A few blogs back I made the point that some unionist politicians appear to think they have the right to decide on who leads or speaks for nationalists/republicans. This naturally leads them into difficulties, since they’ve accepted Martin McGuinness as Deputy First Minister and nationalists/republicans just keep on insisting that they choose their own leaders. In short, efforts to tell nationalists/republicans that they’ll accept Leader X but not Leader Y have failed abysmally.
Unionist politicians and some unionist non-politicians now appear to have moved onto another field where they’d claim the right to cal the shots: what republicans leaders say. This shows in their reaction to Martina Anderson’s recent tweet on the 1983 exodus from Long Kesh: “And what a Sunday it was – #Proud”. This has caused pain in a number of unionist hearts. Their claim: that since a prison officer died in the course of the escape, it is shameful that Ms Anderson or anyone else should remember the event with pride.
Are they sincere when they express horror at Martina Anderson’s tweet? Did my granny chew tobacco? They are clearly using the prison warder’s death as a substitute for talking about the escape itself. Why? Because it was just too damned spectacular. At the time, even those people with no interest in politics here were dazzled to see one of Europe’s most secure prisons breached so daringly. We’re into The Shawshank Redemption and Escape from Alcatraz territory here. In fact, there’s even talk of making a movie based on the events 33 years ago.
Do unionist politicians believe for a moment that Martina Anderson is gloating over the prison warder’s death? Nah. They know what she’s talking about. She’s a republican, she was involved in the armed conflict here, these were her comrades. But that doesn’t matter. If they can manage it, some unionist politicians will have her muzzled.
I was on Talkback yesterday discussing this issue and it was revealing. As with the 1981 hunger strike in which 10 men died, some unionist politicians see the Long Kesh escape as frightening because it was too spectacular, too successful. Even with half the escaped men recaptured afterwards (and, according to some, treated in a vile fashion once within the prison walls again), the Long Kesh escape was a massive propaganda coup for republicans, as was the hunger strike of 1981. That’s why unionists like those involved on Talkback yesterday are consumed with a desire to detract from both events. The hunger strikers were duped by Sinn Féin into carrying on their fast even when it was pointless; the Long Kesh escape was morally repugnant because a prison officer was stabbed. Anything and everything that might conceivably be used take the shine off two events which attracted world-wide attention and admiration.
How to do it? Hound into silence those like Martina Anderson who express admiration for it.
Next stop: thought control.
Why do you refer to the escape from Long Kesh? The escape was from the Maze Prison, the Long Kesh camp having long since closed?
As for the point of your article, just because we know that republicans are pro-terror, and others such as yourself are ambivalent about terror, that doesn’t mean that anti-terror people should desist from condemning those who continue to seek to defend, legitimise or glorify terror.
Why do you continue to call it Londonderry when the London connection has long gone? Republicans are not pro terror they are anti the British Army presence in Ireland. You haven’t posted lately about the terror unleashed on the poor innocent non combatants of Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan in your name. Proud of that, are you?
“Why do you continue to call it Londonderry when the London connection has long gone?”
What I call it is irrelevant. The discussion is about the BBC.
“Republicans are not pro terror they are anti the British Army presence in Ireland.”
They are both.
“You haven’t posted lately about the terror unleashed on the poor innocent non combatants of Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan in your name. Proud of that, are you?”
I’m not aware of any, but obviously would oppose any terrorism in either country. Why would I be proud of it?
Being ‘not aware of any terrorism’ in Iraq , Syria and Afghanistan says it all. I think it is called ‘the ostrich syndrome’.
“Being ‘not aware of any terrorism’ in Iraq , Syria and Afghanistan says it all. I think it is called ‘the ostrich syndrome’.:
Feel free to enlighten me if you can.
MT, – You’re making Jude’s point about thought control for him by insisting that he should not use the original name Long Kesh.
When you talk about ‘anti-terror’ people, are you talking about loyalists (who comprise British army members, UDA, UVF and RHC)?
“MT, – You’re making Jude’s point about thought control for him by insisting that he should not use the original name Long Kesh.”
Eh? When did I insist thst he shouldn’t use Long Kesh?
“When you talk about ‘anti-terror’ people, are you talking about loyalists (who comprise British army members, UDA, UVF and RHC)?”
Eh? Of course not. How could members of loyalist gangs be anti-terror?
“that doesn’t mean that anti-terror people should desist from condemning those who continue to seek to defend, legitimise or glorify terror.”
You should do stand up MT.
Talk of this event as if it is some kind of boys own adventure simply glosses over the grim fact of the death of James Ferris following his injuries.
Is Martina Anderson not representing all her constituents? Making such insensitive statements hardly shows much thought for her unionist minded constituents,
Pointing that out is hardly hounding her, muzzling her, thought control, or any other such hyperbole.
The killing of the prison officer is largely irrelevant. It is wrong to take pride in such a prison escape, whether or not anyone was killed.
See below,troll
“See below,troll”
I really am starting to believe MT is a troll. He types like Gregory Campbell…..
MT
I understand your point but there are those who feel the prison escape was something to be proud of and that is their business,
But to me an elected representative should be showing a bit more sensitivity in her public pronouncements.
The death of the prison officer gives greater reason for sensitivity, but of course none was shown.
Then could I suggest no one remembers 1690 as many more people were killed, Catholic, Protestant and Dissenter.
You would no doubt agree it would be upsetting to their descendants that such an event be celebrated!
Sherdy
People can remember whatever they want I don’t care.
But this event took place within living memory and there are presumably still living family members of James Ferris.
Why would an elected representative feel she had to express her pride in the events that led to his death in such a facile manner?
Should we not expect a bit more from them than crass insensitivity?
Yes all of them.
Unionists would see this as gloating in exactly the same way Republicans would see it as gloating when Unionists talk about Loughgall its just childish and nit picking.
As I remember the Prison Officer (RIP) did not die from his wounds, which was/were not life-threatening, but of a heart attack. To be sure the events could have precipitated it but there was obviously a weakness there to start with. The poor man should not have been working at such a stressful job.
Prison officers were a vital tool for the British states terror program in Ireland. Always have been. Alas the education they were force fed, no pun intended, should bear responsibility for putting folk in that position in the first place.
wolfie
That’s right.
The people that held him down and stabbed him with a chisel can hardly be expected to take any responsibility.
And the British states terror program Gio? Anything? Anything at all?
wolfie
What has that got to do with Martina Anderson’s tweet.
As a matter of fact I made mention of British actions very recently on the thread about Joe McVeigh’s experience with the BBC.
Why not try and focus on one subject at a time.
“As I remember the Prison Officer (RIP) did not die from his wounds, which was/were not life-threatening, but of a heart attack”
Was a prison officer shot in the head by Gerry Kelly? That’s what I heard. Apparently Gerry held the prison officer hostage and told him not to move or attempt anything, if he obeyed then he wouldn’t get hurt. But the prison officer tried to be a hero and lunged at Gerry when the opportunity seemed favourable but all that happened was the gun went off in the struggle and the prison officer took a bullet to the head. He was unconscious for a while and then woke up and Gerry apparently said: “Now why did you do that for?” and the prison officer replied: “I’m sorry”. He survived anyway. That’s the story I heard.
Imagine the unbounded glee if half a dozen Britishers had escaped from Colditz. The derring do and the stiff upper lip as our boys escaped from the animal like Hun to get back to Blighty to join their mates in the war. But here tbe roles were reversed. The animal like Republicans broke out from their pens and caused harm to basically decent ‘folk’ who were only doing a day’s work to provide stacks of moolah for their basically decent families. Too smart for the UDR and too stupid for the RUC.
So Unionists have no right to speak?
Of course they do.
They just don’t have any right to tell others what to speak, as much as they might try.
Odd that people would think that an opposing argument was telling people what to say.
It’s patently obvious the unionists have decided to water down their ‘croppies lie down’ policy to ‘republicans definitely must lie down’ policy. One of the callers on talkback yesterday said he didn’t mind if republicans remembered such things privately but not on social media cos ‘everyone can see it’. Yip, republicans must quietly, behind closed doors, honour their fellow republicans. Leave the public stuff to the British. That’s the way it must be!
Btw one shouldn’t fall into the trap of comparing militant republicans to loyalists. Even the British army terrorists viewed both very differently. Most republicans couldn’t give a rats arse what or who loyalists honour. Rather most republicans find it offensive the honouring of British army terrorists. If we want to put a halt to offensive symbolism we could make a start with the numerous British army terrorist cenotaphs that litter this country.
“Yip, republicans must quietly, behind closed doors, honour their fellow republicans”
I don’t think Republicans should really care what some people want Wolfe Tone, especially people who wear their poppies with “pride” after what the British Army done throughout the years. Talk about hypocrites.
We should deliberately show our pride in our heroes and people/events we admire, the more people complain, the more we should show it. I’m not one to usually want to cause offence but I think its important we do in this case. Its important to drive the message home: we’re not ashamed of our heroes, we’re proud of them and its time you learnt to live with that. That’s the solution to the problem. I’m not demanding parades through sensitive areas (unlike some) but we do need to make things clear. They have to get use to it. I would be more sensitive if they were sensitive to my sensitivities but they are the exact opposite.
“Btw one shouldn’t fall into the trap of comparing militant republicans to loyalists”
Exactly. Loyalists consisted mostly of sectarian, uneducated thugs. That’s just the truth. Most of them weren’t political thinkers, many of them joined the UVF/UDA to satisfy their sectarian blood lust. Unionist politicians used them for their own purposes and then cast them away when they were finished. Fundamentalist Protestantism played a major role (and still does) in Unionism/Loyalism.
Republicans consisted mostly of political thinkers and people who wanted political change, whether that was through violence or democratic politics. It was never about religion or sectarianism. Of course the Republican movement made many mistakes but their overall agenda was political.
Labour MP Peter Mandelson once said “the IRA are freedom fighters and Al Qaeda are terrorists”. He said this because of the organisations differing objectives.
Republicans consisted mostly of political thinkers and people who wanted political change, whether that was through violence or democratic politics. It was never about religion or sectarianism. Of course the Republican movement made many mistakes but their overall agenda was political.
Ah the fig leaf it was political argument if it was why did you and republican cronies kill thousands was it because you couldnt win your political arguments that you resorted to violence unlike the SDLP?
Is there a bucket big enough for all the puke politics we have to wade through in this place
After allowing one’s fingers to do an Alan Wickers through Wikipedia, Esteemed Blogmeister, one’s inner escapist abruptly sat back, having been taken aback.
The location in Wkikpedia, incidentally, was:
-The Ten Most Incredible Prison Escapes.
While the toppermost of the poppermost was, of course, (yawn, stretch and trouser cough), The Great Escape, it was the lesser placings which shaped the eyebrows in an arch of surprise. Two in particular, numbers three and four.
At number four was ‘The Escape from Alcatraz’. While number three was filled (gulp) by:
-The Maze Escape.
One can only imagine how the a-mazed Yunes, north and south of the Black Sow’s Dyke, must react: somewhere between Umbrage and Dudgeon, the taking of the former and the leaving in the higher echelons of the latter.
It can only have come upon them, ‘aniar aduaidh’ ‘ / ‘from a north westerly direction’ as they say in the Leprechaun, even if it happened in a north eastern shire of the Eyeland of Ireland.
Funny thing, but one found oneself on another island – the Isle of Lewis – when one eventually caught up with the celluloid classic in which ‘The Great Escape’ is (if memory serves) downplayed.
This was August 1971. One remembers that month as Harry Thornton was shot dead in Belfast the day one had already driven through Belfast on the way to the Highlands and the Islands, via Larne.
Thankfully, in retrospect, in a non-backfiring motor car.
One was surprised to find ‘The Great Escape’ was being shown in the cinema in Stornaway as the movie dated back to 1963. Did this mean that the fillum was a sort of Rocky Horror Show deal which gets unreeled every Saturday night ad infinitum?
It was a not inappropriate fillum to watch, having somehow missed it the year it was released (?) , as one found oneself stuck in Stornaway , there being no ferries the following day, the Sabbath,
The superbly sinister Donald Pleasance as the braggadocious Blythe the Forger and Gordon Jackson as ‘Intelligence’ filled roles which did not feature as, erm, ‘bigly’ on the fillum posters as, say, the leavetaking Steve where the McQueen’s writ (still) ran.
And mention of Donald and McDonald remind one that, Moyra, the Scots-Gaelic speaking mathair of The Donald was born in Steornabhragh, capital of Eilean Lodhais in 1912.
(Thinks) Wonder what Crooked Mouth the legendary Londonderry linguist (it’s his fabled way with the Tower of Babel which has the polyglot’s beal the way it is) , calls the Scots Gaelic?
The mathair-teanga of Alba where Black Bob, the Border Collie and his master Andrew Glen of the Crooked Staff , hailed from.
Could it be (gulp):
-Sheprechaun ?
Sheprechaun – I love it…
In ‘Britain’s Gulag’, Caroline Elkins wrote:
“…there would be no soul-searching or public accounting for the crimes perpetrated against hundreds of thousands of men and women in Kenya…Ian Macleod…decided to draw a veil over the past…the image of Britain’s moral war in the empire was not going to be revealed by thorough investigation…”
The author was writing about events in Africa between 1952 and 1960, Operation Demetrius took place in Ireland on 9 August 1971. People lost their liberty on the basis of ‘suspicion’, there was no due process, no proof, no evidence and no opportunity for legal representatives to challenge the basis of detention in an open court. Long Kesh was just one more British gulag. In Kenya, attempts to draw a veil over the past failed, attempts to draw a veil over the past in Long Kesh met with a similar fate.
I think Wolfe Tone has raised a very good point. At what point does honouring and feeling proud of what we see as our own become insensitive ?
Every year many people feel proud of the RAF and bomber command, standing for silence as they honour those men.
For me, bomber command was a terrorist organisation that rained death down on tens of thousands.
I accept the differences of opinion and get on with life. I suggest the Martina Anderson bashers do the same.
Republicans often draw analogies between the British army honouring their dead and republicans honouring theirs.
What if the British employed the same rules as the IRA? There was a clip of Gerry Adams on the spotlight programme speaking in 1987 and threatening summary execution for touting. (mmm? maybe it took a while to break old habits?).
What if the Brits did the same, or had summary execution, or at least had the death penalty over the course of the more recent troubles? After all, if we still had the death penalty, there wouldn’t have been any hunger strikes, any escapes or any revisionist history from the IRA.
Or is the moral highground a cold house for the British?
You don’t think the Brits delivered summary executions during the conflict, then, joe? Or maybe I’ve misunderstood…
if they did, they were fighting fire with fire.
Also – if they did, they should be investigated and tried. You often say that a hierarchy of agressors should be employed.
Does that mean if state killings were investigated and tried first, you would support the investigation and trial of all IRA criminality? Or maybe I’ve misunderstood….
“if they did, they were fighting fire with fire.
Also – if they did, they should be investigated and tried. You often say that a hierarchy of agressors should be employed.”
‘If they did’? Still in denial then.
‘…they should be investigated and tried.’ – by whom? What ‘if’ those who ‘should be tried’ were actually ordered to carry out their deeds by those who may actually be tasked with the ‘authority’ to try them? Conflict of interest?
“if they did, they were fighting fire with fire”
So was the IRA….
“You often say that a hierarchy of agressors should be employed. ”
The British Army was meant to uphold the law and be a neutral force. They were neither. In that case it was no surprise conflict escalated here.
“Does that mean if state killings were investigated and tried first, you would support the investigation and trial of all IRA criminality?”
I disagree with the term “criminality” but its estimated 20,000 IRA/INLA members went to prison throughout the entire troubles. The British Army directly killed 300 Catholic civilians (compared to a handful of Protestant civilians, on the Shankill Road being one case) and next to none have been investigated or trialled, never mind imprisoned. The number imprisoned could be counted on one hand. This, of course, doesn’t include murders committed through collusion and helping the UVF/UDA or effectively running the UVF/UDA. It doesn’t include the MRF/FRU whose members openly gloated on TV 3 years ago that they targeted and murdered innocent people.
There’s a reason why the British Government wont release files on numerous cases, especially the Dublin/Monaghan bombing, despite numerous civilians (including children and unborn twins) being murdered. But you can only deny requests so many times until things start to look and sound fishy…..there’s been many frowns from people in the USA, Europe and in the South at Britains repeated refusal to release files……
So no then Ryan?
“You don’t think the Brits delivered summary executions during the conflict, then, joe? Or maybe I’ve misunderstood…”
They didn’t get it for nothing, Jude…..#JoesLogic
Do you mean like Douglas Hurd, the British Home Secretary’s speech in Westminster about NI solicitors ‘acting for IRA members’ and a few days later solicitor Pat Finucane was murdered by the UDA, under the guidance of the British FRU?
You can’t claim that the IRA weren’t criminals! If you murder, rob, kneecap, steal and rape, you are a CRIMINAL. What ever context you want to place the IRA in, they were criminals who hid behind a “cause”….a cause that failed in its objectives….no amount of double-speak or revisionism or lies will ever change that.
@Jude – so do you want to see the perpetrators of those crimes brought to justice or not. Or did you just light the fuse and run away….?
What a wholly divided society we have here, eh?Let’s get real .Nationalists and specifically republicans within the nationalist community, have an entirely different perspective on the “state” here. you might as well compare apples with squirrels as compare the mindsets of unioinists and nationalist here. Our experiences with the state and its outworkings have been different from Day One.There was no acceptance by nationalism of being manipulated into a sneat little specially -made unionist statelet. it was cobbled together to suit unionism and nobody else.How could anyone not see that it developed in such a way that unionism had an entire stake in irt and nobody else had.most people accept that it is unsustainable without financial input from the British Exchequer so there was always a paranoid need for unionism to hang in there.
As far as comparisons to great gaol breakouts in history or fiction are concerned .That is a very valid aspect of it too.From the Man in the Iron Mask , the Shawshank Redemption,Cool Hand Luke , Papillon, the whole Colditz saga, The Wooden Horse ,or good ol’ Steve McQueen (again) in that Christmas favourite “the Great Escape”….no matter our politics , nationality, religion , or none,or our morality(!)…for let’s remember that most of these escapers ,in all these stories ,have been consigned to prison as “criminals” of one sort or another, by someone ,or some state ,….. we are hard-wired to identify with the escapee anyway. We are that person , in that cell,using our wiles and wits to tunnel behind that poster of Raquel Welch an dswim through shit to break into daylight………except when it comes to norneverland , it seems. I have to say that as someone of a nationalist origin , i was always in favour of the British POWs of Colditz getting one over on their German captors. They weren’t the same kind of Brits that we sometimes have to contend with here, mind.
So you can see that for the still -beleagured unionist mindset any acceptance of the skill and craft of their adversaries would be a step too far.After all , the vast majority of those prison officers charged with keeping their captives in one place ,were their brothers, fathers and uncles.What else could you expect in a divided society?
Having spoken to several people who escaped from both the Kesh and Portlaoise,they all admitted that “the great escape” was one of their favourite films!
And the unionist celebration of the Bloody Sunday murders each November?
For an equivalent level of farce. But hey, sauce for the goose and all.
“And the unionist celebration of the Bloody Sunday murders each November?”
What’s this?
Beautifully said, Paddy K.
“Because it was just too damned spectacular.”
Spectacular?
No.
This is spectacular:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sistine_Chapel
There is nothing spectacular about what we call The Troubles.
Nothing.
“There is nothing spectacular about what we call The Troubles.
Nothing.”
Was there anything spectacular about the Battle of the Somme? Or the Battle of the Boyne, PF?…..
No.
I don’t recall saying there was.
You should try, Ryan, not to let your stereotypical bias get the better of you.
“A few blogs back I made the point that some unionist politicians appear to think they have the right to decide on who leads or speaks for nationalists/republicans”
All people with supremacist mind sets have the same attitude. The KKK had the same attitude in the USA, especially in the southern states. KKK members (the 2nd KKK had millions of members, it was alleged even President Harry S. Truman was a KKK member back in the 1920’s) believed that they had the right to dominate Black people and other minorities. From separate toilets to separate schools, KKK members believe they had the right to dominate and boss black people around, to tell them what to do. Unionists have exactly the same attitude with Catholics/Nationalists/Republicans. If we were a different colour, I’m sure Unionists would’ve tried to go down the whole separate toilets/education route if they could get away with it, but they still believe they have the right to dominate Catholics in other ways. That needs nipped in the bud and no amount of “compromise” or “talks” is going to change that.
Is it a coincidence that most people in the southern states of the USA (in the 19/20th century anyway) were of the same gene pool as Ulster Scots? There seems to be a trend here….
“This has caused pain in a number of unionist hearts”
The same Unionists dismiss or even celebrate the pain, enormous pain, the Unionist State and Orange Order did to Catholics here, not only going back decades but centuries. Just because it happened centuries ago doesn’t make the people then any less human than people today. Yet most Unionists celebrate and fully back Orange Parades, even supporting Orange demands to march through or near Catholic areas. I imagine if some republicans demanded to march through a Protestant area, the vast majority of republicans would tell them to wise up. Unionists certainly don’t work this way. The “moderate” Unionists usually remain silent or refuse to speak out against sectarianism that is now portrayed perversely as a “culture”. I mean, at least most Whites in the southern states of the USA have moved on, acknowledge how black people were treated was wrong and want to build a new future. Unfortunately, in my opinion, I don’t think Unionists have moved an inch in this direction.
Republicans/Nationalists/Catholics should never give the time of day to Unionist hypocrisy. It just encourages the supremacist mentality.
“Because it was just too damned spectacular. At the time, even those people with no interest in politics here were dazzled to see one of Europe’s most secure prisons breached so daringly”
It was indeed, it was an incredible escape. From what I read from numerous sources it WAS the most secure prison in Europe. No other group ever pulled off such an escape at the time. Republicans have a long history of escaping prisons. Its one of the most difficult things to do. The only time I heard of Loyalists/Unionists escaping was one Loyalist (jailed for sectarian murder) escaping and hiding in a bin lorry only to be crushed to death amongst the rubbish….
3 years ago I bought Gerry Kelly’s book and even spoke to Gerry himself about the escape and got the book signed. It was only afterwards I realized he signed my book “To Brian” instead of “To Ryan”. lol
“How to do it? Hound into silence those like Martina Anderson who express admiration for it”
I’m sure that will be just as successful as making the Civil Rights Protests go away and bringing back the Protestant Parliament for a Protestant People.
“Next stop: thought control”
I wouldn’t put it past some of them.
I wont forget what Kenny Donaldson from “Innocent Victims United” said on the Nolan radio show a few weeks ago. He basically said that Republicans shouldn’t be allowed a narrative on the past, he openly said that. I actually rewind the conversation to repeat what he said just to confirm it. So basically Kenny wants to deny democracy and freedom of speech to republicans, very basic human rights……you can bet your house he’s not alone in wanting that….
People forget this Was a War wether or not the UK cared to admit but blatantly took part in collusion with loyalist paramilitary killing squads. With their own Shoot to Kill policy.
These were POW’s and like the brave men who gave their own lives to gain PoW status within the Maize(Kesh) .
These 38 Prisoners of War planned and successfully implemented a master stroke in embarrassing the crown with a mass escape from the highest security prison although a prison officer sadly died in the line of duty he knew the risks that came with taking a paid position with the crown the enemy.
And though half where caught within hours this was a masterstroke that gave the government a bloody nose and kept the forces busy for years.
If it had been a British Army breakout The Geat Escape, Colditz a film would have been applauded .
A well made movie is overdue for such a feat.
“People forget this Was a War wether or not the UK cared to admit but blatantly took part in collusion with loyalist paramilitary killing squads. With their own Shoot to Kill policy.”
It wasn’t a war and any collusion wasn’t done blatantly.
“These were POW’s and like the brave men who gave their own lives to gain PoW status within the Maize(Kesh) ”
They weren’t POWs. They were all.convicted criminals.
“It wasn’t a war and any collusion wasn’t done blatantly”
How would you know?
“They weren’t POWs. They were all.convicted criminals”
The rest of the world wouldn’t agree with you. Criminals don’t have streets named after them in numerous countries worldwide. They don’t have the Indian Parliament stand up for them in a minutes silence when they pass away. They don’t have the Governments of Russia and China expressing their worry over their treatment to the British Government directly. They don’t have US Senators and Mayors (one being a young Bernie Sanders) writing letters to the British Government demanding they stop prosecuting Irish nationalists.
Lets face it MT, your on the wrong side of History.
“How would you know?”
Because I understand what war is, the definition of.it, and the condition that apply for a state of war to exist.
“They weren’t POWs. They were all.convicted criminals”
“The rest of the world wouldn’t agree with you. Criminals don’t have streets named after them in numerous countries worldwide. They don’t have the Indian Parliament stand up for them in a minutes silence when they pass away. They don’t have the Governments of Russia and China expressing their worry over their treatment to the British Government directly. They don’t have US Senators and Mayors (one being a young Bernie Sanders) writing letters to the British Government demanding they stop prosecuting Irish nationalists.”
Naming streets and MPs standing up is irrevant. What’s relevant are the facts, and they were all convicted in criminal courts of serious crimes following due process. POWs are captured in war: they don’t go through the criminal courts, the police are not involved, they’re not held in prison, they don’t have criminal records.
“Lets face it MT, your on the wrong side of History.”
That doesn’t make sense.
“It wasn’t a war and any collusion wasn’t done blatantly.”
Eh to borrow a phrase from you good self- have you any proof of that?
“Eh to borrow a phrase from you good self- have you any proof of that?”
Proof that it wasn’t a war?? It didn’t meet the criteria for war, it wasn’t treated as a war, the conditions didn’t exist for it.to be a war, it wasn’t recognised as war …
Or proof thst collusion wasn’t blatant? Er, the fact that it has required investigation to uncover it!
“Or proof thst collusion wasn’t blatant? Er, the fact that it has required investigation to uncover it!”
Eh ok that proves it then.(thats sarcasm btw)
Any ‘investigation’ carried out by the British state into British state terrorism(murderers investigating murder?) was/is merely window dressing to quieten international scrutiny. The state institutions must never be implicated no matter what. If there is blame it must be directed at rogue officers,ptsd or a misunderstood order etc etc. You get the picture yet? If the British state just admitted they were involved in a squalid little war there’d be no need for ‘investigations’. Alas in pursuit of their overall image they crave, internationally integrity, they will never admit their deeds. The British state knows that some folk couldn’t handle the truth; especially their own people.
“Any ‘investigation’ carried out by the British state into British state terrorism(murderers investigating murder?) was/is merely window dressing to quieten international scrutiny.”
If collusion was blatant, why would there be any desire to ‘quieten’ scrutiny.
Do you actually know what ‘blatant’ means?
“The state institutions must never be implicated no matter what. If there is blame it must be directed at rogue officers,ptsd or a misunderstood order etc etc. You get the picture yet? If the British state just admitted they were involved in a squalid little war there’d be no need for ‘investigations’. Alas in pursuit of their overall image they crave, internationally integrity, they will never admit their deeds. The British state knows that some folk couldn’t handle the truth; especially their own people.”
Again, if collusion was blatant there would be no need or desire to avoid implicating ‘state institutions’, nor to direct blame to rogue officers.
“If collusion was blatant, why would there be any desire to ‘quieten’ scrutiny.
Do you actually know what ‘blatant’ means?”
I agree it’s ridiculous why the British state continue to try and quieten scrutiny. It’s blatantly(oops) obvious they were up to their necks in terrorism. So you may ask them why the ‘desire’.
Do you actually know what ‘collusion’ means?
here’s a wee video about how the great escape was planned and carried out – as well as the aftermath, including the funeral of arch-planner larry marley
https://eurofree3.wordpress.com/2014/01/04/1983-great-escape-from-the-mazelong-kesh/
Ah right MT, got it. As long as the murder isn’t blatant it’s ok. Understood.
“Ah right MT, got it. As long as the murder isn’t blatant it’s ok. Understood.”
Eh? Unlike most of the contributors on this site, I’m against murder. All murder.
MT – stop it. Now. This is the second time you’ve suggested that a number of people on this site (myself included) ‘support’ killing. If you have evidence, bring it to the PSNI. If you attempt such a comment here again you won’t go up.
Convicted by the forces of occupation as in Nazi occupied France?
The very thought that some might seek a validity akin to those who liberated Europe from Fascism beggars belief.
It really is an odd thing, and seems to me to demonstrate something of an inferiority complex, that what certain politicians say by way of argument and rhetoric is seen by others to be a superior attitude.
“The very thought that some might seek a validity akin to those who liberated Europe from Fascism beggars belief.”
What’s the USSR got to do with this?
Nothing.
Who mentioned the USSR?