Irish Soldiers who deserted during WWII to join the British Army & Starvation order

CDfm

I came across this being debated on reddit

Why Irish soldiers who fought Hitler hide their medals

By John Waite BBC Radio 4, Face the Facts John Stout: "I feel very betrayed about how we were treated, it was wrong"
Five thousand Irish soldiers who swapped uniforms to fight for the British against Hitler went on to suffer years of persecution.
One of them, 92-year-old Phil Farrington, took part in the D-Day landings and helped liberate the German death camp at Bergen-Belsen - but he wears his medals in secret.
Even to this day, he has nightmares that he will be arrested by the authorities and imprisoned for his wartime service.
"They would come and get me, yes they would," he said in a frail voice at his home in the docks area of Dublin.
And his 25-year-old grandson, Patrick, confirmed: "I see the fear in him even today, even after 65 years."
Mr Farrington's fears are not groundless.
He was one of about 5,000 Irish soldiers who deserted their own neutral army to join the war against fascism and who were brutally punished on their return home as a result.
They were formally dismissed from the Irish army, stripped of all pay and pension rights, and prevented from finding work by being banned for seven years from any employment paid for by state or government funds.
A special "list" was drawn up containing their names and addresses, and circulated to every government department, town hall and railway station - anywhere the men might look for a job.
Continue reading the main story Find out more

• John Waite presents Face the Facts: Deserters Deserted
• The programme will be on BBC Radio 4 at 12:30 GMT on Wednesday 4 January 2012 and can be heard afterwards on BBC iPlayer
• Read more about the programme

It was referred to in the Irish parliament - the Dail - at the time as a "starvation order", and for many of their families the phrase became painfully close to the truth.
Treated as outcasts Paddy Reid - whose father and uncle both fought the Japanese at the battle of Kohima Ridge - recalls a post-war childhood in Dublin spent "moving from one slum to another".
Maybe one slice of bread a day and that would be it - no proper clothing, no proper heating.
"My father was blacklisted and away all the time, picking turnips or whatever work he could get. It's still painful to remember. We were treated as outcasts."
John Stout served with the Irish Guards armoured division which raced to Arnhem to capture a key bridge.
He also fought in the Battle of the Bulge, ending the war as a commando.
On his return home to Cork, however, he was treated as a pariah. "What they did to us was wrong. I know that in my heart. They cold-shouldered you. They didn't speak to you.
Continue reading the main story “Start Quote

What happened to them was vindictive and not only a stain on their honour but on the honour of Ireland”

End Quote Gerald Nash Member of the Irish Parliament
"They didn't understand why we did what we did. A lot of Irish people wanted Germany to win the war - they were dead up against the British."
It was only 20 years since Ireland had won its independence after many centuries of rule from London, and the Irish list of grievances against Britain was long - as Gerald Morgan, long-time professor of history at Trinity College, Dublin, explains.
"The uprisings, the civil war, all sorts of reneged promises - I'd estimate that 60% of the population expected or indeed hoped the Germans would win.
"To prevent civil unrest, Eamon de Valera had to do something. Hence the starvation order and the list."
Ireland adopted a policy of strict neutrality which may have been necessary politically or even popular, but a significant minority strongly backed Britain, including tens of thousands of Irish civilians who signed up to fight alongside the 5,000 Irish servicemen who switched uniforms.
Confidential list Until I showed him the list - the size of a slim phone directory and marked "confidential" - John Stout had not realised his name was included.
But after the war it quickly became apparent that he could not get work and was not welcome in Ireland - so he returned to Britain.
"I feel very betrayed about how we were treated, it was wrong and even today they should say sorry for the problems we had to endure. We never even got to put our case or argue why it was unjust," said Mr Stout.
And the list itself is far from accurate, according to Robert Widders, who has written a book about the deserters' treatment called Spitting on a Soldier's Grave.
Eamon de Valera inspects his country's neutral army
"It contains the names of men who were to be punished but who'd already been killed in action, but not the names of men who deserted the Irish army to spend their war years as burglars or thieves," he said.
In recent months, a number of Irish parliamentarians have begun pressing their government to issue a pardon to the few deserters who remain alive.
"What happened to them was vindictive and not only a stain on their honour but on the honour of Ireland," TD Gerald Nash said.
But for those nonagenarians who helped win the war but lost so much by doing so, time is of the essence, and it is running out fast.
Face the Facts - Deserters Deserted will be on BBC Radio 4 at 12.30GMT on Wednesday 4 January 2012 and will be available to listen to afterwards online.



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16287211

My own view is that Irish Neutrality was the only option for the state as to join Britain at War would have generated a Civil War .

The pre WWII army was around 10,000 in strenght and 5,000 represented 50% or so.

During the 1930's you had both the Blueshirts and IRA active as paramilitaries.

The blow to the security of the state was massive .

Take the Christmas Raid

The Christmas Raid

The term Christmas Raid is a name used within the folklore of the Irish Republican Army (IRA) to describe the theft of a huge quantity of weapons and ammunition from the Regular Irish Army's ammunition Magazine Fort storage depot in Dublin'�s Phoenix Park.



The raid took place on 23 December 1939, and was immediately prior to the passing of the Emergency Powers Act in Ireland.



A total of 1,084,000 rounds of ammunition were taken and removed in thirteen lorries with no casualties or hindrance.



The ammunition didn't remain at large long, however. On 1 January 1940 it was reported that almost three quarters of the ammunition had been recovered - a total of 850,000 rounds -



Two and a half tons were seized in Dundalk, County Louth

Eight tons in Swords, County Dublin,

Sixty-six cases of Thompsons and ammunition in South Armagh (2 and a half tons captured by the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC)),

One hundred crates containing 120,000 rounds in Straffan, County Kildare.



The raid had turned into another disaster for the IRA to contend with. The volume of material stolen, and the massive hunt to recover it that followed turned up all the stolen ammunition and weapons plus more, along with the IRA volunteers attempting to store it. The positive effect on morale that the raid had made evaporated. The day after the raid the Irish Minister for Justice, Gerald Boland, at an emergency session of the Dail introduced the Emergency Powers bill to reinstate internment, Military Tribunal, and executions for IRA members. It was rushed through and given its third reading the next day creating the Emergency Powers Act.

These guys were not there to protect the country or their minds were elsewhere.

pablomakaveli

I'd admire them for their bravery in fighting the germans but the reality is that desertion is a crime and considered even worse during wartime.

The author of the article seems to give the impression that they view Irelands needs for defence during wartime as less important than Britain even though we could have faced an invasion from Germany or the Allies.

However i dont see any harm in pardoning them now either.

jonniebgood1

pablomakaveli wrote: »

I'd admire them for their bravery in fighting the germans but the reality is that desertion is a crime and considered even worse during wartime.

The author of the article seems to give the impression that they view Irelands needs for defence during wartime as less important than Britain even though we could have faced an invasion from Germany or the Allies.

However i dont see any harm in pardoning them now either.

Pardoning them now would as you say do no harm. Germany pardoned its wartime deserters in October 2009. Surely given that these men had good intentions they should be pardoned. There is a short but interesting radio piece by RTE on this subject that can be listened to here (Title = History Show November 13, 2011 - Dev's treatment of deserters. Its about 2 thirds down the page)

I believe the controversial order was emergency powers order no 362 which saw the creation of a black list of the deserters that was subsequently circulated to all civil authorities to deny assistance or employment to the returning soldiers. The Dail debate on order 362 can be read here and is interesting in parts. It shows that in the consideration of this order that the TD's were well aware of the horrors that the Irish 'deserters' had been fighting against with references to Belsen amongst many stories that had been reported at that stage.

And from the response to calls to refute order 362:

Mr. R. Walsh: I have been 16 or 17 years in this House. I have heard many speeches, anti-national and otherwise, but I have never listened to a speech that seemed to be so deliberately intended to do the maximum harm to this country and to this State by deliberately misconstruing the Order referred to as that which has just been delivered. I wonder if the Deputy who is so anxious to secure justice for those men would extend that justice to any one of those men who happened to join the German Army.

Dr. O'Higgins: Definitely, I should do so. There is your answer.

Mr. Walsh: It is rather amusing. I shall give the Deputy credit for one thing—he never concealed his attitude during the war. We would not have been neutral if he could have helped it. I ask the Minister, in his statement, to refute the imputation that this Order was inspired by malice against a certain group of Irishmen because they held certain political opinions. Let us regard this matter realistically. Desertion from an army is desertion. It cannot be camouflaged. It is either desertion or it is not and it is doubly damaging and doubly dangerous to the army from which desertion takes places if the deserter joins another army which might conceivably be fighting the army from which he deserted. Let us have some sense of reality. The Army authorities here are asked to condone the act of a man who deserts from the Irish Army and joins another army which the Irish Army may conceivably be fighting. Such a deserter is in a position to use whatever capacity he has as a fighter against the Irish Army and he is also in a position to act as a very dangerous spy.

CDfm

To find out what happened Bosco's Daddy you need to scroll down to the end

Professor Murphy from UCC has a very readable piece on Irish Neutrality

War-time neutrality was conducted as a pragmatic policy, based on a widespread consensus and on Ireland's realisation of the futility of the "collective security" notion of the inter-war period. Neutrality was about keeping us "out of the war" and avoiding the threat of renewed civil conflict and foreign occupation, which belligerent involvement would bring.
Neutrality put Ireland's interests first and it was the supreme test of the State's new-found sovereignty. In the words of Joseph Walshe, secretary of the department of external affairs: "Small nations like Ireland do not and cannot assume the role of defenders of just causes except their own.''
Certainly, neutrality was not pursued out of high-minded principle, but was an expression of realpolitik, which allowed for "a certain consideration" for Britain's interests in Eamon de Valera's phrase. For all that, it was a genuine policy, seriously conducted until the end, even to the bizarre extreme of De Valera's ill-conceived expression of condolences on the death of Hitler. Moreover, there was no jumping on bandwagon towards the end of the conflict.


http://www.independent.ie/entertainment/books/review-documents-on-irish-foreign-policy-volume-vii-19411945-edited-by-michael-kennedy-catriona-crowe-et-al-2489399.html

Samuel Beckett gets a deserved mention but not Francis Stuarts HawHaw type broadcasts urging voters to vote Fine Gael in 1943.

Also missing is the sometimes quoted Cranborne Report which gives an idea how far we went for Collective Security .

I can only find it on Wikipedia

Viscount Cranborne, the British Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs, wrote a letter to the British War Cabinet regarding Irish-British collaboration during 1939-1945:[44]
“

1. They agreed to our use of Lough Foyle for naval and air purposes. The ownership of the Lough is disputed, but the Southern Irish authorities are tacitly not pressing their claim in present conditions and are also ignoring any flying by our aircraft over the Donegal shore of the Lough, which is necessary in certain wind conditions to enable flying boats to take off the Lough.
2. They have agreed to use by our aircraft based on Lough Erne of a corridor over Southern Irish territory and territorial waters for the purpose of flying out to the Atlantic.
3. They have arranged for the immediate transmission to the United Kingdom Representative’s Office in Dublin of reports of submarine activity received from their coast watching service.
4. They arranged for the broadening of reports by their Air observation Corps of aircraft sighted over or approaching Southern Irish territory. (This does not include our aircraft using the corridor referred to in (b) above.)
5. They arranged for the extinction of trade and business lighting in coastal towns where such lighting was alleged to afford a useful landmark for German aircraft.
6. They have continued to supply us with meteorological reports.
7. They have agreed to the use by our ships and aircraft of two wireless direction-finding stations at Malin Head.
8. They have supplied particulars of German crashed aircraft and personnel crashed or washed ashore or arrested on land.
9. They arranged for staff talks on the question of co-operation against a possible German invasion of Southern Ireland, and close contact has since been maintained between the respective military authorities.
10. They continue to intern all German fighting personnel reaching Southern Ireland. On the other hand, though after protracted negotiations, Allied service personnel are now allowed to depart freely and full assistance is given in recovering damaged aircraft.
11. Recently, in connection with the establishment of prisoner of war camps in Northern Ireland, they have agreed to return or at least intern any German prisoners who may escape from Northern Ireland across the border to Southern Ireland.
12. They have throughout offered no objection to the departure from Southern Ireland of persons wishing to serve in the United Kingdom Forces nor to the journey on leave of such persons to and from Southern Ireland (in plain clothes).
13. They have continued to exchange information with our security authorities regarding all aliens (including Germans) in Southern Ireland.
14. They have (within the last few days) agreed to our establishing a Radar station in Southern Ireland for use against the latest form of submarine activity.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_neutrality_during_World_War_II

Churchill's attitude

Winston Churchill enjoyed a good joke. According to Dennis Kelly, one of Churchill’s former literary assistants, the following was one of his boss’s favorite stories, one that ‘he used to adore telling’: ‘British bomber over Berlin, caught in the searchlights, flak coming up, one engine on fire, rear-gunner wounded, Irish pilot mutters, “Thank God Dev kept us out of this bloody war.”

http://www.winstonchurchill.org/support/the-churchill-centre/publications/finest-hour-online/833--winston-churchill-a-eamon-de-valera-a-thirty-year-relationship

And then take this into account which puts the British position for their own soldiers

Sir, – Robert Widders and Peter Mulvany should read the Dáil Debates for April 29th, 1980 (http://historical-debates.oireachtas.ie/D/0320/D.0320.198004290013.html) to see how the British treated the puppeteer Eugene Lambert who they wrongfully accused of deserting from their army 34 years earlier. Eugene was arrested as he stepped off the ferry at Dover on his way back from France on a family holiday, brought forthwith before a magistrate, and jailed there and then. And the alleged offence was supposed to have taken place in Omagh, one year after the Nazis were defeated, and peace had been reigning for 34 years before they arrested him!
Our minister for foreign affairs was told by the British that the arrest was part of a campaign to find and punish any British army deserters going back over a long time. So there was no policy of pardon there, whether peace had broken out or not!
There are numerous defence provisions voted for by the people of Ireland in Bunreacht na hÉireann which require citizens to give loyalty to the State, and which legitimise the defence and Emergency laws and provisions made by the State. During the Emergency the State was the only authority to decide how it would conduct national defence, and how to deal with threats from both the Nazis and the Allies. It is outrageous to suggest that any individual or group can be justified in taking unilateral military action which they, rather than the State, think is an appropriate national defence action. Taking such unilateral actions is properly seen as rebellion or mutiny, particularly when, as in this case, the numbers of individuals reach into the thousands.
The loyal comrades of the deserters had every right to feel resentful when they had to fill the “bearna baoil” vacated by those from whom they expected comradeship and loyalty in return. This is one reason why the taking of an oath of allegiance to a foreign country by a soldier while still under an oath to Ireland is prima facia evidence of desertion. – Is mise,
MICHAEL HEERY,


http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/letters/2011/0701/1224299846662.html

So not prosecuting anyone was "official policy".

Ireland also benefitted from UN membership in 1948 & was rewarded with aid under the Marshall Plan.

It is estimated that some 70'000 Irish (north & south served) with some 7,000 casualties.

And check out the Elizabeth "Espionage" Bowen link Churchills double agent in Ireland .

Elizabeth Bowen was a British writer who
happened to be born in Ireland, and to inherit a
Cromwellian property in Co. Cork. Britain was an Empire
and a great many of her well-known writers were born
in the Empire. For example, Kipling was born in India
and Orwell in Burma. Bowen was Irish only if one takes
Irish as a subset of British – as was done, of course, for
centuries.
She adopted an Irish persona for espionage
purposes during the War. But in various memoirs,
written without an ulterior motive she made it clear that
she was not milk and watery British but English. The
part of the world that made her buzz was Kent.
She was English Churchillian. After the rejection
of Churchill in 1945 England was no longer English
enough for her. She could not stand it when the lower
classes came to the top. So she retreated to her
property in Ireland – not because it was Ireland but
because it was not Welfare State England.
Her espionage reports to Churchill are objective,
well informed and well written accounts of Irish opinion
during the War. It is a great pity that more of them are
either withheld or destroyed. But they are espionage
reports to her Government, written frankly in the
confidence that they would remain secret.
*
Following the inaugural Bowen/Trevor Summer
School in Mitchelstown in 2007 an exchange of letters
took place in the Irish Examiner. The most well-known
contributor was Martin Mansergh TD.
Why does Mr Mansergh get so exercised about
Elizabeth Bowen and her activities here during WWII?
5
The facts of the matter are now indisputable. At
the beginning of the war she immediately volunteered
her services to the British Government to do espionage
work in Ireland. She befriended people under false
pretences, reported in secret,, got paid for it, wrote
about 200 reports (according to her biographer, Heather
Bryant Jordan) - approximately one per fortnight - and
delivered a number of personal reports too sensitive to
be put in writing. She deceived all her Irish
acquaintances and was well pleased with what she did.
James Dillon was mortified and humiliated when the
truth was brought to his attention in 1974.
Innumerable other English writers and artists did
similar. It was their patriotic duty and they cannot be
criticised for doing so. She succeeded in her main aim of
helping to get Churchill to resist his instincts to invade
and so helped him avoid a costly bloody nose. Southern
Ireland always was ‘unfinished business’ for him and he
was ‘bulling’ for another go after the failure of his Black
and Tans. She was also successful in never having her
cover blown.
And now we have the extraordinary situation of a
legislator here seeking to maintain her cover! What
does it say of his priorities and judgement? And he is no
ordinary member of Fianna Fail, he is “Fianna Fail’s
most venerated elder statesman”, no less, according to
the Irish Independent (January 4, 2008).
To seek to make his case he has to turn Irish
history, and common sense, inside out and upside
down. Elizabeth Bowen becomes someone else. In fact
she becomes some sort of monstrosity because she did
all the above and was neither a traitor nor a spy but
was an agent for both governments. The logic of this is
that the Irish government needed someone to go
around the country deceiving people in order to inform
itself about how people felt about neutrality!
Furthermore, that they got the British government to
pay for this and never asked for a copy of any of the
reports! She becomes not just a double agent in the
6
normal sense, more a duplicate or parallel agent. The
logic gets more bizarre the more one thinks about it.
A good example of Mansergh’s methodology is
the way he tries to get an ultra-revisionist book “The
Emergency” by Professor Brian Girvin further revised to
seek to prove his case that it was really the Irish
Government that set Bowen up for her spying.

http://aubanehistoricalsociety.org/irishexaminerbowendebate.pdf

kabakuyu

Gerald Morgan, long-time professor of history at Trinity College, Dublin, explains.
"The uprisings, the civil war, all sorts of reneged promises - I'd estimate that 60% of the population expected or indeed hoped the Germans would win.

Is there any real basis for this qoute from Prof Morgan or is it just his personal opinion,were there any polls conducted at the time? There is a huge difference between people expressing an opinion that the Germans would win and actually hoping they would win.

ejmaztec

kabakuyu wrote: »

Is there any real basis for this qoute from Prof Morgan or is it just his personal opinion,were there any polls conducted at the time? There is a huge difference between people expressing an opinion that the Germans would win and actually hoping they would win.

I can't see it at 60%, but that's my personal opinion based on nothing in particular.

Were there any stories where those heading off to join the Allies were pressured by the "60%" not to go?

I can imagine Franco supporters, Blueshirts and hardcore republicans hoping that the British would get a good "doing", but after the Americans joined in, the feeling would have been different, as I don't think that anyone had an axe to grind re the Americans, and wouldn't have wanted the Germans to beat them.

kabakuyu

Were there any stories where those heading off to join the Allies were pressured by the "60%" not to go?

I know of none, but I have no doubt that this figure of "60%" will be seized upon by certain interests for political reasons and will join the other old favourites of how the Irish refuelled the U-boats and left the lights on so the germans could bomb more accurately:rolleyes:
Its funny how a nation with an alleged support of "60%" for the nazi regime did not manage to put an any German/Irish unit in the field, I suppose they could have called it "Waffen SS Division Hibernia" or "Division De Valera":rolleyes:
If I recall correctly alot of other European nations eg.Norway, Holland,Belgium, Spain,and Denmark to name a few did provide volunteers to fight for Hitler.The support for Hitler must have been quite staggering in those countries.

Zebra3

Soldiers deserted their country that they had pledged to defend when, at the time, there was a significant possibility that they were joining an army that may have been planning an invasion of their homeland.

It didn't happen, but it could very easily have.

Given that the soldiers would have had no knowledge of the death camps, to them, Britain and Germany had very little difference in their treatment of humans. So any crap of "fighting facism", was just that.

Would we pardon any soldiers who went off to fight for Germany in the belief that Britain was our historical enemy and that they could try to re-occupy the Free State?

CDfm

Zebra3 wrote: »

Given that the soldiers would have had no knowledge of the death camps, to them, Britain and Germany had very little difference in their treatment of humans. So any crap of "fighting facism", was just that.

Lots had been to Spain, on both sides, and whatever about Irelands Civil War - Spains and its aftermath was well nasty.

They may not have had the full skinny on the death camps but they had the general gist .

Would we pardon any soldiers who went off to fight for Germany in the belief that Britain was our historical enemy and that they could try to re-occupy the Free State?

With reference to this an Professor Morgan.

Did any Irish fight for the Germans ?

70,000 or so from both sides of the border fought for the British. 7,000 were killed. That's between 1 & 2 % of the population, more if you say fighting age.

Does anyone know how many fought for the Axis ?

And, how does Prof Morgan arrive at the figure ? Were there any pro-german politicians topping the polls anywhere in Ireland. ?

If this is the guy he is professor of english ?

http://www.tcd.ie/English/staff/academic-staff/gerald-morgan.php

FiSe

There is a double thread on it here: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056496336

FiSe

CDfm wrote: »

Did any Irish fight for the Germans ?
Does anyone know how many fought for the Axis ?

We all know by now that there were Irish citizens fighting in German uniforms. Either as a POW/deserters from the British Army or due being caught in the circumstances of the time and their German origins...
I can imagine that their number wouldn't be in 100s rather than 10s, but I don't have exact or estimated number at all.

CDfm

I can't see how Prof Morgan's figures would make any sense as the numbers don't stack up. Maybe he was analysing literature or political writings and that would hardly be representative.

Here are extracts from the North Strand Bombings site on whether Ireland knew what was coming and its knowledge of Spain.

Along with every other country in Europe, but uniquely amongst Commonwealth members Ireland did not join the war. People ask what countries in Europe were neutral in the First World War and the answer is all of them except the belligerent and that’s not being smart. The two that started…well Poland was obviously no longer neutral, it had been invaded; Austria had been annexed in the Anschluss. The United Kingdom and France were at war with Germany, everyone else was neutral when Germany invaded other countries they stopped being neutral and became invaded. Ireland is often described at the time as being neutral, but perhaps a better phrase is Garret Fitzgerald’s ‘non-belligerent’. Because while we weren’t actually at war there was a huge of commerce with Britain, both in people who went to work in the war in the war industries, the British soldiers having gone to fight in the war proper and trade; we sold tonnes of stuff to Britain. The period in Ireland, is normally called as “The Emergency”, and that is normally said to be some sort of euphemism; it’s not because de Valera’s constitution enacted a couple of years previously, Sub-section 3º of section 3 of Article 28 of the Constitution, said:

In this sub-section “time of war” includes a time when there is taking place an armed conflict in which the State is not a participant but in respect of which each of the Houses of the Oireachtas shall have resolved that, arising out of such armed conflict, a national emergency exists affecting the vital interests of the State.

And the day before war was declared, on 2 September the same de Valera said to the Dáil that he was proposing, ‘That Dáil Éireann hereby resolves, arising out of the armed conflict now taking place in Europe, a national emergency exists affecting the vital interests of the State’ – the same exact phrase from his constitution of two years previously.
He went on to say “I do not think it is necessary for me to add anything to what I have already said. I think it is evident to everybody that the circumstances contemplated by the amendment of the Article of the Constitution do, in fact, exist”.
Now the commentators on the war, Eunan O’Halpin, being one of the very good ones, in his book ‘Defending Ireland’, he said that the Government basically accepted the conventional wisdom of the time that aerial bombing of civilian targets would be an inevitable and rapidly decisive tactic in the European war. That’s actually not true; there were huge sections of Europe that knew nothing about aerial bombing. Spain did because the Luftwaffe had practiced their aerial bombing in the Spanish Civil War. And it suddenly struck me while reading this that de Valera did too, because de Valera had two very good opportunities of finding out what happened in Spain. He would have known people who served in Eoin O’Duffy’s Irish Brigade and he would have known and indeed locked up some of his own ex-colleagues who fought in the International Brigade with Charlie Donnelly and Mick O’Riordain. ..........................

Where over a few short nights we had mines dropped in Enniskerry, bombs in Drogheda, bombs in Bettystown, bombs in Terenure in Dublin, eight at the Curragh Racecourse, ten near Duleek, and eight in Carlow where three people were killed and finally three more in Oylegate in Wexford. So we had 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9 bombings over ten days or 8 of them over two. In the Knock Row in Waterford, three people were killed. Now later that night, that’s the night of 3rd January 1941, Dublin was bombed again. And the rather terse report in the Military Archives on the first major bombing in Dublin since, basically since the Rebellion and the first serious event since the Civil War,................................................................................

Uniquely in wartime bombings and this includes the North Strand Bombing, uniquely the Irish Army were of the view that this bombing was deliberate. There is in the Military Archives in Rathmines a large file called the 2nd World War Bombings on which I base much of what I’m talking tonight and Commandant D.J. Murphy and Captain T.J. Hanley mentioned the earlier bombing of the Rosslare-Fishguard boat, and saw in the set of attacks an attempt by Germany to disrupt or destroy the supply of food to Britain, and a punishment for the breaking off of trade with Germany by the creamery management in Campile, which they had done earlier. So going back to the non-belligerent, not alone were we supplying Britain with much-needed food but we had stopped selling to Germany.


http://northstrandbombing.wordpress.com/interviewees/german-bombings-transcript/

Snickers Man

CDfm wrote: »

Oh My God they arrested Bosco's Daddy

I remember that incident very well and it was indeed part of a broader sweep against "deserters" from the British Army going back decades. There were several other Irish nationals, including quite a well known writer from Northern Ireland - I think his name was Galvin- who were also arrested. But the papers were out of date and there were several cases of mistaken identity.

But let there be no doubt about the persistence of the authorities in chasing up people decades after the alleged "offence" of desertion had been committed.

I have very mixed feelings about this. I didn't believe there was major discrimination against Irishmen who had served in the British forces. My own granfather did, although as he died in the war I don't know how his subsequent treatment in Ireland post war might have been. Certainly we never felt the need to keep quiet about him, and I seem to remember several classmates of mine in national school who were only too happy to talk about the exploits of their fathers/uncles/grandfathers who took part in world war II.

jonniebgood1

Reference is made in this history ireland piece on Irish volunteers to WWII to attempts to prevent Irish army personnel joining the British army. It references Irish military intelligence unit G2 trying to prevent this happening.

By 1943 the main objective of G2 was to discourage desertion from the Irish armed forces and to apprehend those who attempted to leave the state. G2’s efforts met with mixed success. In 1942 nearly three quarters of deserters were apprehended; however, during the first eight months of 1943 this had dropped to a third. This implied that those who wished to desert to the British side in 1943 were finding effective means of doing so.

The article goes on to explain how people could avoid being apprehended.

A number of factors were involved. Some members of the British Legion were in contact with military authorities in Northern Ireland and could secure safe passage from the South. In addition, it was common for an individual to arrange the specific date he would cross the border and arrangements were made to pick him up by the military authorities. It is also probable that deserters had by this time a more effective escape route out of the South which allowed them to leave undetected. It is also likely that most civilians who crossed into Northern Ireland to volunteer did so without the requisite travel permits from the Irish authorities. According to one source, he had family reasons for travelling to Northern Ireland during the World War II, but had considerable difficulties obtaining a permit. This, despite the fact that he had been born in the North, had family there and spoke with a strong Northern accent. The reason for this was that the Irish authorities assumed that any male of military age attempting to obtain a travel permit was doing so to enlist. Some sources suggest that up to 200 Irish citizens were enlisting in Belfast per week, especially in 1944 and 1945. If these figures are accurate it would mean that about 10,000 people per annum were recruited in this way and crossed the border in a clandestine fashion. Official Irish sources, on the other hand, indicate that between 1943 and 1945 only 771 travel permits were issued to males going to Northern Ireland.

The Irish government drew a distinction between those who provided references for members of its armed forces, which was illegal, and those who did so for civilians.
According to one official source, ‘it is clear that while individuals are facilitating or assisting prospective recruits for the British Forces in a variety of ways, the formal act of recruiting takes place across the border’. It was clear to Irish security personnel that short of introducing new and draconian legislation to prohibit Irish people from joining a belligerent power’s armed forces, little could be done to prevent those wishing to leave the state from doing so.

http://www.historyireland.com//volumes/volume6/issue1/features/?id=181

CDfm

It is interesting that the reasons aren't analysed.

The feeling I get from this article is that many thought the state would not survive or else did not take their oath to serve very seriously at all.

It really is hard to gauge how popular independence was really following the 1930's and WWII.

The 1916 rising itself was not a popular rising and the populism that accompanied the elections etc may have somewhat waned.

The emigration outflows may have masked the dissatisfaction.

The other thing that is not visible is the composition of the army. Who was in it and what was their relationship to volunteers that fought for independence.

What happened deserters that were apprehended ?

And how come deserters who came back were comfortable to do so and that indicates they had no fear of punishment.

Delancey

I agree a pardon would do no harm but we must remember these men could be considered to have deserted in their country's hour of need - loss of pension and benefits seems very light punishment for an offence that in other countries would have seen them executed.

Even today in the US for example a conviction for desertion or indeed a Dishonourable Discharge means that person can ' whistle dixie ' for any chance of ever working for the federal government.

CDfm

So are you suggesting that the administrative way of dealing with it was by way of dishonourable discharge ?

Delancey

CDfm wrote: »

So are you suggesting that the administrative way of dealing with it was by way of dishonourable discharge ?

Well , that may not have been the name given it but effectively that is what happened , I note that prison does not seem to have been used against these men - in the circumstances it could be argued they got off lightly.

To this day in Holland there are elderly people on reduced pension benefits as punishment for war time collaboration - the Irish treatment of deserters is not therefore without precedent.

CDfm

Here is the current oath taken when joining and I cannot imagine the one back then was dissimilar.

Mionnaímse (nó dearbhaímse), <ainm>, go solamanta go mbead dílis d’Eirinn agus tairiseach don Bhunreacht agus, faid a bhead im chomhalta de na hOglaigh Cúltaca, go gcomhlíonfad gach ordú dleathach a bhé arfas m’oifigigh uachtaracha dhom agus nach gceanglód le haon chumann rúnda ar bith ná nach mbead im chomhalta den chéanna ná nach dtaobhód leis an gcéanna.

I, <name>, do solemnly swear (or declare) that I will be faithful to Ireland and loyal to the Constitution and that while I am a member of the Reserve Defence Force I will obey all lawful orders issued to me by my superior officers and will not join or be a member of or subscribe to any secret society whatsoever.

http://www.military.ie/careers/reserve/join-the-reserve

That is very clear.

jonniebgood1

Delancey wrote: »

To this day in Holland there are elderly people on reduced pension benefits as punishment for war time collaboration - the Irish treatment of deserters is not therefore without precedent.

This is correct but surely recognition for the differing roles these people performed must be acknowledged at some stage (as per your previous post). But then maybe the level of knowledge of the worst parts of this war can be used as a reason for tough treatment of deserters. Given that we can view this with the benefit of hindsight it suggests that we can adapt the judgement of these men from that of current US army guidelines or Holland. As already mentioned Germany and Austria have pardoned their army deserters in recent years so there is also precedent for doing this.

Alot of the Irish deserters that I have read about did not stay in Ireland for long after returning. In Ireland they had reduced benefits, they could not work in the civil service and any state help was withheld if they were on the list of people circulated in the civil service. In the UK they would have employment assistance and benefits in contrast as a reward for their service. Thus it followed naturally that alot of these men would naturally return to the UK. I have also read accounts that detail how soldiers returning to Ireland had difficulty in relating to people who had lived through the emergency as opposed to the war (i.e. shortages of tea or other items as against bombings and more dramatic elements of war)

CDfm

I look at it a bit differently, during the "emergency" the decisions based on the "common weal" were made by the Oireachtas and these guys put themselves first.

Personally, I have no problem with anyone who joined the Allies as the fascists were a thoroughly evil bunch.

Ireland had first dibs on the deserters services and being in the army is a different type of occupation to most other jobs as there is an element of patriotic duty involved.

So this type of join up was different as they had already signed up to the Irish Army.

You can't serve two masters or have your bun and your penny and all that.

The other thing that seems missing is why they did it ?

Was morale in the Irish Army that low, what were their perceptions about the outcome of the war and what were their views on the survival of the state into whose army they signed up to.

What did the people on the street think ?

1,100 or so IRA members were interned in the Curragh ?

Richard

Delancey wrote: »

To this day in Holland there are elderly people on reduced pension benefits as punishment for war time collaboration - the Irish treatment of deserters is not therefore without precedent.

That isn't a precedent. Comparing those who collaborated with the Nazis to those who fought against them is not an accurate thing to do. The Irishmen mentioned are heros.

But they did desert the Irish Army, and every army I know of punishes deserters. So I suppose some punishment was inevitable. But at this stage, they've suffered enough. It's not like there is a deterrent issue.

CDfm

Richard wrote: »

But they did desert the Irish Army, and every army I know of punishes deserters. So I suppose some punishment was inevitable. But at this stage, they've suffered enough. It's not like there is a deterrent issue.

I can't see how they were punished excessively. They were dishonourably discharged.

And, the deterrent is for those who served afterwards, especially where the internal security of the state was concerned.

So to pardon them would create a precedent but also imply that the actions taken by the countries leaders at the time were wrong.

The piece is emotive

John Stout: "I feel very betrayed about how we were treated, it was wrong"
Five thousand Irish soldiers who swapped uniforms to fight for the British against Hitler went on to suffer years of persecution.
One of them, 92-year-old Phil Farrington, took part in the D-Day landings and helped liberate the German death camp at Bergen-Belsen - but he wears his medals in secret.
Even to this day, he has nightmares that he will be arrested by the authorities and imprisoned for his wartime service.
"They would come and get me, yes they would," he said in a frail voice at his home in the docks area of Dublin.
And his 25-year-old grandson, Patrick, confirmed: "I see the fear in him even today, even after 65 years."
Mr Farrington's fears are not groundless.
.

And, the punishment was not brutal.

He was one of about 5,000 Irish soldiers who deserted their own neutral army to join the war against fascism and who were brutally punished on their return home as a result.
They were formally dismissed from the Irish army, stripped of all pay and pension rights, and prevented from finding work by being banned for seven years from any employment paid for by state or government funds.
A special "list" was drawn up containing their names and addresses, and circulated to every government department, town hall and railway station - anywhere the men might look for a job

It is hardly comparable to the Shot at Dawn campaign.

I can't see their treatment as being any way excessive.

Delancey

A good deal of hyperbole in that press release , to describe their punishment as '' brutal '' is ridiculous - they lost the chance to work for the state and lost their pension rights - no more than happens to this very day in many countries.
In the US a Dishonourable Discharge means one loses almost all their post-service benefits.
None appear to have been imprisoned , they got off lightly.

I can't help feeling that much of what is being said is targetted at a British audience who may be instinctively sympathetic to these men.

I have no issue with these men having fought for the British Army , however we cannot overlook they deserted the Irish Army.

The 92 year old still ' living in fear ' is pure bulls**t !

Zebra3

CDfm wrote: »

Personally, I have no problem with anyone who joined the Allies as the fascists were a thoroughly evil bunch.

There was really very little between both sides in WWII when it came to evil.

Both sides had carried out their own fair share of genocide, and ethnic cleansing.

If the Axis had won, we'd all be living in a world in which the crimes of the USSR, US, Britain, and France were the worst things ever.

CDfm

Haha, he certainly seems to be enjoying his moment of fame.

These guys were more than deserters they defected.

What we don't know is how the British targeted or recruited the men and whether they used inducements or did money change hands.?

And, what was their leaving package like and do they receive pensions from the British ?

jonniebgood1

CDfm wrote: »

I can't see how they were punished excessively. They were dishonourably discharged.

And, the deterrent is for those who served afterwards, especially where the internal security of the state was concerned.

So to pardon them would create a precedent but also imply that the actions taken by the countries leaders at the time were wrong.
.......

If it created a precedent it would only be for a similar situation. The benefit of hindsight allows us to judge if there was value for the Irish state in their actions and in this case I think there are clear arguments for that. So if it did create a precedent it would not be of any danger. There is not currently a similar situation to that in WWII so Irish defence forces are not going to 'desert' if the last few WWII deserters are pardoned.

Zebra3 wrote: »

There was really very little between both sides in WWII when it came to evil.

Both sides had carried out their own fair share of genocide, and ethnic cleansing.

If the Axis had won, we'd all be living in a world in which the crimes of the USSR, US, Britain, and France were the worst things ever.

This is a whole different argument and I don't think you are correct in the comparison. It is true that history is written by the victor and crimes were committed on all sides but given the facts that have been revealed about WWII I think it is unrealistic to compare the crimes of Britain with those of Germany or the Axis forces in general.

jonniebgood1

CDfm wrote: »

These guys were more than deserters they defected.

Was defecting better or worse than desertion? This could be looked at in many different ways given the circumstances and is interesting.

CDfm wrote: »

What we don't know is how the British targeted or recruited the men and whether they used inducements or did money change hands.?

And, what was their leaving package like and do they receive pensions from the British ?

I would presume that they would be entitled to pension if they served in the British army.

Is there any evidence of inducement?

If they left because they thought it was the right thing to do then they have a better argument for pardon. If they left to line their pockets then the argument is damaged.

CDfm

Given that 20 years before you had the War of Independence with spies and intelligence and all that stuff like here

http://www.warofindependence.info/?page_id=411

So I sort of expect to here of some sort of British Intelligence operations and it is glaring in its absence.

Was there a recruitment route in operation. They hardly advertised in the Evening Herald.

We know lots about the Germans were up to but not the British .

Delancey

To my knowledge the Irish who joined HM forces frequently enlisted in Belfast or Liverpool , I have not heard of any ' bonus ' for Irish deserters to encourage them to join the British military and to my knowledge at wars end they received the same few pounds and 'demob ' suit that all squaddies got - no more , no less.

I reckon some at least would have some sort of pension entitlement particularly if wounded.

Oasis_Dublin

I read this article last week. When you bear in mind the contemporary views of desertion, the treatment doesn't seem anything over the top. Obviously, looking back at it today, it seems ridiculous but reading back into history is not a good practice. As someone with a family member who fought in WWII, I wouldn't be banging the "pardon them" drum. Similarly, if a pardon was offered, I wouldn't kick up a stick against it.

Belfast

Audio link to the radio 4 Programme
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b018xtr9

I just listen to the programme.

Some of the Irish soldier did go to jail. They were ones who came back to Ireland on leave from the British army during the war.
One of them Phil Farring was interviewed on the programme. He was jailed in a military prison in Cork, after he was released he left the country and rejoined the British army.

Belfast

Lord Haw Haw (William Joyce) still has not been pardoned yet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Joyce

ejmaztec

Belfast wrote: »

Lord Haw Haw (William Joyce) still has not been pardoned yet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Joyce

The only phrase that springs to mind is "slim to none" on that ever happening, but you never know.

Fratton Fred

Belfast wrote: »

Lord Haw Haw (William Joyce) still has not been pardoned yet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Joyce

I fail to see how Joyce is relevant.

These guys deserted to fight against fascism in a war in which their country was neutral(ish). Their crime was desertion.

Joyce actively engaged in acts that were meant to undermine his country whilst working for the enemy. His crime was treason (although he did give plenty of people a good laugh, particularly when he announced that HMS Kestral had been sunk, much to the bewilderment of all those based there and the surrounding villages.

Belfast

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I fail to see how Joyce is relevant.

These guys deserted to fight against fascism in a war in which their country was neutral(ish). Their crime was desertion.

Joyce actively engaged in acts that were meant to undermine his country whilst working for the enemy. His crime was treason (although he did give plenty of people a good laugh, particularly when he announced that HMS Kestral had been sunk, much to the bewilderment of all those based there and the surrounding villages.

The guys deserted this is true.
They also fought in a war that was none of our business against countries had no quarrel with.

William Joyce's crime was obtaining a British passport by Fraud. the fine for that was 10 shillings.

He could not have committed treason against Britain as he was not a British citizen.
The was born in America and was an Irish citizen.and later a German citizen.

My point was if we are going to let bygones be bygone this should extend to William Joyce too.

What I do not understand is if they wanted to fight the fascist why did they join the Irish army first?

I wonder if the deserted and joined the German/Finish or national armies fighting Stalin and the Communist on the Eastern front would the BBC be make a programme about them getting a pardon.

Irish Volunteers in German Service
"There were no Irish units in the Waffen-SS or Wehrmacht, although there were Irish volunteers.

In the spring of 1941, the Abwehr trawled through 'British' POWs that they held in the hope of finding Irish Republicans who would be prepared to act as the nucleus of an 'Irish Brigade' modeled on Casement's concept from the First World War. In May 1941, about 50 Irishmen were concentrated at a special camp at Friesack where they were to be subjected to propaganda and persuasion. It says much about the mentality of the Irish prisoners - all regular soldiers of the British Army, whether from Ulster or Eire - that they elected a 'Senior British Officer' to represent them. This was initially a Lieutenant Bissell, but subsequently Major John McGrath of the Royal Engineers.

The Irishmen were subjected to intense psychological pressure and eventually, in December 1941, five of them were removed to a safe-house in Berlin. Their names were Brady, Cushing, Walsh, O'Brien and Murphy. Instead of being formed into a military unit, as the Germans had originally envisaged, the five then began training as Abwehr spies; in early 1942, a sixth man, Frank Stringer, also joined this process.

It is worth mentioning at this point, that all of the 'volunteers' had actually discussed the matter with Major McGrath and that at least four of the men (Cushing, Walsh, O'Brien and Murphy) had no intention of genuinely changing their allegiance but were seeking a means of escape. As a result, none of the Irishmen were actually dropped as spies, and both Cushing and Walsh ended up as inmates of Sachsenhausen concentration camp.

Brady and Stringer continued to work, on and off, for the Abwehr, but eventually their services were dispensed with and, rather than doing agricultural work as POWs, both opted to join the Waffen-SS. They reported to Sennheim in October 1943 and were posted to 'Jagdverbande Mitte' in March 1944, under the aliases 'Charles Strength Lacy' and 'Willy Lepage'.

Brady certainly took part in operations in Rumania, as well as 'Operation Panzerfaust' - the arrest of Admiral Horthy, whilst Stringer appears to have had a quieter time, working as a cook. In early 1945 both were fighting on the Eastern Front as members of Otto Skorzeny's ad hoc division at Schwedt an der Oder. By this time, Brady was an Unterscharfuehrer. As the war came to an end, Stringer escaped westwards and gave himself up to US forces, who handed him over to the British, whilst Brady, who was wounded, was in an SS hospital. He escaped after the Russians had taken it over and spent more than a year 'on the run' with other Waffen-SS 'special forces' soldiers before giving himself up to the British in Berlin. He received a fifteen-year sentence at a court martial in London in 1946.

One other Irishman is reported as having served in the Waffen-SS: 'Patrick O'Neill' was supposedly a doctor in SS-Bewahrungsverbande 500, a penal unit. I have seen no documentary evidence that this was the case but it is quite possible.

Other Irishmen worked for the Germans as spies and radio propaganda broadcasters, but their numbers weren't huge and probably came to less than ten or fifteen.

Contrary to popular supposition, no Irishmen served in the 'British Free Corps'."
http://www.csn.ul.ie/~dan/war/ssvols.htm

James Brady (born 20 May 1920, date of death unknown) was one of two Irishmen known to have served in the Waffen-SS during World War II.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Brady_%28SS%29

Ozymandiaz

Belfast wrote: »

Audio link to the radio 4 Programme
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b018xtr9
.

Thanks for that link, Belfast, I just finished listening to the programme myself.

Those men who deserted the Irish army during a time of national crisis were punished quite rightly in 1945 by having any benefits accruing from their military service negated and being denied future employment out of the public purse for a period SEVEN YEARS. They could be employed in the private sector (and were) or could go abroad.

Yet the programme featured a 90 year old stating that he still remained in fear of a knock on the door because of his desertion 70 years ago! Another claimed the punishment was tantamount to starvation for him and his family. I put it to you that these men’s punishment was over a long time ago, that nobody is looking to knock on his door, and that there were many families aside from those of these deserters who were living below the breadline in Ireland.

The programme was biased and exhibited extremely poor standards. I found it biased, disingenuous and emotive. It had a clear and unambiguous agenda. The BBC cannot hold it up as an example of impartiality in broadcasting. It nailed its colours to the mast and will stand or fall accordingly.

However, regarding the issue and with the benefit of historical hindsight these men should be pardoned but I have serious concerns about their honour and integrity. They enlisted or were called up when Ireland was neutral and at a time of national emergency. Ultimately they put themselves first and before their sworn allegiance to their country. The boring mundanity of daily life in their national army, which was ill-equipped, Mickey Mouse and of poor moral, was not good enough to overcome their need for military adventure. Even if we grant them nobler motives of wanting to fight Nazi tyranny and inhumanity (and that was not clearly evident until late in the war – all people had was propaganda and media censureship) we must ask why they joined the Army of a non-belligerent neutral! Why did they not go to enlist in Britain where they were guaranteed the opportunity to fight their crusade or get their combat adventure? Which came first for them: their anti-Nazi idealism or boredom in an Irish military camp?

Give them their pardon, I say, let them have what they want, but I am reminded of the words of JFK: ‘Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.’

jonniebgood1

Belfast wrote: »

The guys deserted this is true.
They also fought in a war that was none of our business against countries had no quarrel with.

The war was very much our business. It is conjecture what might have followed a British defeat but I think Alan Shatter refered to this element of the discussion in the Dail on 12 July 2011:

Had there been a different outcome to World War II there is no reason to believe that this State would have been immune to invasion. http://debates.oireachtas.ie/dail/2011/07/12/00252.asp

Belfast wrote: »

William Joyce's crime was obtaining a British passport by Fraud. the fine for that was 10 shillings.

He could not have committed treason against Britain as he was not a British citizen.
The was born in America and was an Irish citizen.and later a German citizen.

My point was if we are going to let bygones be bygone this should extend to William Joyce too.
...

I wonder if the deserted and joined the German/Finish or national armies fighting Stalin and the Communist on the Eastern front would the BBC be make a programme about them getting a pardon.

The clammer for pardoning the men in the program is based on their service, i.e. what they did for the allied side during WWII. Thus it is a fundamentally different situation for Joyce although I see the point you are making. In the Dail debate immediately following order 362 a similar type query was answered by a FG TD who indicated that a deserter to Germany should be pardoned also. I posted this already but it is interesting.

Mr. R. Walsh: I have been 16 or 17 years in this House. I have heard many speeches, anti-national and otherwise, but I have never listened to a speech that seemed to be so deliberately intended to do the maximum harm to this country and to this State by deliberately misconstruing the Order referred to as that which has just been delivered. I wonder if the Deputy who is so anxious to secure justice for those men would extend that justice to any one of those men who happened to join the German Army.

Dr. O'Higgins: Definitely, I should do so. There is your answer. http://debates.oireachtas.ie/dail/1945/10/18/00027.asp

Belfast wrote: »

What I do not understand is if they wanted to fight the fascist why did they join the Irish army first?

Perhaps some were in the Irish army before the war started.

Fratton Fred

Ozymandiaz wrote: »

Thanks for that link, Belfast, I just finished listening to the programme myself.

Those men who deserted the Irish army during a time of national crisis were punished quite rightly in 1945 by having any benefits accruing from their military service negated and being denied future employment out of the public purse for a period SEVEN YEARS. They could be employed in the private sector (and were) or could go abroad.

Yet the programme featured a 90 year old stating that he still remained in fear of a knock on the door because of his desertion 70 years ago! Another claimed the punishment was tantamount to starvation for him and his family. I put it to you that these men’s punishment was over a long time ago, that nobody is looking to knock on his door, and that there were many families aside from those of these deserters who were living below the breadline in Ireland.

The programme was biased and exhibited extremely poor standards. I found it biased, disingenuous and emotive. It had a clear and unambiguous agenda. The BBC cannot hold it up as an example of impartiality in broadcasting. It nailed its colours to the mast and will stand or fall accordingly.

However, regarding the issue and with the benefit of historical hindsight these men should be pardoned but I have serious concerns about their honour and integrity. They enlisted or were called up when Ireland was neutral and at a time of national emergency. Ultimately they put themselves first and before their sworn allegiance to their country. The boring mundanity of daily life in their national army, which was ill-equipped, Mickey Mouse and of poor moral, was not good enough to overcome their need for military adventure. Even if we grant them nobler motives of wanting to fight Nazi tyranny and inhumanity (and that was not clearly evident until late in the war – all people had was propaganda and media censureship) we must ask why they joined the Army of a non-belligerent neutral! Why did they not go to enlist in Britain where they were guaranteed the opportunity to fight their crusade or get their combat adventure? Which came first for them: their anti-Nazi idealism or boredom in an Irish military camp?

Give them their pardon, I say, let them have what they want, but I am reminded of the words of JFK: ‘Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.’

Regardless of Lord Haw How's nationality, he was still on the side of the enemy. He wanted a British passport because he wanted to be British. He was also a fascist and an all round nasty piece of work. Despite this, there are suggestions he traded his life for that of his equally fascist wife who was undoubtedly a British citizen but escaped the rope.

If these men went and fought for the Russians, Finns or even the Americans then there would be little or no British interest there, so a British (the first B in BBC in case you were wondering) tv station probably wouldn't bother making a tv programme about them and let's face it, there is a cluster**** in this country every year around the 2nd Sunday in November, so I wouldn't be surprised if these men were a little shy to announce what they were doing during the emergency.

Maybe you could explain what agenda there is here?

Oh, BTW, you forgot one significant Irishman from that period. He worked for an organisation outlawed by the dail, died on a German submarine whilst helping the Germans plan an invasion of Ireland and ended up getting a statue to commemorate him.

CDfm

And why not pardon Joyce if we are on the subject of mixed identities.

Classy, I wish I'd thought of it but then I decided to see if Kevin Myers had anything to say and came across this piece.

But the problem of the place of the volunteers in Ireland’s epochal narrative remained, particularly as republican-nationalist dismissals of them came to have less and less purchase in public and political opinion. One obvious solution was to revise the narrative itself, to argue that Ireland wasn’t really neutral at all during the war, that it was a non-belligerent on the side of the allies, that the country did as much as it could to aid the allied side during the war. Within that framework the volunteers could be lauded as heroes who made a significant contribution to the allied cause, a not to be forgotten Irish dimension of the anti-fascist struggle during the Second World War. This revised narrative of the role of Ireland and the Irish in the Second World War came in the 1980s and 1990s to form the backbone of most historical works on the topic. In press coverage of anniversaries of the war, articles and editorials defending Irish neutrality stood side by side with features on the exploits of Irish volunteers. It is a viewpoint exemplified, by among others, Kevin Myers – a staunch defender of Irish wartime neutrality, but one who spent many years campaigning for public and official recognition of the Irish veterans of World War II. In November 1999 Myers wrote:

Ireland now officially remembers its lost sons of the Great War without embarrassment or shame. It would be no bad thing if people also freely recalled the purely personal and voluntary sacrifice made by many individuals, unsupported by any political campaign and rigorously concealed by the censor – even in their deaths – those whose fight for freedom helped to give us a free Europe.

But Myers underestimated the extent to which the Irish volunteers of World War II had already been fully rehabilitated – politically, historically, and in popular opinion. The contemporary consensus which views both the volunteers and wartime neutrality in a positive light is, of course, largely an updated version of R.M. Smyllie’s position, basically an attempt to harmonise the Irish neutralist position during the war with support for the allied cause.
Officially, the long government silence on the volunteers began to be broken in 1994 when Bertie Ahern (then Minister of Finance) formally opened the renovated and completed Islandbridge war memorial. Kevin Myers commented that Ahern’s presence signified “a change in attitude towards Irishness, in definitions of what it is to be Irish and how many forms of Irishness there can be without betrayal of anybody or anything.”

The organisation behind the site is the Reform Group and it looks like a pro Ireland rejoining the Commonwealth site

http://www.reform.org/site/2004/01/11/irish-ww2/

It says DeV's logic was that small nations like Belgium and Holland got creamed and

"De Valera’s statement coincided with the publication of Pope Pius XII’s expressions of sympathy for the plight of Belgium and Holland. But, much like Pius, de Valera was to maintain his silence thereafter"

There were some challenges to de Valera’s nationalistic neutralist narrative – above all by James Dillon, until 1942 deputy leader of Fine Gael . Dillon argued that there was a great struggle against evil unfolding in the world, a struggle which Ireland should be part of. But de Valera’s viewpoint was the one accepted by Fine Gael and the rest of the Irish political elite.

and

Fine Gael’s strong support for neutrality amounted de facto to an abandonment of its distinct identity as the “commonwealth party. During the war Fine Gael made numerous reaffirmations of its support for Irish participation in the Commonwealth, but, as Hogan pointed out, standing aside when the very existence of the Commonwealth was at stake was tantamount to its abandonment. In this connection it cannot be without significance that it was a Fine Gael-led coalition government that took Ireland out of the Commonwealth and established the Republic in 1948.

And then there is the numbers

Others have pointed to the significance of the fact that between 1939 and 1945 nearly 200,000 workers from Eire migrated to work in the British war economy – most of whom remained in the country after the war.

And also estimates the numbers who served from north and south at 120,000

During the war an estimated 70,000 citizens of neutral Ireland served in the British armed forces, together with 50,000 or so from Northern Ireland.

Now , I have no problem with people serving etc , and the only issue I have with the campaign is that it somehow suggests that the action taken against Irish soldiers who "defected" was wrong when I feel it destabilised the fledgling state.

So there is a bit of a pro-treaty angle there too amongst nationalist's such as James Dillon.

And

Brian Girvin quotes Fine Gael leader Richard Mulcahy’s summary judgement in July 1940:

“Dev would have to swerve his party away from their present road. He could only get half. Cosgrave two thirds. We would be left with a divided front. One third of the country opposed to us. This would be a matter of terrible difficulty. The one third of the country would be that part with the greatest possible capacity for nuisance and damage.”

So while my view is fairly straight forward , these Reform Group guys argue that between half and two thirds of the population were pro-British at a push and far from clear cut.

Fine Gael - the Commonwealth Party - now that would be a vote getter but is it representative of the era or not ?

Delancey

It should be understood that William Joyce sealed his fate by having held a British Passport - at his trial his Barrister argued that the charge of treason couild not stand as Joyce was not British - the Judge ruled that as a British passport holder he was classed as British and thus the charge stood.
Lord Haw Haw was hoist by his own petard.

CDfm

In reality, I could never see why the British hanged Joyce and Field Marshall Smuts petitioned Atlee for a reprieve for John Amery an actual British citizen who plead guilty and was the son of a Conservative politician.

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Before Amery's execution Field Marshal Smuts sent the following letter to Prime Minister Clement Attlee:[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]PRIME MINISTER 14 December 1945.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Mr. Heaton Nicholls telephoned to say that he had received the following cable from Field Marshal Smuts.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"Please convey to Mr Attlee a private and personal message from me as soon as possible in connection with the possible execution of Amery’s son. We have had similar cases in South Africa, in none of which execution has been inflicted, as the acts were more of an ideological than of a criminal character. I am deeply moved by consideration for Amery and his wife, both of whom have deserved well of their country."[/FONT]


[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]http://www.stephen-stratford.co.uk/john_amery.htm[/FONT]

There were other broadcasters such as Norman Baillie-Stewart, a British officer, who recieved a jail sentence and PG Wodehouse who didn't .

So if you use Joyce's hanging as a yardstick the "dishonourable discharges" meted out were not at all harsh.

What interests me was the broadcasts were not illegal it was probably their efforts to recruit POW's for the British Freikorps that got them hanged and their notoriety.

So, the recruitment of serving soldiers is a bad thing by that standard .

Belfast

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Regardless of Lord Haw How's nationality, he was still on the side of the enemy. He wanted a British passport because he wanted to be British. He was also a fascist and an all round nasty piece of work. Despite this, there are suggestions he traded his life for that of his equally fascist wife who was undoubtedly a British citizen but escaped the rope.

He was on the side of Britain's enemy not ours.
You are right he was a nasty piece of work and was probably nuts.
He could should used his talent for something better that being a mouth piece of one of the most evil governments on the face of the earth.
Yes you are correct he did want to be British. He should have made a legal applicant for a British passport.
if he had got a legal British passport , his conviction for treason would be correct.
I think the real reason he was hanged was he annoyed Churchill so much.

His wife was a British citizen. This may have changed after he married her , as under British law a wife automatically took on the citizenship of the husband.
Joyce's mother was fined for this reason. She was fined for entering Britian without a valid visa.
He husband had be granted American citizenship making Mrs Joyce an American citizen under British law.

Fratton Fred wrote: »

If these men went and fought for the Russians, Finns or even the Americans then there would be little or no British interest there, so a British (the first B in BBC in case you were wondering) tv station probably wouldn't bother making a tv programme about them and let's face it, there is a cluster**** in this country every year around the 2nd Sunday in November, so I wouldn't be surprised if these men were a little shy to announce what they were doing during the emergency..

James Brady deserted the British army and fought for the Germans. He surrendered to the British Army in 1946 and was sentenced to fifteen years in prison. He was released in 1950 and returned to Ireland.
He is dead now.

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Oh, BTW, you forgot one significant Irishman from that period. He worked for an organisation outlawed by the dail, died on a German submarine whilst helping the Germans plan an invasion of Ireland and ended up getting a statue to commemorate him.

Both Russell and Frank Ryan, (who had arrived in Berlin on 4 August), departed aboard U-65 from Wilhelmshaven on 8 August- the mission was titled Operation Dove ("Unternehmen Taube" in German).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Dove_%28Ireland%29

The plan was not for a German invasion but to get the IRA to set off bombs to disrupt British war production.

Germany never had a navy that was able to transport an army to Ireland or keep it supplied in the field.

The IRA were using foolish logic was "my enemy's enemy is my friend". I think they would have accepted help from anyone who would help them fight the British.

CDfm

Belfast wrote: »

The IRA were using foolish logic was "my enemy's enemy is my friend". I think they would have accepted help from anyone who would help them fight the British.

And like it or not this "collaborative neutrality" depended upon keeping the IRA in check.

Joining the Allies could have caused Civil War and that was Mulcahy's opinion.

So the active recruitment of deserters from the Irish army had a destabilizing influence.

Ireland was between a rock and a hard place.

Belfast

CDfm wrote: »

In reality, I could never see why the British hanged Joyce and Field Marshall Smuts petitioned Atlee for a reprieve for John Amery an actual British citizen who plead guilty and was the son of a Conservative politician.


There were other broadcasters such as Norman Baillie-Stewart, a British officer, who recieved a jail sentence and PG Wodehouse who didn't .

So if you use Joyce's hanging as a yardstick the "dishonourable discharges" meted out were not at all harsh.

What interests me was the broadcasts were not illegal it was probably their efforts to recruit POW's for the British Freikorps that got them hanged and their notoriety.

So, the recruitment of serving soldiers is a bad thing by that standard .

1. William Joyce, on the 18th of September, 1939, and on other days between that day and the 29th of May, 1945, being a person owing allegiance to our Lord the King, and while a war was being carried on by the German Realm against our King, did traitorously adhere to the King's enemies in Germany, by broadcasting propaganda.
2. William Joyce, on the 26th of September, 1940, being a person who owed allegiance as in the other count, adhered to the King's enemies by purporting to become naturalized as a subject of Germany.
3. William Joyce, on the 18th of September, 1939, and on other days between that day and the 2nd of July, 1940, being a person owing allegiance to our Lord the King, and while a war was being carried on by the German Realm against our King, did traitorously adhere to the King's enemies in Germany, by broadcasting propaganda.[

William Joyce was charged with 3 charges.
He was acquitted of the first and second charges, but convicted of the 3rd

Joyce also argued that jurisdiction had been wrongly assumed by the court in electing to try an alien for offences committed in a foreign country. This argument was also rejected, on the basis that a state may exercise such jurisdiction in the interests of its own security.

Fuinseog

Belfast wrote: »

Lord Haw Haw (William Joyce) still has not been pardoned yet.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Joyce

although the crown knew he was not a British citizen.a travesty of justice.

Fuinseog

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I fail to see how Joyce is relevant.

These guys deserted to fight against fascism in a war in which their country was neutral(ish). Their crime was desertion.

Joyce actively engaged in acts that were meant to undermine his country whilst working for the enemy. His crime was treason (although he did give plenty of people a good laugh, particularly when he announced that HMS Kestral had been sunk, much to the bewilderment of all those based there and the surrounding villages.

he was born in New York, grew up in Galway and became a German citizen in 1940. How does that qualify for treason?

Fuinseog

.




James Brady deserted the British army and fought for the Germans. He surrendered to the British Army in 1946 and was sentenced to fifteen years in prison. He was released in 1950 and returned to Ireland.
He is dead now.
.[/QUOTE]
where did you get the information that james brady is dead? information on him after 1950 is hard come by. I am surprised he has not been the subject of any documentary. He was grilled by G2 when he returned here.


a lot of folks never forgave Francis Stuart for his broadcasts, though he managed to successfully to sue the Irish times for labeling him an anti semite.

Fratton Fred

Fuinseog wrote: »

he was born in New York, grew up in Galway and became a German citizen in 1940. How does that qualify for treason?

He took a British Passport and was only tried for treason up to the point his passport expired.

It was tenuous, but how many people actually mourned his death? Also, as I said in a subsequent post, there is some speculation that he did a deal which kept his wife away from the gallows.

My point though with regards the difference, is that Joyce left the country he had lived and worked in (and became a political activist in) for the majority of his life to join a nation Britain was at war with and set about to subvert Britain.

I know there is a strong argument that he was unfairly tried for treason, but I don't see his death as being any great loss to the gene pool.

CDfm

Fratton Fred wrote: »

My point though with regards the difference, is that Joyce left the country he had lived and worked in (and became a political activist in) for the majority of his life to join a nation Britain was at war with and set about to subvert Britain.

And the recruitment of serving Irish soldiers from a friendly nation by Britain was not subverting Ireland?

DeValera tried, imprisoned & hanged terrorist leaders and interned at least 1,100 active IRA members for anti British activity.

I know there is a strong argument that he was unfairly tried for treason, but I don't see his death as being any great loss to the gene pool.

His death was a loss to his wife , daughter & brother, and maybe even Sir Oswald Mosley shed a tear.

I do not think the issue is that it was a miscarriage of justice, as that is fairly irrelevant, the standard of justice applied is.

No-one in Ireland mourned him and that is hardly the point , the point is that, by the standards of justice applied by Britain ( & Ireland) at the time these deserters/defectors got away scot free.

What happened to them was that they were dishonourably discharged from the Irish Army as deserters.

The radio show by the BBC , the state broadcaster in the UK, is inherently anti Irish (whether intentionally or not) and wrongly portrays Ireland in a prejorative way when the opposite is in fact the case that Britain owes a wartime debt to Ireland for all our people did for it.

I hope the show is met with an influx of complaints for its biased and inaccurate and biased reporting.

Fratton Fred

Britain and Ireland were not at war, which I think makes a big difference and what makes you think these guys actually fessed up to being serving Irish soldiers.

Then there is the nationality issue, at this point I'm guessing all of these soldiers would have been entitled to a British passport?

I think you are going a bit OTT on the anti Irishness and war time debt thing. It leads back to the old question of what did Hitler have I'm mind for Ireland had he successfully invaded Britain. You also need to take into consideration the fate of those interned during the emergency, or even Sean Russell.

Statues for some, spending the rest of their lives I'm poverty for others.

At the time, I agree, these men got off lightly, but in hindsight, I don't see a pardon being too much to ask.