The real Michael Collins was a murderous, degenerate thug that used tactics that would make the Islamists in Iraq blush. Make no mistake about it he was no freedom fighter as this movie would have you believe, but rather a bloody terrorist with no regard to human life. It sickens me that the British must be unfairly vilified as means to justify his characters actions. DO NOT BELIEVE THIS FILMS LIES!
shareOn the history of British India (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Famine_in_India):
>>Some British citizens such as William Digby agitated for policy reforms and famine relief, but Lord Lytton, the governing British viceroy in India, opposed such changes in the belief that they would stimulate shirking by Indian workers. Reacting against calls for relief during the 1877-79 famine, Lytton replied, "Let the British public foot the bill for its 'cheap sentiment,' if it wished to save life at a cost that would bankrupt India," substantively ordering "there is to be no interference of any kind on the part of Government with the object of reducing the price of food," and instructing district officers to "discourage relief works in every possible way.... Mere distress is not a sufficient reason for opening a relief work." (quoted in Davis 2001:31, 52)
It was more or less the same behaviour as the British Administration held during the Potato Famine in Ireland. These people really believed in free market, no matter how many people starved to death in the meanwhile.
Winston Churchill and colonial policies (http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=3930):
"Two years later, Churchill was secretary of state at the war office when the Royal Air Force asked him for permission to use chemical weapons against "recalcitrant Arabs" as an experiment. Winston promptly consented (Yes, Churchill's gassing of Kurds pre-dated Hussein's by nearly 70 years).
"I am strongly in favor of using poisoned gas against uncivilized tribes," he explained, a policy he espoused yet again in July 1944 when he asked his chiefs of staff to consider using poison gas on the Germans "or any other method of warfare we have hitherto refrained from using." Unlike in 1919, his proposal was denied...not that history would not have forgiven him anyway.
In language later appropriated by the Israelis, Winston Churchill had this to say about the Palestinians in 1937: "I do not agree that the dog in a manger has the final right to the manger even though he may have lain there for a very long time. I do not admit that right. I do not admit for instance, that a great wrong has been done to the Red Indians of America or the black people of Australia. I do not admit that a wrong has been done to these people by the fact that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place.""
These English are scary. It really seems that they don`t have human feelings of any sort. And, unlike other racist nations, they don`t pretend they feel superior as to conceal some inferiority complex: they really believe it!
By the way, a couple of thinks you will not hear British historians lingering at:
Gallipoli http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Gallipoli
And the English Armada, 1589 (English reply to Spanish Invincible):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Armada
[deleted]
Of course, you are right and I knew all along. In fact, my post was rather aimed at the author of the opening message of the thread, which seemed to me quite a jingoistic moron.
You forgot mentioning how it was the English, almost solely, who managed to eradicate slave trade between Africa and America in the 1840`s, quite a legitimate source of pride. As to the second link, I don`t know how to make it clickable, just select the whole URL then click the righ button of your mouse, choose "copy" then "paste" the address at the address box by clicking again the right button. You can also search "English Armada" + "wikipedia" in Google.
Do you think English working class has not benefitted from the Empire? Do you think they have also been opressed? If for anything else, the WWI butchery was nothing short of a genocide against farmers and workers of all nations involved.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Shame on you!
shareI just want to know does that Hitcher Dude ACTUALLY know anything about Irish history? Has he even ever been to Ireland?? How dare anyone pass judgement on a country the have most likely never been too? Everyone is allowed express there opinion, but if they decide to, they should at least KNOW about the subject or whatever.
shareHitcher doesn't surely know anything about Irish History and he's never been to Ireland, I bet.
I'm very interested in Ireland in general, read a lot about it and came there well prepared, I thought at the time....spending time in Belfast and Derry took my breath away anyway, even though the situation was totally peacefull.
He'd better watch "Bloody Sunday", "In the name of the father" or read Bobby Sands'diary to get the slightest idea of what was going on over there and stop talking b******t about Irish terrorism.
Well, yes, watch Bloody Sunday or The Name of the Father or read Bobby Sands' diary to get a balanced view! Both the first two movies are fictionalised to a degree and made by left wing sympathisers to the Republican cause and Bobby Sands was a member of the Prov. IRA! So how is that bloody well balanced FFS?!
How about Hitcher- who is now long gone anyway- try to read books from all sides of the conflict and try to get a balanced view from hearing both sides views instead? Now THAT might give him a better idea about Northern Irish politics. Better than watching two movies which are slanted and reading the diary of a convicted terrorist.
"Trust me. I know what I'm doing."
My, my, my, I am amazed this thread is still going after all this time.
Anyhow Hotrodder, though you are correct to propose an overall study of the situation from all the various perspectives, lets not demean the value in the above sources mentioned.
The film " Bloody Sunday", has it's merits and I found it very powerful, ( you already know my take on the days events) this led me to further investigation such as reading the Widgery report amongst others. It inspired me to look deeper and in so doing I then formulated my own opinion and Ideas on the matter.
The same goes for the " Gerry Conlon Story" and some of Bobby Sands writing. Compelling stuff that sparks interest to further one's knowledge cannot be dismissed so out of hand nor should they be. I care not if the producers or writers have a Left or Right leaning political philosophy, for if they catch mine interest I will dismiss their perspective and form my own ideas and concepts.
This I believe is what the above poster is attempting to say in so few words.
I could go on and on in my usual long winded way, but I daresay you get my point.
Slainte'
AL
" Whack Fol da Diddle "
http://macnaheirean.free-forums.org/macnaheirean.html?
Hi Allen- by all means read Bobby Sands' book, but remember of course that it is biased towards the extreme Republican side. I've read Gerry Adams' autobiography myself so as to gain an understanding into the workings of his mind and to try to understand his view point.
As I said it's important to get a sense of balance about an extremely complex subject that has heroes and villains on both sides but many also essentially decent British and Irish people appalled by the violence that has occurred over the years.
"Trust me. I know what I'm doing."
______________________________________________________________________________
Hi Allen- by all means read Bobby Sands' book, but remember of course that it is biased towards the extreme Republican side.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Redundant: as I stated, perhaps not clearly, that a producer or writer's political leanings have not much bearing on me as I am attempting to gather information to form my own opinion.
___________________________________________________________________________
As I said it's important to get a sense of balance about an extremely complex subject that has heroes and villains on both sides but many also essentially decent British and Irish people appalled by the violence that has occurred over the years.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Agreed...
Slainte'
AL
" Whack Fol da Diddle "
http://macnaheirean.free-forums.org/macnaheirean.html?
I just want to say one thing about the whole legal system that was put in place and a few other things.
The Brehon System which was the Celtic system at the time was actually fairer and more advanced than the Common Law which is actually based on many Roman laws so you cannot take credit for that. The Celtic way of life was also more equal towards woman so the suffergete movement was actually increased by this Common Law. I am just stating it. History student here.
Michael Collins was both bloody and brillant. He was the big fella on the bike who the Britsih could not catch.
As for Iraq, it is illegal for the British to be in there right now. This is an illegal war for Britain and it has killed 3000 of your men. No international law condoned or allowed Britain go in. There is still some debate about US.
As for pensions and what not, these were really brought in after WW2 and the Jarrow March of 1936. The British government did not handle with the structural unemployment in Britain at the time and by the time those things came in 1945/46, Ireland was pretty much a republic by then.
Trinity was closed to everybody but Protestants for hundreds of years so that kind of kills your argument.
The British government might have brought the same to every place but it killed a culture by doing so. Most of Africa is poor today because of colonlism. It is now listed as one of the three factors of povery today. I mean what does that say about an Empire?
Yes, Britain brought some good but also a lot of bad. We can estimate at least 100,000 were killed by British hands and at points where the population was just over a million. Britain also has given financial backing especially the Cnservative Party to groups like the UDF. The IRA/RIRA aren't the only groups up there. There are Unionist groups.
Michael Collins put everything on the line for his country. He was ruthless, bloody but he did it for a cause he thought was worth it.
Also, it was Britain not Ireland who really condone Fascism. Just look at appeasement from 1933-1939 and what that did. I mean, no side is a saint or a sinner. We both are guilty of horrible acts but at the end of the day that does not make Michael Collins a terrorist.
He was a fighter for his country and proud of it. He was not a terrorist. He would have been appalled by the way Guerrilla Warfare is being used today
your and idiot english retard, you have the nerve to say those things about michael collins? did you watch the movie? do you know what happened at croke park? are you an moron?
shareThe original post is almost three old and the poster- theHitcher22- who made it buggered off in March 2007. So your post is a tad pointless...
"Trust me. I know what I'm doing."
Not only that, but how do you know he was English? Why assume that?
shareThe fact he reads The Sun- a British newspaper- is a bit of a dead giveaway. The fact he reads The Sun shows that he is an idiot too.
BTW I wouldn't use the Guardian to wipe, I read The Sun.
Oh right fair enough. Not sure about English as an insult mind, being English myself.
share[deleted]
You are indeed a massive hypocrite, hitcher.
I feel ashamed to be of English descent.
Hitcher you are a clown and havent a clue what your talking about.
Micheal Collins fighting to free his land against the English makes him a terrorist?? Thats laughable. Look at what the black and tans did, the parachute regiment in 1972. Thats terrorism.
I love how typical English idiots brain washed by their government belive their country are angels. So lets look at this objectively. A country invades another country and the people rebel and they are ones labeled terrorists? How stupid and ignorant does that sound?
Why were you even watching this film you moron? What a sad bitter little man you are, you must have no life.
RIP Micheal Collins.
He was a fighter for his country and proud of it. He was not a terrorist. He would have been appalled by the way Guerrilla Warfare is being used today
What wouldn't you say he'd like about guerilla warfare today assuming if it was done to rid the oppressor? I think Mr.Collins would be pretty tough if he had to when it came for a people to fight for their freedom. I'm sure he thought long and hard about taking out the tough Brit agents in London who were a threat to the Irish fighters. He was vilified for that by some especially the British of course. But after it was done Britain knew what and who they were facing and knew they were in for a big match. The stakes were then raised and it showed what Collins would do to get free of the British.
[deleted]
"I was left in no doubt as to the severity of the hangover when the cat stamped into the room."
[deleted]