Hi all....
Just to let you know I started a Facebook group to voice our complaint that this fine movie has yet to see DVD. Please join and tell your friend!
The link is http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=10188040897.
The group is called "People who want Some Mother's Son released on DVD!!!"
Your comments are very much appreciated, as you guys are the experts on this movie!
I refuse to eat prison food or wear prison uniforms until this film is released on DVD.
shareBut even starving men can join a Facebook group!
share
yeah, we deserve to have more movies that glorify terrorists who bomb, maim and murder innocent people and then claim political justification !
If this film is not released then what hope for a DVD of the true heroes of 9/11, the poor terrorists who had no other option than to bravely fly those planes into buildings - presumably if they had survived the USA and posters here would have been delighted to award them 'political status' and allowed them to wear uniforms and special treatment......
...... can't have it both ways chaps.....terrorism is terrorism.
OK, Rice, we get the message here and in other threads that you don't like the movie. Fine, you're entitled to your opinion. Does that mean that the rest of us can't enjoy it?
As to the terrorist question, would you consider the invading English of 800 years ago to be freedom fighters or terrorists? You can't have it both ways.
[deleted]
I cannot imagine why you come to that conclusion - if I am anti anything it would be anti terrorist, and anti the tacit support given to them by such romanticised clap trap as this film and others about the Troubles.
If you are from Wexfird then perhaps that explains why you do not understand what the Troubles were all about - I mean most people in the South only seem to have heard about them from folk songs or Hollywood.
I look forward to meeting with you some day.
[deleted]
[deleted]
"rice-1,
Would you consider Lenny Murphy a Terrorist? "
yes, absolutely yes.
It would help if others could see beyond their own religious background and identify terrorist for what it is - the forcing of ones will against the democratic will of the majority.
I'm an atheist.
Terrorism is a tactic not a group of people. When civilians use such tactics against a government they are labelled as terrorists, in the case of IRA, it was to break their status in the eyes of the world and people in Ireland, hence they were called terrorists and therefore criminals.
When governments kill innocent people its called collateral damage, to be expected etc.
It's all about perspective and your's is clearly biased as evidenced by your posting background here on imdb were the meat of your offering is anti-irish slander.
"It would help if others could see beyond their own religious background and identify terrorist for what it is - the forcing of ones will against the democratic will of the majority."
Um, isn't that what the British ruling class did to the Irish peoples? Force 800 years of minority rule on the majority in Ireland?
Kind of like how the English government ignored the will of the people of Ireland who by a very large margin voted for independence in 1918. Sinn Fein won 73 seats to the Unionists 22 with the old Irish Parlimentary Party taking the reminaing 6 seats. A clear majority of over 3-1 voting for independence. So don't try the democratic will of the people nonesense as it has no argument when it comes to Englands continued occupation of the 6 northeastern counties of Ireland.
shareThere's a reason Bobby Sands was elected, garnered worldwide support, and had 100,000 people (terrorist supporters?) attend his funeral. No romanticization needed.
What were the Troubles about then?
We didn't treat Al Qaeda as mere criminals after 9/11, they were Enemy Combatants. To compare Al Qaeda-like terrorists to the IRA is intellectually dishonest. All violent force is not equal. The IRA did not specifically target civilians deliberately, as al Qaeda does, that's just for starters. England ignored the reasons behind the IRA to their own peril, much of their actions perpetuated the Troubles, which could have been resolved much sooner otherwise. Now that the formerly oppressed have some political opportunity and relations have improved, you see the IRA voluntarily disarmed, something al Qaeda, and like minded terrorists, will never do. Please do not insult us all by making such pedantic comparisons again.
sharefor drlaxm
I can only guess that you have learnt all you know of the Troubles, from watching Hollywood films !
1 The IRA most definitely DID target civilians, look it up.
2 The IRA were 'militarily' defeated, and morally bankrupt by the time they gave up, the majority of their operations were being disrupted in the end, largely thorugh the use of informers and double agents, again look it up.
It is sad that you are attempting to suggest that a civilian murdered by the IRA is somehow more deserving of that fate than someone murdered on 9/11 !??
They were both murdered and are innocent victims of terrorism, it is relly that simple.
I didn't suggest any victim of terrorism was any more or less deserving than another. If the IRA was militarily defeated, why did they bother with the Good Friday Agreement? Not to excuse all IRA violence, but the Troubles could have been a much shorter period of time if the British government would have handled it better in the first place.
I stand by my original point. Al Qaeda (and other terrorist orgs) and the IRA are significantly different entities with different motives and modus operandi. And as such, al Qaeda must be dealt with accordingly.