse periods of unemployment ever) your children weren't taking jobs as soldiers policing the province and getting killed. It tends to temper ones idolatry of these characters. |
|
23 May 08 - 09:19 AM (#2347587) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Just so, Weelittlelout. Keithlout. |
|
23 May 08 - 09:28 AM (#2347592) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Mick Al, what has that got to do with how much money McGuinness and Adams make? Discussions of the bombing campaign have happened here many times. Discussions of whether Sands was a hero, a terrorist, or something in between, go on with regularity. As to whether our cities being on the receiving end of bombs, I suggest you take a look at the last 40 years, culminating with 9/11/2001 and rethink your position. As to your children taking jobs as soldiers "policing" the province, as best as I can tell they chose to do so. My answer to that is the same as my answer to my own government's actions in Iraq. Get out. You act as though there were no choice. Don't join the military if you don't want to do such a thing. |
|
23 May 08 - 09:53 AM (#2347607) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle Easily said Mick, trouble is a lot of these English kids taking soldiers jobs weren't all that bright. As for Americans in Iraq, I thought when they interviwed them before the last election - they seemed decent well motivated people. I had a lot of respect for them. They had doubts about what they were f doing - but the ones I heard from believesd they were doing someting good for the countries theyw ere serving in. A number of them wrote to me when one of my songs ended up on a Pentagon website - I've heard all the terrible stories, but the guys who wrote me and their parents were the very soul of decency and dignity. As for the personal fortunes of Mart and Gerry, well could you blame them. I think Churchill did okay out of world war 2. |
|
23 May 08 - 10:04 AM (#2347613) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Stu "That should keep you children happy" "As to your children taking jobs as soldiers "policing" the province, as best as I can tell they chose to do so. My answer to that is the same as my answer to my own government's actions in Iraq. Get out. You act as though there were no choice. Don't join the military if you don't want to do such a thing." Dickhead. You've got no idea about my political standpoint on this subject (though you might if you got off your fat arse and bothered to take a look back through some of the previous threads ). There have been people who knew what they were talking about in this context who used to post on this site - I wish they were here now. "You louts show your prejudices very clearly" Yeah? Well you don't have the wit to understand them then. Don't tar everyone with the same brush - over here it's considered part of our freedoms to look into and comment upon our politicians incomes, actions and behaviours regardless of their political creed. Believe me, I am a very long way from Keith's and Teribus' political standpoint but your two-dimensional view of them is a fundamental mistake in understanding where they are coming from. I'm looking forward to seeing the movie, and think Ken Loach speaks for an increasing number of people in this country who have grown up with nothing but propaganda and lies to help them form an opinion. |
|
23 May 08 - 10:12 AM (#2347624) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle Stig, don't call our friend dickhead! Not nice! |
|
23 May 08 - 10:14 AM (#2347626) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Mick stigweard, I certainly hope we meet one day. My comments were directed at those, in general, who hijacked the thread. If the shoe fits, put that sucker on. No one specific. So, I hope we meet one day. As to Teribus' and Keith's viewpoint, I get them very well, and have been a part of these discussions since about 1998. I commented on the narrow bit with regard to them turning the thread away from it's subject to their own ends. It gets tiring. |
|
23 May 08 - 10:17 AM (#2347627) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Mick Actually, Al, I started it with the use of the term "lout". Unfair on my part. I just got pissed off for a minute. Sorry about that. But I do hope we meet one day, stiggie. |
|
23 May 08 - 10:21 AM (#2347631) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Big Mick The main role of the British Army from the 60s to the end of the Century was to defend Nato's Eastern flank against the armoured might of the Soviet armies.. Alongside their US comrades. That is what our young men joined the army to do. No one wanted that nonsense in NI. |
|
23 May 08 - 10:28 AM (#2347635) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Mick Keith, the British Army's role in the effort to contain, and eventually cause the downfall, of Soviet expansionism is well known and appreciated. I served, during my time in the military, with British armed forces, and became very good friends with a number of them, even though their beer wasn't very good...(ducking here). Many of the Brit's here have altered, to a degree, my thoughts on The Troubles. But they have not shifted one tenet of my own views. The Brit's need to be out of the North of Ireland. You folks continually point out that the people don't support the continued troops in the North, yet they are still there. |
|
23 May 08 - 10:34 AM (#2347638) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Stu "But I do hope we meet one day, stiggie. Er, is a threat implied in that statement Mick? |
|
23 May 08 - 10:35 AM (#2347639) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Mick Take it in whatever way makes sense to you, stiggie. |
|
23 May 08 - 10:37 AM (#2347642) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Stu Nice. |
|
23 May 08 - 10:41 AM (#2347648) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Stu "Stig, don't call our friend dickhead! Not nice!" Yeah, that was wrong and I instantly regretted it, but since he's started getting a tad aggressive and threatening I don't feel too much like apologising to him. I do however, unreservedly apologise to everyone else for my outburst against Mick. |
|
23 May 08 - 10:44 AM (#2347655) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Teribus "I suggest you take a look at the last 40 years, culminating with 9/11/2001" - Big Mick. Yes absolutley, let's do that: "Historical Background Office of the Historian Bureau of Public Affairs Terrorist Incidents on US mainland, 1961-2003: A Brief Chronology Incident 1: Domestic Terrorism, January 27, 1975: Puerto Rican nationalists bombed a Wall Street bar, killing four and injuring 60. Incident 2: Domestic Terrorism, January 29, 1975: The Weathermen Underground claims responsibility for an explosion in a bathroom at the U.S. Department of State in Washington no casualties. Incident 3: World Trade Center Bombing, February 26, 1993: The World Trade Center in New York City was badly damaged when a car bomb planted by Islamic terrorists exploded in an underground garage. The bomb left 6 people dead and 1,000 injured. The men carrying out the attack were followers of Umar Abd al-Rahman, an Egyptian cleric who preached in the New York City area. Incident 4: Domestic Terrorism, bombing of the Federal Building in Oklahoma City, April 19, 1995: Right-wing extremists Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols destroyed the Federal Building in Oklahoma City with a massive truck bomb that killed 166 and injured hundreds more in what was up to then the largest terrorist attack on American soil. Incident 5: Empire State Building Sniper Attack, February 23, 1997: A Palestinian gunman opened fire on tourists at an observation deck atop the Empire State Building in New York City, killing a Danish national and wounding visitors from the United States, Argentina, Switzerland, and France before turning the gun on himself. A handwritten note carried by the gunman claimed this was a punishment attack against the "enemies of Palestine." Incident 6: Terrorist Attacks on U.S. Homeland, September 11, 2001: Two hijacked airliners crashed into the twin towers of the World Trade Center. Soon thereafter, the Pentagon was struck by a third hijacked plane. A fourth hijacked plane, suspected to be bound for a high-profile target in Washington, crashed into a field in southern Pennsylvania. The attacks killed 3,025 U.S. citizens and other nationals. President Bush and Cabinet officials indicated that Usama Bin Laden was the prime suspect and that they considered the United States in a state of war with international terrorism. In the aftermath of the attacks, the United States formed the Global Coalition Against Terrorism. Incident 7: Anthrax Attacks, October-November 2001: On October 7 the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported that investigators had detected evidence that the deadly anthrax bacterium was present in the building where a Florida man who died of anthrax on October 5 had worked. Discovery of a second anthrax case triggered a major investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). The two anthrax cases were the first to appear in the United States in 25 years. Anthrax subsequently appeared in mail received by television networks in New York and by the offices in Washington of Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle and other members of Congress. Attorney General John Ashcroft said in a briefing on October 16, "When people send anthrax through the mail to hurt people and invoke terror, it's a terrorist act." Office of the Historian Bureau of Public Affairs U.S. Department of State March 2004" Well 42 years turned up 7 incidents: - 4 involve bombs. - 1 is a shooting incident in which the gunman kills himself. - 1 is an incident where civilian aircraft are used as missiles and deliberately crashed into their intended targets. - 1 is an attempted biological attack. No Big Mick, your cities and civilian population have not been through the wringer as have the citizens of Derry; Belfast; Dublin; London; Madrid; Barcelona, etc, etc, the list is amazingly long. One of the tiny, minute edges of silver that shone through the dark cloud that covered the USA in the immediate aftermath of 11th September, 2001 was the assessment by the President of the United States and his Administration of the threat of terrorism. "You are either with us, or against us in our fight against terrorism" is basically what he said. Meanwhile, taking a look at what his words meant, someone in that Administration called Richard Haas, clearly told the Provisional IRA and the armed Republican movement - "Go out of business, and go out of business now, or else you will find yourself with the US as your enemy." - And lo and behold! Disarmament and decommissioning came about. Now that in itself is no great deal, the IRA could rearm tomorrow if it wanted to. It won't though, because there can be no resumption of "The Struggle", there can be no resurrection of "The Troubles", because if the Republicans opt for violence they know that they will automatically go on a list in Washington as would the names of their supporters courtesy of "Homeland Security" and the Patriot Act. As to what happens in Northern Ireland? That, quite rightly, is solely a matter for the people of Northern Ireland and no-one else. By the bye, can't wait for the films dealing with the "disappeared", particularly Mrs Jean McConville and Captain Robert Nairac. The latter is currently topical as someone has just been arrested and charged as either an accessory or accomplice in his death, the two others sought under similar charges are currently living in the USA and their extradition has been applied for I believe, six others were previously caught, tried and sentenced. |
|
23 May 08 - 10:59 AM (#2347666) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Jean(eanjay) standing ovation Apparently the film got a standing ovation when it was screened in Cannes, although from some of the write ups I understand that for some people it was a difficult film to watch because they were watching the last few weeks in the life of someone starving to death. I will be one of the people who will find it difficult to watch, but I am determined to see it. |
|
23 May 08 - 12:01 PM (#2347700) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST Mick, "You folks continually point out that the people don't support the continued troops in the North, yet they are still there. " There are no troops on the streets, fields or hills of NI. They were sent to control the violence. They pulled out when it stopped. Britain will leave the North the moment a majority of the people of the North vote for it to happen. That day can not come soon enough for us. Off line for a week now. You have heard it all before from me anyway. Keith. |
|
23 May 08 - 12:02 PM (#2347701) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,Keith A o Hertford That was me. Sorry. |
|
23 May 08 - 12:46 PM (#2347722) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Stu "No Big Mick, your cities and civilian population have not been through the wringer as have the citizens of Derry; Belfast; Dublin; London; Madrid; Barcelona, etc, etc, the list is amazingly long." So 9/11 wasn't putting NY and it's population through the ringer then? |
|
23 May 08 - 01:47 PM (#2347761) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Mick I feel compelled to tell you all that I went out to the barn and did some good, hard, sweat inducing, work. I think best when I do this. The product of that was to find that I needed to come back and apologize for the tenor of my message. While my opinion hasn't changed much in terms of the hijack of the thread, I did come off as a bullying oaf. Didn't mean to do that, I just get pissed off and then fly off sometimes, and I usually wish I didn't do that. Who says with age comes wisdom?......***chuckle***. I would also like to point out that Stigweard sent me a PM(that I discovered when I came back to write this) indicating that his positions remain solid, but seeking conciliation. That is the mark of a gentleman, and more than I deserve given that I flew off the handle. Good man, Stigweard. Carry on, Mick |
|
23 May 08 - 02:29 PM (#2347783) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Teribus "As to whether our cities being on the receiving end of bombs, I suggest you take a look at the last 40 years, culminating with 9/11/2001 and rethink your position." - Big Mick So I did as Big Mick suggested, which resulted in me stating the following: "No Big Mick, your cities and civilian population have not been through the wringer as have the citizens of Derry; Belfast; Dublin; London; Madrid; Barcelona, etc, etc, the list is amazingly long." Your response Stigweard: "So 9/11 wasn't putting NY and it's population through the ringer then?" Put through the wringer in the same way that civilian population of say Belfast were, Stigweard? - Nothing remotely like. 9/11 was a terrorist "spectacular", a one-off, the people of Belfast had to live with the expectation of that sort of thing every single day for 18 years - It must have been somewhat wearing to say the least. By the bye Big Mick gave a period of 40 years culminating in the attacks of 11th September, 2001. Significant in that there have been no other successful attacks since that date, how about giving those responsible for that three cheers? Or at least a muted "Thank You". |
|
23 May 08 - 10:48 PM (#2347951) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Mick What an arrogant man you are, Teribus. You have no idea what I have done and continue to do on the issue of homeland security. Or even my views on it. Pitiful man, you are. |
|
24 May 08 - 03:26 AM (#2347995) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Teribus What your views on Homeland Security and the Global War on terrorism are, are of no importance whatsoever Big Mick. The view that does count is the adopted party line of the US Government. The threat that they will weigh-in against any resumption of violence by terrorists in Northern Ireland serves as deterrent enough to the Republican cause and the "plastic paddies" than funded the bombs from the safety of their homes and bars in the US. If you want to apply the term pitiful to anyone apply it to them, they and their actions were below contempt. |
|
24 May 08 - 05:00 AM (#2348012) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle Well for what its worth Teribus I disagree with you on this one. The USA is a huge place with huge borders and its full of ingenious people. The authorities would be about as successful at keeping funds and weapons in there, as they are at keeping drugs out. I suspect there always was some sort of attempt to stop the activities of terrorists. Remember Ghadaffi was in the terrorist loop in those days, and the Yank authorities were never particular mates with him. I'm afraid it comes down to the boring old process of getting people to jettison the idea of killing each other. That's why Thatcher with her wind up speeches (inspiring as it was to her followers) was such minus quantity. She was more bleeding trouble than Paisley and Adams put together. |
|
24 May 08 - 06:44 PM (#2348441) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Teribus Well there WLD we must agree to disagree, while Maggie gave Bobbie Sands every opportunity to win slimmer of the year 1985, she did not deliberately cause the deaths of over 3500 people or cause horrific injury to 30,000 more. While I do not for one minute deny that the man had conviction, I absolutely condemn the cause for which he stood and means by which he sought to achieve its end. Unlike many on this forum I actually had to clear up the bits and pieces after the so called "Bold IRA". One thing singing about them in your "Boston Bars" another completely when you're wiping blood and guts from the street 3000-odd miles away. |
|
24 May 08 - 07:52 PM (#2348474) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle Oh come off it Teribus. Maggie had an instinctive grasp of what invective was going to please her blue rinse supporters, and she knew bloody well it would grip the shit of every Irish republican. She was a past master at stirring it. She set the stage for that hunger strike. It was precisely because she was such a git, that Sinn Fein was able to reverse its fortunes so rapidly. You can say the guy who came up with Der Sturmer never killed a jew. But it got him a hangman's rope at Nuremberg. When you whip up feelings of anger for political gain like she did - you bear some responsibility. |
|
25 May 08 - 01:12 AM (#2348580) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Den Rule Britannia, Britannia rules the waves Britain never never never shall be slaves unless of course you come from west Belfast, Derry, South Armagh or South Down. |
|
25 May 08 - 02:55 AM (#2348594) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,Ram Teribus cleared blood off the streets of Ulster ? This whole Action Man story Teribus is becoming ridiculous. First your a sailor, then your a Marine, then you were an interrogator in some special unit, then you served up nosh, now your on the streets of Ulster removing dead bodies ? Sorry lad, I think you have been reading too many "Dan Dare" comics. |
|
25 May 08 - 07:17 AM (#2348687) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Teribus Well Guest Mushroom of 3 posts, lets take a look at what you find so ridiculous: "Action Man story Teribus is becoming ridiculous. First your a sailor, then your a Marine, then you were an interrogator in some special unit, then you served up nosh, now your on the streets of Ulster removing dead bodies ?" Take it bit by bit shall we? The Royal Marines ARE part of the Royal Navy - Does that clear up any confusion over "First your a sailor, then your a Marine," When have I ever said that I was - "an interrogator in some special unit" Guest Ram - I'll save you a little time and effort - Never. "then you served up nosh" - Eh No I think that you will find that it was one of your one post Guest Mushrooms that came up with that one, probably yourself. Did forces serving in Ulster clean up after IRA, INLA Bombs, yes they did. So lets see how ridiculous that looks shall we: "Action Man story Teribus is becoming ridiculous. Served in Northern Ireland attached to Royal Marines and had experience of clean up operations in the aftermath of terrorist bomb attacks." I can think of about 30-odd thousand British Servicemen who could vouch for that not being in the slightest bit ridiculous. Now toddle off and think up what you're going to call yourself next time you post. |
|
25 May 08 - 07:23 AM (#2348688) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Teribus Oh almost forgot: Den its - "Rule Britannia, Britannia rule the waves Britons never never never shall be slaves" The song was an invocation under the threat of Viking attack for a musical piece set around the time of Alfred the Great I think. |
|
25 May 08 - 11:10 AM (#2348812) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: goatfell what was Bobby Sands phone number? ate nothing, ate nothing ate nothing |
|
25 May 08 - 11:14 AM (#2348815) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: goatfell I am against Terrorists and I don't care which side they 'fight' for terroists all murderers no mtter which side they are on it doesn't matter if they pulled the trigger or placed the bomb or not they are just guilty as the next terrorists. |
|
25 May 08 - 03:36 PM (#2348932) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: RobbieWilson Surely the whole importance of the film is Arran's last post. It's more comfortable to slag off "them" as bastards if we only look at what we want to see; stories of "us" as the good guys. We are constantly subjected to stories of the courage of the heroes of our armed forces who sign up to obey without question and face a risk of being killed or injured, yet feel free to deny the courage of people who act in the almost certain knowledge that they will die. We still send our armed forces to foreign lands convinced they are the forces of righteousness while the bastards who blow themselves up in the land they come from are "terrorists". Villages, weddings, women and children are unfortunate, collateral damage, or deserve what they get for supporting "terrorists" We still support torture, detention without trial, use of "inellegence" obtained by torture to convict absolutely innocent people and are quick to demonise anyone who questions these as an apologist for murder and indiscriminate terror. I think we still have a lot to learn and we can only learn by looking back at our experience. |
|
25 May 08 - 03:46 PM (#2348936) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Mick Robbie Wilson, that is the wisest post in the string. We suffer with the same types of problems in the States. Mick |
|
25 May 08 - 06:11 PM (#2349018) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle Well I don't see a welter of stories and films supporting our troops. In fact I can't think of a single artist of any significance, who faces up to the fact that the freedoms of our liberal democracies were incredibly hard won, and have had to to fight like hell for their survival. We have film directors like Neil Jordan deifying Michael Collins - yeh like Devalera would have allowed a film like The Crying Game to be shown. Transexuals! Any kind of sexuals hardly got a look in when the Republic came into being that Collins killed all those people to achieve. In a way of course you're right. If Crossmaglen had been in Libya, the USAF would have bombed it flat. None of us like the violence and nastiness under our nose. But someone has to take down people like Saddam Hussein nd Adolf Hitler. And its never a game of cricket. War is a moral vacuum, you do what you have to, to win. |
|
25 May 08 - 07:58 PM (#2349065) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Gulliver From today's Irish Times: THE FILM Hunger received the Camera d'Or award at the closing ceremony of the Festival de Cannes last night. The award, one of the most prestigious at Cannes, is given to the director of the best first-time feature film in any section of the festival. It was presented by the jury chairman, French director Bruno Dumont, and US actor Dennis Hopper. The prize was accepted by director Steve McQueen, the British artist who won the Turner Prize in 1999. "I'm very proud for myself and the marvellous cast and crew I had on this film," McQueen told The Irish Times after the awards ceremony. "As we worked on it, I knew that we were making something special. Michael Fassbender [who plays Sands] is a star, as are Liam Cunningham and Stuart Graham, and our young actors, Liam McMahon and Brian Milligan. They are the weight, heart and soul of the film." Don |
|
25 May 08 - 08:20 PM (#2349070) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Jean(eanjay) I'm having problems making a link. I was trying to make a link to http://ukpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5hORSFRS1BYKTDdyFLU_wy8P6uxEQ "The key to the film was that it looked at the humanity of the story and how this place, Maze Prison, at that time in history, how it was a brutalising place for everyone - be you prison officer, prisoner, orderly or riot guard. "It was a tragedy for everyone. We looked at what happens when dialogue stops and that has a resonance across the world." taken from the link I was trying to make. |
|
25 May 08 - 08:28 PM (#2349073) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Jean(eanjay) http://ukpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5haY84bghgCjBkJ3LrXlYsEgWY6lAlink fairy This is another link that I would like to have made. |
|
26 May 08 - 04:20 AM (#2349210) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,Joe The brits and the US are the real terrorists, they just have enough money to get planes to drop their bombs. God Bless Bobby Sands MP and all his comrades RIP |
|
26 May 08 - 09:12 AM (#2349314) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: ard mhacha And the Mudcat d`Oir goes to Robbie Wilson, congratulations. |
|
27 May 08 - 02:00 AM (#2349836) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: mark gregory Bobby Sands got elected to be a member of the House of Commons while he was in gaol in the MAZE where he also proved to be a great songwriter see Back Home in Derry in Mudcat |
|
29 May 08 - 09:46 PM (#2352624) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,O'Donnell Sands (and his family) would have faced far worse than starvation from his 'comrades' had he not gone through with the strike. He was no hero, he was used as a sacrifice for propaganda; they gave him no choice. |
|
30 May 08 - 01:21 AM (#2352689) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Mick Horseshit, O'Donnell. Go crawl back in your hole. |
|
30 May 08 - 05:09 AM (#2352767) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: ard mhacha Sorry " O`Donnell", no runners up, you are an also ran, only one winner, ROBBIE WILSON. |
|
30 May 08 - 06:44 AM (#2352823) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: KEVINOAF Thank God for free debate! in my opinion the troubles in northern ireland were caused as aresult of th e british trait of walking into anothers country and trying to take control ,,a long saga of imperialism supported by flag - waving patroitic cretins spawned in this island from the time of the angevin empire to presnt day Iraq . before I get the expected feed-back I have all ready chosen to go else where ,and have no plan to even retuurn to the ISLE OF SHITE unlessI can borrow a B-52! |
|
30 May 08 - 07:33 AM (#2352850) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Jean(eanjay) link I tried to make before It is the wording looked at the humanity of the story that touches me and I try to think of that when I think of the British soldiers, the hunger strikers, their families and all the people of Ireland. The British government left a lot to be desired then and it leaves a lot to be desired now. |
|
31 May 08 - 05:24 AM (#2353594) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: goatfell I copied this from a website Soldier * (Harvey Andrews) In a station in the city a British soldier stood Talking to the people there if the people would Some just stared in hatred, and others turned in pain And the lonely British soldier wished he was back home again Come join the British Army! said the posters in his town See the world and have your fun come serve before the Crown The jobs were hard to come by and he could not face the dole So he took his country's shilling and enlisted on the roll For there was no fear of fighting, the Empire long was lost Just ten years in the army getting paid for being bossed Then leave a man experienced a man who's made the grade A medal and a pension some mem'ries and a trade Then came the call for Ireland as the call had come before Another bloody chapter in an endless civil war The priests they stood on both sides the priests they stood behind Another fight in Jesus's name the blind against the blind The soldier stood between them between the whistling stones And then the broken bottles that led to broken bonmes The petrol bombs that burnt his hands the nails that pierced his skin And wished that he had stayed at home surrounded by his kin The station filled with people the soldier soon was bored But better in the station than where the people warred The room filled up with mothers with daughters and with sons Who stared with itchy fingers at the soldier and his gun A yell of fear a screech of brakes the shattering of glass The window of the station broke to let the package pass A scream came from the mothers as they ran towards the door Dragging their children crying from the bomb upon the floor The soldier stood and could not move his gun he could not use He knew the bomb had seconds and not minutes on the fuse He could not run and pick it up and throw it in the street There were far too many people there too many running feet Take cover! yelled the soldier, Take cover for your lives And the Irishmen threw down their young and stood before their wives They turned towards the soldier their eyes alive with fear For God's sake save our children or they'll end their short lives here The soldier moved towards the bomb his stomach like a stone Why was this his battle God why was he alone He lay down on the package and he murmured one farewell To those at home in England to those he loved so well He saw the sights of summer felt the wind upon his brow The young girls in the city parks how precious were they now The soaring of the swallow the beauty of the swan The music of the turning world so soon would it be gone A muffled soft explosion and the room began to quake The soldier blown across the floor his blood a crimson lake There was no time to cry or shout there was no time to moan And they turned their children's faces from the blood and from the bones The crowd outside soon gathered and the ambulances came To carry off the body of a pawn lost in the game And the crowd they clapped and cheered and they sang their rebel song One soldier less to interfere where he did not belong And will the children growing up learn at their mothers' knees The story of the soldier who bought their liberty Who used his youthful body as a means towards an end Who gave his life to those who called him murderer not friend Susannes Folksong-Notizen * [1972:] If you can con an ordinary man into protecting your interests, he gets done when the crisis comes, not you. Many soldiers are not professional killers, they're kids who couldn't get a job, and as unemployment has soared, recruiting for the army has increased by over 60% in three years. The average soldier is unimportant in the final analysis, it's the ones who shelter behind him that count [...] and they always seem to survive! (Notes Harvey Andrews, 'Writer of Songs') * [1973:] Written from newspaper clippings. (Forces Folk 11/73, p 10) * [1975:] Hugh [Fraser] has a friend, an officer in the Brigade of Guards, just back from a tour of duty in Northern Ireland. While they were there forty of his men bought themselves out of the Army, as their wives would not have them being shot at in Ireland. Meanwhile, partly because of the boom, but partly because of Ireland, the recruiting figure for April this year was half the number for April 1972. (Cecil King, Diary 1970-1974, July 3rd, 1973, p 297) * [1979:] His next major song, however, inadvertently created a controversy which, for a while, clearly damaged Andrews' standing and viability. 'Soldier', in spite of an unambiguous sleevenote, was widely interpreted as a pro-establishment glorification of military heroism and, therefore, by left-wing logical extension, of authoritarian violence; whereas in fact it was a simple (if lyrically somewhat overwritten) story of a young man caught in an impossible situation. The song was neither for the British authorities nor against the Irish rebels; it was about the senselessness of violence, applied on a personal level. [...] Harvey Andrews' Belfast song ('Soldier') was not a lasting success (though it remains popular, for obvious reasons, with army audiences in Ulster and Germany). (Woods, Revival 115f) * [1990:] In Northern Ireland, this song written in 1972 by a professional songwriter, Harvey Andrews, has become very widely known among soldiers, and at the same time divorced in classic folk-song style from its author. (Palmer, Lovely War 18) In 1971 in Belfast a soldier called Sergeant Willis cleared a room of civilians because of a bomb. As he went to close the door afterwards, the charge exploded, and he was killed. [...] Harvey Andrews, was so struck by the incident that he wrote the song to make the point that soldiers, too, are human. (The incident of the soldier's embracing the bomb was poetic licence.) Broadcasts of Andrews' record were banned for some time by the BBC lest feelings be exacerbated in the nationalist community of Northern Ireland. The Ministry of Defence advised (and still advises) soldiers not to sing the song in pubs where it might cause trouble. Some have interpreted this as a ban. Nevertheless, they sing it 'all the time', according to one source, on military transport and in messes and canteens. It has been said that some units require newcomers to learn to sing or recite the song before they become fully accepted. Andrews' authorship is not widely known, and many different stories about the song's origin circulate. [...] The text has appeared in the 'Soldier', the 'Methodist' magazine, and the 'Manchester Evening News' (where in 1988 it won a poetry competition for a youth who sent it in over his own name). (Palmer, Lovely War 199) * [1997:] Someone told me my song was banned in the army, so I thought the ones to know would be the Ministry of Defence, and asked them. [...] They even had it in their files that the song was 'written by Harvey Andrews, who'd been in 2nd Para'. I never was in the army in my life! (Harvey Andrews, pr. comm.) * See also http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=28801 |
|
31 May 08 - 05:27 AM (#2353596) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: goatfell i copied this one aLast Night I Had The) Strangest Dream * (Ed McCurdy) Chorus: Last night I had the strangest dream I never dreamed before I dreamed the world had all agreed To put an end to war I dreamed I saw a mighty room And the room was filled with men And the paper they were signing said They'd never fight again And when the paper was all signed And a million copies made They all joined hands, bowed their heads And grateful prayers were prayed The people in the streets below Were dancing round and round And swords and guns and uniforms Lay scattered on the ground (as sung by Iain MacKintosh & Hamish Imlach) Susannes Folksong-Notizen * english [1965:] [This was already] some years old when it caught on as an expression of commonsense hopes. (Notes 'Spotlight On The Spinners') * english [1966:] In 1950 young Ed McCurdy came up to the hotel room of the Weavers [...]. He sang us [this] which he'd just made up. The song has never been on the top forty, but has gradually spread throughout much of the world. (Notes Pete Seeger, 'Waist Deep In The Big Muddy') * german [1977:] Das Lied schrieb Ed McCurdy zu Beginn der Ostermarschbewegung in England. (Liederkiste 43) s well |
|
31 May 08 - 07:27 AM (#2353637) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: ard mhacha Sorry Arran there is no runners up medals, Robbie Wilson passed the winning post, a long time ago. |
|
01 Jun 08 - 08:41 AM (#2354283) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Den You're crackin' me up Ard, up Armagh! |
|
01 Jun 08 - 11:47 AM (#2354366) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: goatfell i don't know if Den has said sorry but I have many times Arran (prevously knowbn as Guitar) |
|
01 Jun 08 - 08:01 PM (#2354744) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Mick, after your magnanimous appology, you do it again. O'Donnel expresses a view and instead of challenging it, you dismiss it as shit and tell him to "crawl back in your hole. " You could have pointed out that the strike was opposed by PIRA outside prison. They feared either a loss of credibility if it was not carried on to the bitter end, or massive losses if it was. What they feared most actually started to happen. Attendances at funerals began to dwindle after the first couple, and they were haunted by the spectre of a funeral with no support at all. It was a probably a relief when the families of dying men started to insist that they be treated and revived. |
|
01 Jun 08 - 08:37 PM (#2354768) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Den Arran what do I have to apologise for exactly? Please enlighten. Keith would you mind citing your source/s. In the words of the man himself: Comrade, Just some worrying thoughts that are in my mind. As you should know, I don't care much to entering any discussion on the topic of 'negotiations' or for that matter 'settlements' but what is worrying me is this: I'm afraid that there is a possibility that at a crucial stage (which could be after death) the Brits would move with a settlement and demand Index [Prison Chaplin, Fr Toner) as guarantor. Now this is feasible, if a man is dying, that they would try to force Bik to accept a settlement to save life which of course would be subject to Index's interpretation. And we know how far that would get us. It wouldn't make any difference if it were he and Silvertop [Assistant Prison Chaplain, Fr Murphy), the same would occur. I've told Bik to let me or anyone else die before submitting to a play like that. Well that's what was bugging me - silly old fool aren't I!! . . . I was wondering (here it comes says you) that out of the goodness of all yer hearts you could get me one miserly book and try to leave it in: the Poems of Ethna Carberry - cissy. 'That's really all I want, last request as they say. Some ask for cigarettes, others for blindfolds, yer man asks for Poetry. |
|
01 Jun 08 - 08:44 PM (#2354772) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Den, you ask for my "sources" This suggests that you doubt the veracity of something I have said. Tell me exactly what and I will verify. |
|
01 Jun 08 - 08:56 PM (#2354777) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford BS's election victory has been mentioned a couple of times now. Let us put it in perspective. Ordinary decent Nationalist people would not vote for Sinn Fein. Everyone knew that the claimed separation of Sinn Fein and the IRA was just a lie. Untill the violence stopped they preferred to vote for SDLP who sought political change but opposed violence. But for the bloody and futile "armed struggle" they would have achieved all we have now and more decades ago. When Bobby Sands stood for election, the SDLP candidate withdrew his own nomination at the last minute. I wonder why he did that. I expect he wanted to remain alive and wanted the same for his loved ones. The Nationalist voters had the choice of voting for Mr. Sands or not voting at all and allowing the Unionist to win. |
|
02 Jun 08 - 12:17 PM (#2355244) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Den Yeah this for a start,"You could have pointed out that the strike was opposed by PIRA outside prison. They feared either a loss of credibility if it was not carried on to the bitter end, or massive losses if it was." Further more. I voted for Sinn Fein, does that make me something other than "an ordinary decent Nationalist", and if so, what exactly because I've always thought of myself as one. "I expect he wanted to remain alive and wanted the same for his loved ones." Speculation and damaging speculation at that, or is that what you were going for Keith? Why don't you read 10 men dead by David Beresford if you really do have an objective interest in this period of Irish history and then rejoin this debate. |
|
02 Jun 08 - 05:29 PM (#2355553) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: ard mhacha Stop sucking lemons Keith,why did those foreigners give the prize to the Bobby Sands film?, likely they were without your bias,and for your further enlightenment read free on the net, Interment and The Guinea Pigs. |
|
03 Jun 08 - 04:33 AM (#2355930) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: goatfell From: Den - PM Date: 18 May 07 - 10:47 AM Well, well, well. Just dangle the carrot and out come the bigots. Just who did Bobby Sands murder? Several posters (for want of a better title) have called him a murderer. Produce your evidence, put up or shut up. It never ceases to amaze me the ammount of vitriol directed at this young man. I think a lot of you need to educate yourselves. I know for a few that's asking a lot. |
|
03 Jun 08 - 04:35 AM (#2355931) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: goatfell but i don't want to start that rubbish again, the guy ran away from the police while his friends were being shot, some friend eh! |
|
03 Jun 08 - 04:36 AM (#2355933) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: goatfell but let bygones be bygones I just don't like him or his pals or his Loylist counterparts either. |
|
03 Jun 08 - 04:42 AM (#2355936) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: goatfell I'm a Scottish Natinallist, but i just don't think that it's right for anyone to kill anyone else to get freedom, not matter their politics are. like Sinn Fein IRA because that's exactlay who they are. but that is up to you. oh I'm coming over to Northern Ireland at the end of July, and idon't care about Prtestants or Catholics because both are just as bad as each other. |
|
03 Jun 08 - 05:16 AM (#2355952) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: ard mhacha Simple question, why did those foreign chappies vote for this film? Scottish nationalist?, I have met many Scot nats and their opinion was very much different to yours. |
|
03 Jun 08 - 05:17 AM (#2355953) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle Bloody hell Arran ....calm down. Talking to yourself is bad enough (I do it!) Having an e-mail debate with yourself....well its disturbing to watch. we could all end up like that. |
|
03 Jun 08 - 05:57 AM (#2355973) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle Ard, foreign chappies are always giving awards. Every year they used to give the Golden rose of montreux to some tv programme, and when they showed it - you could hear a collective gasp of bewilderment go up over Europe. What I'm saying is. It may be a good film. But don't build your hopes up too far. PS Enjoying the The green Fool - I'll get back to you soon. |
|
03 Jun 08 - 06:58 AM (#2356010) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Jean(eanjay) Steve McQueen won the Caméra d'Or for the best first feature film and quite rightly according to Melissa Anderson. Time Out New York Although the film stems from politics Steve McQueen is not interested in the politics. He looks, unjudgementally, at the effect the conditions in the prison had on both prisoners and prison officers. It sounds as if some people will have difficulty watching the film because of the brutality, the conditions in the prison and the fact that they will be watching the realistic portrayal of someone starving themselves to death. It is irrelevant what people feel about the politics. There will no doubt be scenes in the film that I will have to close my eyes to but, like Steve McQueen, the hunger strikes had a marked effect on me. I remember sitting in the back of our car in early May 1981, with my two young children, on a day out. My husband was driving and the news was reporting the hunger strikes. My father was in the British army (not in Ireland) and was "picking up the pieces" with families of soldiers who had been killed and injured in Ireland. I felt so sorry for the British soldiers and their families. I felt so sorry for the hunger strikers and their families. I felt so sad that Bobby Sands had made his mother promise that the family would not intervene when he went into a coma so it was clear before he died that there was no hope. I felt frustrated that the British government was so inflexible. This is an important film for some of us. Other people have the option of not watching it. |
|
03 Jun 08 - 07:12 AM (#2356022) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle 'unjudgementally, at the effect the conditions in the prison had on both prisoners and prison officers.' I'll believe it when I see it. |
|
03 Jun 08 - 07:31 AM (#2356042) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: goatfell I just don't terrorists that is all unlike some Northern Irish nationalsts, perticulary those the vote for a prty that backed terrorism, the SNP don't back terrorism but Sinn Fein IRA do. but that is up to them as I said I just hate any terrorist of any politcal thought. republicans and loylist terrorist in Northern Ireland and just evil people. but you still get people that back them. but let bygones be bygones lets agree to disagree. anyway what has this got to do with a film about a man the killed himself anyway to some he was a terrorist and some a freedom fighter a maytor |
|
03 Jun 08 - 07:45 AM (#2356053) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Jean(eanjay) The film is about the humanity of the situation and not the politics. Steve McQueen is trying to show that everyone inside that prison suffered in one way or another and we don't always consider that. |
|
03 Jun 08 - 07:51 AM (#2356056) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Jean(eanjay) I'll believe it when I see it. Whether or not, as individuals once we have seen the film, we feel that Steve McQueen has achieved what he set out to achieve, the people who gave the award to the film and the critics certainly feel that he has. |
|
03 Jun 08 - 09:33 AM (#2356138) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle Forgive my cynicism. But I think film is a much more lightweight artform than the symphony, or the novel, or the poem. Take that Bodyline film, where all the English cricketers were ugly as sin, and the Australian batsman (who in real life had a face like a pissed off bulldog) looked like a filmstar (and a very good looking one too!) Mentally, you prepare yourself for all the IRA men looking like languid poet/philosophers and all the Brits and prison officers having bad breath, shit personalities, sadistic meaness and being richly deserving of their summary executions. Mind you, we had it coming after depicting Germans in such a bad way in the WW2 movies. Achtung! |
|
03 Jun 08 - 09:40 AM (#2356149) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: ard mhacha Arran speaking of bigots if you are coming over here to the wee sick, do us a all a favour and leave your Ibrox Park buddies behind, we seen and heard a festival of bigotry when your Rangers fanatics were in Manchester. |
|
03 Jun 08 - 09:56 AM (#2356158) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Jean(eanjay) weelittledrummer, you've made me smile with the way you put it - especially the bulldog/filmstar bit. |
|
03 Jun 08 - 10:28 AM (#2356174) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,G Achtung in deed WLD. I don't think the Sands film is about terrorists. It's about one guy devoted to his principles. Maybe they could make one about Arthur Harris and the bombing of Dresden if audiences want films about terrorists. |
|
03 Jun 08 - 10:42 AM (#2356183) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Jean(eanjay) The film is not about terrorists. Steve McQueen did a lot of research before making this film. The following is taken from guardian.co.uk McQueen and Enda Walsh, with whom the artist co-wrote the script, interviewed a number of people affected by the events of 1981, including former prisoners, a priest and a prison officer - an experience that McQueen described as "overwhelming". He said, "It's not a film about Bobby Sands in some ways; it is film that questions our own morality." Though he started work on the film before the outbreak of the Iraq war, he said, the contemporary parallels have become unavoidable. "It is history repeating itself, in a sense. The body as a weapon for people who are not being heard." |
|
03 Jun 08 - 10:56 AM (#2356194) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Jean(eanjay) I think the important words are people affected by the events of 1981 and a lot of people were affected, people both inside and outside the prison. |
|
03 Jun 08 - 12:36 PM (#2356286) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Teribus "I don't think the Sands film is about terrorists. It's about one guy devoted to his principles. Maybe they could make one about Arthur Harris and the bombing of Dresden if audiences want films about terrorists." - Guest G I believe that it has already been done, although for teevision, with John Thaw playing Arthur Harris, from memory it was very good. As for the "terrorist" label there is this taken from a very good book entitled "Tail-End Charlies": "Perhaps the final word on the subject of the bomber war should be left to one of those most greatly affected by it, not an airman, a military leader or a politician, just a civilian. Mrs Joan lamberts, a Dutch woman, lived five years under the heel of a cruel conqueror. When the war was over, she wrote from her home in Arnhem to the RAF: 'During the occupation, the throb of your bombers overhead at night sounded like music in our ears. It was an anchor to which we clung in the dark days.' As to the effectiveness of the assault on Germany that Harris was ordered to deliver here is what Albert Speer told his interrogators at Nurenburg. He told them that "there had been a shortage of manpower for armaments factories because so many workers had to be diverted to building air-raid shelters and clearing up the damage after attacks". It was Speer's opinion too that, had the Hamburg Blitz of 1943 been quickly followed up with attacks on another six German cities - as Harris had wanted to do but did not have the resources at that time - it would have crippled 'the will to sustain armament manufacture and war production, and brought about a rapid end to the war'. After Hamburg Speer knew that Germany had lost the war, that message was sent courtesy of "Bomber" Harris and the 125,000 men under his command of whom 55,573 aircrew paid with their lives. In the aftermath of war when everyone and his dog were receiving pats on the back and awards, Bomber Harris's "Old lags" got nothing, even though for four years they along with the US 8th Air Force were the only force that were taking the war to Germany. Harris was offered honours, but refused to accept any until the efforts of his men had been formally recognised. To liken the work and effort that this man put into defeating what was without any shadow of a doubt the most evil regime on earth and to infer that this in some way was worse than the activities of some PIRA prat beggars description. Air Chief Marshal Sir Arthur Harris, far from being a terrorist was probably one of the most capable and effective commanders of a fighting force in the Second World War. |
|
03 Jun 08 - 12:46 PM (#2356292) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle Well maybe so, but I bet it didn't feel quite that good if you were in Hamburg or Dresden getting bombed to buggery. Terrorist maybe not - but his work certainly inspired terror. And not in the hearts of Himmler and Hitler. |
|
03 Jun 08 - 01:07 PM (#2356309) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: goatfell ard mhacha, I am not a supporter of either RANGERS OR CELTIC as a matter of fact I'm not that keen on football, I like rugby I support Scotland and if I did like football I wouldn't supprt any of those bigoted teams anyway, I just don't like Rangers or Celtic, and I not a protestant or a catholic either I'm a Christian I follow Christ. So who is the bigot now. I never was and never wiil be a bigot, and anyway who mentioned football anyway I just don't like football or soccer, I support as I said Scotland, Australia, and The Fremantle Dockers (Aussie rules football team). I have never been to Ibrox or Celtic park and I wouldn't go there I had a choice. Rangers and Celtic and there supporters well some of them are bigots. so there you go. facts wrong again I think ard mhacha, get yer facts right, I know that i have said some stuipd things but I have never been called a bigot, if I was why would I sing Irish rebel songs along with loylaist songs, I mean a bigot wouldn't do that sort of thing, and the wee band that'm in has both protestants and catholics in in it, I just see human beings and reglions. SO GET THE I'm A BIGOT' OUT OF YOUR HEAD RIGHT NOW. Just because I have a different view from you that makes it all right to say that I'm a bigot, where is you proof that I have said anything that is bigoted anyway. but knowing you ard mhacha, you'll find something that I have siad that makes me a bigot. but as i have said let bygones be bygones. you have you views and I have mine. Arran (not Rangers or Celtic supporter) Oh and by the way I love to sing fields of Athenry, and because of that people think that I support Celtic along with my late father, wh also didn't support rangers or celtic he supported any scottish team. |
|
03 Jun 08 - 01:08 PM (#2356312) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Teribus Possibly not WLD, but maybe they could compare notes with people from Guernica; Warsaw; Rotterdam; London; Coventry; Plymouth; Portsmouth; Clydebank; etc; etc. As he walked round Coventry, the morning after the attack, Churchill swore that it would repaid a thousand times over - "Bomber" Harris and his "Old Lags" delivered. |
|
03 Jun 08 - 01:09 PM (#2356315) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: goatfell I was brought up as an athiest, so how can I be a bigot If I didn't support God. and When Rangers where in Mnchester I wasn't there and I could give a damn wither they won or lost the same goes for Celtic when they where in europe. |
|
03 Jun 08 - 01:12 PM (#2356320) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: goatfell Well to tell the truth, I support any Scottish sports team/star no matter what their religion is. I just don't support terrorist either LOYIST OR REPUBLICAN. now do you think that rangers bigot wouls would say that. |
|
03 Jun 08 - 01:19 PM (#2356327) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: goatfell I support God and Christ, who you support, just because I don't support any terrorist group on either side republican or loyalist doesn't make me a bigot. so let bygones be bygones |
|
03 Jun 08 - 01:21 PM (#2356330) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,G Terbus why are supporting this action ? The bombing of Dresden by the RAF 12 weeks before the surrender of the German army (not after Coventry as you say) remains one of the most controversial actions of the Second World War. The raids saw 1,300 heavy bombers drop over 3,900 tons of high-explosive bombs and incendiary devices in four raids, destroying 13 square miles of the city. Estimates of civilian casualties were between 24,000 and 40,000. Dresden was a cultural landmark of little or no military significance, the attacks were indiscriminate and not proportional for the commensurate military gains. In the first few decades after the war, some death toll estimates were as high as 250,000. It constituted a war crime. The raids continue to be included among the worst examples of civilian suffering EVER. YET AGAIN TERIBUS YOU EXPOSE YOURSELF AS THE ULTIMATE ASREHOLE OF MUDCAT. |
|
03 Jun 08 - 01:25 PM (#2356336) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: goatfell anyway what has two bigoted teams got to do with a bloody film? |
|
03 Jun 08 - 01:47 PM (#2356354) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle You see Teribus - exposed as an azure hole. Try not to feel blue about it........ |
|
03 Jun 08 - 01:54 PM (#2356363) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Jean(eanjay) I thought we were talking about a new planet :) |
|
03 Jun 08 - 02:18 PM (#2356388) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: ard mhacha Arran, go and read your bible and relax, nothing can change the result Steve McQueen a winner in France and Robbie Wilson`s comment on this Thread by far outstrips all. |
|
03 Jun 08 - 04:04 PM (#2356517) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Den Who's yer man talking to now. Oh hold on, if it makes you feel better Arran: I'm sorry (i'm sorry) so sorry (so sorry) for treating you the way i did (i didn't mean to hurt you baby) i'm sorry (i'm sorry) so sorry (so sorry) for leaving you the way i did. There now feel better? What a simplistic view of history you have Teribus. Englishman = Hero. Irishman = prat. |
|
03 Jun 08 - 04:22 PM (#2356539) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,Gulliver in the sun Oooops, look like I stumbled into the wrong thread--I thought this was about the film Hunger! Silly me... |
|
03 Jun 08 - 04:55 PM (#2356564) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Teribus "Dresden was a cultural landmark of little or no military significance, the attacks were indiscriminate and not proportional for the commensurate military gains." - An urban myth Dresden bomber twice before in August 1944 by the USAAF target oil processing plant, again in October 1944 by the USAAF target railway yards. Briefing Notes for the raids of night of the 13th carried out by RAF Bomber Command and the daylight raid of the 14th Feruary 1945 carried out by the 8th USAAF: "Administrative staffs and refugees are fleeing from Berlin towards Central Germany which they consider is the only safe area left, and the object of the attack is to so disrupt organisation and transport as to create chaos and so bring about the collapse of the enemy's war machine" The city of Dresden housed 127 factories all turning out material for the German war effort and it had been designated a strongpoint in the defensive line along the river Elbe to be defended at all costs. |
|
03 Jun 08 - 05:21 PM (#2356601) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,G Was there any Palestinians or Irish in Dresden Teribus ? Three wipes would have been better than one eh ? |
|
03 Jun 08 - 05:52 PM (#2356646) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Den, you asked for my sources for "You could have pointed out that the strike was opposed by PIRA outside prison." I have books too. Also this http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/events/hstrike/chronology.htm It later became clear that the IRA leadership outside the prison was not in favour of a new hunger strike following the outcome of the 1980 strike. The main impetus came from the prisoners themselves. Re. the SDLP man deciding to withdraw his nomination, my speculation is as valid as yours, and more than plausible. Re. "Further more. I voted for Sinn Fein, does that make me something other than "an ordinary decent Nationalist", and if so, what exactly because I've always thought of myself as one." The majority of Nationalists did refuse to vote Sinn Fein before the cease fire. Were they not ordinary decent folk too. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 01:42 AM (#2356885) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Teribus "What a simplistic view of history you have Teribus. Englishman = Hero. Irishman = prat." - Den Not exactly Den, more like this: Commander of a properly constitiuted and authorised armed force in time of war undertaking an extremely difficult task successfully against one of the most evil organisations the civilised world has ever known = Hero Mediocre terrorist (according to your own view of his performance Den) ineffective member of a non-representative group, operating without mandate on behalf on no-one other than themselves, engaged in the murder of their own countrymen = Prat. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 03:44 AM (#2356936) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,Em Thanks for the YouTube link Teribus. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQRzNuaW0yE I agree, very moving indeed. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 04:20 AM (#2356947) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: ard mhacha And the winner is `HUNGER` and no amount of sour-grapes can change that, reading some of the vitriol on this Thread it has really got under their skin, not forgetting Robbie Wilson`s words of wisdom, the winner on this Thread. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 05:04 AM (#2356964) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford I am sure it is well produced and performed to earn such acclaim. I look forward to seeing it. Has anyone read any critique of the film that examines its historical authenticity? |
|
04 Jun 08 - 05:30 AM (#2356975) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle surely being 'only a mediocre terrorist' is better than being a really good one. not as good a neighbour as 'not being a terrorist at all', but definitely a step in the right direction. I'm not sure I'd agree with your assessment though. Our local MP went to plead with Sands when he was killing himself. The kind of resolve he showed scared me - a bit like these suicide bombers, and 9/11. To know that there was someone who hated your country so much and was indifferent to the murders that would come in the wake of what he was doing. That sort of moral certainty is scary. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 05:37 AM (#2356981) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford A couple of reviews here. I think I might give the film a miss. Hardly a good night out. http://film.guardian.co.uk/cannes2008/story/0,,2280448,00.html http://www.emanuellevy.com/article.php?articleID=9951 |
|
04 Jun 08 - 06:16 AM (#2356997) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Jean(eanjay) I have read a lot of reports about the film and it does appear to have been well researched. My post on 3 June 10.42am mentions this and the following is taken from the link below. McQueen, who had never written a script before, described the research process of speaking with ex-prisoners, prison officers and priests who had visited the Maze as "probably the heaviest experience of my life emotionally". research |
|
04 Jun 08 - 07:02 AM (#2357010) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,Stafford As far as I know Britain crossed the Irish sea and stripped Ireland of it's assets and sailed off. Then came back and occupied it's lands. I can understand why the Irish were a little pissed about it. Personally I think we should address our error and get out of Ireland. So many of you seem to think the occupation is justified and because the Irish fought the invaders they should be looked upon as terrorists! Bob Sands was probably hammered all his life because he was born into the catholic church and rebelled against the lack of human rights in Ireland around that time. Was he wrong to do so ? What we did in Ireland over the centuries was wrong. Killing people because of their faith was wrong, stealing their lands and properties was wrong. Locking guys up before a court made judgement on them was wrong. Causing untold pain and suffering on men, women and children was wrong. This film is about one man who suffered injustice at the hands of the British and because of the exposure we frown on anyone prepared to make a film about our shame and embarrassment. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 07:40 AM (#2357027) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford As far as I know, there were no assets to strip. Conquest was what all nations did back in the Dark Ages. Now, we have votes. There was no popular movement for home rule before 1916. There is still not quite a majority in the North. Try and stick to the subject Stafford. Some contributors get very cross else. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 08:26 AM (#2357047) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,Stafford Thank you. The British government sanctioned the taking of Land in Ireland. An organised government didn't exist in the "Dark Ages" though. I was keeping to the subject, this film is about one man and his protest against the British. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 08:57 AM (#2357081) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,Keith A How many centuries ago are we talking then?? His protest was against being refused special status in prison. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 09:03 AM (#2357093) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Mick No assets to strip? Keith, just when I thought you might be at least reasonable, you throw this out. Ever hear of Irish Oak? Not recently because it was stripped and sent to make English and European furniture. Do you not consider land an asset? It was stripped from the hands of the Irish, and given to transplanted peoples. How about homes? Were these assets? The ones that were taken from families who had lived in them for centuries, and then razed to make way for cattle to graze. How about Arranmore? You may of heard of the place. It is where the people who had lived there for centuries were evicted to make way for the plantation lords to graze cattle. Here is the paragraph from the linked article: Your attempt to whitewash centuries of repression, discrimination, and usurpation of rights and property does not speak well. Debate on the film is fine. But your denial of factual history, and your attempt to mitigate the guilt of the English government is beyond comprehension. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 09:18 AM (#2357121) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford I know. All those things happened to English, Scottish and Welch folk too. No reason to murder someone today though. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 09:25 AM (#2357130) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford I do not think that furniture making could destroy a forest Mick. Read here about what really happened. http://www.irishoakforests.com/munster.htm |
|
04 Jun 08 - 09:41 AM (#2357141) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford "Your attempt to whitewash centuries of repression, discrimination, and usurpation of rights and property does not speak well. Debate on the film is fine. But your denial of factual history, and your attempt to mitigate the guilt of the English government is beyond comprehension. " Sorry Mick. I missed this bit at the end of your post. All nations did things in history that would not be acceptable today. Britain was no worse than others, and better than most. Your country, Mick, was stealing land from Mexico in much more recent times. You have to move on Mick, and ask the people of today what they want. What you must never do today is force things on a people that those people do not want. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 10:12 AM (#2357172) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: ard mhacha Weelittledrummer, Down through the ages the unswerving stupidity of the Charge of the Light Brigade was also `scary` as was the brave spitfire pilots in WW2, those servicemen and countless others were no different to the IRA volunteers, all brave men,but willing to sacrifice their lives for their country. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 10:33 AM (#2357200) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Teribus "surely being 'only a mediocre terrorist' is better than being a really good one. not as good a neighbour as 'not being a terrorist at all', but definitely a step in the right direction." - WLD Excellent point Big Al - very well put. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 10:42 AM (#2357209) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Den Re. the SDLP man deciding to withdraw his nomination, my speculation is as valid as yours, and more than plausible. Its still only speculation and completely in keeping with your bias and as it happens completely untrue. I tend to rely on the facts. You see the difference between you and I Keith is that, as far as I know you have never set foot in N.I. I on the other hand lived through the period in question every hour of every day. Now back to the point you made about the SDLP rep. withdrawing his nomination because he feared for his life and the lives of his family. The particular seat that Bobby Sands took was MP for Fermanagh- South Tyrone. The incumbent was a man by the name of Frank Maguire who past away after a lenghty illness. There was infighting amongst the SDLP party as to who would replace Mr Maguire. The party's support was split between two candidates, Austin Currie and Frank McGuire's brother Noel. Who by all accounts was a fairly inexperienced politician. Currie had stood in 1979 against Unionist leader Harry West without the endorsement of the party and lost the election. Currie's self serving attitude in 1979 forced the party leadership to temporarily remove him from his executive position, though he was by 1981 reinstated. It was the fear of being ostracised for good, should he repeat that performance that forced Currie to swallow a bitter pill, when the party executive decided to overturn the local selection convention and not to contest the election. Step up Noel McGuire and Fr Joe McVeigh. I'll leave Father McVeigh to end the "speculation" in his own words. "Shortly after hearing about the second hunger strike, I opened the New York Times and read about the sudden death of Frank Maguire, MP for Fermanagh- South Tyrone. His death came as a great shock to me. We had been very close friends. I did not realise he had been so ill. Not too long after his funeral, I heard a report that there was a move to enter Bobby Sands in the by-election against the unionist candidate, Harry West. I thought this was a brilliant idea. There were other nationalist candidates going forward but I knew that for Bobby to have a chance there had to be a straight fight with West. All that was required was for the SDLP to withdraw and for Noel Maguire, a brother of Frank, to withdraw and support the Sands campaign. When I got confirmation that Bobby Sands was entering the election I phoned Noel Maguire and said that I thought he should consider making way for him. Noel took his own counsel and eventually decided to withdraw from the contest leaving a straight fight between Bobby Sands and Harry West. There was a solid republican vote in this constituency. There was hope that Bobby Sands would win the election, bringing world attention to his situation and the intolerable conditions in Long Kesh prison and the British government would be forced to come to a deal." From the Irish Democrat. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 10:47 AM (#2357212) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Den Teribus, if you want to talk terrorists why don't you tell us about the MRF? After all the predated Bobby Sands by a few years. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 10:52 AM (#2357215) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,G British Mudcatters = Cultural and religious intolerance. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 10:59 AM (#2357219) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Den Guest G, I think its unfair to tar all British Mudcatters with the same brush. There are certain British Mudcatters who are thankfully open minded enough to reason for themselves. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 11:11 AM (#2357231) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Teribus RE: "Cultural and religious intolerance" Now who exactly was it that came out with this? Somebody or others Cultural Attache? "YET AGAIN TERIBUS YOU EXPOSE YOURSELF AS THE ULTIMATE ASREHOLE OF MUDCAT." Although I must admit, it that had been from a Brit I would have expected them to be able to spell. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 11:15 AM (#2357234) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: goatfell ard mhacha, you don't even know me, and I thought that being either protestant/catholic the Bible was a part of your religion and God, ard mhacha, you don't even has the decincy to say your sorry, I have said I'm sorry many times, but then I have grown up and be adult about this unlike you and yer pal Den who are both wee school chidren small mined and have tunnel vision, no only that but yo and yer pal Den are just back stabbing, two faced simple minded tunnel vision people that can't see the whole picture and see that there is trouble on both sides. so away and play with yer pals the the republican movement in Northern Ireland along with Den. Oh and before I go I support the Republican movement but I don't support the terrorists, unlike the ones the vote for Sinn Fein IRA because they support terrorists. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 11:20 AM (#2357241) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: goatfell I beivieve that the Scots, Welsh, English and the Northern Irish have the right to home rule, but the difference is that the Scots, Welsh and the English don't fight with Westminster. but as I have said You have your views and I have mine, So I wonder you ard mhacha and Den both go to Church or else you are just like me a hypocrite. I know that I am one and freely admit it can you? |
|
04 Jun 08 - 11:23 AM (#2357244) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,G Teribus I am as English as you, thank you very much and as capable as you of making a typing error(something your good at might I add). You once told me a funny story about "The Heroes of Waterloo". Why have you changed so much ? I repeat, TERIBUS YOU EXPOSE YOURSELF AS THE ULTIMATE ARSEHOLE OF MUDCAT." |
|
04 Jun 08 - 11:28 AM (#2357251) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: ard mhacha Arran son, there`s a good boy, it`s time for your strait jacket. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 11:34 AM (#2357258) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Teribus "Teribus I am as English as you," Guest G So not very English at all then! |
|
04 Jun 08 - 11:44 AM (#2357268) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: goatfell ard mhacha, at lest I have said that i'm sorry but you don't have the guts because you are a coward like Bobby Sands and he was a coward because he left his two friends to the RUC and Bobby Sands ran away like the coward that he was. but there you go you can't even face the truth but then again you do vote for people the believe in muder or if you don't then you are a hypocrite, an Northern Irish Catholic hypocrite like all the Celtic supporters, ard mhacha and yer Pal Den GET A LIFE BOTH OF YOU, or is this case where you throw insults at people that don't agree with you all mouth and no action. well you'll be glad to know that I can say if I think I'm sorry then I'll say it but if not I won't GET A LIFE AND BLOODY GROW UP THE PAIR OF YOU SIMPLE MINDED (DAFT) PEOPLE ard mhacha and Den. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 11:49 AM (#2357272) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: goatfell |
|
04 Jun 08 - 11:52 AM (#2357277) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: goatfell This me again getting angry becase of a dickhead who can't say that arran you're right/wrong. I'm sorry about that but I do take thing like this personally because one of my family was killed by the IRA while I lived in Belfast for a wee while and it just makes me angry that's all. so I'm sorry ok. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 12:03 PM (#2357285) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,+ Arran, did Teribus ever buy you presents at Christmas ? Did your mother ever speak about him? Sorry, just I can see a striking resemblance. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 12:16 PM (#2357292) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Den, I admit to being surprised that the SDLP would go out of their way to help a convicted IRA man get elected, but I am happy to withdraw. I only offered it as a speculation anyway. My one statement of fact that you specifically challenged was that the hunger strike was not supported by IRA leadership outside. As you have fallen silent on that issue I take it that you now concede, irrespective of where you used to live, that you were completely wrong and I was right. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 12:27 PM (#2357302) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle I don't know about anyone else, but I get very uncomfortable with these conversations when they descend to abuse. Calling each other 'daft' and 'arseholes' and the like. We obviously hold different shades of opinion, but lets try and keep it civilised. And this in a way is an answer to your question, Ard. My father fought with the Irish Guards in the last war driving a tank. When I was a young idiot, I took him to task for wearing the Kings uniform and killing people he didn't even know. He said to me , Of course I killed people that was what we were there for. I asked him what was morally different about the people who had killed people in the camps over in Germany - some of which he was there for the liberation of. He simply said, it was different, and if you had been commanded to do those things, a civilised person would have let them kill you first. After the war, he resumed his job as a detective on the Boston police force. In those days, if they caught murderers - they hanged them. In my young idiot role, I asked him - how could you let yourself be part of that? He said, Yes I tried to stop people who needed stopping, but if they ever ask ME to hang someone, that's the day I tell them to stuff their job. I believe there is a dicernible difference. I thank God, I've never had to discern it. Starving yourself to death in the full knowledge that your death will trigger reprisal murders and counter reprisals...... it makes me shudder, and I wish Bobby Sands was at home now enjoying his middle years. I'm not even anti IRA. I thought the guys who drove a van and did a rocket attack on Downing Street were really brave. I know my relatives were involved in the organisation sometime in the 1930's. But no, I don't approve of what Bobby Sands did. I'm not sure what the 1970's/80's campaign achieved. I feel pretty bloody sure that all the democratic processes had not been exhausted before unleashing the terror. Most Irish people would be astonished at the the average English person's ignorance of, and indifference to their politics. We weren't aware of your grievances, and the democratic structure and free press existed to put things right. Putting bombs in our cities and killing our young soldiers just closed peoples ears. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 02:50 PM (#2357422) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Den Hold on Keith where did I specifically challenge that the hunger strike was not supported by IRA leadership outside? I merely asked for your sources. Any other reading into my request is your interpretation. I'd stay clear of the speculation Keith, the damage you wished to inflict has somewhat backfired on you. I'm still waiting to hear about the MRF, any takers. As I said somewhere up there I would like it if the film focussed on the events that shaped the life of Bobby Sands. Life doesn't happen in a vacumn. I don't think that anyone wakes up in the morning and decides to suddenly take up a path that they know could eventually lead to their untimely death. What made Sands do the things he did? What shaped his beliefs? I think that Bobby Sands and a number of other young men got tired of the oppression and decided to do something about it. There are only so many times you can kick a dog before the dog bites back. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 03:21 PM (#2357451) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle the trouble was - he was biting Thatcher, who (rather like some other people) was certain she was right. moral certainty = scary people she simply didn't give a rat's rectum about the rights and wrongs. he provided her with another chance to play Winston hurchill - a sort of warm up for the falklands and the Miners strike. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 04:15 PM (#2357497) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Den, you demanded my sources. When I asked what for specifically you said, "Yeah this for a start,"You could have pointed out that the strike was opposed by PIRA outside prison." " Den, no one reading that would doubt that you were challenging the truth of it, and you lose dignity by denying it. Re the MRF, why would we be discussing that in this thread? Start a new one if you must. We must not go off topic must we. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 04:25 PM (#2357505) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford WLD, did your dad drive his tank over the canal bridge on the road to Nijmagen? The Irish Guards crossed it knowing it to be rigged for demolition. In the film A Bridge Too Far it was supposed to have been cleared by Americans just in time. But it was not. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 05:14 PM (#2357545) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Den, here is another perspective on the decision by Noel Maguire to withdraw. It comes from an interview with Pat McGeown (OC of H Block 6 and one of the strike organisers) in 1985. "(Maguire) asserted his intention to stand right up until the hour before nominations closed. Sinn Fein members were standing by to withdraw Sands' papers if Maguire went ahead. A visit by Adams and O'Connail (IRA Army Council member) and .... the Sands family finally persuaded him against it." I am sure it did. Most people would be "persuaded" |
|
04 Jun 08 - 06:43 PM (#2357645) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle He was fighting in that area. he arrived two days after D-day somewhere in Caen area. and he fought through France, Holland, and Germany of course. he wasn't actually part of th Arnhem thing, but he said that the fighting was very fierce and units were getting cut off and trapped behind enemy lines like that all the time. A Bridge Too Far was about the only war film he ever went to see. But he said although it captured some of the recklessness, it missed the relentlessness of people you knew being killed all around you every day. And of course the smell of dead people which was apparently everywhere. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 07:08 PM (#2357672) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,Resolve Who would have thought that 25 years later the same army would be driving armoured personal carriers through the streets of a UK city and firing gas and plastic bullets at unarmed British citizens resulting in several deaths. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 07:35 PM (#2357698) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Jean(eanjay) interesting link Apparently as well as being shown in selected cinemas the film will be shown on channel 4 later this year. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 08:05 PM (#2357731) Subject: RE:After the War From: GUEST,warhatchet Mack do you know where I might find a copy of After the War by Tim Irvine if so please e-mail me at warhatchet1975@yahoo.com thank you |
|
04 Jun 08 - 08:36 PM (#2357754) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Teribus Bobby Sands hunger stike Film "Hunger" - All this prat managed to achieve was possibly "weight watcher or of the year 1985" absolutely nothing else. Now let's face it exactly what did he starve himself to death for? United Ireland - Not achieved A Police Force that was predominantly Catholic or Republican - Not achieved. A commitment from the Government of the UK that Ireland will be a single united country - Not achieved Can any of you tell me what this man achieved apart from writing songs with lyrics that were entirely spurious, historically incorrect and intended to inflame a bad situation with the sole intent of making it worse. Now all that is bad enough but these were the people he was supposed to have been protecting. Protecting, Jesus "H" come dancing Christ Bobby Sands and his colleqagues killed 3500+ Irishmen, Women and Children and injured and maimed about 30,000 more - For What??? Absolutely Nothing - Hey boys that is what this prat died for absolutely nothing. And that is how history will record his so called sacrifice - It was made for nothing. Oh Yes "I wish I was back Home In Fuckin' Derry" - Hey all you so called Folkies take a bloody good look at those lyrics - lets hear you give them some sort of credance based on history taking into account that they sing of something that was supposed to have happened in 1803 but was written about in the 1970's - Bobby Sands contribution should have been based upon historical accuracy, particularly as it should have based upon 20 X 20 hindsight - But there again, as with all things Irish - Why let the truth get in the way of a good story. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 08:37 PM (#2357756) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle dunnoResolve , thirty years before they were squaring up to the Welsh miners at Tonypandy....less than 20 years before that in the General strike as well. I used to have a little recording studio in the 1980's and the late Tufty Swift made an album there for Topic with Jim Eldon and someone else, whose name I've forgotten - one of ashley hutchings chaps. The album was called You'll Never Die For Love and it was based on a collection of marches and other tunes made by a local militia band in the early 1800's that Tufty had discovered in an old piano stool. I sad to Tufty, so this was probably the gang that put down the Pentrich Riots. This is the music of the forces of repression. Tufty said, Yeh well that's folkmusic. think about songs like the British Grenadiers...... We got stuff to be ashamed about. We know that. But by Christ, the other side has as well. Some people on this thread seem to be saying otherwise. That's in the nature of war. And lets face it that's what the hunger strike was about. they said they were political prisoners - and shouldn't be made to wear prison uniform. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 08:56 PM (#2357763) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle Teribus... be more respectful of people's feelings. to these guys he was a hero. Okay, they aren't respectful of you - but carry yourself with more dignity for godsake - you're old enough to know better. |
|
04 Jun 08 - 10:56 PM (#2357832) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,Observer Post wasted on the "keypad warrior" Teribus, WLD. The guy was a failure in every aspect of his pitiful life, hence his postings of military achievements on the edge of a British regiment he failed to acquire rank in. It would be unlikely any organisation would call upon him to commence a Hunger Strike, if you saw his physical condition, it would take around six years for him to wither. Highly unlikely they could wait that long for aims and objectives ! He has been losing argument after argument throughout all the threads here and it's no surprise he waddled in here to attempt to talk down Irish & Irish American members. He belonged to a failed force that actually admitted in the Operation Banner report that they would never have beaten the Provisional IRA. Professional soldiers tend to be more intelligent. Now to correct and answer his remarks. "Bobby Sands hunger (stike) ? Film "Hunger" - All this prat managed to achieve was possibly "weight watcher or of the year 1985" absolutely nothing else. - REPLY. R.G. Sands stood on principle, qualities Teribus could never understand. To resort to playground remarks gives the character of the man. Now let's face it exactly what did he starve himself to death for? United Ireland - Not achieved. - - REPLY, Political Status was his aspiration. REPLY. He undertook a hunger strike as a soldier to demand the right for "Political Status" for his comrades, something which the British government gave him during his time in cages 9 and 11. In 1976 they removed it. Political Status is a right for those incarcerated for politically motivated actions. A Police Force that was predominantly Catholic or Republican - Not achieved. -REPLY No that was never an objective Teribus, disbandment of the B Specials (1920-1970) disbandment of the Ulster Defence Regiment (1970-1992) disbandment of the Royal Ulster Constabulary (1922- 2001) disbandment of the home service Battalions of the Royal Irish Regiment. ALL ACHIEVED. A commitment from the Government of the UK that Ireland will be a single united country - Not achieved - REPLY, No commitment was ever requested by the Provisionals. Demanded yes. Can any of you tell me what this man achieved apart from writing songs with lyrics that were entirely spurious, historically incorrect and intended to inflame a bad situation with the sole intent of making it worse. - REPLY, well he gets your blood to boil, and that's enough in it's own right. He brought to the eyes of the world the determination of the Irish people and the injustice against those incarcerated within the blocks. Now all that is bad enough but these were the people he was supposed to have been protecting. - REPLY, Senseless remark, not requiring an answer. Protecting, Jesus "H" come dancing Christ Bobby Sands and his (colleqagues) killed 3500+ Irishmen, Women and Children and injured and maimed about 30,000 more - For What??? - REPLY, I would reply if I knew what colleqagues were ? is it a collection of pictures cut from magazines ? Absolutely Nothing - Hey boys that is what this prat died for absolutely nothing. And that is how history will record his so called sacrifice - It was made for nothing. - REPLY, well Teribus, there are 14 streets in the world named after him, his funeral was attended by over 100,000 people in Ireland. His sacrifice has been an inspiration to a generation. The British government did make amendments to incarceration after the strike. Oh Yes "I wish I was back Home In Fuckin' Derry" - Hey all you so called Folkies take a bloody good look at those lyrics - lets hear you give them some sort of (credance) based on history taking into account that they sing of something that was supposed to have happened in 1803 but was written about in the 1970's - Bobby Sands contribution should have been based upon historical accuracy, particularly as it should have based upon 20 X 20 hindsight - But there again, as with all things Irish - Why let the truth get in the way of a good story. REPLY, he didn't life in Derry, Teribus is that John Foggery's band, credance you refer to ? It has been a pleasure replying to you and pointing out these facts. A few I would like to add are, the aims and objectives of the Fourth Northern Command for equality of the nationalist people in the North of Ireland, the right to vote, housing fit for habitation was achieved. There should be glorification in the loss of the life of a volunteer. True remorse and regret has been expressed at the loss of life of all non- combatants. Families of soldiers who died in the North of Ireland during the war are entitled to the same respect. In your final post on this thread tonight, you exposed yourself as a fool, nothing more, nothing less other than a fool. Go raibh maith agat |
|
05 Jun 08 - 12:13 AM (#2357878) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Teribus Guest Observer - composition of the PSNI today is? "R.G. Sands stood on principle," - What principle? The right to murder his fellow citizens?? Hey Observer take your blindfold off. Tell us all exactly what the result of the Irish Referendum was on use of weapons to gain political ends was. The PIRA did not disband the Ulster B Specials - The forces of the Crown did that - The Official IRA stood back and applauded that. Where in your post was the fact that 3500+ were killed and 30,000+ were maimed - Or do they not count in your reckoning you complete and utter Wanker. By the bye convict ships from Ireland only sailed from Dublin and from Cork - So much for: "In 1803 we sailed out to sea Out from the sweet town of Derry" Oh Observer, if you actually look into it after the second convoy of convicts to Australia, you actually stood a better chance of getting there as a convict than as a passenger. 30 years of suffering, bloodshed and grief, for something that was there for the taking right from the start, so much for the "cause". I have got nothing but complete and utter contempt for the likes of Bobby Sands and his ilk - achievements in life, absolutely nothing. I will give him exactly the same respect that the PIRA gave the civilian population of Northern Ireland when planting their bombs. And if you, or anybody else can't live with that then tough shit. |
|
05 Jun 08 - 10:06 AM (#2358241) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Den This schoolyard style bullying is something to behold. Puts me in mind of something...oh yeah, British checkpoints in N. Ireland. |
|
05 Jun 08 - 10:08 AM (#2358243) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford "bullying" ?? |
|
05 Jun 08 - 10:18 AM (#2358252) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,Den's mum Poor Den. Don't talk to those rough boys anymore. |
|
05 Jun 08 - 10:28 AM (#2358261) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Den You're all about scoring points and innuendo aren't you Keith and you're still clinging on to your speculation. If I thought for a second that Mr. Maguire's life or the lives of his family had ever been threatened during the course of that election I would not still be having this discussion. Discussing the MRF is entirely appropriate in this thread. I talked about events that shaped the life of Sands and many others. Hasn't this thread wandered enough off topic. You and others would prefer to paint Sands as some kind of sociopath without context. You and Teribus etc would prefer to dodge that particular subject I'm sure. |
|
05 Jun 08 - 10:31 AM (#2358264) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Den My mother is dead, please refrain from using her name to try to get to me. "Or do they not count in your reckoning you complete and utter Wanker", that doesn't sound like bullying to you. |
|
05 Jun 08 - 11:33 AM (#2358302) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,Alan KA of H. Best if you condemn the crude comments made by Teribus above, otherwise it could be seen as your condoning his blaspheming of members. |
|
05 Jun 08 - 11:33 AM (#2358303) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: ard mhacha Teribus so there has been no changes from 1968, well Billy boy I live here and I am amazed to see so many Catholics-Nationalists in top jobs. Basil Brooke who was Prime Minister here from after WW2 until the 1950s stated that he wouldn`t have one about the place, Catholics that is. Today wonder of wonders we even have Catholic Lord Mayors, I could go on and tell you of the various seats of employment which were taboo for Catholics and are now filled by them, all of this over the past few years. I remember reading the Protestant poet John Hewitt at Queens University in the 1930s, regretting the fact that two of his Catholic friends although academically brilliant would have to emigrate to fulfill their profession, he knew that discrimination was such that no learned Catholic had the slightest chance of employment, thankfully it is much improved to-day, we still have a bit to go to enjoy full citizenship, but we are getting there, there is no going back now. Oh yes Teribus things have radically changed here, and there was no way that the Unionists would have made changes if they had still have had free rein to do whatever they pleased, I live here, I know, seeing is believing. |
|
05 Jun 08 - 11:33 AM (#2358304) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Den, my speculation is as valid as yours, and more than plausible. IRA routinely used(use?) violence, threats and intimidation to achieve their ends, as did all the other paramilitary thugs on both sides. You were a big man when crossing swords with poor, confused, Arran/Guitar/Tam, and you were belligerent enough with me until your arguments fell down. Then you whinged that you meant somthing other than what you said, and then you play the victim card like Republicans always do. Pathetic. |
|
05 Jun 08 - 11:35 AM (#2358311) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Alan, Terribus has been abused, lied about and slandered here for years. Where were you then? |
|
05 Jun 08 - 11:51 AM (#2358328) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,Alan Tell you what is Pathetic Keith, your denial of factual evidence. The bombs that killed 33 people in Dublin and Monaghan came from the British Army, according to the official inquiry into the atrocities. The inquiry was given evidence that British soldiers supplied loyalist s with explosives that had been confiscated by the British army from the IRA and that these were used in the three bombs which exploded in Dublin during rush-hour traffic. Maybe you will depute the word of Mr Justice Henry Barron the retired Irish judge who exposed this army you lick anally here day and night. British authorities trailed their feet in supplying him vital information to the inquiry team, nothing new in that. The bombings were engineered by undercover British agents working inside loyalist paramilitary groups. It was a British Army bomb disposal expert that concluded this, and that the three car bombs in Dublin used crystallised ammonium nitrate. This technology was only known to the IRA at the time but was not mastered by loyalists for at least another six years. This somehow rings of your character Keith, Stir Teribus up, and he will throw the balls for you. PATHETIC. Originally, both loyalist and republican terrorists made most of their bombs from ammonium nitrate fertiliser mixed with fuel oil, but in 1973 restrictions introduced on the nitrate content of fertiliser made this simple process impossible. IRA members quickly developed a crystallisation technique that allowed them to extract nitrates from the new fertiliser, a method loyalists did not learn until the end of the 1970s. The expert's 100-page report submitted to the inquiry states: "Loyalist terrorist groups did not have the skills to undertake this operation in 1974. Further, I do not believe they have ever possessed them, otherwise a similarly complex operation would have been repeated." It goes on: "The loyalist terrorists who undertook this operation were at least guided, and very likely directed, by somebody with considerable knowledge of terrorist bombing activities. The most likely sort of person who could have provided that guidance is an ammunition technical officer or ammunition technician with experience of intelligence processes and practices and with access to loyalist terrorists." The bomb disposal expert's report estimates that only five people, all of them British soldiers, combined this level of access to seized IRA explosives and to loyalist terror groups. It describes another bomb in Monaghan, near the border with Northern Ireland, which detonated 90 minutes after the Dublin blasts and killed eight people, as of standard loyalist construction. It did not use IRA explosives and is believed to have been built by a different loyalist unit. The bomb disposal expert's report was commissioned by Justice for the Forgotten, an Irish government-funded group for the victims of the atrocities, at Barron's request in 2001. However, it is understood further reports have been commissioned from the same expert into other explosions in the republic. These found two other loyalist bombs were probably composed of explosives seized from the IRA. One of these was detonated at Kay's Tavern in Dundalk, a bar which was at the time used by republicans, on December 19, 1975 and claimed two lives. The second exploded on the same day outside a bar in Silverbridge, Co Armagh, and killed three people. Last month Bertie Ahern, the taoiseach, told the Dail that he had raised the alleged non-cooperation of British authorities with Paul Murphy, the Northern Ireland secretary, who assured him that "further material would be forthcoming". Ahern added: "The prime minister is fully aware that we want to see the maximum co-operation from the British authorities and the matter has been raised through the British-Irish secretariat and at the recent meeting of the British-Irish intergovernmental conference." |
|
05 Jun 08 - 12:17 PM (#2358370) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Den Keith you're starting to mildly irritate me, that's never a good idea. |
|
05 Jun 08 - 12:28 PM (#2358396) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Den Guest Alan, I think its fairly common knowledge who was behind the Dublin, Monaghan bombings. There will be more to come of this hopefully, later this year but then again we're still waiting for the results of the Bloody Sunday inquiry. |
|
05 Jun 08 - 12:33 PM (#2358403) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: RobbieWilson My God but this thread is depressing. Someone makes a film looking into the life of a man most of us know very little about and have no conception of what it would take to drive ourselves to the depth of what he put himself through. Do we watch it and then say "That's what he got wrong, or misunderstood or was deluded by"? No, we air once again our predjudices and dismiss anyone who does not go along with them as part of one or other gang of murdering bastards. The only way to make this world a safer place is to learn the lessons of our past. Why do young men and women kill themselves and innocent shoppers, bus passengers, office workers? Is it really, as seems to be the suggestion of several posters here that they are are congenitaly "prats" and murderer, that they are born to be terrorists. If we treat todays "terrorists" and the communities from which they draw support with "complete and utter contempt" will the world become a safer place? I for one would like a little more insight into how this all works, but then again I have never chosen to be part of any organisation set up to kill "the enemy" so have never had to have a one eyed view of the world. Finally I think it takes a really perverse view of the world to describe someone who takes part in an action where he has a strong chance of being shot, and then puts himself through the horror of starving to death as a coward, but another man who sits in an office sending hundreds of young men to risk death while slaughtering tens of thousands of innocent civilians as a hero. Perhaps I'm missing something here. If I am I know I can only find it by looing where I did not look before, not by restating again and again my side righteous heroes, everyone else murdering bastards. |
|
05 Jun 08 - 12:35 PM (#2358405) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford And finally the threat. Completely true to form. |
|
05 Jun 08 - 12:48 PM (#2358421) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Mick There are times that I respect the positions of members of the debate that run counter to mine. These are the times when there is at least respect. But lately, in several threads, the absolute denial of facts and the openly anti Irish/Irish American comments have shown the prejudice that oozes from them. In the former case there could be respect, in the latter, none. As to the combatants, I have great empathy for the families of all the combatants. I would try and explain why to the tin soldier, but he would just try and twist it. One thing that sticks out. For all his rants, terrible T knows deep inside that the actions of the IRA soldiers will ultimately end in a united Ireland. Despite the wishes of the privileged Orange, they will ultimately be a part of a united land. In fact, the signs are already out there that they are realizing the hoax (known as the Orange card) that was perpetrated on them several generations ago by English capitalists. Average folks are coming to understand, slowly but surely, that they have far more in common interest than the differences over where and if they pray. There are many bricks in the Famine roads, and Bobby Sands and his brave comrades are some of the most important. Ultimately and surely though, the trek is being made on those self same roads. As the song that I recorded says, "every road we've ever walked was built by hungry hands". Can't wait to see the film. Le gach dea-mhéin, Mick |
|
05 Jun 08 - 12:51 PM (#2358427) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Mick And Robbie Wilson, once again you show great wisdom. One day I hope we can have a jar and talk, maybe sing a song or two. Le gach dea-mhéin, Mick |
|
05 Jun 08 - 01:05 PM (#2358440) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Den Congratulations Keith you got what you wanted. I sincerely hope that it makes your day, really I do. You goaded me and I reacted. I have never walked away from a fight in my life and I certainly don't intend to start any time soon. So your choice of words against me provoked a reaction, that coupled with the death of my mother early this year and the comment above...did you make the comment above? Anyway I don't think that I have shrunk to the level of calling people names during a discussion or to make a point. I don't like to see that happen. To my mind it is a form of bullying as I stated. I do my best usually, not to attack the poster. What I try to provide are facts as I did above. I don't like speculation. Anyway I'm going to cool down for a little bit and come back to this. |
|
05 Jun 08 - 02:46 PM (#2358544) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford It is not supposed to be a fight. It should be an exchange of views among friends. There is no denying facts Mick, but we draw different conclusions from them. For instance we both accept that Ireland will be united, but you credit it to IRA and I and a majority of even Nationalist people in NI think that they just increased the hatreds and delayed the whole thing. I really do think and believe that. Can you not bear to accept that, and then tell me why you think I am wrong, and then allow me to counter that without emnity? Keith. |
|
05 Jun 08 - 04:47 PM (#2358676) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: ard mhacha Another amazing statement from Keith, Sinn Fein got an overwhelming majority of the Nationalist vote, so how can you come out with this nonsense, Keith get your facts right. |
|
05 Jun 08 - 05:53 PM (#2358755) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Not while the armed struggle was going on Ard. The IRA would not have let Bobby Sands stand for election if there had been an alternative candidate for the Nationalists to vote for. Even in that staunchly Republican place, they knew that a large number of the Nationalist people would never vote for an IRA man if there was any alternative at all. I accept that Sinn Fein vote really took off when the violence stopped. Is it not true that anti violence SDLP took the majority Nationalist vote before the cease fire? Facts. Perspectives. keith. |
|
06 Jun 08 - 04:13 AM (#2359085) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: ard mhacha Why did the people vote for Sinn Fein when the struggle ended, surely the Nationalist people would have seized the opportunity to get rid of them,this didn`t happen because the Nationalist people were never going back to another 50 years of Unionist discrimination and suffering. |
|
06 Jun 08 - 04:19 AM (#2359089) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford This chart allows you to compare the votes for the NI parties over the years. The Sinn Fein vote did not beat the peaceful, Nationalist SDLP until 2001 http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/issues/politics/election/electsum.htm |
|
06 Jun 08 - 04:21 AM (#2359091) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: ard mhacha I should have added, organisation was the key for Sinn Fein, the SDLP were the established Nationalist Party, once the struggle ended the brilliant young people attached to Sinn Fein left the SDLP in their wake. |
|
06 Jun 08 - 04:27 AM (#2359094) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Yes I agree Ard. It was just the abhorrence of the violent campaign and the linking with IRA that prevented so many Nationalist voting for them before. |
|
06 Jun 08 - 04:44 AM (#2359102) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: ard mhacha Organisation and a brilliant team of young workers swept away a middle-class SDLP Party,given time, it was always going that way. |
|
06 Jun 08 - 06:55 AM (#2359170) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Perhaps. My interpretation would be that however organised, young and brilliant they were, while they were linked to IRA violence they would go nowhere. |
|
06 Jun 08 - 08:39 AM (#2359252) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: ard mhacha Well they were not linked to The Sisters of Mercy. |
|
06 Jun 08 - 08:51 AM (#2359261) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Not even the Provisional Sisters of Mercy? |
|
06 Jun 08 - 08:52 AM (#2359264) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Den Most people were afraid to vote for Sinn Fein not because of their association with the IRA but because the fact of the matter was if you did vote or openly support Sinn Fein you were seen as a radical or Republican sympathizer and your name would be placed on a list which eventually would end up in the hands of British agents to supply to loyalist death squads. Brian Nelson was instrumental in signing death warrents for a lot of people on flimsy or fabricated information. |
|
06 Jun 08 - 09:09 AM (#2359274) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford With around 200 000 SF voters in the 80s those death squads must have had their work cut out. How did they know who voted? What are your sources for that Den? |
|
06 Jun 08 - 09:16 AM (#2359279) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Den Fear is a great motivator. Sources? Brian Nelson? You're kidding right? Just google Brian Nelson British agent, should be enlightening. Or Force Reconnaissance Unit, Gordon Kerr. In fact there was a great Panorama programme about this not too long ago. Did you see it? I didn't unfortunately but I have the transcript, made for some very depressing reading. |
|
06 Jun 08 - 09:24 AM (#2359287) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Den Gotta get back to work here will check back this evening. |
|
06 Jun 08 - 09:34 AM (#2359304) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford I will try that Den. And if there is nothing about targetting individual voters, you will retract right? I will be off line by evening Canada. Have a good weekend. Catch up with you on Monday. keith. |
|
09 Jun 08 - 04:26 AM (#2361209) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Den, I tried the top sites thrown up by the searches you suggested, but found no new stuff there; certainly nothing to support your assertion that voter intimidation was ever an issue. This is worrying because I have read widely on the period of transition from armalite to ballot box and the winning of the Nationalist vote, and also never saw any reports of that as an issue. Also, I have discussed this same topic here before many times with the likes of Divis, Ard, The Curator, and indeed yourself, and it has never been raised before. It is as if you just made it up in order to deny an uncomfortable fact, i.e. that there was little Nationalist support for the IRA terror campaign. Please give a credible source |
|
09 Jun 08 - 08:49 AM (#2361322) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: ard mhacha Keith, It is entirely hopeless to get through to you, if I went out on the street to-day and related what you have written above I would be laughed at. You are wrong there was more support among the nationalist people for the IRA than the SDLP, the followers of Sinn Fein abstained in large numbers throughout the struggle. There was no way that Sinn Fein could organise, not with incessant pressure from the Brits, the candidates and their supporters that did attempt to stand were harassed at every juncture. The difference was very much apparent when the ceasefire was arrived at, for the simple reason likely candidates were now able to conduct their canvassing without the Brits confronting them at every turn in the road. Take note of the many Sinn Fein candidates that stood throughout the six counties and also take note of the many Sinn Fein successes, people who never voted for years came out to vote foe their Sinn Fein nominees. |
|
09 Jun 08 - 09:13 AM (#2361342) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Ard, You say,"the followers of Sinn Fein abstained in large numbers throughout the struggle." Please explain why a Sinn Fein supporter would abstain from voting for their Sinn Fein candidate. I accept that they did abstain, as witness the surge in votes when the violence stopped. |
|
09 Jun 08 - 10:11 AM (#2361391) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,Observer Keith could you possibly provide proof that anyone in the North of Ireland either felt pressurised to vote for Sinn Fein prior to the ending of the war. You seem to make out that Northern nationalists either received a knock at their door from a masked man or received threats of intimation. That is a fairly wild allegation to state without proof. Maybe your energies would be better spent exploring why the government of your beloved country stood back and permitted their unionist colleagues in Stormont to deny the nationalist population in of the North of Ireland a voice or vote for many years. You seem to prefer to focus on hogwash statements which aren't backed up with hard facts. Tell me Keith, what's your opinion on a part of the government of the United Kingdom in denying a section of their subjects the right of a vote ? Your interest in the affairs of the North of Ireland appear to be a little weighted to the righteous rule of Britain and their unblemished record of human rights towards nationalists and followers of the Cathoilc faith. There may have been a large majority of the population in favour of British rule, but there was also a sizeable number who only wished to follow the faith they were born into and in doing so faced discrimination and bigotry in every aspect of their daily life for doing so. Are you not aware of this ? Are you saying that every inhabitant of the North of Ireland was a republican and deserved to be deal with accordingly ? By the time we had reached the 1970's, the treatment of the nationalist community in the North of Ireland by Britain and their henchmen in Stormont proved the strongest recruitment drive for entry into republican groups by young men who were not going to roll over and lay down. You are no doubt aware Keith of injustices throughout the world today by corrupt governments. Are you saying the people of these countries should accept the unacceptable ? Keith, let's become realistic for a moment. You are British and a strong supporter of British policy throughout the world over several hundreds of years. You will never accept that Britain created the problems in Ireland, neither will you accept that the basic human right of any nation to resist reform against their faith, right to their own lands and traditions. Keith you seem to draw lines in the sand when it comes to Irish/British history with fleeting statements against the Provisional IRA and an ignorance as to why the came into being. You often say that their requests would have been delivered in time without an armed struggle, rights had been denied for eight hundred years, how could you possibly know they were just around the corner? Can you honestly and truthfully provide proof of this ? No you can't. Stormont was a stone wall unionist regime who despised the Catholic church and the nationalist community and would never have embraced equality or gave a voice to a Catholic. Well the Nationalist/Republican/Catholic people of the North of Ireland have a determination that you will never understand or comprehend. Your GOC's on the ground did, as did the failed British Secataries on State. Keith, Britain could never have broken the spirit of the Irish people. Accept that and reconsider your view of repression in Ireland for over 800 years through one half opened eye. |
|
09 Jun 08 - 11:16 AM (#2361449) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Observer, is it because you cannot challenge any of my actual views, that you make up a load that I have never held, and attack me for them? I challenge and defy you to produce one of my posts that support anything in your attack on me. You open with this. Badly written but the meaning is clear. "Keith could you possibly provide proof that anyone in the North of Ireland either felt pressurised to vote for Sinn Fein prior to the ending of the war. You seem to make out that Northern nationalists either received a knock at their door from a masked man or received threats of intimation. That is a fairly wild allegation to state without proof. " Observer, if you observed any of my last few posts, you would see that I have been challenging the idea that voter intimidation was an issue at all, and demanding proof from others. Twats like you just damage your own cause. |
|
09 Jun 08 - 11:58 AM (#2361502) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,Observer Thank you Keith. Your refusal to accept that the British government supported gerrymandering in the North of Ireland once again exposes you as a bigot. Your refusal to acknowledge that the British occupation of Ireland was both morally wrong and unjustified exposes you as simply thick. Throughout this thread you have written the greatest load of horseshite that I have ever read in my entire life. Irish mudcatters have not only exposed your ignorance of Irish history, but the statements you continue to make lack proof or substance. You continue to dig a hole for yourself and it's actually becoming quiet humorous (keep it up). Republicans are now in government and enjoy strong support within the community. Many of those in positions of power were freedom fighters during the war. Political prisoners were also released from British goals. The wealth and lavish lifestyles enjoyed by overpaid prison staff and members of the UDR and RUC are long since over. Moss now grows over the headstones of those who once came to Ireland to repress the Irish nation. Stop sucking on that lemon Keith. |
|
09 Jun 08 - 01:38 PM (#2361583) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle without wishing to disrespect either party - do you think there is a point at which you might achieve mutual respect. Maybe that's the point at which to start, rather than your differences of opinion. |
|
09 Jun 08 - 01:57 PM (#2361597) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,PriceWise This attack on the Irish by K A of H reminds me of Denis Healey's famous quip, "It is like being savaged by a dead sheep". It is clear that K A of H hasn't a clue about Ireland or what he's talking about. |
|
09 Jun 08 - 02:19 PM (#2361613) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: ard mhacha The IRA`s part in the death of cock robin and also coming soon the IRA and the death of Jesse James--- by Keith of Hertford |
|
09 Jun 08 - 03:41 PM (#2361694) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Dave the Gnome I posted earlier here, I think. Couldn't be bothered to trawl back through all that negativity to be honest. Point I want to make now, if I didn't make it before, is that the bloody thing is over all bar the shouting. The violence seems almost at an end. The army are all but moved out. The republicans have gained huge support. Ireland may well be united soon. The question is who is going to be left with the legacy of the screwed up bit in the top right corner? The English don't want it any more. Nor, apparantly, do the rest of Ireland. Having seen how the reunification of Germany caused no end of political and financial problems I don't blame them one bit. It seems to me that by deliberatley raising and reraising these issues some people seem to be unhappy that the fight is over. They want it to carry on. Why can't you all just accept that the past is in the past and while we can learn from it, it should realy stay where it is. Cheers Dave |
|
09 Jun 08 - 03:55 PM (#2361703) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford WLD, I can and do respect Observers views, but not his right to make up lies about me. Shamelessly, he has ignored my complaint and just made up more! Observe this Observer. I have never denied gerrymandaring, though I would say that the British turned a blind eye rather than supported it. It had no consequence here. I do accept that the invasion and occupation was "morally wrong and unjustified" by modern standards, but not by the standards of those medieval times. All countries did it and worse in those far off centuries. Move on. USA stole a hundred irelands just in the 19th Century which is why I will take no historical moralising from Big Mick! I recognise and celebrate with you the achievements of the Nationalist people. I am just saddened that, but for the bloody carnage of the IRA terror campaign, it could have been achieved earlier and the people spared years of misery and grief. |
|
09 Jun 08 - 03:58 PM (#2361706) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Pricewise, "It is clear that K A of H hasn't a clue about Ireland or what he's talking about." Please be specific. Give your best example of my cluelessness. |
|
09 Jun 08 - 05:38 PM (#2361799) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Mick Very nice, Keith. What you just did is proved that you are guilty of the very same thing you accuse others of. In my last post, I almost added a para that suggested you not raise the point of what the USA did with the native peoples. But I didn't because I knew you would raise it, and do so after you complained that folks put words in you mouth. Now, if you would be so kind, would you point out anywhere that I raised that point? You will not be able to, as I also have great empathy with native peoples everywhere who are displaced by others from their ancestral lands. I find great irony in the Irish that came to this country and ended up fighting in the various "Indian" wars. But there is a distinct difference in my country and yours. For the most part, your country continues to try and cover up and justify the use of the taxpayer supported armed forces to collude with the loyalists who are intent on keeping a people separated from themselves. Your government has been shown to be complicit in the murders of civil rights activists. There have been examples of this in my country, as well, but we put an end to it and have recognized the sovereign rights of native peoples. I suggest you do the same. We have much to do here, but we are well on the road. But ..... that is a topic for a new thread, and I won't hijack this one. But I will point out that you are guilty of exactly what you accuse others of. You will not find any defense of my country's actions in this regard by me. Further more, it is not my issue. My issue has to do with my views on the actions of your government in my ancestral homeland. Despite your, and Terrible T's, attempt to act like I am not entitled to these views. let me assure that this is a pretty weak show of intellect. I need not live in a country to comment on its politics and actions, as many of you Brits demonstrate by your constant carping about what is wrong with the US. And my ties to Ireland, by virtue of blood, study, training, and celebration of its customs and musical heritage, enhance my absolute right to do so. Mick |
|
09 Jun 08 - 06:14 PM (#2361831) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,Observer Well said Big Mick. Sadly it will be lost on the guy. His constant cry about the retaliatory actions of republicans against their suppressors would put anyone to sleep. Possibly he could address the actions of trigger happy British soldiers against unarmed men, women and children killed by rubber,plastic and FMJ rounds. I don't think I need to post their names here. Maybe he could address the issue of British collusion with loyalists ? Two sides to every coin Keith. We heard your views many times on one side, now enlighten us to your views on the above. |
|
10 Jun 08 - 03:09 AM (#2362070) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Big Mick, you did raise the issue of stealing lands. On 4th June you said " Do you not consider land an asset? It was stripped from the hands of the Irish, and given to transplanted peoples. " When I spoke of USA taking a hundred Irelands (guesstimate)in 19th Century I was not thinking of the lands taken from Native Americans but from the poor Catholic country next door. And I do not judge USA. In those days conquest was not seen as immoral. Britain also took lands in 19th C , although we did give them all back in 20th C. I just ask that you acknowledge your more recent historical "crimes" when declaiming against Britain's more ancient ones. |
|
10 Jun 08 - 03:17 AM (#2362072) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Observer, I have addressed the issue you refer to many times. Here for instance; "Date: 29 May 06 - 07:54 AM Sweeney, The government had little choice but use the army with the level of violence threatening civil war. They could not be withdrawn until IRA belatedly realised its terror was counter productive. The British army is better than others but Akeneaton and Ardmhacha are right that soldiers make bad policemen. I admitted that the army killed innocents but I have 3 caveats. 1 Last year an ex ira man, overcome by guilt, admitted having killed a child in a botched attempt to shoot a soldier. IRA had lied about this and blamed it on the army. How many more such cases? 2 We (RIGHTLY) expect high standards of restraint from our law keepers. Other countries would not be shocked if car thieves crashing through a check point were shot at. 3 Republican paramilitaries killed far more innocents than the army. Many hundreds more innocent deaths on their hands. " Try to be more observant . |
|
10 Jun 08 - 03:25 AM (#2362075) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Observer, I challenged and defied you to produce one post of mine that justified any one of the slanders against me in your two 9thJune posts. You ignored my reasonable request and just carried on posting. I take your silence as an admission that you completely misjudged me. Or have you got anything? Of course not. |
|
10 Jun 08 - 03:29 AM (#2362079) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Den, you promised days ago to come back and justify your intimidation argument. |
|
10 Jun 08 - 03:41 AM (#2362084) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle What you ARE not really facing up to though Keith is that Sands and his compatriots did manage to defeat a very ruthless enemy in the shape of the Thatcher government - and really that was no mean achievement. As Arthur Scargill will tell you, the Thatcher element really had no scruple about tearing up the democratic rulebook when it wanted to defeat an enemy. And they would lie - in an unprincipled and unprecedented manner for their own short term gain. For example I can remember Norman Tebbit coming on TV in the miners' strike and saying that not a single English miner would lose his job. And the snotty slimey voiced BBC interviewer saying, so why are you and your followers pursuing this illegal strike Mr Scargill? At least Sinn Fein didn't go the way of the British mining industry and all the ancillary industries attached to it. In war, the first rule is that you win. And you can argue with Sands and his methods, (and I will personally say the way SF supporters have conducted this debate and abused you has been sickening) but at least SF didn't get pissed about and defeated like the NUM. And that was an achievement. |
|
10 Jun 08 - 04:08 AM (#2362093) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford WLD, i will never accept that an elected government be defeated by bomb and gun. There is always a better way. This is from the Cain site about the situation BEFORE Thatcher. The way was already clear for all the achievements that have been described. " NICRA. Local government was reformed and even if the present boundaries and powers have not been subject to detailed investigation, the general principles of local government are acceptable - or would be acceptable if the system were to operate in the manner in which it was intended, that is with the existence of a regional parliament. Housing was taken from local r councils and placed in the hands of a central body. Although this too is far from perfect it is a major step forward in the struggle for democracy. Universal adult franchise is now applied in all elections in Northern Ireland and proportional representation is used for all elections except those to Westminster. The Ombudsman exists and it is an offence to discriminate against anyone on the grounds of religion. The Fair Employment Act and the Sex Discrimination Act are additional legislative victories. |
|
10 Jun 08 - 04:13 AM (#2362095) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford This is what the same site says of IRA. This is for those who say I am out of touch with NI residents. "The final group which has played such a major part in the past 10 years is the IRA. The Provisionals were the men who first broke the civil rights pledge of no talks until Internment ends. Their sporadic sectarian war against Protestants and their campaign of murder against civilians has been one of the greatest denials of civil and human rights in recent Irish history. Fuelled initially by Fianna Fail money they rocketed across the Irish political scene leaving death and destruction, reactionary politics and repressive legislation in their wake, and their present orbit is powered by the continuing sectarianism generated by their own actions. Their production line in martyrs and heroes has provided the raison d'etre for the continuation of their campaign and the living and dead bodies of their members which lie scattered across the prisons and cemeteries of Ireland are mute testimony to the futility of their actions. They did not want British rights. They wanted Irish rights. Their actions have ensured that they now have none of the rights of either nationality, and the rest of us must suffer accordingly. |
|
10 Jun 08 - 04:17 AM (#2362097) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/events/crights/nicra/nicra786.htm Link for above quotes. It is actually an NICRA document. |
|
10 Jun 08 - 04:39 AM (#2362111) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: goatfell what a dickhead he was good riddincae to bad rubbish and the was no war in Northern Ireland because I can't remember Westminster declearing war on British soil. it was loylist and republican murderers killing innocent men, women and children that where at so called war, the terrorists on both sides are just muderers. but that is the way I think. |
|
10 Jun 08 - 04:41 AM (#2362113) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: goatfell but then I said all this before and was called a bigot by someone who doesn't know me |
|
10 Jun 08 - 04:45 AM (#2362116) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Arran/Guitar/Goatfell/Tam Please stop changing your name. You are entitled to your opinions, but try to be nice with it. keith. |
|
10 Jun 08 - 04:55 AM (#2362118) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle Yes, but can't you see that Thatcher sort of crystallised the situation? Her manner and rhetoric and cavalier way with the democratic process made the choices very stark. and this is really what gave SF the window of opportunity. A nice man like John Hume was always just going to get kicked in the knackers and his wallet nicked by Thatcher. Democratic process, public service, even intelligence were largly forbidden areas in the world of Thatcher. Look what she did with Hesseltine, John MacGregor and Jim prior. Only lickspittles like Lawson and Baker were her sort of people. Or Tebbit - Buckingham to her Richard III. In truth she was playing ducks and drakes with the democratic process even before she was elected - using the intelligence services of the country in much the same way Richard Nixon got impeached for. The Spycatcher revelations showed that. With SF she came up against a group that was quite as uninterested in democratic niceties as she was. The economy of means with which SF worked would have delighted Thomas Cromwell and any practitioner of realpolitik. Credit where its due, for godsake. |
|
10 Jun 08 - 05:13 AM (#2362121) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Stu I was determined not to post back to this thread as what I see are a lot of people shouting and no-one listening. Mick said: "For the most part, your country continues to try and cover up and justify the use of the taxpayer supported armed forces to collude with the loyalists who are intent on keeping a people separated from themselves." This statement implies ordinary UK taxpayers are actively supporting the criminal activities of the UK Government by giving up their taxes for this very purpose. Well, that's a sweeping generalisation, and a look back at Ken Loach's comments might indicate not every 'Brit' is so blinkered and ignorant of the facts as the more stereotyped image might indicate. The problem here is at the end of the day is the whole situation is very complex and for the peoples of Ireland and the UK the lines can be blurred and confusing, especially for those of us who have lived with the results of the conflict and suffered it's effects without knowing fully what the reasons for the war were. I've known people involved in both sides this conflict and it soon becomes clear as you talk to them there is a fundamental difference in their understanding of what the conflict was about and why it was being fought. I've known British Army soldiers shot in a gunfight with the IRA, one man who was a member of the IRA left and joined Loyalist group and since has spent his life on the run for fear of revenge attacks but by his own admittance had seen and done some questionable things for both sides. Then of course people I've met here like Divis for whom I have a lot of respect and like Ard told their side of the story from where it was actually happening, on the ground, for real in their home. As a 'Brit', I spent my entire youth as the subject of an intense and one-sided propaganda campaign conducted by the British Government. When it's your only source of information (no internet etc), it's difficult not to be swayed by the endless media bombardment telling you that we're right and they're wrong, and when they start pulling the bodies out of pubs a few miles up the road from your house and every one is shitting themselves about going shopping it becomes difficult to gain a perspective. So much blood spilt, so much suffering. Look at us bickering on this thread, perpetuating the myths and prejudices that have allowed both sides to slaughter innocents and keep alive old animosities long after they should have been buried. If odious types like the Chuckle Brothers can shake hands and get down to managing the situation and start on the long and arduous road taking the violence and bitterness out of the equation, then so must we all. This film is a part of that process, and it should be celebrated for that reason. The winners in the peace process will be the innocents of Ireland and the UK who don't get torn apart by bombs or suffer the indignities of discrimination or intimidation from either side. Time for us on these Islands to revel in our common heritage - the folly of Empire is behind us and the war is over. Let's get back to being ourselves, because we are all good people and we have always go on so well on a personal level, even in the darkest days. Now, who's for a tune? |
|
10 Jun 08 - 05:17 AM (#2362124) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,Observer Now what about collusion Keith. The British army and the police and in the North of Ireland helped loyalist paramilitaries to murder Catholics. Are you saying that Sir John Stevens got it wrong Keith ? The Metropolitan Police Commissioner's report into collusion between the security forces and loyalist paramilitaries also found that military intelligence in the North of Ireland helped to prolong the Troubles, not the IRA as dimwit Keith seems to think. Members of the RUC and Army colluded with the largest loyalist paramilitary group, the Ulster Defence Association (UDA), to murder Catholics. Keith Sir John found that actions or omissions by security forces led to deaths of innocent people. Murders of solicitor Pat Finucane and student Adam Lambert could have been prevented. Collusion with loyalist murder gangs in both murders of Pat Finucane and Adam Lambert.Three official inquiries wilfully obstructed and misled. DO YOU KNOW WHAT COLLUSION IS KEITH ? Wilful failure to keep records Absence of accountability Withholding intelligence and evidence Agents involved in murder and working alongside Loyalist murder gangs. I repeat, You are a bigot Keith. |
|
10 Jun 08 - 05:18 AM (#2362126) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: goatfell the reason why I change my mudcat name is after a while I get fed up with it and so I try some new name for a change, mind you I quite like the name Goatfell, after a while I get quite bored with my mudcat name and then I change it or as I say for me anyway it becomes boring. it's like wearing the same sort of clothes for the rest of your life |
|
10 Jun 08 - 05:39 AM (#2362133) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle 'You are a bigot Keith. ' and you calling folks names adds little to the gaiety of nations. |
|
10 Jun 08 - 06:11 AM (#2362140) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,Fairbourogh Bottom line here is that a film was made about a hero of the Irish people and it will be screened worldwide and will expose Britain as scumballs. LIVE WITH IT. |
|
10 Jun 08 - 06:17 AM (#2362143) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Observer, we have had threads on collusion. Reopen one or start a new one. It is out of place here. Again I challenge and defy you to produce one bigoted statement from me. Some hope. I am surprised that a "Guest" is allowed to behave like you and not be deleted. |
|
10 Jun 08 - 07:03 AM (#2362160) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,Observer Keith, You come onto this site to defend the indefensible. The actions of the British army in the North of Ireland was one of shame, murder and collusion. Then you launch attack after attack on those groups who took up arms against them. This thread is about a film Keith. A film which tells the story of the strength and conviction of one man and the determination of the Irish people against a tyrant nation. Keep it up Keith, the hole your digging for yourself is getting bigger. |
|
10 Jun 08 - 07:11 AM (#2362164) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Dave the Gnome Wonderful piece of rhetoric there, GUEST,Fairbourogh. Hero of the Irish people was he? Which ones? Ian Paisley is an Irish person isn't he? I am sure he has posters of Mr Sands on his bedroom walls... Will expose Britain as scumballs? Britain is a concept only and as such it is singular. How can a singular concept be multiple balls of scum? Or do you mean that all British subjects are scumballs? British subjects like, oh, let me see, Gerry Adams? Nice to see a concise, well thought out piece of logic. D. |
|
10 Jun 08 - 07:16 AM (#2362171) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Jean(eanjay) and will expose Britain as scumballs I am looking forward to seeing this film. From all the reviews, reports etc. there is nothing to indicate that that was the purpose of the film or that that is what it will do and I have read a lot of what has been written about the film. I am British and I would be the first person to acknowledge that the British government left a lot to be desired and should have been more flexible. However, I am not willing to listen to Britain being labelled scumballs. This film looks at the HUMANITY of the situation. Read what Steve McQueen has to say about it. |
|
10 Jun 08 - 07:25 AM (#2362175) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Observer That last attack on the IRA was not from me. It was from the Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association. But what did they know? |
|
10 Jun 08 - 09:26 AM (#2362237) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: goatfell Britan will be exposed as scumbags, well Bobby Sands was British because Northern Ireland is a part of Britain, though some og them don't think so, and some of them post here on the mudcat |
|
10 Jun 08 - 09:30 AM (#2362240) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: goatfell and will expose Britain as scumballs and if you come from Northern Ireland then you too are a scumball because you too are British |
|
10 Jun 08 - 03:12 PM (#2362524) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle Shit! What will we do when we've all been exposed as scumballs. Possibly there will be mass suicides - thousands of people jumping over the white cliffs of Dover, cos they can't face life exposed as a scumball. There will be Sun reporters outside all our houses, shouting through the letterbox, We know you're in there Mr Scumball. tell us your side of the story......Gerry Adams says you're a drunken brute and you used your fists on him, and forced him to do it with a rubber bullet....... I had my fun with bearded politician and bikini clad Ian Paisley in night of shame, says love rat brit! Now I'm off! |
|
11 Jun 08 - 01:51 AM (#2362927) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Teribus "The actions of the British army in the North of Ireland was one of shame, murder and collusion." That one I particularly liked coming from someone defending the actions of the "bold" PIRA - Illustrates perfectly their balance and perspective. I would love to hear this guys take on the thousands of completely innocent civilian lives lost, the vast majority of that number being the very people they claimed to be "protecting", along with the 30,000 people maimed and injured. Throughout the period of this so called epic struggle of which Sands was a willing participant, not one instance can be found or put forward where a member of any paramilitary group in Northern Ireland gave their lives in defence of a member of the civilian population - I discount of course PIRA bombers who managed to blow themselves up either making or transporting their bombs. Sands was a shoddy little terrorist, who did exactly as his "masters" bade him to do, if that meant planting bombs in shopping centres that he probably did and would have done, if it meant committing acts of murder he probably did and would have done, if it had meant him carrying out punishment beatings and knee-cappings he probably did and would have done - After all as a member of the PIRA, which he undoubtedly was, as a "Volounteer" what choice would he have? But please do not expect me to show him or any other member of any other Northern Ireland paramilitary organisation any respect or admiration. On the subject of collusion, who was it the Official IRA and the PIRA colluded with to get rid of that nuisance organisation called the INLA? Who was it that factions within the INLA colluded with to resolve their squalid little internal tiffs and get back at the PIRA? Oh as to the British Army having withdrawn from Northern Ireland - There twice the number of troops in Northern Ireland than there are in Afghanistan and six times the number in Northern Ireland than we have in Iraq - or at least there were last time I checked. They have every right to be there it is after all part of the United Kingdom of great Britain and Northern Ireland. |
|
11 Jun 08 - 02:21 AM (#2362934) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle okay, we won't expect YOU to show any respect for a guy some people have decided to idolise as a hero of Irish patriotism. However you can't really be surprised if reciprocally, they show no respect for the ikons you hold close to your heart, Teribus. As you see - its quite possible to characterise anybody who has taken part in military action as some sort of thug. People regularly say just as nasty things about the British army as you have just said about Bobby Sands and the IRA. Someone somewhere though is going to have to break the cycle and start showing some respect for others beliefs. Otherwise we will only ever have bitterness and aggression between us. |
|
11 Jun 08 - 03:20 AM (#2362953) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford I am shocked that you people think that disability abuse is still acceptable in this society. Are you still living in the Dark Ages? (Well, obviously some of you are, but please. You will be planting settlers in our back yards next.) We sufferers from Acute Residual Scrotal Exudation Syndrome, (A.R.S.E.S.) are tired of our painful and disabling condition being treated as a joke or a term of abuse. We will not stand for it, (although we have to stand for most things). Poking fun at A.R.S.E.S must stop. We A.R.S.E.S. will not be poked. (And yes, that is what the A stands for.) |
|
11 Jun 08 - 04:18 AM (#2362992) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Dave the Gnome Another award winning film that could provide an interesting discussion. Somehow I don't think it will provide as much reaction from some quarters. Even though it is more up to date and possibly more relevant. Cheers dave |
|
11 Jun 08 - 07:18 AM (#2363070) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,Egan Did any of you see the Polish fans in Euro 2008 singing "The British Three Lions" song last night.I Really enjoyed it. One Polish fan said " This is the great game England brought to the world and they can´t even make it here,so we thought we would remind them". It´s great to see all these nations enjoying the game. If England had reached this stage, it would be a shambles by now as their support thugs (a lot wear British army uniforms when not on the terraces) would have wrecked a town or killed someone by now. These thick football thugs always sing "We won the war" when in central Europe. Correct me if I am wrong, but was it not a large country to the left of us that saved Britians ass ? |
|
11 Jun 08 - 07:39 AM (#2363083) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle I believe they eventually showed up. |
|
11 Jun 08 - 07:47 AM (#2363087) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Soldier football fans. A rarity for soldiers to attend matches I think. But I expect that you have some shred of evidence you can put before us. You wouldn't make up lies about Britain would you? |
|
11 Jun 08 - 07:54 AM (#2363089) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Perhaps you mean this one? Manchester football riot cop: Hero soldier saved me from mob By Andy Rudd 16/05/2008 Pc Mick Regan The Manchester football riot cop who survived the mob Gordon Brown warns riots have put England's 2018 World Cup bid at risk More Top Stories Have your say on What are you talking about? in our Forums News picturesRelated Tags glasgow rangers, mick regan, riots, uefa cup final (What's this?)The policeman attacked by rioting Glasgow Rangers fans has spoken about the moment he was brutally kicked and stamped on by the 20-strong mob - and thanked the soldier who saved his life. Pc Mick Regan, a married of father-of-two, was one of six officers caught on CCTV retreating through Manchester city centre from around 200 football fans as they threw missiles of bottles, cans and rubbish at them. The officer, who suffered bruising to both arms, sore ribs and a puncture wound to the elbow, has revealed he owes his life to a brave Army medic who came to his rescue. "One of them shouted at me saying 'I'm British Army, I'm a medic'," said Pc Regan. |
|
11 Jun 08 - 08:24 AM (#2363102) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Jean(eanjay) Some people think that Bobby Sands was a hero and I don't have a problem with that - they are entitled to their opinion. Steve McQueen did address the issue of whether or not the film portrayed Bobby Sands in this way, but I cannot find the report where I read it to make a link. It has been made clear that the purpose of the film was not to show anybody as a hero. It is possible to find plenty of reports about the film which indicate what Steve McQueen was trying to achieve. On a previous thread when it was mentioned that one of the ideas for the site of the maze prison was a supermarket I indicated that I felt that that was not appropriate. Personally I see Bobby Sands as one of the many people on both sides who suffered at that time. He was a young man with a young son and I imagine those last 6 weeks were absolute hell; it is very sad. However, I do object to this slagging off of the British army and British people in general. Have a go at the British government by all means but British soldiers and their families suffered too, in a lot of cases soldiers were very brave and responsible in their actions. Nothing in this thread has put me off wanting to see this film. |
|
11 Jun 08 - 08:55 AM (#2363124) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Stu "I would love to hear this guys take on the thousands of completely innocent civilian lives lost, the vast majority of that number being the very people they claimed to be "protecting", along with the 30,000 people maimed and injured." Sorry, is this the British Army in Iraq and Afghanistan you're talking about? |
|
11 Jun 08 - 12:18 PM (#2363317) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Teribus Yep Stig, the very same British Army that is serving in Iraq as part of the MNF at the request of the duly elected, duly constituted, internationally recognised Government of Iraq and under the terms of a duly authorised United Nations Security Council Mandate. The very same British Army that is serving in Afghanistan as part of ISAF at the request of the duly elected, duly constituted, internationally recognised Government of Afghanistan and under the terms of a duly authorised United Nations Security Council Mandate. |
|
11 Jun 08 - 12:24 PM (#2363322) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Teribus Oh, almost forgot Stigweard, care to give us your run down on what the result would have been if that British Army and the Emergency Services hadn't been there: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloody_Friday_(1972) |
|
11 Jun 08 - 02:27 PM (#2363444) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Dave the Gnome I'm surprised no-one has commented on the link I posted. Not! D. |
|
11 Jun 08 - 02:53 PM (#2363479) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Mick Actually, Dave, you are one of those whose opinions I have great respect for. I immediately went to your link, and determined that I will look this one up. Thanks for the link. Abu Ghraib, and the scapegoating of the young soldiers ranks right up there with My Lai for this American. I don't condone the actions, but as a vet I understand how living in that system puts great pressure on young soldiers to go along and get along. That, in my mind is exactly what many Brit soldiers face in the North of Ireland. The real problem lies in administrations, and senior officers, that are perfectly willing to let, and even encourage quietly, to commit acts that are immoral or illegal, and then hide behind the written rules and systems and say they never authorized it. These lower ranking soldiers (often in life or death situations) then act on the signals they have received, and when the boot comes down, can't find a soul to take the heat with them. I know this is hard for those that are not "in the moment" to understand, but combat vets know what I am speaking of. But..... yes I did go to your link. Mick |
|
11 Jun 08 - 03:17 PM (#2363497) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Mick, did you intend to say "Brit soldiers face..." ? It is all in the past now. At last. keith. |
|
12 Jun 08 - 04:09 AM (#2363994) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Dave the Gnome Thanks Mick - And a very sensible reaction if I may say so. As I am sure you know I do not condone the actions of my government in the North of Ireland either. But I will defend the ordinary people of this land, including the defenders of our peace, against the type of blinkered racism that has been portrayed over and over again on this thread. If only some other people would accept that Britain is not 'scumbags', that the soldiers serving in Ireland are just doing what they are told and that in a war attrocities are committed on both sides, the world would be a lot happier. Cheers Dave |
|
13 Jun 08 - 03:36 AM (#2364814) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Mick, I also have respect for Dave's opinions. You could not put a ciggy paper between us. I also respect your opinions, and actually share all of them, except that I do not believe that paramilitaries helped bring about reform in N.I. (On that my opinion is the same as N.I.Civil Rights Association.) That is the only difference between us Mick. keith. |
|
13 Jun 08 - 04:44 AM (#2364840) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle You could take issue with many people who have been singled out for canonisation, even deification - ask Salman Rushdie. Look at the hot water I get into on Mudcat, bcause it is self evident to me that half the traditional folksongs aren't worth saving and would have been better left in the library or the dustbin. (We have tradition in this country like some houses have rats.) Songs get selected for reverence - not just people. Dull unmemorable ones. Nevertheless, at some point, you have to take aboard the fact that this is the altar some people have chosen to worship at. Your relationship is unlikely to progress until you accept that. |
|
13 Jun 08 - 07:29 AM (#2364902) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,Observer "You could not put a ciggy paper between us" When did Dave EVER support British soldiers murdering women and children with plastic bullets or turn a blind eye to British soldiers working with loyalists to kill nationalists ? Christ I can´t believe you just said that Keith. Dave is a gentleman. As for Teribus, well we all tend to give him a fools pardon as he is just a crackpot. |
|
13 Jun 08 - 08:05 AM (#2364920) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Exactly. He never did, and neither do I. |
|
13 Jun 08 - 08:09 AM (#2364925) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford No. Enough of being polite. I say you are a LIAR Guest Observer. I defy you to find a single post of mine to justify a word of that vicious unprovoked attack on my character. So called Guests should not be allowed to do that to Mudcat members on our own forum. |
|
13 Jun 08 - 08:19 AM (#2364929) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Dave the Gnome Well, thank you for the compliment, Observer, but before we go any further down the road of who's views are nearer to whom's I had better make my position quite clear. 1. I am an Englishman of Polish/Russian/English/Welsh descent. Brought up Russian Orthodox and Catholic and now very critical of organised religions of all types but particularly the extemist ones. I am also quite cosmopolitan in outlook with many friends of different nationalities and religions. I spend as much time as I can travelling both inside and outside this nations boundries. 2. I do not and will never support the annexing of anyone elses lands or goods by force. Nor will I ever support any government or organisation that believes it can command anyone elses respect by force. 3. I am of the fervent belief that anyone who believes that they can run a country must be disqualified from doing so instantly on the grounds of diminished responsibilty. 4. I know with certainlty that the ordinary people of England, Ireland, the USA and all other countries of the world are the same. Non are any better or worse than the others. 5. Because of number 4 above and because the ordinary soldier on the ground is drawn from ordinary people like you or I then the soldiers from all sides are the same as well. They are neither saints nor sinners. It is their paymasters who have most to answer for. 6. I respect anyone and everyone until they do something that looses that respect. Most people on here, including Keith, Observer, Mick and a host of others have never done anything to loose that respect. A few have shown that they warrant no respect at all in their first few words. 7. One of the easiest ways to loose my respect is to make blatant racist remarks about the 'British'. Whoever they are. Or anyone else for that matter. I am always at a loss as to why the Mudcat sems to think that it is OK to use he term 'British scumbags' but will not tollerate 'thick Irish', 'tight Jews' or 'lazy Blacks'. Non of them should be allowed as far as I am concerned. 8. I agree with the pro-republican supporters here who state that something did need to be done to rid Ireland of British rule. I disagree with violent way it was achieved but accept that, at the time, people felt it was the only answer. I agree with the posters who feel that once the violence had started something had to be done to protect the integrity of law. I disagree with the violent way that was done as well but, again, at the time people felt it was the only answer. 9. I will not dismiss someone as a fool or crackpot just because they disagree with my ideas. If their arguments are put over in sensible, logical and reasonable manner, whether I agree with them or not, they will be treated with respect. 10. I keep saying, and will continue to do so, it is over now. It should be an open book for our children to learn from but why on earth the past be dragged over the coals so often and, as is the case here, so viciously? There is far more too it than that of course. There are various shades of grey in between those black and white words but at least now everyone should know what my opinions realy are. Well, as much as I do anyway... D. |
|
13 Jun 08 - 08:26 AM (#2364936) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Yes, not a ciggy paper there. Observer, you also called me a bigot, but when challenged could not find one statement of mine to justify it. Lies and slander. Why is this person allowed to post here? Members have been barred for less. |
|
13 Jun 08 - 08:27 AM (#2364937) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford 400! |
|
13 Jun 08 - 08:50 AM (#2364947) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Dave the Gnome And I claim page 9! :D |
|
13 Jun 08 - 09:38 AM (#2364977) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Good call Dave. Looking back at your list, you include Observer among those who have not lost your respect. Have you noticed that he has not, and presumably can not, challenge anything that I have ever said. Instead he makes things up about me. Is that respectable? |
|
13 Jun 08 - 10:29 AM (#2365022) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Dave the Gnome It's getting very close, Keith but I am still operating on the basis that a lot of things here are being said in anger. I don't think, as yet, that anything personaly vindictive has been used although if it was directed at me I may see it a different way. Let us see if any explanations are given. Cheers Dave. |
|
13 Jun 08 - 10:33 AM (#2365030) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford It is 3 days since I asked him to explain what makes me a "bigot". No explanation is going to come Dave because, as you know, these are false accusations. Lies. |
|
13 Jun 08 - 10:55 AM (#2365052) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle with the best will in the world dave - its vindictive. both sides referring to the others soldiers as low life thugs. both breaking out into abuse. little is being said in the way of debate - its just a tedious duet of angry sneering and smearing. |
|
13 Jun 08 - 12:20 PM (#2365134) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Stu "Oh, almost forgot Stigweard, care to give us your run down on what the result would have been if that British Army and the Emergency Services hadn't been there:" Teribus - people like you are part of the problem. I've had enough. No more Mudcat. |
|
13 Jun 08 - 02:41 PM (#2365255) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle yes indeed people are a problem.. If there weren't any people, particularly those we disagreed with....why, there would be peace on earth. |
|
13 Jun 08 - 06:46 PM (#2365449) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Dave the Gnome Your right, WLD, and it that vindictiveness that I can't get my head round. The real protagonists stopped fighting years ago. Why are the armchair soldiers still doing it here? And I am part of the problem as well. I am attracted to the fight like people are to an RTA. I think I may be able to do some good but I should know better. I do hope I have given some people food for thought though. :D |
|
14 Jun 08 - 01:53 AM (#2365644) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford It is just a discussion Dave. Most people like to exchange views on important subjects. Opponents, you have tried shouting me down and discrediting me. Now try debating. Notice how I put my case objectively, and supported it with quotes from an IRA commander, from NICRA, with voting statistics and, when challenged that I had never addressed an issue, with old posts to show I had. It is as if you are not used to your beliefs being challenged. Perhaps, where you come from, that was not a healthy thing to do. Try something like this: Keith, I think you are wrong because.... or: Keith, a major flaw in your argument is... or: I believe that IRA was a force for good because... |
|
14 Jun 08 - 07:08 AM (#2365726) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,Observer Keith A. Your government authorized many a military incursion into my country to murder and capture Northern republicans. They knew it would not trigger immediate military action and often said, "Opps sorry". Do you not consider these incursions across the border were violating the sovereignty of another country and against international laws and treaties ? As for your remarks that there was a better way to deal with the problem than an armed campaign, rubbish. |
|
14 Jun 08 - 07:25 AM (#2365735) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford "rubbish" You have not quite got the hang of this debating thing have you. My opinion is identical to that of NICRA and SDLP which, during the armed campaign, had between them the support of an overwhelming majority of the Nationalist people of Northern Ireland. Re cross border incursions, I remember one incident where an SAS team was arrested in the Republic. They claimed to be lost.I agree that is suspicious. I really am not aware of "many a military incursion into my country to murder and capture Northern republicans." Please supply evidence. IRA units from the Republic regularly and routinely carried out incursions into the North though didn't they? |
|
15 Jun 08 - 02:18 PM (#2366411) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: ard mhacha Worth a read Keith, Magill, September 2002: The Truth Trickles Out Mystery has always surrounded the 1974 Dublin and Monaghan bombings. An independent inquiry has been set up to look at the events surrounding the attacks, and the bombing of Dundalk the following year. Donall O Maolfabhail reports on its likely findings. Earlier this summer, a BBC Panorama programme produced new evidence suggesting that British military intelligence colluded with loyalist paramilitaries in murdering a significant number of people in Northern Ireland. Over the last three years, an independent inquiry established by the Irish government has been investigating whether British military intelligence colluded in the murder of citizens of this state also. This inquiry - headed by Judge Barron - is expected to publish its report later this autumn. The findings of Barron's report are likely to put the government under intense pressure to set up a full judicial inquiry, similar to the Saville inquiry into Bloody Sunday, to ascertain the whole truth about these matters. There has long been a suspicion that British military intelligence, as part of its war against the IRA, either directly engaged in carrying out a number of bombings and assassinations in the Republic of Ireland, or at least colluded with loyalists in so doing. According to this analysis, the assassinations were aimed at eliminating key republican figures, while the bombings were psychological operations aimed at putting pressure on the southern establishment to adopt more repressive measures. The Barron inquiry, formerly known as the Hamilton inquiry, was set up in 1999 at the behest of Justice for the Forgotten - the organisation which represents the families of the victims of the Dublin and Monaghan bombings. On the day of the bombings in 1974, 33 people lost their lives and many more were injured. The bombing of Dundalk, which took place in December 1975, and in which two people were killed, was also added to Barron's terms of reference. The powers of the Barron inquiry are quite limited, however. It does not have the power to subpoena and so is entirely dependent on voluntary co-operation. It appears that the judge has received co-operation from the Garda and the PSNI, with the exception of Special Branch. But on 24 April last, the Taoiseach stated that "the material [that] came from the British files, in actual fact, that was limited enough." This situation has since improved to some degree, but the judge is still thought to be dissatisfied with the level of co-operation from the British security services. For all that, Magill understands that the inquiry has obtained strong new evidence that would indicate at least a willingness on the part of certain sections of the British military to engage in grave undercover actions. A security memo for the British government in 1971 - now in the hands of the Barron inquiry - points out that the IRA is operating at a very high level of intensity and that the border is practically open. It states that in order for Britain to gain full control of the border, an additional 18 to 29 battalions would be required. This would mean withdrawing troops from other parts of the world, which would be embarrassing for Britain within NATO. The memo therefore outlines three other options as to how the British Army should proceed. The best of these is felt to be the final one - that existing restraints on the operations of British forces should be removed. This, the memo states, would include an intensification of border operations. Any cross-border actions would have come under the heading of border operations. The first car bomb south of the border that was attributed to loyalists exploded on 13 May 1972, six months later. There was one fatality. In fact, almost half of the fatal loyalist car bombs that occurred in the 70s happened between May 1972 and January 1973. It is worth noting that during the same period Chief of Staff Major General Thomas O'Carroll of the Irish Army sent a memo to the then Minister for Defence, Gerry Cronin, stating that dealing with the possibility of "incursions into the Republic by organised security forces or partisan (i.e. loyalist) elements from Northern Ireland.... would require an increase in military strength and more border patrols." The bombs that went off in Dublin and Monaghan in 1974 were among the worst atrocities of the Troubles. Yet confusion has always reigned over who was responsible for them. David Ervine, one-time UVF member and now leader of the PUP, stated to BBC journalist Peter Taylor some years ago that the UVF was responsible for the bombings. Submissions made to the Barron inquiry by well-placed sources and seen by Magill would seem to confirm that both UVF and UDA members were involved. However, Magill has also learned that a former senior member of the British Army, who was serving in Northern Ireland at the time, has told Judge Barron that he believes loyalists could not have carried out the Dublin and Monaghan bombings on their own. Rather, he believes it was a sophisticated effort by the British military. The circumstances of the 1974 attack, and the bomb technology used, meant that allegations of collusion were made long before the Barron inquiry began its work. It is understood that a British soldier, who was on duty not far from the border on the night of the bombings, has told the Barron inquiry that his unit got no instructions to take any action that night. The normal course of action after such an incident would be that NI Army Command HQ would instruct all brigade headquarters to seal the border. As far as technology goes, Captain Fred Holroyd, who was stationed in Portadown in 1974, has stated that "loyalists mainly used Double Diamond kegs, beer kegs filled with explosives with a black powder fuse. They were pretty primitive" Lieutenant Colonel George Styles, formerly head of the British Army's bomb disposal network worldwide, and who served in Northern Ireland from 1969-72, concurs with this view. "I don't think they were at a level that would equate to the sort of techniques that were used here in Dublin." This view has also been supported by Commandant Patrick Trears, who in 1974 was the Irish Army's main bomb disposal expert, and by former Garda Commissioner Eamon Doherty. Allegations of collusion have long hung over other incidents being investigated by Barron. In December 1972, two bombs exploded in Dublin. Two months later, it emerged that Garda Special Branch had information that connected two men who stayed in the Belgravia Hotel in Belfast with the bombings. Both men used false passports and are still wanted in the Republic in connection with the bombings. There were other incidents where British military collusion was suspected. On 1 May 1976, a Co Louth man, Seamus Ludlow, was found shot dead at Culmore, near Dundalk. Ludlow is understood to have resembled a senior republican living in the town. James Sharkey, a relative of Ludlow's, now claims he has been told by the RUC that two of his killers were UDR men, but since the crime happened in the Republic, it is up to the Garda to pursue them. John Francis Greene, a top IRA commander from North Armagh, was killed on a farm outside Castleblaney in Co Monaghan on 10 January 1975. At the time the IRA was on ceasefire. Ruairi Ó Brádaigh, then leader of Sinn Fein, claims that this assassination had a huge bearing on the breakdown of that ceasefire six days later. Raymond Murray, author of The SAS in Ireland believes "that MI5 did not like this truce, as it thought the IRA was using it as a shield to regroup, and they arranged to kill Greene." It wasn't until two months later, on 18 March, that the UVF claimed responsibility for the murder. But in 1999, John Weir, a former RUC officer, named a member of the UDR along with loyalist paramilitaries including Robin 'The Jackal' Jackson as being behind the murder. Speaking to the Dail on 24 April last, the Taoiseach stated that the Barron Report would, when completed, be submitted to the Joint Committee on Justice, Equality, Defence and Women's Rights. It will be for the members of that committee to then determine whether a more comprehensive inquiry should be set up - the terms of reference of the Barron inquiry do not allow Judge Barron to recommend a public inquiry. Magill understands that the finished report will at least allude to the identities of the various loyalists suspected of involvement in the Dublin and Monaghan bombings. It is also expected to be fairly critical of both the Garda and the RUC. As for the final issue of a British military role in the bombings, Barron is unlikely to be conclusive. However, according to the Taoiseach, the judge will "assess and comment in his report on the co-operation he has received from the various authorities with which he has been in contact." In the case of the so far limited co-operation received from the British, Judge Barron is expected not to shy away from drawing adverse inferences. Magill understands that his comments in this regard alone might well be enough to persuade the committee to support the setting-up of a full judicial inquiry. If British military intelligence did collude in the murder of citizens of this state, one can rest assured that there are a significant number of people who will be anxious for the truth never to see the light of day. They may yet be disappointed |
|
15 Jun 08 - 04:04 PM (#2366446) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Dave the Gnome And does the collusion of British Intelligence in these bombings make the bombings, by all parties, in which there was no such collusion any better, Ard Mhacha? Does it bring any of the victims back? Does it make anyone feel any better? Just wondering. Dave. |
|
15 Jun 08 - 05:05 PM (#2366482) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford There is also evidence of collusion between IRA and Gardai. Any and all collusion between authorities and paramilitaries was very wrong. |
|
15 Jun 08 - 05:51 PM (#2366507) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,Mike S. Someone clever once said that the first casualty in any war is the truth. Anyway, I blame the Normans for it all.. Mike |
|
16 Jun 08 - 02:48 AM (#2366699) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Dave the Gnome What's poor old Norman done to deserve that? :D |
|
16 Jun 08 - 03:34 AM (#2366721) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford I took the view earlier that this discussion was about Bobby Sands and the cause he devoted and gave his life for. How does the subject of collusion impact on that discussion? He said and wrote much, but I find no mention of it. I have argued that the IRA campaign was unnecessary and counter productive the the Nationalists' aims and aspirations. I would argue that collusion was just another of the evils that flowed in its wake. |
|
16 Jun 08 - 07:14 AM (#2366819) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle well maybe the time has come to accept that these blokes disagree with you, keith. Nothing much you can do about it. they disagree. You got your opinion - they got theirs. Obviously the facts bear a different interpretation - because they have interpreted them differently. i really don't think this comes down to them being unacquainted with the facts. they just see them differently. |
|
16 Jun 08 - 08:02 AM (#2366848) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford There would be no point discussing if we all agreed with each other. Reading the strongly held views of others challenges us to question our own beliefs. |
|
16 Jun 08 - 01:25 PM (#2367054) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,Observer During the war up North the British media poured out anti republican shite on a daily basis. Seems Keith A carries on their tradition here. |
|
16 Jun 08 - 02:21 PM (#2367105) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Big Al Whittle takes one to know one, they say........ |
|
16 Jun 08 - 02:28 PM (#2367113) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Observer, you can not specify any particular shite, or say why it is shite, or correct the shite. What is the point of your "contribution" Observer? Just shite. |
|
16 Jun 08 - 04:20 PM (#2367262) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Observer, here is a positive contribution you can make. You say you live in the Republic. Presumably you vote Sinn Fein. Why do the rest of your countrymen refuse to? Why is every election in the Republic a disaster for Sinn Fein? Give us your observations. |
|
17 Jun 08 - 04:32 AM (#2367609) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Dave the Gnome I must say, Observer, that I do tend to agree with Keith on this one. Just saying that something is shite does not make it true. I have not spotted anything particularly anti-republican in Keiths posts on this thread. Anti war, yes. Anti violence, yes. Anti republican, Hmmm? Not convinced. Are there any such examples? As to the other question. Can I hazzard a guess that Sinn Fein want a united Ireland? Maybe that answers the question as to why they are not well supported in the South? Who in their right minds would want to take on the hot potato that is currently Northern Ireland? Cheers Dave |
|
17 Jun 08 - 07:38 AM (#2367708) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,Observer No I don´t vote Sinn Fein,I am a member of Republican Sinn Fein. Keith A. supported the role of the British army in the North of Ireland and in doing so supported their murderous campaign against the nationalist people. go maith go mbeidh deacrachtaí romhainn ins an obair seo ar fad agus glacaimid na cúraimí seo orainn le dóchas go mbeidh muintir na hÉireann fial lena gcúnamh mar a bhí i gcónaí. |
|
17 Jun 08 - 08:01 AM (#2367718) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Organisation Total Killings Protestant Catholic Not from NI IRA 1696 (49%) 790 338 568 British Army 299 (9%) 32 258 9 INLA 110 (3%) 55 33 22 Official IRA 51 7 24 20 The British Army's "murderous campaign against the nationalist people." killed fewer Catholics than your lot did. And most of those killed by the army were activists. Most killed by your lot were uninvolved civillians. |
|
17 Jun 08 - 08:14 AM (#2367725) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Sorry if the table is not very clear. In brief. Catholics killed by army 258 Catholics killed by Republican paramilitaries 395 |
|
18 Jun 08 - 04:15 AM (#2368516) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford This post shows the army to be responsible for the deaths of less than 80 people who were non combatant or not engaged in crime, irrespective of religeon. thread.cfm?threadid=91818&messages=457#1754202 Scroll up from the post to see the impeccable source of the data. Republican paramilitaries were therefor responsible for the deaths of more than FIVE TIMES as many innocent Catholic men, women and children. But, there were about 20 soldiers to every one volunteer. So,the average volunteer was ONE HUNDRED TIMES as guilty as the average soldier. |
|
18 Jun 08 - 06:52 AM (#2368608) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,Observer Defence of British army murder of the innocent in the North of Ireland courtesy of one eyed Keith A. |
|
18 Jun 08 - 07:06 AM (#2368614) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford I do not, and never have defended it. Just adding perspective. I would not even go as far as Mairead Corrigan and Betty Williams, who said,"We do not equate the vicious and determined terrorism of the republican and loyalist paramilitary organisations with the occasional instances when members of the security forces may have stepped beyond the rule of law." (Nationalist founders of the Peace movement. 20,000 demonstrating in support in Belfast and same in Dublin even before protestants began to join.) |
|
18 Jun 08 - 07:22 AM (#2368622) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,Observer Williams and Corrigan resigned their positions in the peace movement two years after they formed it.There is still a lot of anger at the fact they both received a healthy handshake with their award. They promised they would put ALL the money into their Communities (it never happened, neither community they came from received a brass penny from either women). By 1980 they had become estranged,slagging eachother off in public. In 1982 Williams divorced her husband of many years after a string of affairs and married a wealthy younger man and moved to Florida in the United States.She said she would never return to Ireland (a lot wished she would). Fine examples Keith A. You really know how to source your facts ! |
|
18 Jun 08 - 07:36 AM (#2368636) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford You should try to counter the ARGUMENT, not smear the person. You have done the same with my arguments throughout. Ignored them and tried to discredit me instead. |
|
18 Jun 08 - 07:44 AM (#2368645) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford They were just ordinary, flawed folk who found themselves caught up in events. They never asked for it, and in the end were overwhelmed by it all. As I said, their arguments had huge support from the Nationalist people. You should say why those thousands of people were wrong, and why they should have followed the likes of you instead. |
|
18 Jun 08 - 07:46 AM (#2368648) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,Giveitarest At least there's one thing you do have in common.......You're a pair of bollocks!! |
|
18 Jun 08 - 08:27 AM (#2368695) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Consider also the Republican group, Belfast Citizen's Defence Committee. They had 50,000 people sign a "call for peace", and hoped that the Provisionals would respect the wishes of the people and stop bombing and shooting. (1972) |
|
18 Jun 08 - 08:36 AM (#2368706) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Jean(eanjay) another festival prize win Taken from the above link: His winning film is a visually striking drama about the intense conflict between guards and IRA prisoners, which led to the death of a hunger striker, Bobby Sands, in 1981. A jury headed by the Australian director Gillian Armstrong chose Hunger as winner of the 12-film competition that has run at the festival over the past 12 days. The film's producer, Laura Hastings-Smith, accepted the trophy, which is affectionately dubbed the Blue Pavlova. Armstrong said the jury's decision was unanimous. "Hunger was selected for its controlled clarity of vision, its extraordinary detail and bravery, the dedication of its cast and the power and resonance of its humanity," she said. |
|
18 Jun 08 - 09:11 AM (#2368745) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Jean(eanjay) Perhaps I should have indicated that it was the Sydney Film Festival's first international competition that the film won last night just in case people don't want to be bothered with the link. |
|
18 Jun 08 - 06:24 PM (#2369343) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: RobbieWilson 437 posts. Has anyone here seen the film yet? |
|
19 Jun 08 - 04:04 AM (#2369622) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Jean(eanjay) I haven't, but it is going to be shown on channel 4 later this year so I'll watch it then. |
|
02 Sep 08 - 10:03 AM (#2428711) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Jean(eanjay) Gucci Group award |
|
26 Sep 08 - 02:48 PM (#2451061) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,Cannes the can If you're eager to see the film "Hunger" which tells the story of Bobby Sands and the 1981 Hunger-strike your in for something of a disappointment. Although the level of acting is excellent, the film lacks dialect and the long spells of silence is boring (five minutes spent watching a spider walking around the actors finger). Popcorn and matchsticks for the eyelids for this one. |
|
26 Sep 08 - 04:06 PM (#2451106) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,Cannes the can Even dialogue ! Sorry. |
|
27 Sep 08 - 08:41 AM (#2451487) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: goatfell |
|
29 Sep 08 - 01:03 PM (#2452992) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Jean(eanjay) The film is due for release on 31 October. There is a link to the trailer here . Popcorn and matchsticks for the eyelids for this one. Love it, made me smile but it won't put me off watching :-) |
|
16 Oct 08 - 03:54 PM (#2467604) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Den I watched the film the other night. I felt that it fit very well with my perceptions of the Maize/Long Kesh at the time. As for the boredom comment. Isn't that really a moot point. I think that's what McQueen was trying to get across. Can you imagine what it was like trapped in a 4 x 6 concrete room for 24 hours a day? The brutality portrayed in the movie was very much in keeping with what I'd heard from people who had actually been there. Anyway check it out at the end of the month. It opens in Belfast this weekend...that should be interesting. |
|
28 Oct 08 - 01:32 PM (#2478292) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Jean(eanjay) I haven't seen it yet but am still determined although I will find the brutality hard to watch. It has 7 nominations at the British Independent Film Awards. |
|
28 Oct 08 - 04:13 PM (#2478449) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford Welcome back to thread Den. You were saying.... (me) What are your sources for that Den? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post - Top - Forum Home - Printer Friendly - Translate -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Den - PM Date: 06 Jun 08 - 09:16 AM Fear is a great motivator. Sources? Brian Nelson? You're kidding right? Just google Brian Nelson British agent, should be enlightening. Or Force Reconnaissance Unit, Gordon Kerr. In fact there was a great Panorama programme about this not too long ago. Did you see it? I didn't unfortunately but I have the transcript, made for some very depressing reading. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post - Top - Forum Home - Printer Friendly - Translate -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Den - PM Date: 06 Jun 08 - 09:24 AM Gotta get back to work here will check back this evening. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post - Top - Forum Home - Printer Friendly - Translate -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford - PM Date: 06 Jun 08 - 09:34 AM I will try that Den. And if there is nothing about targetting individual voters, you will retract right? |
|
28 Oct 08 - 05:46 PM (#2478537) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,fredbert Bobby Sands died to perpetuate murder, he committed suicide by starving in the belief that others would come onto the streets of N.Ireland and carry on his terrorists organisation murders. His brother in-law has been named as the leader of the RIRA, who insistently try to murder people in Ireland, that is the legacy of Sands,he was really committed in his quest for death. The film was pure propaganda and I say that using the dictionary definition, that is 1. Information that is spread for the purpose of promoting some cause. When we see the prison officer being brutally murdered in front of innocent people including his mother who was covered in her sons blood, there was no pause for thought for the victim or the bystanders. When Gandhi went on hunger strike he did so to end violence Sands done it to perpetuate it. Hardly a hero figure. |
|
14 Dec 08 - 04:52 PM (#2515223) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: GUEST,jjjjjjem i saw that movie a few days ago, it was the most boring load of crap i have ever seen. bobby sands got what he deserved, a slow and painfull death |
|
02 May 09 - 05:46 AM (#2623050) Subject: RE: BS: Bobby Sands hunger strike film From: Keith A of Hertford A new film about the troubles may be of interest. 5o Dead Men Walking about Martin McCartland. http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/film/article5982359.ece |