Bobby Sands

Subject: RE: Bobby Sands
From: Big Mick
Date: 04 Jan 00 - 04:16 PM

Dave, once again I would point out that I really enjoy the way you argue your points. I had wanted to let this one run its course which is why I have tried to stay back and read the fascinating dialogue between yourself and Larry. But I am going to take issue with you on one point. The Mudcat is exactly the place to discuss politics. Those that would leave politics out of a folk music discussion forum would doom us to a very sterile version of music. A very large percentage of folk music is of the protest or "commentary" type. Music has been used from the beginning to make political statements. Woody Gutherie's "This Land" was written as a protest against Irving Berlin's music. This is exactly the right place to discuss this type of thing. We don't subject those that choose not to be involved to our arguments, and we get very informed discussion as this thread proves. Imagine if Sean Tyrell with his "12th of July" or Tommy Sands with his "There Were Roses" felt as though politics shouldn't be part of the discussion. Make folks uncomfortable??.............I say "Good!!" . Then we are accomplishing something. We are making ourselves and others who choose to take part examine their own notions. That is a good thing in my estimation.

All the Best,

Mick

Subject: RE: Bobby Sands
From: Blackcat2
Date: 04 Jan 00 - 04:25 PM

This from a post a couple ones up: "The ROI has dropped its offensive and immoral claim on NI"

Little has bothered me on the idea of people's opinions but this does.

Does this presuppose that God gave the U.K. the right to invade, usurp and populate N.I. and that everyone should shut up and leave them alone?

I'm not saying that the ROI HAS a right to claim N.I. - I'm just saying that their claim is not all that unreasonable. and it is an insult to the intelligence of the Irish people to say such a thing. With people using such inflamatory language it is a wonder that the peace process has progressed at all.

Subject: RE: Bobby Sands
From: Hasek
Date: 04 Jan 00 - 04:39 PM

Music with out politics ( in my own opinion and song writing and performances ) lacks a strong ingredient. In my life the song represents the struggle and the voice is the tool to let it be heard !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Mike Strobel

Subject: RE: Bobby Sands
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 04 Jan 00 - 04:53 PM

I am more pressed for time so this will be short. I am going to have to come back to the central issue - what did Sands achieve, and was he hero or villain, soon.

But right now I do want to say that having thought quite a lot about it while driving back and forth to visit my wife in hospital over the last few days (funny how the human mind turns things over while apparently doing something else), I do feel that this thread is more than just another BS thread. Like disco music in pop and rock, Irish music has come to occupy a huge part of the stage of folk music. We should try to understand the songs we sing. We should even try to understand the songs we don't sing (and I don't sing many Irish songs, partly because I don't agree with many of them, and partly because I could understand the rage of an Irishman who found an Englishman born into the upper middle classes occupying not just his homeland but also his music. So, although the impish glee of "the Old Alarm Clock" makes it an attractive song, I avoid it. Comparably I would never sing "Champion he was a dandy (a/k/a the twenty pound dog)". I abhor dog-fighting.

So it is important to folk music to get to grips with it. And because of the importance of Irish folk music to folk music generally (a flute and whistle player I know, who although an upper-middle class Englishman also owns a cafe in the West of the ROI once infuriated an Irishman who objected to him, an Englishman, playing Irish tunes by riposting that Irish music was too important to be left to the Irish) it is important for all folkers to understand the English conquest of Ireland and its consequences. Some songs we may sing as a result. I certainly am not afraid to play (I have not the tenor to sing) "Young Ned of the Hill". If I were good enough I could do "the Praties they were small". I do not support the Cromwellian occupation or the boycott.

So this thread is important to the music, and so it has a place here.

Subject: RE: Bobby Sands
From: InOBU
Date: 04 Jan 00 - 05:22 PM

Dear Richard: My band will be ariving for a rehearsal in a few moments, so I will be very brief. First and most important, you and your wife have my wife and my best wishes and prayers for her quick recovery. I hope it is nothing serrious.
As to Liam Devlin and his accusing Bill of being anti governemnt and a biggot... I have to answer that. Bill was a Captain in the US Marine core and almost lost his arm, and in fact his life, fighting off an attack by a Japanese soldier who was armed with a bayonett while Bill was unarmed. He expressed his hopes and love for his country the way a good parent does for a child, by challenging that child to be better, as should every citizen. While on an airplane once, he was simmalarly verbally attacked, and an older gentleman rose to his defence, and asked him to change his seat and sit next to him. It was one of the conceservative Supreme Court judges - which one I forget. Bill did more for his country than many of us ever will have an opportunity to have done, if only to be a voice for those who the majority sees as pariahs. Those who knew Bill, and I expect more than a few who read this did, as he was a great fan of traditional music - know that as he walked the streets strangers from those racialised and hated groups would come up to him and recieve the Kunstler bear hug. His was a legacy of love in the face of hate.
For those who complain that this particular post has grown too long, I am ending with my e-mail address for Richard, and any others who have spesific points on this all.
Got to run, Again, Bet well soon Mrs. Bridge.
Larry Otway [e-mail]

Subject: RE: Bobby Sands
From: Rick Fielding
Date: 04 Jan 00 - 05:55 PM

For anyone who appreciates impassioned and articulate (for the most part) writing, this has been a fascinating thread. Thank you for having the nerve to keep it alive. I've learned a great deal by listening to both (all) sides

Rick

Subject: RE: Bobby Sands
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 04 Jan 00 - 06:21 PM

Blackcat, I respectfully suggest that after almost 400 years it is not the ROI who might have a claim on Northern Ireland, but rather the people of Northenr Ireland.

THe ROI would be an invader.

As would the English if we sought to re-take Calais.

Subject: RE: Bobby Sands
From: JedMarum
Date: 04 Jan 00 - 06:39 PM

Larry - actually I don't doubt Bill Kuntsler's bravery during his military career, nor his good intentions for his country. Maybe my judgemental comments above were a bit harsh. Let me try again, in a more positive light. I think Bill had a 'question authority' attitude, I recognize this in him, since I have a 'question all' attitude myself.

I mean Bill no ill-will. I know he did good for our country, as well. It may be that his public persona was harder and more bitter the real man, and that public persona is what my comments were based on. So I would ammend my comments to say that it appeared to me that Bill's relentless pursuit of anti-authority issues made me suspect they were based upon personal bitterness, rather than altruism. I could be wrong. I hope I am. Maybe ... I was playing the devil's advocate myself, just a bit ....

Anyway to all, this has been a good thread. Deep, thought provocing and, frankly, deeply disturbing. I thank all for your thoughts. I wish we had solved something here, but I know we can't ... still I walk away with a deeper understanding ... and I still pray that all of this discussion was academic because the pending and promising peace takes root.

Subject: RE: Bobby Sands
From: Brendy
Date: 04 Jan 00 - 08:01 PM

And Richard I would respectfullly suggest that it is the Irish, no matter what their religion, are the only ones who have a claim on Ireland.
A good part of a lot of the 'anti - Irish' point of view in this thread pre-supposes that it is England (The United Kingdom is a perverse description, long outdated, and no longer relevant) who has the claim on us.
This is exactly the conditioning that I am talking about. And attitudes have to change in that department, where people stop thinking and acting superior to others as if it was theirs by Divine Right.
Was Bobby Sands a terrorist?
If he was, England made him that way.
B.

Subject: RE: Bobby Sands
From: remi from Paris
Date: 04 Jan 00 - 09:38 PM

An answer to Phil Hatton : In 98' I heard a song in the podoir O'Donnell in derry that was -they said- written by Bobby Sands. Can't remember the title. A line said :

but you gave your sons and daughters the sense of liberty

all I can do for you...

Subject: RE: Bobby Sands
From: InOBU
Date: 04 Jan 00 - 11:22 PM

CITATION: 599 F. Supp. 270 Here is the cite and a few quotes from Doherty v US. If anyone wants the whole case, e-mail me at [e-mail]
Sorry for the delay
IN THE MATTER OF THE REQUESTED EXTRADITION OF JOSEPH PATRICK THOMAS DOHERTY BY THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND

No. 83 Cr. Misc. 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

599 F. Supp. 270; 1984 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21294

December 12, 1984

The Court is not unmindful of the fact that it would be most unwise as a matter of policy to extend the benefit of the political offense exception to every fanatic group or individual with loosely defined political objectives who commit acts of violence in the name of those so called political objectives. Therefore it is proper for the Court to consider the nature of an organization, its structure, and its mode of internal discipline, in deciding whether the act of its members can constitute political conduct under an appropriate interpretation of the Treaty.

However, the PIRA, as the evidence showed, while it may be a radical offshoot of the traditional Irish Republican Army, has both an organization, discipline, and command structure that distinguishes it from more amorphous groups such as the Black Liberation Army or the Red Brigade. Indeed, as the testimony established, its discipline and command structure operates even after its members are imprisoned [**16] and indeed, as Doherty testified, it was at the direction of the PIRA that he escaped and then came to the United States. See Tr. at 650-73, 830; see also In Re Mackin, supra, 80 Cr.Misc. 1 at 78-80. ....
n2 While the Court is not persuaded that the methods and objectives of the PIRA are in fact shared by a majority of the people in Ireland, or indeed by a majority of the Catholics in Northern Ireland, that circumstance is not dispositive of the issue of whether respondent, as a member of that group, is entitled to rely upon the political offense exception to the Treaty. Indeed, at the time of the American Revolution, there were a large number of colonists who not only desired a continued union with England, but regarded the thought of armed opposition to the Crown as both treasonous and abhorrent. See, e.g., J. R. Alden, The American Revolution 1775-1783 (1954); S. E. Morison, The Oxford History of the American People (1905); C. H. Van Tyne, Loyalists in American Revolution (1902). Many loyalists suffered the consequences of these beliefs both before and after independence. Given the nature of that history it would indeed be anomalous for an American court to conclude that the absence of a political consensus for armed resistance in itself deprives such resistance of its political character. ...
In sum, the Court concludes for the reasons given that respondent's participation in the military ambush which resulted in Captain Westmacott's death was an offense political in character. The Court further concludes that his escape from Crumlin Road prison, organized and planned as the evidence established that it was, under the direction of the PIRA and to effect its purposes rather than those of Doherty himself, was also political. That conduct and all of the various and sundry charges which are connected therewith and for which extradition is sought are not extraditable offenses under Article V(1)(c)(i) of the Treaty. n7 The request for extradition is therefore denied.
All the best wishes
Larry

Subject: RE: Bobby Sands
From: InOBU
Date: 04 Jan 00 - 11:29 PM

Liam, :
I know you have no ill wishes for Bill, and if you did, it is too late, as he is above us all, looking down, and chuckling. There was a particularly mean spirited heckler at his funeral, who, I found, was very abusive about Bill as a supporter of draft resisters, though he had himself never been in uniform , of a varity of other issues, and worst of all was screaming at those of us who filled St. Johns Cathedral to burry Bill. I finaly said to him that it was actualy good Bill died before the fellow heckling did, and he asked why, I told him Bill would argue his case in case his eternal sentence was not so much the upper lodgings as the lower ones...
Bill had thick skin, as all of us who confront the tyrony of governments in all the nations we love.
Thanks for the interest in this post, Liam, and good new year.
Larry

Subject: RE: Bobby Sands
From: Ringer
Date: 05 Jan 00 - 05:32 AM

Brendy: I repeat that you can't discount any argument on the grounds that the person making that argument is conditioned. He merely has to reply that you are only saying that because you are conditioned, and that's not just the end of that argument, but the end of all argument. Unless argument/discussion is based on the respective merits of the different points of view, then we all might as well pack up and go home.

That our points of view are determined by, amongs other things, our conditioning, is a completely different matter and is not one that I reject.

Subject: RE: Bobby Sands
From: GeorgeH
Date: 05 Jan 00 - 01:04 PM

Can I propose a new prefix for Mudcat? A suitable abbreviation for "Republican Propaganda", please. Because so much of what appears as reasoned argument in this thread (no, I've not read every article here) is, in fact, propagandist. Mainly by selection of facts, but also by lack of context. To take just a couple of points from the tale of this thread:

US court rulings reflect the reality of US society, where the Irish ex-pats are a significant influence; whatever the US court may claim it perfectly possible to argue that its distinction between the PIRA and the Red Brigades is a bogus convenience for pandering to the political realities of the USA. (Actually, I accept the political motivation of the IRA and - as a non-lawyer - would expect this to invalidate extradition under many such agreements. But would say the same arguments apply to the Red Brigades.)

Even if we accept Ireland as the "Land of the Irish" (whoever they may be) rather than an extension of England, that does nothing to legitimise the IRA or their political aims.

And - to return to an early comment which particularly irritated - only the lunatic fringe of the terrorists' supporters have ever claimed they should be regarded as Prisoners of War . . Within the frameworks which recognise the concept of Prisoners of War there's never been a war in Ireland - though it suited the British to so describe the so-called "civil war" between the Free-State and the Republicans, as doing so allowed them to wash their hands of the "semi-judicial" murders of Republicans by the Free State.

Yes, the British have screwed up just about everything they've done on/in Ireland, for as far back as you care to go. However that OF ITSELF does not in any way LEGITIMISE either the actions or the objectives of the PIRA.

But there is simply too much misunderstanding (of facts, and of background) and downright nonsense in this thread - from so many different angles - to even begin to deal with it. However, to return to the original post; whatever else, Bobby Sands was a man of remarkable courage, and his self-sacrifice did have a significant effect (but remember the Hunger Strikes were a characteristic of both the Republican and the Loyalist prisoners/internees.

G.

Subject: RE: Bobby Sands
From: Hasek
Date: 05 Jan 00 - 01:14 PM

Dear G. Your last sentence was and is the only part of your post , I agree with. Please read all OF THE POSTS TO THIS THREAD in an effort to understand all issues and view points. It's a remarkable thread !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Mike Strobel

Subject: RE: Bobby Sands
From: InOBU
Date: 05 Jan 00 - 01:40 PM

Hi GeorgeH:
Good to see you back! US courts,are a nuetral environemnt, wherein the government of GB made its best arguement the IRA Vol. Joe Doherty was a member of a terrorist group, and therefore extradictable. A judge who is much more concervitive than I will ever be, listened to months of testimony and read boxes of submitted materials, and ruled as he did in the post above. To say that this is an examination of Republican Propaganda hardly justifies comment. I dont think that United States Federal District Court Judges, appointed by the President of the United States and ratified by the Congress of the United States to a possition of life long tenure are often - if ever - advocates of radical politics. To show that he ruled against his inculturation, he made a quip to several of us, durring another case, after a piece of reporting from the NY Times, that we should be happy that particular incident did not happen before the Doherty case, and in that comment we see the difference between wieghing all the facts in court and what we read in the news. However, a good judge, studies the facts presented uncolored by the less than careful reporting of the news (especially when reporting on Ireland often comes through the coloring of British Intellegence, as is attested to by British Intellegnce member retired, Frank Holroyd).
As always good to hear from you, in the New Year.
All the best
Larry

Subject: RE: Bobby Sands
From: JedMarum
Date: 05 Jan 00 - 01:52 PM

chuckle ... the thread that wouldn't die!

Subject: RE: Bobby Sands
From: InOBU
Date: 05 Jan 00 - 05:07 PM

Liam
If old Bill were here, he would answer the tread that woulnd t die, with, - like the light of truth and freedom.
By the way, are you related to the Pavee Devlins - as in Bernadette? Some great musicians there!
Slan go foil
Larry

Subject: RE: Bobby Sands
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Sep 04 - 07:07 AM

I may not be Irish but I believe that Bobby Sands is not a terrorist.According to my opinion terrorists are all those who provoke and give birth to the so called "terrorists".In this case if the British hadn't caused that much pain and sorrow in the Ulster area we would'nt have all these incidents.Why doesn't anyone call
George Bush or Donald Rumsfeld terrorists?

Subject: RE: Bobby Sands
From: GUEST,Nick O'Neil
Date: 20 Mar 11 - 05:53 PM

As one who lost a nephew Jonathan Ball (age 3) to a bomb placed by these murderous thugs that you call "soldiers," in a Belfast market bombing, let me tell you that those imprisoned in the Maze were killers of 2,000 innocent men, women and children in an attempt - not to unite Ireland - but to impose a Marxist government on it (as in the Sinn Fein manifesto.) My little nephew was toddling on his little chubby legs to buy a Mother's Day card for my sister. Along with other children, he was blown apart. In a similar outrage in Warrington, the IRA set a bomb in a trash can outside a favorite kids' eatery, and a second one timed to catch those fleeing the first - more dead kids and innocent women and men.

The Czech Semtex used in IRA bombs came from Libya, bought by money collected in Irish-Amereican pubs, bars and clubs in the New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Chicago etc. Michael Hensall, Bishop of Warrington, said: "Pictures should be sent to America and people there told 'this is what some of you are funding. Look at it. See what you have done.'"

So don't give me your rubbish about how the IRA represent the Republic of Ireland. They have been illegal from the very formation of the Republic in 1922. Eamon deValera, no lover of Britain, used to hang IRA members as enemies of the state (ironically, he used the official British hangman!) Every single Irish Prime Minister has condemned the IRA, and the majority of Irish regard them as thugs, murderers and Mafiosi. Most of them are not even Irish; they are from the six counties that form Northern Ireland, recognized by every country on earth as part of the United Kingdom.

The prisoners in the Maze were not "political prisoners" - men imprisoned for their political beliefs - they were there because they committed murder, arson, torture and maiming, and witness intimidation - violent offenses illegal in any civilized country. As common prisoners they were required to wear prison clothing during the day, but WERE ALLOWED TO WEAR THEIR OWN CIVILIAN CLOTHING AFTER WORK HOURS, AND DURING THE DAY WHEN RECEIVING VISITORS. They took their case to be treated as "special case" (i.e. political) prisoners to the European Court of Human Rights, which ruled that they did not qualify for any special treatment or classification.

Sands was convicted of several weapons offenses, including possession of a gun used to fire at police. First conviction 1972; five years. On release in 1976 (one year off) he returned to the same criminal activity, being involved in one bombing. Leaving behind two wounded confederates (brave of him) after a gun battle with police, he and three others tried to escape by car, but were cought. His printes were on one of the guns in the car. This time he got 14 years. Some hero.

Example of the other hunger strikers are just as ghastly:

Sean McKenna: 21 offences, including attempted cop killing, kidnapping, hijacking, possession of firearms and explosives, intimidation of witnesses - all in 13 months. April 10, 1972, he and his buddies hijacked a car at gunpoint, shot at a policeman and policewoman, wounding the male. At his triel, he said: "I didn't think I had killed the policeman ... I intended to kill him." But this piece of dirt was just getting warmed up. Ordered to kill a member of the Ulster Volunteer Force in Newry: "We hijacked a car and drove to the house where I thought he lived. I asked the girl for her husband and fired three shots into him. Then we drove to the Border Inn and had a few drinks. I found out that I'd shot the wrong man."

John Nixon: Armed robbery and possession of arms;
Tom McFeeley: Ditto
Tommy McKearney: Murder of a part-time cop;
Raymond McCartney: Murder of DuPont executive Jeffrey Agate and a cop;
Leo Green: Cop killing;
Brendan Hughes: Firearms possession.
And on the list goes. Murder, arson (one was imprisoned for killing an elderly woman in the shop he firebombed). As Sean O'Casey said: "They live to kill and they kill to live."

Want to hear the ultimate irony? The first hunger strike deaths were in 1940, when seven prisoners went on hunger strike IN DUBLIN'S MOUNTJOY PRISON, BECAUSE THE REPUBLIC'S DEVALERA WOULDN'T ACCORD THEM POLITICAL PRISONER STATUS. Two of them, Tony D'Arcy and John McNeela, died after 51 and 54 days, respectively. :)

Subject: RE: Bobby Sands
From: Richie Black (misused acct, bad email)
Date: 20 Mar 11 - 06:00 PM

I see the new crop of "Guests" have arrived on this thread. should be closed as it started out asking a simple music question.

Subject: RE: Bobby Sands
From: GUEST,Alan Whittle
Date: 20 Mar 11 - 09:55 PM

I'm not sure this thread was ever about music. Not the initial post. The intial post seems to be about Bobby Sands and his achievement and how it should be measured.

There seems to be a measure of disagreement about that. Doubt if we'll sort it out here, or change anyone's opinion. I can't see much profit for anyone in sensibilities being outraged by this thread.

We disagree. People have, for a while at least stopped killing each other over these grave matters. I can't see that an outbreak of violent argument and insult (even in the rough and tumble of Mudcat debate) is desirable.

Lets just hope we can put our unfortunate past far behind us.

Subject: RE: Bobby Sands
From: GUEST,Tim O'Neil
Date: 20 Mar 11 - 10:34 PM

Nick sorry for your loss! Might I suggest you read up on your history, particularly the Cromwellian years during the days innocent women and children were butchered seeking refuge inside church walls and the famine years when England attempt the mass extermination of the irish race. I think then you might have a better understanding of who were actually the original perpetrators of the term " terrorists"!

Subject: RE: Bobby Sands
From: ollaimh
Date: 21 Mar 11 - 12:33 AM

ah yes the old right wing crank richard bridges is back obsfucating at his best. if he's a lawyer as suggested i not in cape breton the pronouciation of liar and lawyer are almost identical.

i note he has routinely defended the killing of peacefullcivilians by the british army on bloody sunday but finds it teribel and wothy of condemnation that the ira killed innocent civilians. there's the old bigot not seeing the sauce for the gander and and goose/

i am a pacifist for life, but there is no ethical or moral difference between the ira and the americasn revolutionaries. or the south african freedom fighters under nelson mandela--something mandela siad hinself.

bobby sands may have used tactic i wouldn't but he lived by his principles, and he died by his principles.

therte was a recent documentasry on cbc about the gorta mor--the great hunger. british people who have these thing c3nsored should try to see it on line. it was a clear cut genocide of convience to the welth landowners and their alles. landlords who got thier land through a series of military events over three hundred years disposssing the native population. after ireland the british empire took the show on the road if i may quote gore vidal. they "practiced genocide in ireland then took the show on the road and ended up on the california coast all dressed up for empire and no one left to kill."

there is a great book of essays about the dispossession of natives in north america also called "the dispossed" and a great book of gaelic poetry of the same name"an duanaire" to have an opinion on these things these are must reads. the sstory of the victums of dispossession and the power that ethniclly cleansed them--natives all--is riviting. it is the story of laissez faire capityalism. the story of the neo con "market capitlists" the story of the miltary industrial complex. they are all one powerfull heartless and greed driven movement in history that has driven us to the brink of extinction through enviornmental ignorance and ddestyruction. all one theme that is often ignored.

i point out one more poetic/spiritual connection. to ancient celts, at least in our gaidhlig ledgends in ole cape breton--such as they survive--starvation is a shamefull end. beyond redemption. however there is one exception. to enact permanent dioglais(vengence) on an enemy you can do it by starving yourself to death a the enemy's front gate. then your soul will become a demon that will curse them for eons. i love the symbolism of the starving irish at the front gate of the empire. and the same for bobby sands. starving at the british empires front gate.

as for remining a bit anonymous.well richard i doubt you have been assaulted by other folkies for speaking out about liberation of all peoples --well i have, on native american issues,,balck issues and gealic issues. i am getting old but i have always been prepared to defend my self. and luckily anglos are so cowardly in fisticuffs--in my experience--they will only go through with the threats if they out number you badly, and even then when you attack with vengence and all weapons blazing they run usually.however i try to avoid these situations as mch as possible, so i remain partially anonymous. i however state unequivocally i have been threatned in folk circles in toronto vancouver and london, and these have occasionally required me to throw a bar table into a crowd of anglos redneck to get out the door!!!!

i did thaqt in sasketchewan once as welll--that's another story i will tell one day

again i quote a black poets paraphrse--by an old busking bud in new york from back decades

" they don't come by ones, they ddon't come by threes they come by tens, they don't talk by ones they don't talk by threes they talk in hundreds, they don't kill by ones they they don't kill by tens they kill by thousands thousands and thousands"

so i try not to have to fight anymore than i have to. i was young when the esstern solicist alliance went campaigning for the organization of the nova scotia fishermens unon--we had to fight the best we could because the enemy was preparted to use violence and had state support for that violence. in a protest some of my georgian busker pals from decades ago got me into we had to fight the rednecks.and many irish have had to fight the abuse of violence supported by the state. in t he case of blody sunday openly supported by the military the courts and all levels of society for thrity years.however if i don't have to fight i don't, even if the threatning assholes are obvious chirpers who will back down if confronted. and i actually only had to duke it out a half dozen times in my wanderings. a good mad man agrtessive stance will get you out of most shit--and we highland wscotts are real goos at the madman agressive stance--people tell me i am terrifying when i start my conyrolled scream. so i like to lay low because the people who arte poassive ifots and the agressively violent anglo military capitalst state people don't pull any punches.

thse empires that kill so many, i point out are legal responsible and democratic governments. and i remain amazed and out raged that so many british on these lists hold anyone speaking out about irish oppression--or the oppression of the french in canadan is held responsible for every group fighting the opression, no matter how underground and no matter how un connected they are, while none of the britsh seem to think they haveanyperson responsibility for the deadly actions of their elected governments soldiers and secert services.

and finally rick fielding--i know people who respect you, but don't be an idiot. the main stream in ontario may be unaware of the massive historically injustices perpetrated by the british on the gaels, but you should know better--reaaaaaly. its not just those mad violent terrorist insanely and criminally fighting the sweet and just ethical state. the british state and the canadian state had killed many mnay minorites and expect no reprisals. i think canadian natives are among the most forgiving people on the planet and you should be gratefull for that. so are most irish.most anglo camadians and most british would stop at nothing , violence, war nuclear retaliation, if these things were dome to them.

the canadian native schools right now is going through a sham truth and reconcilliation commission on native schools. the anglican, protrstant, and catholic churtches with the authorization of the canadiasn state took native children from their patents, assumed legal guardianship and put then i shool that existed ntill th late seventies. there the average death rate was above fifty per cent right up untill the end. its no accident that native population has been booming since the residential schools have ended.and what was the official response? natives have to provide a written advance copy of their testimony to bureaucrats before they can testify--nastives who often come from wilderness traditional orasl cultures as far as tadoolie lake and rankin inlet. and they can;t name any names of the crimial perpetrators.what hypocracy!

this is not a digression.the same capitalist/military state that ethncally cleansed the hghlands and committed genocide in ireland created these schools, for the same reason--to dispossess the landholders on land wanted by the conquerors!!

there you have it
1. bobby sands was dedicated fighter for liberation and no more violent nor more murdeous of the innocent than the british army and secert sertvices. nor canadian army or secert services or indian affairs department
2. the sme empire ethnicallyn cleansed us highlanders and us french acadiens==remember le grand derangerment?? well you all should--that's when the british collected acadien allied natives' scalps for pay for several decades, thats when they deportd the settled acadiens without regard to famly unity nor for safety--almost a third died in the deportation year. and acadiens didn't get equal civil and human rights untill the sixties and seventies, under louis robichaud and piere trudeau--i like to say trudeau and robichaud promoted us to white folks!!

3 the british empire was not the most abusive nor violent in history, far from it, they were totally venial and greedy but they did have some tradition of human and civil rights, but they have no claim to any ethical nor any moral authority. they used state power to kill the innocent from the geraldine wars in munster--which killed three quarters of the population, to the great hunger--other european nations had a the potato blight and food riots, but not being the richest and most powerfull empire on earth they fed their citizens!!! to the north americamm genocde right up to residential schools, and to the paying bounties for native scalps by the british army in nova scotia to le grand derangement(the deportation of the acadiens. and including the massive civilain deaths in .

4 and finally some of us don't have the luxury of being part of the majority culture, and have to try to recude their exposure to the violence from the majority culture--in the folk scene and in civil rights and human rights battles. so we try to have a little anonymity. any who question that ought to answer when was the last time they got beat up with axc handles or chains by anglo rednecks fighting for corporations or even for white suprenists thugs? when you've ad that experience then criticize those who like a lttle protection--and not much. any one who reads all my psts can likey nfigure out who i am.

Subject: RE: Bobby Sands
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Mar 11 - 07:18 AM

P.S. Nick
It should also be said....the existence of the IRA is directly related to the atrosities committed by the British Empire.

Good to hear from you Lor!

Subject: bobby Sands son
From: GUEST,dezarahg
Date: 15 Aug 14 - 09:42 PM

Hello, I've been learning more about the acts of Bobby Sands and I adore his passion for his beliefs. Every one has a sole purpose in this life. However, I just don't understand his his son suffered the most, obviously having to be hidden his entire life to be protected, simply because of his father's core values. Nothing is ever mentioned of Gerad yet he's the only child? Are we supposed to believe that he's a chef? The irony in that is just crazy. Whomever must think that the supporters that live and carry on Bobbys very own beliefs and ideas are silly to not know. Why not let him be known? Gerad deserves to be his own person and not trapped with an identity crisis the rest of his life. Good Lord he's in his 30s he's suffered long enough also..

Subject: RE: Bobby Sands
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Aug 14 - 06:12 AM

Should this thread not be in the bottom list?

Subject: RE: Bobby Sands
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Aug 14 - 06:36 AM

One of the best songs to come out of this period is Mick Moloney's 'Ohara, Hughes, McCreesh and Sands.
I first heard it during the Willia Clancy Summer School sung by Seamus Mac Mathúna around the time of the events - powerful stuff
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Bobby Sands
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 16 Aug 14 - 06:41 AM

I wonder if Bobby Sands' death made the lasting impact on the lives of his many supporters, at home and abroad, that it did on the dozens of grieving families of people who were killed on the streets of Belfast in the few days after his suicide.

My local MP, Don Concannon -went to BS's deathbed and begged him not to go through with it. Still if you adore his passion - knowing fully the mayhem it unleashed......you gotta admit his achievement was a bit nothing compared what the 9/11 guys achieved against the US.

one man's terrorist.....heh! heh! heh!

its funny how US perceptions of terrorism have changed now they are on the receiving end of all that adored passion.

Subject: RE: Bobby Sands
From: michaelr
Date: 16 Aug 14 - 02:00 PM

Ouch.