Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
On this day in 1981 Bobby Sands began his Hunger Strike
-
01-03-2014 10:17amLike him, loathe him or indifferent to him his actions, and those of his comrades, irrevocably changed the face of Irish politics.
During the course of the Hunger Strike Bobby Sands was elected as a Member of British Parliament.
His election, though not as a Sinn Féin candidate, showed Sinn Féin the massive support that was latent out there that could potentially be tapped into. This was a direct continuation on from Kieran Nugent's initial refusal in 1976 to wear prison clothes "nor meekly serve my time" which, together with Bobby's election, has led to the Peace Process on this island.
Throughout the world Bobby Sands is held up as a figure of resistance and equality and is internationally respected... but not so much by authorities in his own country.
If we really are a 'mature nation' it's time we properly embraced our past and heroes like Bobby Sands and remembered them with the love and pride they deserve, not the disdain, embarrassment and confusion that many exude mainly due to a lack of knowledge.
Bobby Sands and others didn't cause the war, they merely fought back. Fighting back against an invading aggressive army is never wrong.
How this country could do with Bobby Sands today, the time is coming that we will soon hear the laughter of our children.
"I may die, but the Republic of 1916 will never die. Onward to the Republic and liberation of our people"11
Comments
-
Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 47,335 CMod ✭✭✭✭Join Date:Posts: 36456
MOD MOVING COMMENT:
This thread is of historical nature and may be better featured in the History and Heritage forum. It's being moved locked, so that mods may review it for appropriateness.0 -
A very noteworthy figure in Irish history. I think a thread that debates his actions and the effect he had on Irish history is fine. I would note though that the charter will be strictly enforced at moderators will on any poster that is deemed to be trying to derail thread.0
-
bobbysands81 wrote: »Like him, loathe him or indifferent to him his actions, and those of his comrades, irrevocably changed the face of Irish politics.
You start off so well...During the course of the Hunger Strike Bobby Sands was elected as a Member of British Parliament.
His election, though not as a Sinn Féin candidate, showed Sinn Féin the massive support that was latent out there that could potentially be tapped into. This was a direct continuation on from Kieran Nugent's initial refusal in 1976 to wear prison clothes "nor meekly serve my time" which, together with Bobby's election, has led to the Peace Process on this island.
And continue in a nice, objective vein...Throughout the world Bobby Sands is held up as a figure of resistance and equality and is internationally respected... but not so much by authorities in his own country.
Which then begins to crumble...
Bobby Sands is unknown t the vast majority of people internationally. To some who have heard of him, he is a hero and well-respected. To others, he represents violent terrorism. Others don't have an opinion either way. To claim however, that he is "internationally respected" is ludicrous. I have friends from many countries. It would be daft however, to claim, on that basis, that I am internationally liked. And it's equally as spurious to claim international respect for Bobby Sands on the basis of a street in Tehran, and a partisan and narrow reading of disparate viewpoints.If we really are a 'mature nation' it's time we properly embraced our past and heroes like Bobby Sands and remembered them with the love and pride they deserve, not the disdain, embarrassment and confusion that many exude mainly due to a lack of knowledge.
Mature nations generally have populations with disparate viewpoints. Mature societies respect differing opinions. And mature people don't seek to paint different opinions as the product of ignorance. Nice try, but it's nonsense.Fighting back against an invading aggressive army is never wrong.
Ummm, yes it can be. It all depends on the tactics and strategy one employs. It's very naive to think that the act of fighting back automatically enobles all who follow that case, regardless of actions is naive in the extreme.How this country could do with Bobby Sands today, the time is coming that we will soon hear the laughter of our children.
I hear the laugther of children every day.0 -
and Roger Casement returned home (1st March 1965)0
-
Bobby Sands, as a physical force republican, presents a problem that few others do. He certainly did present himself to the people and was massively endorsed. What exactly the people endorsed in a matter of opinion. I disagree with the OP who thought it was latent support for Sinn Fein and think in truth, it was a vote greatly swelled by the anger of nationalists at the British handling of the hunger strikes.
But the road Bobby Sands originally took was not endorsed by the Irish people. In the late 20th century, as now, and even perhaps before, the Irish did not and do not sanction physical force to bring about a united Ireland.
If we were to upgrade his official status to Irish hero surely we are giving licence to current and future groups who would use force to being about political ends (and they need not even be republicans) who would not need worry about mandates from their peers as their more enlightened descendents will redeem their reputations?0 -
Advertisement
-
OP is a rather trite rosetinted view and quite inaccurate in many of its claims.bobbysands81 wrote: »If we really are a 'mature nation' it's time we properly embraced our past and heroes like Bobby Sands and remembered them with the love and pride they deserve, not the disdain, embarrassment and confusion that many exude mainly due to a lack of knowledge.bobbysands81 wrote: »Bobby Sands and others didn't cause the war, they merely fought back. Fighting back against an invading aggressive army is never wrong.
How this country could do with Bobby Sands today, the time is coming that we will soon hear the laughter of our children.0 -
pedroeibar1 wrote: »
Sands & co wanted a 32 county Socialist Republic and were prepared to (and did) shoot and bomb people to try to get their way, regardless of the views of the majority. The sentiment throughout Dublin at the time of the hungerstrike largely was anti-British and while many people were against what Britain was doing to Northern Ireland they were not supportive of all the aims of the hungerstrikers nor did they support the IRA’s violence or its aspirations. It is nonsense to state there was 'huge latent support for Sinn Fein' – there is a huge difference between support for a party/individual and a once-off vote against an existing political system. I am neither confused, ill-informed nor embarrassed over my views on Sands and like many I find your remarks unnecessarily condescending and quite inaccurate.
The 5 demands of the huger strikers were relatively simple- I do not see any evidence that people with an interest in the 'troubles' would have denied these rights. After the hunger strike was ended the 5 demands were granted which begs the question why the deaths were allowed happen. That Sands had been elected MP and was not listened to was and is controversial as it can be considered that after his election he had a mandate for his cause (The use of democracy adding legitimacy to the strikers).
Also I do not understand your suggestion that this was a "once-off vote against an existing political system". The current administration in northern Ireland proves this to be a doubtworthy statement.pedroeibar1 wrote: »The British troops were initially welcomed into the North by the people of Derry; the mismanagement of NI by Westminster changed that view. Ignoring the claim of the ‘invading aggressive' bit, fighting an army is one thing, but planting bombs, robbing banks and maiming thousands of innocents is not heroic. Sands’ torchbearers today do not support the peace process and there are strong Real IRA connections, so no, I do not see any need to glorify people like that or indeed how Sands could contribute anything to Irish society today. There are a lot of dead innocents that cannot hear the laughter of their grandchildren due to the IRA, so that last sentence is a load of BX."On the question of principle, Britain's prime minister Thatcher is right in refusing to yield political status to Bobby Sands, the Irish Republican Army hunger striker. But this dying young man has made it appear that her stubbornness, rather than his own, is the source of a fearful conflict already ravaging Northern Ireland. For that, Mrs. Thatcher is partly to blame. By appearing unfeeling and unresponsive, she and her Government are providing Bobby Sands with a death-bed gift-the crown of martyrdom." "Britain's Gift to Bobby Sands"
New York Times, 29 April 1981"As they did with Kevin Barry, executed at 18 by the British in 1920, poets will write sad songs of Bobby Sands, filling American saloons with late-night tears and beers...Ireland does not need more sad songs. Ireland does not need more martyrs. The slow suicide attempt of Bobby Sands has cast his land and his cause into another downward spiral of death and despair. There are no heroes in the saga of Bobby Sands."
Boston Globe, 3 May 1981,Reaction flooded in from around the world. The US Government issued a statement expressing deep regret. The Longshoremen's Union announced a twenty-four-hour boycott of British ships. The New Jersey State legislature voted 34-29 for a resolution honouring his 'courage and commitment'. More than 1,000 gathered in St Patrick's Cathedral to hear New York's Cardinal Cook offer a Mass of reconciliation for northern -Ireland. Irish bars in the city closed for two hours in mourning. The New York Times said: 'Despite proximity and a common language the British have persistently misjudged the depth of Irish nationalism.' In San Francisco's Irish community the mood was reported to be 'subdued, courteous enough, but curiously menacing, as if everyone is waiting for a message as yet undelivered'. In Rome the President of the Italian Senate, Amintore Fanfani, stepped into the breach left by the British Speaker, expressing condolences to the Sands family. About 5,000 students burnt the Union Jack and shouted 'Freedom for Ulster' during a march in Milan. In Ghent students invaded the British consulate. Thousands marched in Paris behind a huge portrait of Sands, to chants of 'The IRA will conquer.' The town of Le Mans announced it was naming a street after him, which the British Embassy said was 'an insult to Britain'.
The Hong Kong Standard said it was 'sad that successive British governments have failed to end the last of Europe's religious wars'. The Hindustan Times said Mrs Thatcher had allowed a fellow Member of Parliament to die of starvation, an incident which had never before occurred 'in a civilized country'. Tehran announced Iran would be sending its ambassador in Sweden to represent the Government at the funeral. In Oslo demonstrators threw a balloon filled with tomato sauce at the Queen, who was on a visit to Norway. In India Opposition members of the Upper House stood for a minute's silence in tribute. Members of Indira Gandhi's ruling Congress Party refused to join in. In Portugal members of the Opposition stood for him.
http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/events/hstrike/beresford.htm0 -
pedroeibar1 wrote: »Sands’ torchbearers today do not support the peace process and there are strong Real IRA connections,
The organisation that Bobby Sands was a member of fully supported the Peace Process, it's political representatives are today elected members of the resulting power sharing executive. To try and suggest that he was or is some how linked to the Real IRA is wrong.
I don't believe that anybody who takes such course of action (hunger strike) can be 'hero worshiped'. I do believe he and all the others who participated in the blanket and Hunger strikes showed a strength and determination that can only be admired by those who find themselves in a similar situation.0 -
I started reading Bobby Sands Diary from his time starting on the hunger strike till he was too ill to write any further. It is an extraordinary read.0
-
bobbysands81 wrote: »How this country could do with Bobby Sands today
"
Genuinely, If he were alive today, what positive effect would he have on the country?0 -
Advertisement
-
rockatansky wrote: »Genuinely, If he were alive today, what positive effect would he have on the country?
He would be a great inspiration to those participating on Operation Transformation0 -
You have some unusual inferences in your post on what I wrote, JBG.jonniebgood1 wrote: »Was there not support in Dublin for the hunger strikers. There were attacks on the British embassy the night of Francis Hughes death. What prompts your suggestion that Dublin sentiment was 'anti British' rather that supporting the hunger strikers?pedroeibar1 wrote: »The sentiment throughout Dublin at the time of the hungerstrike largely was anti-British and while many people were against what Britain was doing to Northern Ireland they were not supportive of all the aims of the hungerstrikers nor did they support the IRA’s violence or its aspirations.jonniebgood1 wrote: »The 5 demands of the huger strikers were relatively simple- I do not see any evidence that people with an interest in the 'troubles' would have denied these rights. After the hunger strike was ended the 5 demands were granted which begs the question why the deaths were allowed happen. That Sands had been elected MP and was not listened to was and is controversial as it can be considered that after his election he had a mandate for his cause (The use of democracy adding legitimacy to the strikers).jonniebgood1 wrote: »Also I do not understand your suggestion that this was a "once-off vote against an existing political system". The current administration in northern Ireland proves this to be a doubtworthy statement.jonniebgood1 wrote: »Linking Sands to the Real IRA seems like a desperate stretch with no proper proof even possible. His memory in reality is enhanced as are many who die for a cause, when the death appears to have been imposed. He is remembered by both his own followers and most neutral observers as a martyr. Whether that was manufactured by IRA leadership may be debated but it is the way he is remembered. His legacy as a Martyr is proven in some of the headlines of the time in response to his death:pedroeibar1 wrote: »Sands’ torchbearers today do not support the peace process and there are strong Real IRA connections, so no, I do not see any need to glorify people like....
The main ‘torchbearer’ is his sister, married to McKevitt (the convicted Omagh bomber) has always been against the Belfast Agreement and its tenets, stating that "Bobby did not die for cross-border bodies with executive powers.’ (English, Armed Struggle: The History of the IRA, p 316–317) She and her husband were founder members of the The 32 County Sovereignty Movement, generally accepted as the political wing of the RIRA.
I’d maintain that most people who were students in the late 60’s /early 70’s supported the Burntollet marchers and initial protest movements (including initially the IRA) in NI but by the time of the hunger strike were totally disillusioned with Sinn Fein, the IRA and that brand of republicanism.
Nowadays most people under 40 probably neither know nor care about Sands and the other strikers and the event is probably a margin-note in their memory.0 -
While working in local youth club the teenagers were quite animated about the hunger strike & Bobby Sands0
-
TheHappyChappy wrote: »I started reading Bobby Sands Diary from his time starting on the hunger strike till he was too ill to write any further. It is an extraordinary read.
A lot of people are of the opinion that these "diaries" were written by another person as propaganda fodder. Sands didn't have a history of writing and due to his protest was unable to avail of any educational courses in Long Kesh0 -
Santa Cruz wrote: »A lot of people are of the opinion that these "diaries" were written by another person as propaganda fodder. Sands didn't have a history of writing and due to his protest was unable to avail of any educational courses in Long Kesh
I'm studying history at NUIM at moment could you tell me where you seen this written as I've never come across that suggestion previously0 -
pedroeibar1 wrote: »There are a lot of dead innocents that cannot hear the laughter of their grandchildren due to the IRA, so that last sentence is a load of BX.0
-
ChicagoJoe wrote: »All ultimately victims of British violence and the reactions it inevitably produces.
Such a narrow minded view does not warrant any response.0 -
TheHappyChappy wrote: »I'm studying history at NUIM at moment could you tell me where you seen this written as I've never come across that suggestion previously
You will cover it in year 40 -
Is santa cruz a spoofer?0
-
Santa Cruz wrote: »You will cover it in year 4
Second year History Post Grad,
Obviously you made up your comment & your embarrassed to be found out as a spoofer
Your a spoofer Santa Cruz....yes?0 -
Advertisement
-
TheHappyChappy wrote: »Second year History Post Grad,
Obviously you made up your comment & your embarrassed to be found out as a spoofer
Your a spoofer Santa Cruz....yes?
No I'm not. You shouldn't believe everything that is pushed by the Provo side
Sands alleged diaries should be filed under fiction or credited to the proper author. At the time the SF/PIRA propaganda department was under pressure to paint Sands as a latter day poet/writer/Patrick Pearse. Such stereotype drivel came out then as his writings.0 -
TheHappyChappy wrote: »Is santa cruz a spoofer?
Watch your conduct or I will ban you.
You have the opportunity to back up your opinion on Sands diary if you wish. Calling people names will end in only 1 way. If it happens again you will be banned.
moderator0 -
Santa Cruz wrote: »No I'm not. You shouldn't believe everything that is pushed by the Provo side
Sands alleged diaries should be filed under fiction or credited to the proper author. At the time the SF/PIRA propaganda department was under pressure to paint Sands as a latter day poet/writer/Patrick Pearse. Such stereotype drivel came out then as his writings.0 -
bobbysands81 wrote: »it's time we properly embraced our past and heroes like Bobby Sands and remembered them with the love and pride they deserve
Considering the anemic amount of Michael Collins statues in Ireland, I do not hold out much hope for signs of remembrance for the hunger strikers.0 -
Santa Cruz wrote: »A lot of people are of the opinion that these "diaries" were written by another person as propaganda fodder. Sands didn't have a history of writing and due to his protest was unable to avail of any educational courses in Long Kesh
Utter tripe. Any links at all to back that up???
Sands was always a prolific writer.
"I wish I was back home in Derry" and "McIlhatton" were both written by Sands and recorded by Christy Moore.
Bobby Sands would have been 60 today.
At least some major figures in Ireland recognise the sacrifice of Bobby Sands - http://www.christymoore.com/news/remembering-bobby-sands/0 -
bobbysands81 wrote: »Utter tripe. Any links at all to back that up???
Sands was always a prolific writer.
"I wish I was back home in Derry" and "McIlhatton" were both written by Sands and recorded by Christy Moore.
Actually Christy B said that he was given the song by another who told him it was written by Sands. So do you have any source to back up your claim?0 -
pedroeibar1 wrote: »Actually Christy B said that he was given the song by another who told him it was written by Sands. So do you have any source to back up your claim?0
-
No evidence yet....
It appears that on Boards.ie the problem is not with posting fiction with a personal bias & presenting it as historical fact, but in challenging it as aggressively as it is presented sad day for Boards.ie
Thank you to all that have supported me, much appreciated0 -
TheHappyChappy wrote: »No evidence yet....
It appears that on Boards.ie the problem is not with posting fiction with a personal bias & presenting it as historical fact, but in challenging it as aggressively as it is presented sad day for Boards.ie
Thank you to all that have supported me, much appreciated
This is a discussion forum, not a blog. Topics get discussed and debated here.
I've never heard of the Bobby Sands diaries being fake, but I have heard the songs he supposedly wrote were written by his brother, Sean who is a well known singer songwriter.
Whilst we ate waiting for Santa Cruz to back up his claim, you could disprove him.
If you're a history student then you will appreciate here say isn't a form of proof either way.0 -
Advertisement
-
The fact Thatcher quietly gave them all their demands after the hunger strike within a year of it says how easily the whole dreadful situation could have been avoided. The main legacy of the hunger strikes undoubtedly is that it gave SF the political platform in the north to begin their eventual take over from the SDLP and brought about the Anglo Irish Agreement which unionism hated, knocking them off their perch and have never recovered from.0
-
Sorry, reading post from op to date again - whats your point?0
-
ChicagoJoe wrote: »The fact Thatcher quietly gave them all their demands after the hunger strike within a year of it says how easily the whole dreadful situation could have been avoided. The main legacy of the hunger strikes undoubtedly is that it gave SF the political platform in the north to begin their eventual take over from the SDLP and brought about the Anglo Irish Agreement which unionism hated, knocking them off their perch and have never recovered from.
She gave four of their five demands pretty quickly, but SF wanted to milk the political capital, a move that cost six men their lives.0 -
Fratton Fred wrote: »This is a discussion forum, not a blog. Topics get discussed and debated here.
I've never heard of the Bobby Sands diaries being fake, but I have heard the songs he supposedly wrote were written by his brother, Sean who is a well known singer songwriter.
Whilst we ate waiting for Santa Cruz to back up his claim, you could disprove him.
If you're a history student then you will appreciate here say isn't a form of proof either way.
Sorry I've lost you, whats your point?0 -
ChicagoJoe wrote: »Like post #24, what evidence have you to back that up? ( and Wiki's do not countTheHappyChappy wrote: »No evidence yet....
It appears that on Boards.ie the problem is not with posting fiction with a personal bias & presenting it as historical fact, but in challenging it as aggressively as it is presented sad day for Boards.ie
Thank you to all that have supported me, much appreciated
Not that I’d expect much in the way of history or research from either of you, there is absolutely no proof that Sands wrote it, if you read Christy’s site here you will see your claim is hearsay. FWIW, CM's view is that it is a great song and does not care who wrote it, nor did he care about the controversy over 'The Cliffs of Dooneen' , viewing that affair the same way.
What CM wrote - After my gig .......... having a banter and drinking tea when a bit of singing broke out. A lad, just home from The Blocks, sang these verses and subsequently wrote out the words for me. At the time the name Bobby Sands was not known to the world as it is today. The following night I played in Bellaghy where the same process took place when I stayed with Scullion. Later on he“sang” McIlhatton for me and told me it had been written by Bobby Sands.
If either of you want to be taken seriously here you'd better come up with something better than the content of your posts to date.0 -
pedroeibar1 wrote: »Not that I’d expect much in the way of history or research from either of you, there is absolutely no proof that Sands wrote it, if you read Christy’s site here you will see your claim is hearsay. FWIW, CM's view is that it is a great song and does not care who wrote it, nor did he care about the controversy over 'The Cliffs of Dooneen' , viewing that affair the same way.
What CM wrote - After my gig .......... having a banter and drinking tea when a bit of singing broke out. A lad, just home from The Blocks, sang these verses and subsequently wrote out the words for me. At the time the name Bobby Sands was not known to the world as it is today. The following night I played in Bellaghy where the same process took place when I stayed with Scullion. Later on he“sang” McIlhatton for me and told me it had been written by Bobby Sands.
If either of you want to be taken seriously here you'd better come up with something better than the content of your posts to date.
Any idea what year this was?0 -
Advertisement
-
pedroeibar1 wrote: »
[/I]If either of you want to be taken seriously here you'd better come up with something better than the content of your posts to date.
You've made a spurious claim, backing it up with nothing of note, and passing it off as the truth. Not one shred of evidence or credibility offered. Your question is akin to asking "how long have you been beating your wife?"
I did my MA thesis on Bobby Sands and have never heard even a whisper before that he hadn't written these poems before.
If you're going to be taken seriously here you'd better come up with something better than the contents of your posts to date...0 -
bobbysands81 wrote: »You've made a spurious claim, backing it up with nothing of note, and passing it off as the truth. Not one shred of evidence or credibility offered. Your question is akin to asking "how long have you been beating your wife?"
I did my MA thesis on Bobby Sands and have never heard even a whisper before that he hadn't written these poems before.
If you're going to be taken seriously here you'd better come up with something better than the contents of your posts to date...
What an inaccurate and nonsensical post. You were the one to claim that Bobby Sands wrote a couple of songs and cited Christy Moore as a confirmatory source –I responded that Moore on his own site said he got them from a lad who got them from Sands. That is not proof. If you can provide proof I’m quite open to accept your view.
As to your question on when 'Derry' was written, it is a very old folk tune, and as far as I recall CM started singing it in sessions during the late 70’s, certainly not in Dowlings in the early 70’s and it was not recorded until much later c mid ‘80’s. (I’m also a possessor of an original ‘Prosperous’ LP that was recorded in Andrew Rynnes basement, the cover photo for which was taken on the steps of that house.)
To revert with a claim that you did an MA on Sands is puerile, irrrelevant and probably untrue, as anyone who has posted the several sad comments [e.g. your misspelled ‘tres droll’ (sic)] since removed by Mods could not be educated to that standard.
I see no justification to extol Sands; he was a misguided young man who was callously manipulated by others. The fact that he is celebrated outside Ireland is irrelevant, and probably as a result of a political agenda (as, for e.g. in Iran).0 -
pedroeibar1 wrote: »I see no justification to extol Sands
Having said that I think it is quite possible that redemption will eventually come to Sands. It cannot be doubted that he was very committed to what he believed, not to mention personally very courageous. And of course when it comes to revising our view of such people we have a bit of form!0 -
pedroeibar1 wrote: »What an inaccurate and nonsensical post. You were the one to claim that Bobby Sands wrote a couple of songs and cited Christy Moore as a confirmatory source –I responded that Moore on his own site said he got them from a lad who got them from Sands. That is not proof. If you can provide proof I’m quite open to accept your view.
As to your question on when 'Derry' was written, it is a very old folk tune, and as far as I recall CM started singing it in sessions during the late 70’s, certainly not in Dowlings in the early 70’s and it was not recorded until much later c mid ‘80’s. (I’m also a possessor of an original ‘Prosperous’ LP that was recorded in Andrew Rynnes basement, the cover photo for which was taken on the steps of that house.)
To revert with a claim that you did an MA on Sands is puerile, irrrelevant and probably untrue, as anyone who has posted the several sad comments [e.g. your misspelled ‘tres droll’ (sic)] since removed by Mods could not be educated to that standard.
I see no justification to extol Sands; he was a misguided young man who was callously manipulated by others. The fact that he is celebrated outside Ireland is irrelevant, and probably as a result of a political agenda (as, for e.g. in Iran).
I never cited Moore as a source of proof that Sands wrote those poems.
You've claimed he didn't write them so please leave your childish bickering and get back on topic with some sources please.0 -
Fratton Fred wrote: »She gave four of their five demands pretty quickly, but SF wanted to milk the political capital, a move that cost six men their lives.
http://www.nuzhound.com/articles/irish_news/arts2005/mar11_hunger_strike_war_of_words.php0 -
Advertisement
-
pedroeibar1 wrote: »What an inaccurate and nonsensical post. You were the one to claim that Bobby Sands wrote a couple of songs and cited Christy Moore as a confirmatory source –I responded that Moore on his own site said he got them from a lad who got them from Sands. That is not proof. If you can provide proof I’m quite open to accept your view.
Your telling fat ones buddyI see no justification to extol Sands; he was a misguided young man who was callously manipulated by others. The fact that he is celebrated outside Ireland is irrelevant, and probably as a result of a political agenda (as, for e.g. in Iran).0 -
Note- A selection of posts are removed. No infractions issued at the moment but they will follow if people deviate from forum charter in any way. Anyone posting on this thread will take note of charter and section on threads of this nature.
Moderator0 -
pedroeibar1 wrote: »I see no justification to extol Sands; he was a misguided young man who was callously manipulated by others. The fact that he is celebrated outside Ireland is irrelevant, and probably as a result of a political agenda (as, for e.g. in Iran).
This is far to easy a dismissal. He was remembered in official terms in many western democracies as well as countries where an 'agenda' could be blamed for this. Earlier in the thread links were provided to opinion in European countries and a series of respected American newspapers editorials.0 -
jonniebgood1 wrote: »This is far to easy a dismissal. He was remembered in official terms in many western democracies as well as countries where an 'agenda' could be blamed for this. Earlier in the thread links were provided to opinion in European countries and a series of respected American newspapers editorials.
I did not mean it as a 'dismissal' - it is representative of fact, which available if you look behind what is written/quoted in CAIN.
Sands as I said earlier was manipulated. He and the other strikers were pawns and too politically immature to realise that. Thatcher was using them to send a ‘hard’ message to the IRA/Sinn Fein and was prepared to let the them die to achieve that end. On the opposite side, the IRA/Sinn Fein believed that the adverse PR against Thatcher & Co was a godsend, the deaths (of marked men) would be an opportunity to be seized and milked for what it was worth. No country will give in to blackmail, which effectively is what the strike amounted to. The outcome was a forgone conclusion under any leader, and that does not even take into account the 'Iron Lady' rule of Thatcher.
Apart from the antics of students (which one would expect to be anti-establishment anyway) the general tone of international official comment was slightly tut tut, condemnatory of the events but not supportive of Sands or the IRA. Diplomatically that is a very strong signal.
Belgium – students protested, attacked a British consulate. Big Deal.
France – The history of violent protest in France is worth a study in itself but by French standards Sands’ death was a non-event. No town halls burned, riots, nothing of consequence. A few small streets in minor towns (e.g. Le Mans, Vierzon, Nantes) were named after him. Most French towns have streets named after foreigners – for e.g. there are DOZENS of streets named after JFK. (TOT but there is only one street in Paris , a tiny lane, named after Napoleon.)
Germany - the Government said nothing and the main paper (Die Welt) said that the British Government was right because Sands was trying to blackmail the state with his life. Moreover, Germany was hardly a big ally of GB at that date, so more can be read into the comment/lack thereof.
Hong Kong - The main English paper, the Standard said it was 'sad that successive British governments have failed to end the last of Europe's religious wars'. While that is a BS comment, any inference must be taken in the context of that era, at a time when there were diplomatic games being played between China and GB, coupled with electoral reform in HK as a foundation to the strategies for the eventual handover/departure of Britain.
India - As a former colony one would expect strong words of reproof against the old masters, but that did not really happen. The Hindustan Times said Thatcher had allowed a fellow MP to starve to death, which is rather specious. A small number of Opposition members in the Rajya/Upper House stood for a minute’s silence. Indira Gandhi, main party leader refused to partake in that little side-show. That was an important message – her father, Nehru, was the Mahatma’s political heir, and she was allied with nationalist sentiment. She did nothing. And while we are on the Gandhi name, significantly, the Chicago Tribune (which in those days was a great paper) wrote that Gandhi used his hunger strike to get his countrymen to abstain from civil war and that Sands' deliberate slow suicide was intended to precipitate civil war.
Italy In Rome the President of the Italian Senate, Fanfani, expressed condolences to the Sands family. He was an interesting character, a fascist who turned lefty, so his socialist ideals were at one with the IRA. And as usual a bunch of students burned a union Jack. Well, that's Italy and Fanfani is the guy who once held a government together for 23 days!
Portugal - members of the Opposition stood for a minute's silence. Bet that impressed everybody.
Spain - the Ya newspaper described Sands's hunger strike as 'subjectively an act of heroism' . Whatever that means, but then what would one expect from an ultra right-wing paper that effectively was an organ of the Catholic Church.... Competitor, ABC which was more monarchist, said Sands was 'a political kamikaze who had got his strategy wrong.'
USA The US Government issued a statement expressing deep regret. I mean, with the importance of the Irish vote in the US, with Tip O’Neill as Speaker of the House, and the general ignorance of the Irish community on Irish affairs, what would you expect them to do/say?
The Longshoremen's Union announced a twenty-four-hour boycott of British ships. Those guys are dockers, would not know where Ireland is on a map and are 6,000 miles away - or more if you go by ship.
The New Jersey State legislature voted 34-29 for a resolution honouring Sands' 'courage and commitment'. Nice kick to touch that!
In NYC at St Patrick's Cathedral there was a Mass of reconciliation for Northern Ireland. That really worked!
Irish bars in NYC city closed for two hours in mourning. Two hours? Big deal, a blend of assuaging customer sentiment with a keen eye on the bottom line!
The New York Times said: 'Despite proximity and a common language the British have persistently misjudged the depth of Irish nationalism.'
Rather Wildean, no?
So, worldwide, among the little people, nothing much happened. Worldwide, among the people who do count, or care, or have real influence, Sands’ death was a non event. And still is; water under the bridge.
I'll stop there.0 -
pedroeibar1 wrote: »I did not mean it as a 'dismissal' - it is representative of fact, which available if you look behind what is written/quoted in CAIN.
Sands as I said earlier was manipulated. He and the other strikers were pawns and too politically immature to realise that. Thatcher was using them to send a ‘hard’ message to the IRA/Sinn Fein and was prepared to let the them die to achieve that end. On the opposite side, the IRA/Sinn Fein believed that the adverse PR against Thatcher & Co was a godsend, the deaths (of marked men) would be an opportunity to be seized and milked for what it was worth. No country will give in to blackmail, which effectively is what the strike amounted to. The outcome was a forgone conclusion under any leader, and that does not even take into account the 'Iron Lady' rule of Thatcher.
Apart from the antics of students (which one would expect to be anti-establishment anyway) the general tone of international official comment was slightly tut tut, condemnatory of the events but not supportive of Sands or the IRA. Diplomatically that is a very strong signal.
Belgium – students protested, attacked a British consulate. Big Deal.
France – The history of violent protest in France is worth a study in itself but by French standards Sands’ death was a non-event. No town halls burned, riots, nothing of consequence. A few small streets in minor towns (e.g. Le Mans, Vierzon, Nantes) were named after him. Most French towns have streets named after foreigners – for e.g. there are DOZENS of streets named after JFK. (TOT but there is only one street in Paris , a tiny lane, named after Napoleon.)
Germany - the Government said nothing and the main paper (Die Welt) said that the British Government was right because Sands was trying to blackmail the state with his life. Moreover, Germany was hardly a big ally of GB at that date, so more can be read into the comment/lack thereof.
Hong Kong - The main English paper, the Standard said it was 'sad that successive British governments have failed to end the last of Europe's religious wars'. While that is a BS comment, any inference must be taken in the context of that era, at a time when there were diplomatic games being played between China and GB, coupled with electoral reform in HK as a foundation to the strategies for the eventual handover/departure of Britain.
India - As a former colony one would expect strong words of reproof against the old masters, but that did not really happen. The Hindustan Times said Thatcher had allowed a fellow MP to starve to death, which is rather specious. A small number of Opposition members in the Rajya/Upper House stood for a minute’s silence. Indira Gandhi, main party leader refused to partake in that little side-show. That was an important message – her father, Nehru, was the Mahatma’s political heir, and she was allied with nationalist sentiment. She did nothing. And while we are on the Gandhi name, significantly, the Chicago Tribune (which in those days was a great paper) wrote that Gandhi used his hunger strike to get his countrymen to abstain from civil war and that Sands' deliberate slow suicide was intended to precipitate civil war.
Italy In Rome the President of the Italian Senate, Fanfani, expressed condolences to the Sands family. He was an interesting character, a fascist who turned lefty, so his socialist ideals were at one with the IRA. And as usual a bunch of students burned a union Jack. Well, that's Italy and Fanfani is the guy who once held a government together for 23 days!
Portugal - members of the Opposition stood for a minute's silence. Bet that impressed everybody.
Spain - the Ya newspaper described Sands's hunger strike as 'subjectively an act of heroism' . Whatever that means, but then what would one expect from an ultra right-wing paper that effectively was an organ of the Catholic Church.... Competitor, ABC which was more monarchist, said Sands was 'a political kamikaze who had got his strategy wrong.'
USA The US Government issued a statement expressing deep regret. I mean, with the importance of the Irish vote in the US, with Tip O’Neill as Speaker of the House, and the general ignorance of the Irish community on Irish affairs, what would you expect them to do/say?
The Longshoremen's Union announced a twenty-four-hour boycott of British ships. Those guys are dockers, would not know where Ireland is on a map and are 6,000 miles away - or more if you go by ship.
The New Jersey State legislature voted 34-29 for a resolution honouring Sands' 'courage and commitment'. Nice kick to touch that!
In NYC at St Patrick's Cathedral there was a Mass of reconciliation for Northern Ireland. That really worked!
Irish bars in NYC city closed for two hours in mourning. Two hours? Big deal, a blend of assuaging customer sentiment with a keen eye on the bottom line!
The New York Times said: 'Despite proximity and a common language the British have persistently misjudged the depth of Irish nationalism.'
Rather Wildean, no?
So, worldwide, among the little people, nothing much happened. Worldwide, among the people who do count, or care, or have real influence, Sands’ death was a non event. And still is; water under the bridge.
I'll stop there.
I wouldn't be a great fan of Bobby Sands politically but my recollection of the time is that it was a much bigger deal that you are allowing.
Apparently the Foreign Office was constantly beleaguered in any negotiation on anything anywhere over the whole series of events . Admittedly most countries were using it for their own ends but that is always the case.
Seen as you have done some brilliant research above how about contrasting the coverage of the recent death of Seamus Heaney with Bobby Sands ?
I would say you might get more in depth coverage of Heaney in the English speaking world but not in the wider arena.
It was a big deal all right at least in my memory.0 -
I wouldn't be a great fan of Bobby Sands politically but my recollection of the time is that it was a much bigger deal that you are allowing.
Apparently the Foreign Office was constantly beleaguered in any negotiation on anything anywhere over the whole series of events . Admittedly most countries were using it for their own ends but that is always the case.
Seen as you have done some brilliant research above how about contrasting the coverage of the recent death of Seamus Heaney with Bobby Sands ?
I would say you might get more in depth coverage of Heaney in the English speaking world but not in the wider arena.
It was a big deal all right at least in my memory.
It was a big deal in my memory too, because it occurred at a time I was becoming politically aware. It was also everywhere in the news.
So yes, like a lot of events they are 'of the moment' and are a big deal at the time.
However, the OP saidThroughout the world Bobby Sands is held up as a figure of resistance and equality and is internationally respected... but not so much by authorities in his own country.
The "...not so much by authorities in his own country" bit I agree with - maybe that's because in the overall context of events then and since he's not that significant, except to a niche, animated minority?
The first part about him being well respected throughout the world is, if we're being kind, somewhat exaggerated. There may be isolated pockets around the world who hold that view, but its nowhere near universal.
A quick search on Google Maps throws up three examples in France of streets named after him (Saint-Herblain, Saint-Denis and Morlaix) and one in Tehran - which I assume has more to do with the proximity of the British embassy than any idea to commemorate him.
Contrast that with something like Bernardo O'Higgins - streets, naval bases, ships etc - now that's being held up as a figure of resistance and equality and being internationally respected!0 -
It was a big deal in my memory too, because it occurred at a time I was becoming politically aware. It was also everywhere in the news.
So yes, like a lot of events they are 'of the moment' and are a big deal at the time.
However, the OP said
The "...not so much by authorities in his own country" bit I agree with - maybe that's because in the overall context of events then and since he's not that significant, except to a niche, animated minority?
The first part about him being well respected throughout the world is, if we're being kind, somewhat exaggerated. There may be isolated pockets around the world who hold that view, but its nowhere near universal.
A quick search on Google Maps throws up three examples in France of streets named after him (Saint-Herblain, Saint-Denis and Morlaix) and one in Tehran - which I assume has more to do with the proximity of the British embassy than any idea to commemorate him.
Contrast that with something like Bernardo O'Higgins - streets, naval bases, ships etc - now that's being held up as a figure of resistance and equality and being internationally respected!
I think you're getting mixed up between 'internationally respected' and a 'household name'.
You don't have to be universally known to be internationally respected. Many Physicians, Anthropologists, Academics etc... would be internationally respected but not known whatsoever by your average man on the street, never mind having a street named after them.
Bobby Sands is without doubt internationally respected, a fact that is denied by his detractors on here.
How many other Irish politicians have been recognised in the same way and had streets named after them for their actions within Ireland?0 -
pedroeibar1 wrote: »Sands’ death was a non event.
Such a non-event that it's been reported that his death was the largest funeral ever on this island...
It must kill you that 33 years on from his death you're still talking about this non-event.0 -
bobbysands81 wrote: »I think you're getting mixed up between 'internationally respected' and a 'household name'.
You don't have to be universally known to be internationally respected. Many Physicians, Anthropologists, Academics etc... would be internationally respected but not known whatsoever by your average man on the street, never mind having a street named after them.
Bobby Sands is without doubt internationally respected, a fact that is denied by his detractors on here.
How many other Irish politicians have been recognised in the same way and had streets named after them for their actions within Ireland?
You're right, many Physicians, Anthropologists, Academics etc are internationally respected, but in their own field of expertise and perhaps n their own country, but that does not mean they can be described as internationally respected in the way you are suggesting Bobby Sands is internationally respected
what is your metric for establishing thatBobby Sands is without doubt internationally respected
As for your questionHow many other Irish politicians have been recognised in the same way and had streets named after them for their actions within Ireland?
I'll start the ball rolling by pointing to O'Connell (lots of streets etc named after him in Spain, Australia etc).....
William Molesworth Street (Adelaide)
Mary Fitzgerald Square (Johannesburg)
Eamon Devalera Street (New Delhi)
....and there's loads of things called Cromwell and Churchill- they're certainly well recognised for their actions within Ireland and elsewhere!0 -
bobbysands81 wrote: »Such a non-event that it's been reported that his death was the largest funeral ever on this island...
It must kill you that 33 years on from his death you're still talking about this non-event.
So what.....no doubt Princess Diana's dwarfed his so if that is your metric then herself was more significant in history than he was??????
.....and we're only talking about him because you started the thread0 -
Advertisement
Advertisement