April 30, 2006


Madradin Ruad

I wonder if Adams consulted the INLA leadership ?

After all Kevin Lynch and Michael Devine were the 8th and 10th men to die.

Not that this will in any way alter SF's ghoulish use of the dead to make money ...

Richard Allen

My only problem with the hunger strikers was that there were so few of them.

David Vance

..very true. Dead terrorists are not a threat,,,it's the live ones we need to worry about.


Bought an XXL-size Remember the Hunger Strikers Tshirt yet from Sinn Fein shop? lol!

Madradin Ruad

Strange - our nationalist and republican fans have gone silent.

IRA blocked deal to resolve hunger strike, says ex-priest


Anyone who was there at the time won't take any of this seriously. The hunger strikes didn't end because of any deal. They ended because of the intervention of Fr Denis Faul who put the responsibility for the continuation of the strikes onto the prisoners families. So the British appeared to win. Just like 1916.

If republicans aren't commenting on this here it is because they do not really expect an honest discussion and the issue is too serious for us to treat your opinions with the usual amused indulgence.

Madradin Ruad

More credible Henry - you guys have gone for the Ostrich response. Head in the sand, Arse in the air.

The hunger strikes didn't end because of any deal.

Congratulations - that's the whole point of this Henry. They were offered one and Adams and co' blocked it for electoral advantage.

As for not taking it seriously - we have to ask ourselves have the Governments a history of offering deals behind the scenes - yes.

We talk of "lions led by donkeys" - the foot-soldiers of the IRA and INLA were shafted by the guys now with holiday homes and air miles.


'Bought an XXL-size Remember the Hunger Strikers Tshirt yet from Sinn Fein shop? lol!' Back in the 1920s during the War of Independace, the IRA ambushed some Black and Tan scum on a bridge in my locality. The IRA stoped fireing after a while and went down to the truck. All the Tans were crying like cowards!!!, Whenever they captured an IRA man, they would shot him straight away, or burn his famillies house, they were expecting the same tretment.

The IRA laughed at the cowards, and told them to go home to their mammys, The IRA would play fair even if the scum didnt.

The funny thing is one of the tan twats was shot in the head by a sniper a week later! LOL, u gotta love the Enlish

Madradin Ruad

And Ogra tries to muddy the waters with some fantasy about before he was born. How predictable.

This is the shinner's collusion issue - like the IRA - it won't go away, you know.


its true, dont believe me if you dont want to. Anyway, how do u not know i'm 90?

To tell you the truth i dont give a crap about the hunger strikes.They deserved War prisoner status, which they eventually got. I just dont like people them hunger strikes jokes, because at the end of the day, they had a just cause. They were being treated like criminals!!! (i know u think they were criminals, i dont think its as clear cut as that)

Madradin Ruad

You might not care - but Holiday Homers are still milking the 10 men for all they are worth .... both in electoral terms and Financially.

The Bobby Sands trust with Gerry Adams as trustee ?

There’s also the question of the Bobby Sands Trust, a little-known body of which Gerry Adams is a trustee. Many members of the Sands family are unhappy that the trust holds the copyright to Sands’s writing and has the original manuscripts of his diaries.

It's also worth remembering that other people died because of the Hunger strikes -
Gerard Hodgins "There were 50 or 60 people killed as a direct result of trouble related to the hunger strike" - If they had been ended earlier then some of those people would still be alive.

This is the Shinner's Collusion issue.



You are reduced to yah-booing because you don't have a case.


>>Margaret Thatcher offered a compromise deal that would have ended the 1981 hunger strike early and saved six of the remaining prisoners who went on to die,<<, the first sentence in his article is typical of the woolly thinking that surrounds almost everything Henry McDonald writes on NI.

Of course any compromise deal would have ended the hunger strike early, IF it had been accepted. But then again, so would have the first deal offered by the British Govt when the strike started, or indeed the deals offered even before it commenced, in which case none of the hunger strikers would have died.
A total waste of printer’s ink by the Observer again.

Such speculation shows a total misunderstanding of the dynamics of the hunger strike. Just because the prisoners finally accepted a deal in October certainly does not mean they would have accepted the same in July. It was never just about the 5 demands. And in any case, at the same time as this supposed "offer", the ICJP, a very conservative Catholic organisation acting as intermediary, and which was against the granting of political status, issued a statement saying it had secured Govt consent to three of the demands. Then just a few days later, on 8 July 1981, the same ICJP withdrew from the negotiations accusing the Northern Ireland Office of reneging on the offer it had made just the previous week !

Forget it!

Madradin Ruad

Henry - you are the one dodging.

Here we have two people with republican cred. saying the same thing - Richard O'Rawe and Denis Bradley - close enough to the IRA to be the priest that married Martin McGuinness while he was on the run .....


Nonsense. Bradly is saying that he heard something second hand and O'Rawe's account has been refuted by everyone. The facts prove them both wrong.

You'd believe anything that you think damages SF so there is no point in expecting you to look at the facts.

Madradin Ruad

O'Rawe's account has been refuted by everyone.

you left the important part out - "O'Rawe's account has been refuted on the record by everyone"

well of course the holiday homers are going to deny everything in public - which is why Bradley's account is such a useful corroboration - because of his good standing within republican circles people did confirm things to him behind the scenes.

Do you really think Adams and co' would dare admit what they did ? There's already enough bitterness amongst the IRA men of that generation at their selling out for holiday homes and air miles. And the British government ? Do you think they would flush their man down the pan ? Because they have 20 years invested in Adams and co.


On 8 July '81, the Irish Commission for Justice and Peace withdrew as intermediary in frustration claiming the British Govt had defaulted even on an offer to grant THREE of the demands. And now we are being asked to believe that precisely at this time the British Govt was prepared to grant FOUR of the demands. Thatcher obviously wanted to keep the ICJP, which had a huge influence on middle-class Catholic opinion in Ireland, and also a direct line to the Vatican, on board for as long as possible. If there had ever been such an offer, they would certainly have know of it and would have hailed it as a great breakthrough.
The facts speak for themselves.

Whatever about the prisoners' decision to continue with their fast (and it was their decision alone), there is no doubt that any Republican was in that climate perfectly right to ignore any "offer" that someone had said that someone had claimed that someone had made.

Madradin Ruad

there is no doubt that any Republican was in that climate perfectly right to ignore any "offer"

More water-muddying from the camp follower - the issue here is did the Holiday Homers have the right to make the decision for those on the strike ?


if there had been the offer made - why didn't the British Government say so at the time? (or at least at any other time in the preceeding twenty-odd years?)

Surely this would have been of some use to counter provo-propaganda in the states and elsewhere "The Brits are prepared to make concessions but the IRA aren't listening " etc

The fact this hasn't happened makes me doubt the existence of such an offer

Madradin Ruad

if there had been the offer made - why didn't the British Government say so at the time? (or at least at any other time in the preceeding twenty-odd years?)

That's not difficult to work out Andy - they had painted themselves into a corner with their public stance. How many times have we seen that revealed? A very firm public stance while in private things were very different. And as I have already said - Adams has been their man for some time - do you think they would have flushed him down the pan when things were moving the way they wanted ? If they had spilled the beans in the 80s or 90s - do you think Adams could have survived ? How do you think Jim Lynagh and his unit would have reacted ?

Madradin Ruad

Good for Lindy

The hunger strike myth is collapsing

So how much longer can the republican spin machine continue to feed off the propaganda dividend of the long-haired, bearded blanket man? He looks like Christ, they told the world.
Even in America that hoary old line no longer does the emotive business.
For in America they've noted, so does Osama bin Laden.


dennis bradley refused to visit me in b wingcrumlin road prison when i was on the blanket protest in 1974 i had turned 16 and he c

The comments to this entry are closed.