Will there ever be a Bobby Sands Street in the country?

Shutuplaura · 01-12-2008 9:54am

This old thread eh!

Slightly off topic but has anyone seen Hunger? Whadda think? I read a review that said according to ex=prisoners the only unrealistic thing about it was the silence in the prison wings - in reality there was constant shouting, banter etc.

philologos · 01-12-2008 10:00am

I don't see why we need any recognition of him to be honest. He was arrested for possession of firearms I thought? Then he hunger striked so that he and his IRA comrades could have better rights than the rest of the prison populace. Surely if prison was so bad, he would have campaigned for these rights for all prisoners whether "political" or not. I just don't see any reason to give him hero status.

Shutuplaura · 01-12-2008 10:30am

Thanks Jakkass but the question was more do you think it will happen more than do you want it to happen or do you think its right that it will happen.

Fratton Fred · 01-12-2008 10:59am

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

A question. Did Mr Sands believe that 'the slaughter of the innocent was necessitated by his desire for a change in the administrative arrangements under which his homeland was governed.' and have a speech about it?

RSF Cill Dara wrote: »

slaughter of inocents? could you explain? MP Bobby Sands did not support the british army(slaughter of inocent) as he was a member of the IRA

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

As in he had no problem killing innocent people to further his goals. I am quoting a review on the film about him, Hunger.

Fratton Fred wrote: »

err, are you trying to imply the IRA did not slaughter innocents? it is what they did for a living.

McArmalite wrote: »

God give me patience. For the third time, you brought up the subject of "the slaughtering of innocents for a living" on post #324 :rolleyes:

there, is that better or would you like me to explain some of the longer words?

this thread is not about the British Army, it is about whether or not a man who was part of a terrorist organisation that targetted civilians will ever get a street named after him in Dublin.

horseflesh · 01-12-2008 11:11am

I very much doubt it, and sincerely hope not.
He died like the dog he was.

RSF Cill Dara · 01-12-2008 12:07pm

ilkhanid wrote: »

"less than 30% of IRA victims were innocent, compared to the british army 60% "
Even taken at face value that is a ghastly figure,kiling nearly a third of innocents in their "war". But they killed a lot more than anybody else and their (and your) definition of what constitutes 'innocence' is twisted.PIRA considered people who had been in the RUC in the past as targets,as well as people who worked for the authorities in any (even distrubuting census forms!) capacity,all judicary,families of security-force members,prison officers,businessmen-even foreigners-who ran industry in the North,Unionist politicians,people who drank in bars frequented by loyalists or the security-forces,etc etc. Probably added together this might make up a quarter of the population..all of them "guilty" by this foul definition.

"kingsmill was not an IRA attack! it was a response to the killing of 6
innocent irish men . kingsmill was an anger attack by locals ".

Aah. Angry locals? No hunting rifles or shotguns? Just locals who have precise intelligence of the buses routine, who happened to get hold of machine-guns at short notice, leave no trace and vanish. Of course they were PIRA, but since the dead PIRA are buried under a green-white-and-orange flag and mouth platitudes about uniting "protestant,catholic,and dissenter,(a phrase spoken by Wolfe Tone, a Protestant Irishman) slaughtering harmless men because they were protestants would'nt sit well with their declared non-sectarianism. And, as far as I know, the murder of innocent men for their religion is just that-the murder of innocent men-whether it is carried out in reprisal for some other murder of innocents or any other reason.

The IRA denied responsibility for the killings. The Irish Republican Army has never initiated sectarian killings.kingsmil was disgusting and any real republican would say the same, i condemn the massacre of any inocent person.This was an attack by locals(some of which were in the IRA) as a response to the murder of 6 inocent Irish men .

30% , which includes british royle family , prision guards and bombs with warnings which went on reported e.g bloody friday.

No they are in no way legitimate targets. I dont no whether you were trying to be funny or just plan ignorant but either way it dosnt suit you

McArmalite · 01-12-2008 12:23pm

Fratton Fred wrote: »

there, is that better or would you like me to explain some of the longer words?

this thread is not about the British Army, it is about whether or not a man who was part of a terrorist organisation that targetted civilians will ever get a street named after him in Dublin.

:rolleyes: Again............your the one who brought up the "the slaughtering of innocents for a living" on post #324. I complemented you as nothing best describes the british army past and present.

Sands and thousands of Irishmen and women became invovled in the conflict because of britain's abuses and occuptation of the north east of the country. To leave them out in a discussion regarding Bobby Sands and his actions is only grasping at straws for excuses for the brits - as usual.

horseflesh wrote: »

I very much doubt it, and sincerely hope not.
He died like the dog he was.

Still you cannot find Nairac ?

RSF Cill Dara · 01-12-2008 12:30pm

Jakkass wrote: »

I don't see why we need any recognition of him to be honest. He was arrested for possession of firearms I thought? Then he hunger striked so that he and his IRA comrades could have better rights than the rest of the prison populace. Surely if prison was so bad, he would have campaigned for these rights for all prisoners whether "political" or not. I just don't see any reason to give him hero status.

Yes, Bobby Sands and every republican soldier in prison should have been treated better as they were POW . Republican were treated worse than scumbags and drug dealers in prison. He went 66 days without food for something he believed in , that makes him a hero in my eyes.

McArmalite · 01-12-2008 12:30pm

ilkhanid wrote: »

"Jayus, how many times does it have to be stated, and how many times do the unionists have to state it themselves, - THEY ARE bRITISH "

Geography lesson#1.If you live in America, you are American. If you live in Britain you are British. If you live in Ireland you are Irish.
Even Wolfe Tone, Patrick Pearse and-God between us and all harm-Gerry himself regards these people as Irish.

"one of the great myths of unionism that their is a " million " of them"
All right then,maybe there are only 920 00 or 850 000, A lot of them at any rate.

"If they are in the british forces, defending british occupation, they are british."
No, they are Irishmen serving with the British forces. The 25 000 Irishmen that died in World War One did'nt turn into British soldiers in France and Flanders. And if they are serving in their own land, then they can hardly be "occupying" it, at least not in any sense that you mean.

"Since your obviously so sympathic to them, you must have thought about joining say, the UDR yourself ?"
I live in the Republic, so I was hardly going to join any force away from my home, on any side. I have no more sympathy for them than the next man, and none at all for those of them that broke the law in pursuit of political objectives, but I do recognize that they have the right to their own allegiance and loyalties and the right to live under a political dispensation of their choosing, subject to the law.

"Here we go again, britian the benign, benevolent peacekeeper who acted at all times in a neutral manner wtih nothing but the best intentions for the OIrsh if they could only become a bit agreeable among themselves........ZZZZZZZZZZZZZ"

And your notion of a malign British puppetmaster cunningly manipulating the strings of both sides-sides that would be the greatest of buddies without the influence of perfidious Albion- to keep them fighting each other,or of a Britain utterly dedicated to the Unionist cause and implacably anti-Irish is just as much a simplistic caricature of history as the one you deride above with such sarcasm. Notwithstanding any actions of Britain this was always a civil war. It was only when Sinn Fein began to move beyond the notion that the Unionists were only Britain's straw men and recognized the need to engage with them that Republicanism began to live in the real world. But it appears that the scales have yet to fall from some eyes here.;)

"Conor Cruise O'Brien, Sir Anthony O'Reilly, Ruth Dudley Edwards etc were born and continue to live in the Republic of Ireland, still unionists to the core nevertheless."

I am not a Unionist, and if I lived in Northern Ireland, I would probably vote Alliance or SDLP, but that's not bad company. Better than Mary lou McDonald and "slab" Murphy anyway.:D

ilkhanid wrote: »

Geography lesson#1.If you live in America, you are American. If you live in Britain you are British. If you live in Ireland you are Irish.

So Ian Paisley is an Irish nationalist ?? ( Ooops ,gotta go !!! )

RSF Cill Dara · 01-12-2008 12:36pm

McArmalite wrote: »

Still you cannot find Nairac ?

Robert Nairac ?

horseflesh · 01-12-2008 12:41pm

McArmalite wrote: »

Still you cannot find Nairac ?

Personally I haven't been looking.
But why am I not surprised that an apologist for the scumbag provos would gloat over something like that.

RSF Cill Dara · 01-12-2008 12:44pm

Fratton Fred wrote: »

What about Le Mon restaurent
what about Bloody friday
What About Warrington
What about Jean McConville
What about Harrods
What About Eniskillen
What about the Sussex Arms Pub
What About Victoria Station
What about Proxy Bombing

The majority or them bombs had accurate warnings .

RSF Cill Dara · 01-12-2008 12:46pm

horseflesh wrote: »

Personally I haven't been looking.
But why am I not surprised that an apologist for the scumbag provos would gloat over something like that.

Maybe because he was a murdering scumbag! that had a big role in the Dublin and Monaghan bombings

horseflesh · 01-12-2008 12:47pm

RSF Cill Dara wrote: »

Yes, Bobby Sands and every republican soldier in prison should have been treated better as they were POW . Republican were treated worse than scumbags and drug dealers in prison.

And rightly so, the terrorist toerags.

RSF Cill Dara wrote:

He went 66 days without food for something he believed in , that makes him a hero in my eyes.

I admire his conviction, but it makes him an imbecile in my eyes.

I'm surprised you and your sort haven't petitioned the Vatican to make a new St Bobby.

horseflesh · 01-12-2008 12:48pm

RSF Cill Dara wrote: »

Maybe because he was a murdering scumbag! that had a big role in the Dublin and Monaghan bombings

Do you really not see the contradiction in your two consecutive posts???

RSF Cill Dara · 01-12-2008 12:51pm

horseflesh wrote: »

And rightly so, the terrorist toerags.

I admire his conviction, but it makes him an imbecile in my eyes.

I'm surprised you and your sort haven't petitioned the Vatican to make a new St Bobby.

No mate, he was apart of a liberation movement forced to the gun by the british occupiers. imbecile? Bobby Sands was far from it .

why? sure im not even catholic?

horseflesh · 01-12-2008 12:57pm

RSF Cill Dara wrote: »

No mate, he was apart of a liberation movement forced to the gun by the british occupiers. imbecile? Bobby Sands was far from it .

why? sure im not even catholic?

I actually agree that Sands wasn't a stupid man, but starving himself to death for what was essentially a technicality was stupid.

You being a Catholic or not doesn't really matter, Sands was, and he's been eulogised by the nationalists since he died.
Wasn't Robert Nairac a Catholic? At least it's good to know that the provos didn't mind who they slaughtered.

RSF Cill Dara · 01-12-2008 1:05pm

horseflesh wrote: »

I actually agree that Sands wasn't a stupid man, but starving himself to death for what was essentially a technicality was stupid.

You being a Catholic or not doesn't really matter, Sands was, and he's been eulogised by the nationalists since he died.
Wasn't Robert Nairac a Catholic? At least it's good to know that the provos didn't mind who they slaughtered.

Religion is irellevent. the IRA never targeted anyone because their religion. Robert Nairac was hit as he was an occupier and a murderer

Bottle_of_Smoke · 01-12-2008 1:13pm

RSF Cill Dara wrote: »

The majority or them bombs had accurate warnings .

How about kingsmill then?

horseflesh · 01-12-2008 1:26pm

RSF Cill Dara wrote: »

Religion is irellevent. the IRA never targeted anyone because their religion.

And there was me thinking that the provos shot, tortured, and blew up hundreds of people.
All that time they were just trying to treat everyone equally.

Fratton Fred · 01-12-2008 1:37pm

McArmalite wrote: »

:rolleyes: Again............your the one who brought up the "the slaughtering of innocents for a living" on post #324. I complemented you as nothing best describes the british army past and present.

aaahh, so its the "For a living" bit you took exception to. should I change it to "For Fun" then? not that it makes much difference, RSF is trying to claim the IRA did not slaughter innocent people, which they quite clearly did.

the drug smuggling was for a living wasn't it

i still don't see what this has to do with Iraq though or are you just trying to derail the thread again?

Border-Rat · 01-12-2008 2:51pm

Robert Nairac was implicated in the murder of over 30 Irish civilians. Of course, free-staters who hate us northerners (For having the cheek of getting in the way of the english jackboot) ignore that, and are only willing to have their hearts bleed for Nairac.

The Miama showband Massacre, for example, headed by terrorist Nairac, saw the lead singer be shot in the face 9 times because of 'good looks'. But hey, obviously the victim was a 'provo scumbag'. I'll tell you what - Nairac was arrested, interogated, shot and his scumbag body ran through a meat-grinder. Good stuff.

As for horseflesh and his ilk, get off it. 'Provo scum'? So was Collins and his men 'scumbags' too? Horseflesh, a question - when the british army deliberately cleared the streets in order to give Lenny Murphy a free hand so that he could skin Irish people in the North alive, the Irish army did nothing. The provos did. They protected us. Who are the real 'scumbags' here, you self loathing hypocrite?

And to fratton fred - you're an englishman (Why are you even on this board, if not to troll?) Excuse me while I break a rib laughing at you using the word 'terrorist'. England averages one major war per decade. Shall I break out a list of warcrimes that makes you as a people look like nothing short of outright savages?

Border-Rat · 01-12-2008 2:57pm

horseflesh wrote: »

And there was me thinking that the provos shot, tortured, and blew up hundreds of people.
All that time they were just trying to treat everyone equally.

They also protected us while the 'Irish army' did nothing. What do you have to say about that?

philologos · 01-12-2008 3:10pm

RSF Cill Dara wrote: »

Yes, Bobby Sands and every republican soldier in prison should have been treated better as they were POW . Republican were treated worse than scumbags and drug dealers in prison. He went 66 days without food for something he believed in , that makes him a hero in my eyes.

He was arrested under criminal charges? So surely it should be treated as a criminal case?

Border-Rat · 01-12-2008 3:16pm

Jakkass wrote: »

He was arrested under criminal charges? So surely it should be treated as a criminal case?

Does this apply to the men arrested as criminals after the uprising, Jakkass?

Fratton Fred · 01-12-2008 3:55pm

Border-Rat wrote: »

And to fratton fred - you're an englishman (Why are you even on this board, if not to troll?) Excuse me while I break a rib laughing at you using the word 'terrorist'. England averages one major war per decade. Shall I break out a list of warcrimes that makes you as a people look like nothing short of outright savages?

Why am I where? Ireland? none of your business.

UN Security Council resolution 1566 wrote:

criminal acts, including against civilians, committed with the intent to cause death or serious bodily injury, or taking of hostages, with the purpose to provoke a state of terror in the general public or in a group of persons or particular persons, intimidate a population or compel a government or an international organization to do or to abstain from doing any act.

That's why I call the IRA terrorists.

I suppose I now get

"Oh, but Britain this..."
"Britain that...."
Iraq, Afghanistan, blah blah blah.

When you get a chance, you might want to read the Barron Report, or is that just the West brit free Staters pandering to the whim of the British jackboot

If you want to name a street after a dead terrorist who died to fulfil his own egotistical fantasies, fine, go right ahead, but please don't waste my taxes by doing it in Ireland.

philologos · 01-12-2008 4:51pm

Border-Rat wrote: »

Does this apply to the men arrested as criminals after the uprising, Jakkass?

I don't think violence is acceptable for furthering political goals. Use the parliament, but when it comes to taking the life of another, you have no right to do so.

RSF Cill Dara · 01-12-2008 8:21pm

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

How about kingsmill then?

kingmill wasnt an IRA attack . Iv just debated my point on kingsmill

RSF Cill Dara · 01-12-2008 8:23pm

horseflesh wrote: »

And there was me thinking that the provos shot, tortured, and blew up hundreds of people.
All that time they were just trying to treat everyone equally.

What about the protestant men and women that fought in the IRA ?

RSF Cill Dara · 01-12-2008 8:29pm

Jakkass wrote: »

I don't think violence is acceptable for furthering political goals. Use the parliament, but when it comes to taking the life of another, you have no right to do so.

The Irish in the north east of Ireland were forced to the gun as
they were burnt out of their homes ,
spit at ,
shot at,
killed all for been Irish.
what would you have done?

philologos · 02-12-2008 12:05am

No, nobody was forced to a gun whatsoever. Look and India and Gandhi for example. He was never compelled to use violent means yet succeeded. What was different about Ireland?

ilkhanid · 02-12-2008 12:09am

OK, Here we go over the old ground again.
"The IRA denied responsibility for the killings."

The IRA denial is worthless. What did people expect them to say? When it would show them in a bad light they often denied things.

"The Irish Republican Army has never initiated sectarian killings."
Ah ha, we've moved on from "never committed" to "never iniated(initiated?)" sectarian killings.
"kingsmil was disgusting and any real republican would say the same, i condemn the massacre of any inocent person.This was an attack by locals(some of which were in the IRA) as a response to the murder of 6 inocent Irish men"

Still the whiff of excuse, justification,explaining away. Sectarian murder done in reprisal is no better than any other kind. Sure that's what Greysteel was;a reprisal-"a response" in your words for the Shankill bombing. Did that make the murders slightly less culpable than otherwise? Every side in this dirty mess could claim that their murders were reprisals for something that had happened before, pushing responsibility back ad infinitum.

"So Ian Paisley is an Irish nationalist ??"
No, he's just Irish. Are you incapable of thinking that somebody can be Irish and not a nationalist? After all there are a million....sorry, 890 000 of them.

"Religion is irellevent. the IRA never targeted anyone because their religion"
Apart from the aforementioned Kingsmills, Tullyvallen Orange and other things of course.

Finally...."when the british army deliberately cleared the streets in order to give Lenny Murphy a free hand so that he could skin Irish people in the North alive, the Irish army did nothing. The provos did. They protected us. Who are the real 'scumbags' here, you self loathing hypocrite?"

If the Provos "protected" the Catholic population of the North from the loyalists, they did a remarkably poor job of it. They spent most of their time bombing people's businesses ("economic war") and in the process killing civilians by the hundred through their ineptness,shooting RUC men,judges and so-called 'informers' than targeting loyalists. When they did try, we got the appalling fiasco of the Frizzels fish shop, which only killed civilians and gave the loyalists more excuses for their murderous fury. In fact, the hated and targeted RUC (according to ye, the allies and protectors of the UDA and UVF) took more loyalists off the street and into prison than the IRA campaign ever did. And for all the supposed efforts of the IRA in protecting the nationalist population,the loyalist campaign of murder became more effective with every passing year up to the middle of the 1990s. Not to mention that 'protecting' the catholic population was a bit of a joke,considering that the IRA and their nationalist chums in the INLA were probably responsible for nearly as many catholic deaths as their avowed enemies were, what with murdering informers,"mistakes" etc,etc. With "protectors" like that.....

Border-Rat · 02-12-2008 12:54am

English fred has no trouble arriving to put his feet up in the 'Celtic tiger', but why let that stop him attacking the Natives? English fred reminds me of neo-con racists who attack Iraqis from protecting themselves from Allied rapists.

How many citizens have the IRA killed (Not inclusive of englishmen killing citizens while posing as the PIRA)? How many atrocities have they committed? I'm not sure, but I can however raise the issue of how big a hypocrite this englishman is by taking just a selection of his own military/peoples actions:

- Irish Famine, mass forced starvation: 1,200,000 dead.

- French Navy debacle, WWII mass murder Churchill kills French sailors because they refuse to surrender their boats before Germans retrieve them: 1,500 dead.

- English invasion of Iceland, WWII.

- English invasion of Iran, WWII.

- English attack on Iraq, WWII. The first of no less than 3 attacks the english will launch on Iraqi civilians in less than a century.

- English attacks on Merchant shipping, WWII. Breach of London Naval Treaty. Hospital boats, civilians freighters. Animalistic indifference shown.

- English firebombing of Hospital city Dresden, straffing of civilians at riverbed: 200,000 dead.

- English/anglo-American 'Morgenthau plan' - the deliberate starvation of hundreds of thousands of German POW's.

- English atrocities/murder against German POW's who refuse to lie at show trials.

- English murder 13 Irish civilians, Bloody Sunday. Note: Not the 'other' english bloody sunday, on this Island. The 1972 bloody sunday.

- English sponser UVF terrorists, supply weapons and training.

- English sponser UDA terrorists, supply weapons and training.

- English sponser terrorist butcher Lenny Murphy, provide him with intelligence and immunity. English deliberately let gang which skins Irish civilians alive roam streets, english provide district immunity by removing their army from streets where/when gang will 'hunt'.

- English sponser terrorist and mass murderer Billy 'King Rat' Wright, provide intelligence and training. Sponser the murder of scores of civilians from Tyrone. English later have King Rat killed by giving INLA free pass, because King Rat was going to expose what terrorists they really are.

- English tell Saddam Hussein they won't attack Iraq yet again, if he invades Kuwait. English tell blatant lie, attack Iraq for the second time in 50 years.

- February, 1991. Post-hostilities, as Iraq retreats, English with American assistance assault a 20 mile backup of Iraqi conscripts and civilians contractors. Front end is hit with artillery, rear end hit with artillery, englosh savages obliterate everything in between via carpet bombing: At least 20,000 dead.

- August, 1998. English MI5 request satellite surveillence over Tyrone to track Vauxhall cavalier with MI5-equipped GPS transmitter. Car is equipped with 500lbs of explosives. English sponsered 'RUC' deliberately run like hell from cavalier, behind shopping centre, await blast, and witness the deaths of 30 people.

- 2002, English invade Afghanistan.

- March, 2003. English terrorists barrages Iraqi civilians with cluster bombs, annihilating Iraqi men, women and children.

- March, 2003. English terrorists illegally invade Iraq. Smash infrastructure. Kill men, women and children.

- March 2003 - present, 1,100,000 Iraq men, women and children dead as a result of English invasion.

- 1991/2003 - present, Iraqi cancer rates soar over 600% as a result of english terrorist DU ammunition. Deformities in Iraqi infants sky rocket, a result of english terrorist bombardments.

I could go on all night, but I couldn't be bothered. Now go on. Tell me about a few IRA murders here, there in comparison. You make me sick to the pit of my stomach. Die.

Border-Rat · 02-12-2008 1:02am

RSF Cill Dara wrote: »

The Irish in the north east of Ireland were forced to the gun as
they were burnt out of their homes ,
spit at ,
shot at,
killed all for been Irish.
what would you have done?

He probably would've joined the british army and got stuck straight in. I hear its a trend these days, south of the divide.

philologos · 02-12-2008 9:19am

Border-Rat wrote: »

He probably would've joined the british army and got stuck straight in. I hear its a trend these days, south of the divide.

I don't support any RUC / British army actions either. I don't support gratuitious death over a social construct (i.e the nation), which is basically a certain meaning which is applied to a certain people, a particular meaning that is imposed over a certain geographical area. I don't consider it worth coming to physical blows for.

Fratton Fred · 02-12-2008 9:54am

Border-Rat wrote: »

English fred has no trouble arriving to put his feet up in the 'Celtic tiger', but why let that stop him attacking the Natives? English fred reminds me of neo-con racists who attack Iraqis from protecting themselves from Allied rapists.

I could go on all night, but I couldn't be bothered. Now go on. Tell me about a few IRA murders here, there in comparison. You make me sick to the pit of my stomach. Die.

Tel me, is your problem with what i say, or who is saying it.

Either way, I'm not sure if your post is racist or xenophobic.

Oh well, who cares. hopefully we won't be seeing much more of you.

ilkhanid · 02-12-2008 2:31pm

I'd say it's racist and xenophobic.

"English fred has no trouble arriving to put his feet up in the 'Celtic tiger', but why let that stop him attacking the Natives?"

Why should'nt he? Millions of Irish people have gone to work and live in the UK and made lives there, including people from my family. Would you begrudge a few folk coming back the other way? And as a 'native' I don't feel attacked.

As for this ranting list of British perfidy....what a confused,garbled muddle comprised of the odd bit of truth,a load of misinterpretation, conspiracy-theory twaddle,another load of dubious and debatable assertions and a rich helping of downright nonsense. "The english invasion"? If one took this for gospel one would believe that the British were the main actors in the invasion of Iraq with the Americans just playing a walk-on role....and thats just one of the daft things here.:D

Fratton Fred · 02-12-2008 4:38pm

ilkhanid wrote: »

"English fred has no trouble arriving to put his feet up in the 'Celtic tiger', but why let that stop him attacking the Natives?"

I actually came to Ireland because I have an Irish wife who wanted to return home, it had nothing to do with any tigers, Celtic or otherwise.

Incidentally, she now wants to return back to England, whereas I love it here. Unfortunately the job front may mean she gets her way.

ilkhanid · 02-12-2008 7:52pm

Well ,good luck wherever you go, Fred. I'd say you won't miss twits like this.;)

RSF Cill Dara · 02-12-2008 11:20pm

ilkhanid wrote: »

Well ,good luck wherever you go, Fred. I'd say you won't miss twits like this.;)

twits like who?

PHB · 02-12-2008 11:23pm

So many people in this thread should really be banned, I'll have a look at this thread to see who should be later on.

Will there ever be a Bobby Sands Street in the country?

Comments