most of the mods on this site are now sectarian bigots..

[see commenting policy, again - edited moderator]

I was thinking a cat in the hat style feel to it.

Meanwhile, the H-Block protest for political status and subsequent Hunger strikes were historical events, not just in the history of Ireland but also impacted nations and people throughout the world, ranging from the French Parliament’s criticism of Thatcher to the naming of streets (in Bobby’s honour) in countries far from Ireland to US Trade Unions refusal to unload British vessels. So whether one likes it or not, the death of Bobby sands MP and his comrades is an integral component of Ireland’s history. It is only fitting and proper that the event should be taught to school children. We can never forget our past. We can never allow revisionists, unionists and pro-partitionists to air brush that terribly tragic event which led to wold wide protests and proved to be a turning point in Ireland’s quest for reunification from our history.

“I agree with the OTT analysis and humbly water down my original post (completely embarassed by my own knee jerk – take a redner!!!)”

Thanks!

I’ve a feeling, as Maca said,that we’re all jumping the gun here a bit here anyway.

From the original post:

1. “Co-author of I Arose This Morning, Mr McKeown, said that the writers hoped the book would be made available to every bunscoil in the north.”

Important word there- “hoped”.

2. “”the spokesman from the National Association of Schoolmasters and Union of Women Teachers said:

“If a school was going to use something like that [the book] there should be a counter to it.”"

So, if a positive portrayal of Sand’s life is to be presented to the kids, it must be balanced by allowing on the curriculum also a sceptical, more negative account…. but written in Irish, in order that it can be used in the bunscoils.

Might be waiting some time for that particuliar publication to see the light of day.

There is much in the story of Mr Sands, the reasons he ended up on the course he did; about politicians and how they use people; about the dispensable role of foot soldiers, how they are just numbers and about the weavers of myths and propaganda.

These are not really the material for young children. These are about a balanced over view and context and for that you need a greater breadth of knowledge. No this is sadly just propaganda and seems to wish to follow the maxim about giving me your children until they are seven……

NI is truly a sad place.

fair enough I took a cheap shot at all Irish schools before they have even adopted the author’s recommendation to include it in the curriculum.

If my 10 year old daughter came home and told me her primary school was inviting Michael Stone in for a presentation about his life choices I would be up to the Headmaster like a shot – but it wouldnt happen.
He simply wouldnt be considered suitable primary school material – Bobby Sands and the Hunger Strikers are of the same ilk.

I control what my children watch and what time they go to bed at – they are children.

The life of Bobby Sands and its grotesque end is not suitable for discussion by 9 to 12 year olds.

If my Lower Sixth son said they were discussing such a book then fine.

The Basher Bates street kids

What makes you think I was joking?

Sheez lads, the book has just been written, it’s not on the curriculum, no one is being forced to read it.

‘Disgusting manipulation of young minds for an adult agenda’

Is that as opposed to – disgusting manipulation and abuse of young people & their minds for an adult agenda, as they attempted to make their way to & from school through a loyalist area ( Holy Cross Girl’s Primary School – 4 – 11 yr olds)??

Caireann

What’s wrong with 9 to 12 year olds?

Indeed – certain other ‘educational’ establishments in Pakistan/Afghanistan border spring to mind.

Now here you are going well beyond the actual book and directly heading for the teachers and pupils.

Anna Dale – apology offerred. I agree with the OTT analysis and humbly water down my original post (completely embarassed by my own knee jerk – take a redner!!!)

Will it have a recipes section?

—-

I’m pretty much with John East Belfast on this one – I don’t have a problem with republicans telling the story of the hunger-strike, nor do I have a problem with it being included in the school curriculum.

There’s something about the 9-12 year old target group though that absolutely sends shivers down my spine. I find it difficult to see how such a book as this could be presented to such an age group in a balanced way:

“Young Man sees injustice. Young Man decides to fight the injustice with violence. Young Man takes up arms. Young Man commits violence. Young Man gets locked away. ‘Heroic’ hunger strike. Death.”

I really think 9-12 is too young an age group for this – 14-17 would be much more appropriate, schoolkids can approach issues much more maturely at that age. A 15 year old is infinitely more capable of critical appreciation than a 10 year old is.

I know I’m commenting without actually seeing the book – for instance, I wonder do the innocent victims of “Brave Young Man commits violence” get mentioned? Is it made clear that innocents were hurt and killed by the actions of the ‘heroic’ hunger strikers, prior to their imprisonment?

Does the book constitute a straightforward ‘heroic narrative’ or do the moral issues get teased out.

I would honestly really worry if it’s a simplistic heroic narrative aimed at 9-12 year olds, wherein men of violence are advanced as role models.

I’ve met Laurence McKeown on a few occasions and I certainly respect his right to tell his story. (He was on hunger strike even longer than Bobby Sands and survived.)

It just seems chilling to me that 9-12 year olds in bunscoileanna seem to be the target audience here. I think the target age group should be both older and also cross-community – both Catholic and Protestant schoolkids should learn about this topic in a balanced way.

There’s a real intellectual creativity within republicanism at the moment, and I certainly don’t want to seem to piss all over that – but in this particular instance I think a lot of people of many persuasions will feel disturbed by this book.

That said I’ll certainly keep an open mind should any republican on here wish to address these fears.

Starve starve starve.

See Gerry accept the principle of consent and Stormont.

See Bobby ask what is was all for?

What what what?

Our revenge is the laughter at your childrens books.

“Or why not just come out and state clearly that your are against irish schools, republican history, and ex-republican prisoners having any role whatsoever in your perfect little middle-class prahvince?”

The answer to your three questions is “no”, “no” and “no” but you should not automatically assume that every non-republican posting on here is middle-class it’s both class and sectarian stereotyping. Or are you saying that working class Unionists are incapable of delivering coherent pov?

An admission of sorts, I feel.
Attempting to shift the focus of the debate away from the subject at hand and onto the Orange Order.

Nice attempt at “themmuns are just as bad as ussuns”, but it won’t wash. Now crawl back under your stone you sectarian little creep.

If you read my post you would see that I have nothing against these two individuals writing a book with their take on the hunger strikers – nor have I anything against it being used to promote debate among mature school children.

I am objecting to 9 to 12 year olds.

Give me one reason – other than trying to influence impressionable minds at an early age – why anyone would want to produce a book on such an horrific issue for children this young ?

Well lets see what the authors say its is for

“Co-author Mr O’Hearn said the book was relevant to younger people who faced challenges and the consequences of their actions”.

and

“The original biography asked how people like Bobby Sands become activists and then strengthen their beliefs to the degree that they willingly make tremendous sacrifices and do extraordinary things”

or

“we directly addressed the ethical dilemma that Bobby and others faced in joining the IRA and then doing things that were quite controversial.”

also

“Young people face hard choices nearly every day and we hope this book will encourage them to think about the consequences of the choices they make, even if they are less dramatic than those that Bobby Sands faced.””

FOR 9 to 12 YEAR OLDS !

It is brainwashing and peddaling their nasty little agenda.

-and I dont talk like the way you have inferred and your ad hominem attack on me illustrates the only ignoramus here is yourself.

Even if I did so what – do you look down your nose at the East Belfast Protestant working class or something ?

I have said it before these people are constantly looking for approval to legitimise their crimes so that they dont get remembered by history as terrorists who sqaundered their own lives and made everyone’s elses a complete misery for no benefit whatsoever.

This book is just another weapon in their struggle and when it is directed at 9 to 12 year olds it is a form of abuse.