New Book by Richard O'Rawe

Cruimh

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2010
Messages
83,462
SF leaders 'helped cover up hunger strike offer'
Two sources at IRA Army Council level told O'Rawe that Adams had never even informed the Army Council of the British offer.


O'Rawe said those Sinn Féin leaders who knew of the offer must apologise to the hunger strikers' families for "what may well be the biggest cover-up in the history of republicanism".
Looks like this isn't going to go away - but I cannot see Gerry ever admitting it.
 


SlabMurphy

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 14, 2009
Messages
1,684
Website
www.dublin.ie
SF leaders 'helped cover up hunger strike offer'


Looks like this isn't going to go away - but I cannot see Gerry ever admitting it.
The Sunday Tribune - one of Sir Tony's West Brit comics :rolleyes: And he eat babies form the Shankill Road as well. Now in comes Ed Moloney with his conspiracy theories about Steaknife, Jean McConville etc. :rolleyes:

Does it ever occur to people that Sir Tony's journo's actually make a nice little packet writing such rubbish ?
 

picador

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
20,659
I'll concede I haven't read O'Rawe's first book. He must have been holding back if he has enough material for a second book on the same subject.
 

picador

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
20,659
Looks like this isn't going to go away - but I cannot see Gerry ever admitting it.
Why would Gerry know anything about stuff that went on within the IRA? :rolleyes:
 

Just Jack

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 10, 2010
Messages
3,739
It wouldn’t surprise me if these claims were true.

Adams never had the best interests of any of the Hunger Strikers at heart. If anything he was probably willing them into their early grave.
 
Joined
Apr 3, 2007
Messages
43
I read O'Rawe's first book. I won't be reading this one. It's illogical. Why would the Brits not have shouted about this supposed offer from the rooftops? Perfect opportunity to prove republicans were willing to allow their own soldiers to die for political benefit.

I don't believe him.
 

Young Ned

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
2,952
I'm certainly going to read this book. Somebody's lying here, either himself or Bik.
 

Just Jack

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 10, 2010
Messages
3,739
I read O'Rawe's first book. I won't be reading this one. It's illogical. Why would the Brits not have shouted about this supposed offer from the rooftops? Perfect opportunity to prove republicans were willing to allow their own soldiers to die for political benefit.

I don't believe him.
They had no political leverage to shout about anything.

They already let several men die, it would have been rank hypocrisy to condemn SF for doing the same thing.

I don’t know an awful lot about this O’Rawe character, but I’ve no reason to assume he’s lying.

Do you actually think Adams cared about what happened to those men?
 

picador

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
20,659
What was Gerry's motive for trying to sacrifice more men after Carron was elected?
 

picador

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
20,659
Carron was returned August 20th 1981 - the same day as the last death - Michael Devine
Yes I am well aware of that. The hunger-strike continued for a further six weeks (until October 3rd). A number of men would have starved to death had their families not intervened to have them fed after they lost consciousness.

What was Gerry's motivation for continuing the hunger-strike into October?
 

Cruimh

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2010
Messages
83,462
Yes I am well aware of that. The hunger-strike continued for a further six weeks (until October 3rd). A number of men would have starved to death had their families not intervened to have them fed after they lost consciousness.

What was Gerry's motivation for continuing the hunger-strike into October?
Gerry didn't continue the hunger strike.

You think he could have said the day after Carron was elected - "Oh, silly me, I've found a letter from months ago that says MT has given sufficient ground that the Strike can be called off" ? Catch yourself on .....
 

picador

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
20,659
Gerry didn't continue the hunger strike.
But according to you he was responsible for unnecessary deaths as he could have ended it sooner. Now you are saying he didn't continue it. Make you mind up.

You think he could have said the day after Carron was elected - "Oh, silly me, I've found a letter from months ago that says MT has given sufficient ground that the Strike can be called off" ? Catch yourself on .....
Account for why you are trying to have it both ways. One minute he continues it. The next he doesn't.
 

Cruimh

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2010
Messages
83,462
But according to you he was responsible for unnecessary deaths as he could have ended it sooner. Now you are saying he didn't continue it. Make you mind up.
Account for why you are trying to have it both ways. One minute he continues it. The next he doesn't.
LOl - you really are struggling.

Fact - there were no deaths after Carron was elected.

Fact - Adams wasn't on Hunger Strike - so he didn't continue hunger striking.

What O'Rawe and others claim is that Adams interfered to stop the HS ending before the election of Carron ....

Catch yourself on .....
 

picador

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 19, 2009
Messages
20,659
LOl - you really are struggling.

Fact - there were no deaths after Carron was elected.
That was down to the intervention of the familys. One man had been on hunger-strike 70 days, and a number of others had been on hunger-strike more than 50 days - weeks after Gerry had supposedly achieved his objective with the election of Carron..

Fact - Adams wasn't on Hunger Strike - so he didn't continue hunger striking.

What O'Rawe and others claim is that Adams interfered to stop the HS ending before the election of Carron ....
i.e. he continued the hunger-strike.
 
Joined
Apr 3, 2007
Messages
43
They had no political leverage to shout about anything.

They already let several men die, it would have been rank hypocrisy to condemn SF for doing the same thing.
Of course they had. If what O'Rawe says is true, the Brits made a credible offer with the desire to prevent any more deaths. The IRA and SF made the 5 demands the crux of the strike. The Brits, according to O'Rawe, attempted to solve those 5 issues. The IRA or SF rejected that in the full knowledge that they were condemning their own soldiers to death.

To suggest that the Brits couldn't have made an absolute killing over that chain of events is plainly nonsense.

Do you actually think Adams cared about what happened to those men?
I don't really see what that has to do with the issue. To answer the question, I've no idea. But to be honest, whether Adams gave a fuck about them dying is irrelevant.

It makes absolutely no sense that O'Rawe's version of events took 30 odd years to come out. I find it insane that anyone would believe that the British government would have allowed more martyrs to be created when they had tabled a reasonable offer that could have ended the strike.
 

Ó Donnchadha

Well-known member
Joined
May 27, 2010
Messages
2,082
What would be MT's motivation to suddenly capitulating to the 5 POW's demands ? I do not see how that would be a win for the British. Margaret Thatcher had been almost fanatical in here determination to destroy the will of the IRA.

Thatcher's behavior before and after the 1981 hunger strike is not indicative of a person who would agree to the movements 5 demands.

I also would like to know what Bik's motivation would be, to go along with such an elaborate cover-up.
 

Cruimh

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2010
Messages
83,462
It makes absolutely no sense that O'Rawe's version of events took 30 odd years to come out.
Why not ? O'Rawe's book came out in 2005. Took the same sort of time for the IRA to admit killing Jean McConville and even longer to admit killing Bernard Teggert. Would O'Rawe have survived if he had published in the 80s or 90s ?
 

idle tim

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 19, 2010
Messages
3,050
Is this the book Ed Maloney describes as "Virtually Incontestable"?.Lets wait and see.
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top