Slugger O'Toole

This user has not yet written a description

Latest comments from Mr Crowley (see all)

Mr Crowley has commented 209 times (0 in the last month).

1. Comment on “We on the outside finessed…”
   on 13 January 2011 at 3:18 pm

   What book are you quoting from Pat?

   Go to comment

2. Comment on Adams to apply to the Crown for ‘job’ in the Chilterns?
   on 16 November 2010 at 12:02 am

   It’s all good Rory, Steward of the Cilterns is but a stepping stone to Lord of Ballymurphy where Liam can be Steward of the Childrens. He’ll be a better fit in the lords than the previous Gerry from west Belfast.

   Go to comment

3. Comment on The “Top Secret” Press Release
   on 10 November 2010 at 3:38 pm

   Fin, why did the PSF negotiation team never inform the hunger strikers that an offer had been made. Do you not think they had the right to an input into the decision to accept or decline?

   Could it be that Adams had no intention of accepting the offer and instead chose to prevaricate and create roadblocks whilst Joe McDonnell lay on his death bed?

   Go to comment

4. Comment on The “Top Secret” Press Release
   on 10 November 2010 at 3:33 pm

   Still spinning Rory. O Rawe was articulating the position after the prison leadership’s acceptance of the deal was rejected. It was written in his capacity as PRO stating the ‘party line’ rather than in any personal capacity. Your desperate attempts at diversion and spin fail to obscure the facts that:

   1. An offer was made by the British and conveyed to Martin McGuinness by Brendan Duddy.

   2. Bic McFarlane and Richard O Rawe discussed the offer which was accepted by the prison leadership of the PIRA; the INLA were never informed inside or outside the gaol.

   3. The ‘Kitchen Cabinet’, chaired by Adams, rejected the offer without any consultation with the hunger strikers and despite the wishes of the prison leadership.

   4. When the hunger strike collapsed as a result of family intervention the British implemented what had been on offer all along. Adams was even given draft copies of Thatcher’s speech announcing the end of the hunger strike so he was fully aware of what the British were prepared to do at all times.

   Go to comment

5. Comment on The “Top Secret” Press Release
   on 10 November 2010 at 2:37 pm

   Fin, you said:

   “Mr Crowley you may have the HMG documents now but neither you or the hungerstrikers had them when it counted, they handed them out 25 years (or so) too late,”

   Gerry Adams, Martin McGuinness and the prison leadership knew the contents of the offer, this has been verified as fact. The people who one would most expect to have needed to know the contents of the offer, the hunger strikers themselves, were never informed of the contents or even that an offer had been made. People made the decisions on their behalfs and allowed them to suffer and die without any informed possibility of self-determination.

   Go to comment

6. Comment on The “Top Secret” Press Release
   on 10 November 2010 at 1:44 pm

   More desperate spin Rory.

   You say what O Rawe wrote as PRO “was nothing but a tissue of lies.” when you know full well that it was a fooking press release indicating the position after the prisoners had been overruled.

   And actually, it’s not conjecture what Thatcher would have done, as we have the documents from Thatcher’s government outlining what they would have done, not only in relation to the July offer but even before that, their contingency plan which was drawn up as a response to the first hunger strike, and even more than the documents we have what WAS done when the hunger strike finally ended.

   Go to comment

7. Comment on Peter and Martin make new friends in the Sesame Tree
   on 10 November 2010 at 10:49 am

   They also announced the unveiling of two new muppet characters: a rabbit called Irish whose always on the go around building sites and a forgetful elephant called Gerry.

   Go to comment

8. Comment on The “Top Secret” Press Release
   on 10 November 2010 at 10:43 am

   How old are you Fin? You must have little recollection of Thatcher who under no circumstances would have been seen to have been talking to the IRA.

   The Brits implemented what was on offer in the July offer after the families, influenced by Denis Faul, collapsed the hunger strike. This could have been achieved in July with 6 less deaths. It’s not rocket science.

   Go to comment

9. Comment on The “Top Secret” Press Release
   on 10 November 2010 at 10:06 am

   Any comms issued by O Rawe from within the prison would have been smuggled out and vetted by the PRM. Had he issued a comm stating anything contrary to the position of the ‘Kitchen Cabinet’ it and he would no longer exist.

   O Rawe hasn’t been caught in any lies, everything that he has thus far stated has been independently verified. Those whose narrative he challenges however,…………..we’re talking about people whose very lives are lies.

   The truth equation appears easily solved.

   Go to comment

10. Comment on The “Top Secret” Press Release
    on 9 November 2010 at 3:47 pm

    JoeCanuck, you stated:

    “I don’t believe in suppressing the truth, ever. The problem with this controversy, as I see it, is that there are two separate versions of the truth, each genuinely held, and that there is no way to uncover which, if either, is the whole truth.”

    This statement is a contradiction of itself. You don’t believe in suppressing the truth, yet you claim there is no way to uncover it.

    That claim implicitly suppresses the truth: “It can’t be uncovered, leave it”. So which is it? Should the truth come out, or should it be “left”/suppressed?

    “Why do you keep picking at this sore? It can only cause ongoing psychological pain to the survivors and the families of the dead.”

    Why does anyone attempt to understand history? Families of the dead have no veto over history – and shouldn’t. Stop hiding behind them. What you’re doing is emotional blackmail in order to suppress the truth, something you say you don’t believe in yet here you are, attempting to do so.
    
    “There is no objective reality
    What we have are two conflicting subjective memories. Neither is right. Many many experiments have demonstrated that no two people remember any event the same. That’s why eyewitness evidence is rarely enough to convict a person on its own these days.
    Leave it.”

    This is not a case of subjective vs objective. Rusty’s post is about two things: what Brendan McFarlane claims (subjective) and the artifact of his claims [the comm, which exists in two forms] (objective).

    McFarlane, and before him, Gerry Adams and Danny Morrison, claim that a comm written by Richard O’Rawe in his capacity as Public Relations Officer for the Hunger Strike was a secret comm that shows O’Rawe’s private viewpoint.

    The comm itself, which exists in two forms, the original handwritten copy and the typewritten copy on headed paper released by the H Block Information Centre, which we have photographs of and are now available for everyone to see for themselves online, clearly states “LETTER TO PRESS” and is signed “REPUBLICAN PRO H BLOCKS” on both the handwritten and typed copy, and on the handwritten copy the fact that it is a “LETTER TO PRESS” is emphasised with an arrow pointing to that line and “EVERYONE RECOGNISES THAT” underneath it.

    The objective evidence belies the subjective recollection. In this case, the objective evidence is right. It was a press release meant for public consumption, it is clearly labelled as such, and it was distributed as a press release; it was not the private viewpoint of Richard O’Rawe, it was not secret, and it is not something that has never been seen before.

    The evidence is right, the subjective opinion of McFarlane (2010), Adams (2009: http://sluggerotoole.com/2009/10/09/1981-hunger-strike-adams-and-the-irish-news/), and Morrison (2006: http://www.longkesh.info/2006/06/08/orawe-refuted-danny-morrison-publishes-h-block-comms/#more-689) is wrong.

    It IS that simple.

    Go to comment