Im not arguing they should have been granted political status simply that the unionists like her for that simple act while not realising the inflammatory way she conducted herself was only ever going to exacerbate and prolong the conflict which resulted in more Protestant deaths. They dont seem to be able to grasp the bigger picture.
Well Thatcher did acquiece to the 5 demands if the hunger strikers. Demonstrating that she did concede their political status. She just would not be seen to be beaten. History will show that she was. When Bobby Sands stood for Parliament on that single issue, the vast majority of the electorate supported the stance of the hunger strikers.
Would that be the loyalist scum who were set up to retaliate against the actions of the IRA & INLA murdering scum? My abiding memory of the hunger strikers was the brother of Bobby Sands (murdering catholic scum - not to be confused with the decent, law abiding catholics) who said in a television interview about his brother's action "I think he's bitten off more than he can chew".
The "vast majority" of the electorate in NI surely Reb? That's where he was elected. I'm not saying that I agree with Thatcher 100% on every issue but on this particular one I do. If she had bowed to the demands that IRA and UVF men should be treated as political prisoners then she would have been booted out of office on the back of public outrage.
Wrong. The PIRA emerged as a protection force for catholics in 1969 as Loyalist paramilitaries (after being whipped into a fever by Paisley) aided by the RUC began a campaign of rioting in Catholic areas and burning down entire Catholic estates. Most of the IRAs actions at the time involved evacuating terrified families. Only later did they start to go on the offensive. The emergence of the INLA occurred well into the troubles. Time to brush up on your history I think. The loyalists started the troubles by their response to growing vocal discontent among the catholics with regards to human rights
The vast majority of the electorate where that was the single issue at stake voted to support the Hunger strikers. I dont think the Hunger strike was a pivotal issue in Finchley. The fact of the matter is that the 5 demands were of the hunger strikers were implemented by Margaret Thatcher and her government. She recognised their political status regardless of her proclamations to the contrary.
Aye, so Maggie Thatcher was a right bitch eh? The way she ****ed over the miners and destroyed whole communities, sold off our country's prime jewels for pennies and refused to introduce a minimum wage which saw the likes of security guards having to work 80 hour weeks while earning as little as £1.50 per hour.
I never said they didnt. Im just correcting you in your versions of how the troubles started and who formed in response to who
I'll bow to your superior knowledge on this one Reb and I can understand totally why people despise her, but all i'm saying is that it's pretty clear why some people hold her in high esteem too.
Rebel, no **** cares about your ****ey struggle, when you're lay there on your death-bed, you'll realise that you've spent your whole adult life obsessing over something that doesn't matter.
Come back to me when the IRA have killed a fraction of the women and kids that the British Army have.
Were did I say it was OK? I am just pointing out to people who would probably celebrate the British Army how hypocritical they are. People died in a conflict, hold the front page ffs.
Just a pity your pal Hitler and his nazis did not win when you left the lights on for the Bosch. Twat. Then it really would have been tatties for you lot.
Like who? Freedom fighters is actually two words but no I wouldn't call people bombing other men, women & kids under the cover of darkness freedom fighters.
Mick/syd Close this **** down. It was meant to be about how to celebrate the death of the bitch but AS PER USUAL has turned into another argument about ****ing Ireland
