1981 Hunger Strike: A Case to Answer
WAS THERE A DEAL? ask the Irish News in its two part special on the Hunger Strike. Today’s issue is damning, featuring commentary by Deputy First Minister and, according to the Ed Moloney’s Secret History, Chief of Staff of the IRA at the time of the hunger strikes Martin McGuinness, who admits to his role as the Derry messenger between Mountain Climber Brendan Duddy and the Belfast cadre of Adams, Morrison, Gibney and Hartley. Former Hunger Striker Laurence McKeown also weighs in, shedding little light on the details but muddying the waters on the rhetoric. More significant are the contributions from former Taoiseach Garret Fitzgerald, who believes the IRA vetoed the deal with the British despite the prisoners’ willingness to accept – which he reveals the Irish government was aware of at the time because of a mole they had inside the prison. Hugh Logue of the ICJP, who were at the time of Joe McDonnell’s death negotiating a parallel offer similar to the one between Thatcher and the Adams committee, also weighs in, asking why the outside leadership held out at the expense of the lives of the hunger strikers. Richard O’Rawe, whose book Blanketmen opened up this appalling vista, gives an overview of how the debate has progressed and supports the call for an independent inquiry into events, describing the seeking of truth as a “sacred duty”. The contributions that focus on the families of the hunger strikers are very emotional, as the anguish of their loss is palpable. The Dohertys are hurt by the allegations of the needless death of their son, and want the issue laid to rest, while the O’Haras and Devines, also upset by the issue, want to get to the bottom of things and know the truth of what happened. The late Brendan Hughes, who led the first hunger strike in 1980, touched on this when speaking to Spanish academic Rogelio Alonso: “I’ve spoken about this to people and I’ve always been advised by people like Jim Gibney, Danny Morrison and others that it would be too hurtful for the families of the dead hunger strikers to tell the truth. But that was the other attempt to bury the truth.”
As Sarah Brett concluded on Radio Foyle this morning, after interviewing Irish News Editor Noel Doran, “This isn’t going to go away.”This special investigation by the Irish News contains a huge volume of material, which Slugger will be sifting through more in depth in the coming days.
Comprehensive archive site on the events of the Hunger Strike: July 1981
Cartoon kindly provided by John Kennedy
Earlier on Slugger:
Gerry Adams and Kieran Doherty, 29 July 1981
Prolonging the Hunger Strike: The Derailing of the ICJP
Updated Timeline and Upcoming Discussion Brian Rowan and Brendan Duddy to speak at Feile
Gulladuff: More Heat Than Light Gerry Adams meets with some of the families of some of the hunger strikers.
Gerry Adams to meet Hunger Strikers Families; Inquiry Sought Families of the hunger strikers call for a public inquiry; Adams arranges meeting
“This is a huge opportunity and I feel there’s a potential here to end this” Bik McFarlane miraculously recovers his memory and completely backtracks on every denial he had made previously, while also making up new, contradictory details never before mentioned
“I will not be attending and will not send a representative” Gerry Adams refuses to attend public meeting about the hunger strikes; extremely revealing discussion in the comments section
1981 Hunger Strike Truth Commission Includes text of British document of July offer and transcript of Willie Gallagher’s speech at the Derry meeting
The Truth is a Heartbreaking Thing Initial summary of Derry meeting
Upcoming Debate: “What is the Truth Behind the Hunger Strike?” Announcement of public meeting and note of Radio Foyle debate between Raymond McCartney and Richard O’Rawe (also discussed on The Pensive Quill: A Shifting Narrative)
When in a hole… Contrasts between Danny Morrison’s position and previously published accounts of the time
What were the hunger strikers told? Questions emerge that cast doubt on what the hunger strikers knew when about what negotiations were being conducted on their behalf by the Adams subcommittee.
“Let’s have the whole truth” – Danny Morrison and Richard O’Rawe statements
Did Thatcher Kill All 10 or Only 4? – contains statements and interview excerpts
He hasn’t coughed out anything, or met with O’Rawe or anyone else except the families in private.
You make him sound so principled
No John, I’m simply trying to be acurate.
The funniest post on this is John recounting what Bertie Ahern thought of Adams . I’m no fan of Adams but my God! Bertie being taken seriously about anything- The Minister of finance with bags of cash in his house but no current account who just kept changing his story every time a new fact was uncovered about the cash he stashed. Why don’t we ask John DeLorean for his views on financial probity . It would be about as credible as Bertie’s view on anything!!!. As for that woolly self styled intellectual Garret Fitzgerald suddenly his amnesia has lifted after all these years. VERY VERY strange.
Bizarre, Only Asking. My hardback edition of All In A Life contains no mention of this chapter – there is an entirely different stretch of material on the pages (pp.367-71) quoted from your link. Something of the link appears later, far later in the book I possess. I was under the impression, when I began reading the Irish News this morning, that Fitzgerald was revealing something relatively new. Perhaps this is not the case, but I should warn other readers that certain editions of All In A Life have no mention of this excerpt as credited on pages 367-71.
As for ‘new things coming to light’ who knows what correspondences or sources will emerge down the line? But, one thing is certain; they will. There are plans for the Easter Rising in the roof of a house in Dublin somewhere that might lend a ‘definitive’ tag to a future history, despite the best efforts of Charles Townshend.
And Jim Prior isn’t dead, Only Asking (not that there’ll be much more to come from him on the subject, which I’m sure he’s fine about).
‘I’m no fan of Adams but my God!’
I’m guessing you are. I would say John’s probably spot on about Adams.
‘Bertie being taken seriously about anything’
To paraphrase you I’m no fan of Ahern but his work on the Peace Process wasn’t joking about; most would view it as his saving grace in some respects. But it’s well-known Ahern hates Sinn Fein and something Unionists have just figured out up here. Can you blame him/them?
‘As for that woolly self styled intellectual Garret Fitzgerald suddenly his amnesia has lifted after all these years.’
Fitzgerald was always, and still seems, pretty smart, writes his books still. Can’t be too woolly. Thatcher said something similar about him, preferring wily businessman Haughey (know who’s the more respectable out of Fitzgerald, Haughey, and Thatcher – it ain’t the latter two). He’s a self-styled intellectual in the same way Adams is a self-styled constitutional nationalist!
“Gerry is just a likely lad, a chancer, and a hollow disciple of nothing in particular”
Pretty humble station for someone who’s supposedly tha Anti-Christ doncha think John?
“I’m guessing you are. I would say John’s probably spot on about Adams”
Spot on about Adams?
Have you ever read his delusional rants about Adams being the Anti-Christ and the absolutely irrefutable numeric proof that this assertion is based on?
Sheeesh! I’ll have to go and lie down.
“If Garret FitzGerald and so many others were convinced that the Republican movement prevented a deal, why didn’t they say so at the time? Instead they allowed the construction of a republican poltical strategy which was contary to their interests without saying a word. Why? All very odd”
Because it might look like using the deaths of those people, who were lionised by many in NI and beyond, for political purposes and or sullying their memory. Without “proof” to back up the allegations, a proof which is inherently very very difficult to establish, it would have looked like a baseless allegation to discredit Republicans.
Robbie, could be a later edition,or revised or updated book you have.
I was under the impression, when I began reading the Irish News this morning, that Fitzgerald was revealing something relatively new
No even before the paper came out it was possible to predict what was to be said. I thought they may have elaborated, like saying who the insider was for the Irish government in the maze, and it didn’t look like the reporter pushed Fitzgerald on it.
And Jim Prior isn’t dead,
No you’re right, he’s not, but is in ill health like thatcher, it’s Atkins and Allison who are dead.
As for ‘new things coming to light’ who knows what correspondences or sources will emerge down the line?
Maybe, hopefully, but I’m not confident of it. Duddy has said there are no written notes of any messages he received, he hasn’t anything. If any of the republicans have anything they’re all accounted for, anything underfreedom of information so far hasn’t provded definitively one way or the other, so even if theres anymore to be released it still may not make this a cut and dry case. We shall have to wait and see.
The introduction to this thread with its weird football match analogy is so bizarre and the continued unsubstantiated mudslinging directed at certain Sinn Féin members so scurrilous yet so unfocused that one begins to wonder if perhaps “Rusty Nail” might be a pseudonym for another blogger with troublesome religious delusions. The series of threads on this matter by the anonymous “Rusty Nail” certainly has much in common with the repetitive, rambling, self-righteous outpourings of a tractatian hellbent (but no doubt heaven-bound) on warning errant sinners of the snares and wiles of John Barleycorn.
The difference is that there is more than a smell of something downright nasty in the author’s motivations, an intent to sully the struggle and sacrifice of those who died as manipulable fools .
How interesting then that he attempts to demonstrate the gullibility of the hunger strikers by reference to their very shrewd refusal to be fooled by the Brits into announcing that the hunger strike had been called off before seeing the terms offered by the Brits published in the public arena. That the Brits refused demonstrates the hunger strikers’ good sense, the Brit’s nefariousness and now, Rusty Nail’s Machiavellian tactics in twisting that steadfastness into something completely other.
Crucially he completely ignores the central point of decision making in the whole process. It was always the case that the hunger-strikers themselves would hold the final authority in deciding if the terms offered by the enemy were sufficient to warrant a cessation and, while they would be guided in that decision making process by the outside leadership, they would not be dictated to by it. On respecting the hunger strikers’ integrity and refusing to dictate to them they incur the wrath and censureship of that master of virtue, Rusty Nail. Heaven help us all!
Rusty Nail’s whole campaign seems directed by bitterness at the electoral success of Sinn Féin and the failure of himself and his cohorts to make their own feeble voices heard by the nationalist electorate. The electorate clearly are not stupid.
Rory Carr: The difference is that there is more than a smell of something downright nasty in the author’s motivations, an intent to sully the struggle and sacrifice of those who died as manipulable fools .
Sorry to butt into this Republican house party. However, it’s no real surprise to outsiders to consider the likelihood that the provo leadership was composed of brutal cynics as well as the traditional coterie of brutal zealots. Nor is there anything new about thinking that the hunger strikers were manipulable fools.
However, I don’t think Rusty Nail is going that far – what republican would? Instead, surely he thinks they were starved of information and principled leadership at a very sensitive and desperate moment.
Rory Carr
one begins to wonder if perhaps “Rusty Nail” might be a pseudonym for another blogger with troublesome religious delusions
There is nothing delusional in believing that Gerry Adams is the Antichrist.
Gerry is AN antichrist at the very least for rejecting the ways of Christ [in opposing imperialism]. His path opposes Christ’s path by accepting the ways of imperialism as sacrosanct and rejecting Christianity as unworkable. So he is opposed to Christ and rejects Christ’s ways. So how could he not be an antichrist. The Antichrist is defined in such literature as the book by that name by Friedrich Nietzsche.
see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antichrist
There’s not a lot of literature on being the actual Antichrist as you may expect so it really boils down to seeking coincidences that tie Gerry Adams to the Book of Revelation.
I think that people are confused about Gerry Adams. They ask, how could one of the leaders of the Northern Ireland peace process be opposed to Jesus Christ? The prophecies are very clear that there is a time when the Antichrist was not considered to be the Antichrist, so Adams may even be regarded as a good man for a time, but the period does not last forever. This comes from the verse, “he [i.e. the Antichrist] once was, now is not, and yet will come” (Rev 17:8).
The Antichrist who “once was, now is not” is a reference to the fact that Adams was acting once as the Antichrist (i.e. during the Troubles) and “now” is no longer acting in that way. “Yet will come” indicates that before the prophecies will end, he will return to being the Antichrist, or opposed to Christ. That has happened now with his involvement in the cover up of the Paul Quinn murder.
First of all, I believe that Gerry Adams is the Antichrist because of the coincidence that his name comes out at 666 on my numeric alphabet.
Second of all, due to another pertinent coincidence his name contains “Adam”, the name of the first man, and from a theological point of view, this adds much to the basis of him being the Antichrist. Adam coincidentally means ‘man’ in Hebrew, and the number of the beast is specifically described as “man’s number” (Rev 13:18).
These are extraordinary coincidences and not to be dismissed by any means by any wise observer of matters theological. “The apostle Paul wrote: “For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive” (1 Cor 15:22). Adam therefore symbolises death, and thus the question must be asked, is there significance to the ‘Adam’ in Gerry Adams’ name? Does Gerry Adams, the effective leader of the IRA’s republican movement, symbolise death?
The descriptions of the beasts in the Book of Revelation are interesting.
‘The inhabitants worshipped the first beast, whose fatal wound had been healed,’ (Rev 13:12). Coincidentally, Gerry Adams was shot and wounded in 1984, but recovered. Afterwards he became Sinn Fein president and one of the foremost politicians in Northern Ireland. The use of violence for him is a matter of tactics. That is a matter of fact and record. Gerry Adams has not stepped away from violence. He believes in his own words that “there is a time for peace and a time for war”, mocking the Prince of Peace and equating Christ with the Antichrist, good with evil.
The first beast, who is said to be the Antichrist, is prophesied to have “seven heads” (Rev 13:1), which is coincidentally the number of heads on the IRA army council, including Gerry Adams’ allegedly.
“Who can make war against him?” (Rev 13:7). The IRA has been described as ‘the most sophisticated terrorist organisation in the history of mankind’. Their structure makes it impossible for a conventional army to defeat them.
Gerry Adams fulfilled another prophecy during the run-up to the 2007 Assembly election campaign in the North of Ireland. This involved him requesting the use of Clonard Monastery (and Roman Catholic) church in West Belfast for a political meeting discussing his party’s policy. He still believed that armed struggle was a legitimate means of resolving differences.
When Gerry Adams took to the altar of Clonard monastery while his beliefs were in conflict with Christ’s teaching, he was proclaiming himself to be wiser than God and better than Jesus Christ. He was in logic proclaiming himself to be God.
“[The man of lawlessness or the Antichrist] will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshipped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God.” (2 Thes 2:3-4)”
To paraphrase Monty Python ” Gerry Adams is not the AntiChrist, he’s just a very naughty boy!”
Fitzgerald is a learned man, an academic, a man of letters whom Aer Lingus replaced with a new department and five computers when he left.
Anyone who thinks that woolly-brained wannabe unionist had secret contacts and a deal on the go during the hunger-strike needs their head examined.
The daft old bastard wouldn’t know if his hair was on fire.