53 Comments

• Niall | Oct 16, 2012, 06:11 AM EDT

  "The document shows that the killing happened by chance as the IRA party that had been waiting for Collins had mostly withdrawn believing he was not coming." That much was already known, as recorded by John M Feehan in 'The Shooting of Michael Collins', first published in 1981. The two (yes, two) IRA men who were still there at 8pm were in the process of removing the cart and disarming the mines when the Free State convoy came round the bend and surprised them. Their version is that they only fired shots into the air to warn IRA senior officers meeting in a pub down the road that Free State troops were in the area. But the State troops, understandably, given the circumstances, returned fire and the 15-minute shootout began. "Hanley will state in a new book that the account also proves that an astonishing lack of protection around Collins was the real cause of his death." Indeed, it makes you wonder how he could be so poorly protected... as with JFK, the question we need to be asking is, who has the power to call off the usual security protocols? His regular convoy detail was changed en route to Cork. "It is believed to be the first immediate account of the ambush at Béal na mBláth." Nah, there have been loads before this one. Some of them TOTALLY contradict other versions. A reconstruction of events, taking into account all the available eyewitness testimonies, shows that at least two key members of Collins's convoy (probably the motorcycle rider at the head of the convoy and Emmet Dalton, who was next to Collins most of the time) were lying through their teeth about what happened because their accounts conflict so much with those of the other rank and file officers who were present, as well as with the two IRA men who were there initially and the three others who joined in the shooting after it started.

• cillowen | Aug 28, 2012, 11:59 AM EDT

  ENGLAND has been left in possession not only of the Soil of Ireland, with all that grows and lives thereon, to her own use. but in possession of the world’s ear also. She may pour into, it what tale she will: and all mankind will believe her.

• curtisjohnson | Aug 26, 2012, 11:23 PM EDT

  Just wondering, thanks.

• RichardP | Aug 22, 2012, 12:17 PM EDT

  @Woundedknee: Bullying and vitriol? Look in the mirror. You may think O'Neill was from Bandon but I lived on the same street as his entire family so I don't need your correction on that. I never said he was proud - I said he was not proud of it (as in he didn't brag about it in any way and he also recognized that a great Irishman died that day). Anyway there isn't much point in attempting to discuss anything rationally with a dickhead like you. End.

• RichardP | Aug 22, 2012, 12:11 PM EDT

  Re: "@RichardP " When the Head of State of a country, or some senior figure - such as an Army Chief of Staff is killed in a civil war it is usually called assassination - particularly when it happens in an ambush for that purpose - to call it otherwise in splitting hairs and doesn't alter facts" What do you call it when it's done by the british terror state, which only obeys international conventions at its convenience?..." I call it assassination Curtis..why?

• curtisjohnson | Aug 21, 2012, 04:16 PM EDT

  He may not have been personally intimidated but the british terror state would have unleashed its psychopaths on non-combatants with all of the instruments of modern warfare at their disposal (including poison gas). This would have included a massive campaign of torture, rape, looting, burning and murder.

• ancavker | Aug 21, 2012, 09:35 AM EDT

  Woodman: Collins was not intimidated by that threat although I belive it weighed heavily on his decesion. He plainly states in writings before his death, that had the irish people wished to continue the fight he would have in spite of the British threat. I believe he took the threat seriously enough, and taht influenced his decesion.

• kinvara7 | Aug 21, 2012, 08:11 AM EDT

  The Free State allowed the freedom to achieve the Republic; not the Republic of a United Ireland, but there were, and are, certain realities to that issue which some posters here refuse to engage with. The Civil War gifted Northern Unionists a reason to justify partition. Subsequently, the vast majority of the Anti-Treaty side came into the democratic process and used the freedom obtained by the Treaty to create the 1937 constitution etc., and they too were faced with the realities of partition...

• kinvara7 | Aug 21, 2012, 08:08 AM EDT

  Michael Collins was Commander in Chief of the Irish Army. The Treaty was debated and passed by the Dáil and later in June of 1922 the Pro-Treaty wing of SF won the General election (I believe that not a single Anti-Treaty candidate headed the poll in any constituency). The people had spoken and anyone acting outside the authority of the democratic process was not acting as the Irish Army, nor did it have any right to use that name. Unfortunately, some Irish people didn’t accept the democratic process and a Civil War ensued, which caused the pointless deaths of many Irishmen and for what? Indeed, those who called themselves republicans exhibited a peculiar brand of republicanism by their refusal to accept the verdict of the people.

• Collette2 | Aug 21, 2012, 06:39 AM EDT

  The film remains a hit in my house, in fact I brought up all the VHS copies I could in case I lent one and didn't get it back.

• Woodman | Aug 20, 2012, 11:54 PM EDT

  So the British were just bluffing when they threatened "immediate and terrible war" unless Collins signed the treaty and he had nothing to worry about? The Brits would have done nothing even though the great war was over and the Empire now had thousands of troops and munitions they could send to Ireland. Really?

• Woodman | Aug 20, 2012, 11:49 PM EDT

  The document proves nothing. The only way to possible prove what happened would be to exhume the body and subject it to a scientific examination. The strange thing about the "ambush" was that no one else on either side was shot or wounded but Collins. At the time of his death, Collins was covertly arming the republicans in what is now Northern Ireland to defend Irish areas from British loyalist pograms. He also eliminated a British general he believed to be behind the British atrocities. The Brits were probably well aware of what was actually going but publicly blamed the anti-treaty people IRA and not the Irish Free State. The professor is just rehashing the same old official story, and there is no real reason to believe it.

• warrenpoint00 | Aug 20, 2012, 10:28 PM EDT

  Oh yes Michael Collins, Arthur Griffith and co had many choices concerning Ireland,s future at that stage but surprisingly and obviously for want of better judgement they accepted and choose the british choice. Even if they had done nothing and just sat on their hands it would have been a better choice than that what they accepted.The Treaty of 1922 divided the nation of Ireland, something that the the british had unsuccessfully tried to do for seven centuries and now they had succeeded with the help of Irishmen.An Irish free state.Not much of an achievement for Collins and co /cuman naGael,a far cry from the Irish republic that united Irishmen and women fought and died for, an insult to the memory of Irish warriors ONeill and ODonnell.If only he had waited just a little longer.May you rest in peace Michael OCoileian

• curtisjohnson | Aug 20, 2012, 09:57 PM EDT

  " The English take military defeat very badly, usually exacting retribution of some description." This is when they reveal their real level of civilization, comparable to, say, the Mongol hordes. [b]ritish honor and manhood is always on display in their vile behaviour towards the defenceless, with women and children inspiring particular savagery.

• seanomelb | Aug 20, 2012, 07:40 PM EDT

  Collins always had a choice as did Dev.They all turned on each other giving the enemy a leave pass, divide and conquer and oppress was the mantra and the British tragically won the day.

• ancavker | Aug 20, 2012, 03:48 PM EDT

  Wounded: Sorry if I misunderstood your post. I think Collins was quite progressive for his time, and Ireland would have been a much differetn place. Collins himeself has no use for the Catholic hierarchy, and only resumed going to church upon his engagement to Miss Kiernan. Cosgrave and O'Higgins were home rulers at heart. And Cosgrave abandoned the nationalist people of the six counties for money. Collins in my opinion never would have done that.

• ancavker | Aug 20, 2012, 03:43 PM EDT

  warrenpoint: Collins had no choice but to accept the treaty. The Irish people wanted it, and the IRA was running out of weapons as every attempt to land weapons was thwated by the British. Plus the few IRA men that actually fought the British were exhasuted at that point.

• warrenpoint00 | Aug 20, 2012, 02:23 PM EDT

  If only he had waited..just a few more years even, he could have taken the whole of Ireland to the promised land of an Irish republic.But he was a politician now, eager and ambitious just like his military henchmen McEoin and O Duffy were and the ideals of a republic gave way to political ambition and they ended up with a lousy so called free state.For the first time ever in our nations proud history the unity of our nation was compromised not by the failure of our fearless warriors but by the cowardly stroke of a politicians pen."Ireland unfree shall never be at peace" Padraig Pearse so eloquently stated at least now we can comfort ourselves in knowing that both pro and anti treaty people alluded to Pearse,s aspirations.Our nations freedom will come eventually the Treaty of 1922 just delayed it a little longer.

• WoundedKnee | Aug 20, 2012, 01:41 PM EDT

  Ancavker: Your other post is better. You are quite correct to refute the ignorant claims of the Hate Dev crowd here. The fact is that the anti-Treaty forces did not report to him and he did not direct them. Dev took little part in the Civil War, and certainly no part in the military struggle. In my own family tradition, Dev was scorned and despised by men who had fought as Irregulars in 1922-3 and who have been subsequently exiled from Ireland because of the campaign of discrimination by state, employers and church. There are many things that the Catholic Church in Ireland did over the years that merit contrition and demand an apology. One that they have never been called to account for is their despicable treatment of men and women of conscience in the Civil War period. While a small number of priests, mainly those of the religious orders, remained faithful to their ministry, the great majority of bishops and clergy embraced the Free State as warmly as they had earlier embraced the British Crown. Hell was not hot enough for the Republicans, just as an earlier toad bishop had said in the case of the Fenians. In fact, there were cases of priests breaking the supposedly sacred seal of confession in order to betray the trust of Republicans foolish enough to confess to them. It is truly a miracle that while many Republicans came to hate the church and its priests, more still remained loyal to the faith of their fathers, and looked beyond the treachery of its ministers to an earlier time when priest and people were one.

• WoundedKnee | Aug 20, 2012, 01:34 PM EDT

  Ancavker: You have totally misread my point. I did NOT compare Collins to Cosgrave. A poster attacking me said that an Ireland under Collins would have been very progressive. I replied that it was futile to speculate on something that never existed. The only Ireland we know from the post-Collins era is the one that existed under Cosgrave. Was that a progressive society? I didn't say it explicitly in my post, but it would seem prudent to believe that the Ireland headed by Cosgrave, Blyth, O'Higgins etc was not utterly different from an Ireland governed by Cosgrave, Blyth, O'Higgins, Collins etc. But any opinion is purely speculative.

• ancavker | Aug 20, 2012, 12:05 PM EDT

  As much as I am not A De Valera fan, he did not start the civil war, could he have done more to prvent it, and perhaps end it sooner once started? Yes. But did he start it? No. He was merely a figure head. Liam Deasy, Lynch, Dan Breen, Ernie O Malley were all determined not to accept the treaty as it violated the oath to the Republic they had taken. Much as I admire these men, it was a foolish decesion.

• ancavker | Aug 20, 2012, 12:00 PM EDT

  Woundedknee: To comapre Collins to Cosgrave is a stretch to say the least considering Collins was dead when Cosgrave took power. Cosgrave, O'Higgins etc, wer all part of the old Irish Nationalist party (At least in outlook) and when they took over, that is all they wanted. Fine Gael claims Collins as their own, but that is a laugh. When Cosgrave took over and then De Valera they chaged nothing. The country remained backwards, and just as conservative, and always looking across the water to London.

• bbbandy16 | Aug 20, 2012, 11:49 AM EDT

  Martyr and hero, Michael Collins won freedom for as much of Ireland as could be gotten at the time. His memory should always be honored. And he did it all -- his entire career -- in the span of just five years. God bless his soul. And may those who love Ireland live up to the standard he set.

• Seanmor | Aug 20, 2012, 11:41 AM EDT

  Eyerish: Michael Collins' 'love of country' appliked to the Whole Irish Nation, not merely to the part of the country over which the Dáil has jurisdiction. He signed the Treaty believing that it was a stepping stone toward full sovereignty for All-Ireland. Unlike today's 'constitutional' politicians, Collins would never have regarded Northerners as aliens and their region as foreign territory.

• TisEyerish | Aug 20, 2012, 11:26 AM EDT

  I sit here with tears in my eyes after reading the article and watching the video. Thank God for this incredible man, for his courage and for his love of his country. The more Irish history I read, the more proud I become of the people I claim as ancestors. God bless the Irish and the land they live on...I wish I was among them.

• pilib04 | Aug 20, 2012, 08:35 AM EDT

  Bob McBride, it's de Valera not Develera. As for the rest off you, the blame Dev routine is quite boring. Similar to the blame Obama routine. Sorry, but just because you disagree with someone does not mean they are responsible for everything that goes awry. I'm surprised no one has blamed Obama for Beal Na mBlath.

• IrelandNorth | Aug 20, 2012, 06:24 AM EDT

  It's higly probable that an unwritten condition of the Anglo-Irish Treaty, 1920 was that the English wanted Collins' head on a silver platter, John the Baptist like. The English take military defeat very badly, usually exacting retribution of some description. Inflated imperial egos bruise very badly indeed. De Valera's despatch of Collins to London to negotiate was probably because the English wanted to see the scarlet pimpernell who had run their Black and Tans ragged the length and breath of Ireland up close and personal. For future targetting, perhaps? The divide and conquer tactic by the English paid up trumps, splitting the Irish Republican Army (IRA) (1912-2012) into Free State Army (FSA), 1922-'24, which somewhat oxymoronically and abbreviatedly called itself the "Irish National Army (INA)" (sic). The term "Irish Army" per se is merely the more expedient term for the FSA's successor - the Permanent Defence Forces (PDF), 1924-present, or what its website calls "Defence Forces Ireland (DFI)." Collins' strategic weakness was probably a death wish due to despair of the impossibility of the situation. He also probably began to believe the mythology of his own invincibility. He was a Director of Organisation rather than hands on triggerman. (See Colm Connolly's excellent Radío Telefís Éireann (RTE) 80th anniversary documentary on YouTube - "The Shadow of Béal na m'Bláth"), which treats of the O'Neill/McPeake hypothesis. (Scotchtommy! Think you've got your sporán in a twist, and are thinking of an abusive term for Catholics?) Only leaders and signatories of 1916 were executed. Collins was then only aid-de-camp to the terminally ill Plunkett's in GPO. Collins admired [Scotch-]Connolly over Pearse for his pragmatism over idealsm.

• irishpjk | Aug 20, 2012, 12:28 AM EDT

  wtf What I learned when I was child listening to adults talk some of whom fought with Michael Collins and were friends with General Sean McKeon. Their beliefs were that when De Valera returned from the USA he realized that Collins was now very popular and hands down would have the support of the people. They also felt that De Valera knew there was no way to get total freedom from the crown that is why he sent Collins to negotiate, so when Collins came back with the signed treaty he made his stand against it hoping that he would be able to regain his place at the top. After the treaty was ratified by the people there was no way form him to become the leader, so he walked out on Collins and caused the civil war. They might have been wrong, but many of them including my father and his father went to their graves believing that De Valera had a hand in the killing of Michael Collins.

• sirpeter | Aug 19, 2012, 11:33 PM EDT

  It is well known why Collins did not drive on.He told his men if there was trouble he wanted them to stop and fight it out.Those were his very words.The whole trip South was psychological one.To show that no place in the South was a no go area.The Civil war was coming to a close and this was a psychological statement.He knew exactly what he was doing.What statement would Collins be giving if he had a hundred men with him?Why did he insist on going South and driving into a well known anti-treaty stronghold?He didn't inadvertently tip of the enemy.The whole area where he got directions was an IRA stronghold.Also he was not drunk as some would like to believe.To be drunk would imply that he made an error of judgement in stopping.This is false.He was able to stand and fight.If drink impaired his judgement he would have been caught by the British away back.He was going to fight because he wasn't the type of man to run.He also knew that an ambush site was always going to be in favour of the ambushers.What he didn't anticipate was the machine gun jamming.He exposed himself in the open because the firing had died down and partly due to bravado which was part of his nature. Of course if he was more protected he might have survived..They could have put the boot down..They didn't.Because he wanted to send a psychological message.Michael Collins was an astonishing man but normal standards and nothing he did that day was out of character.Sonny O’Neill also stated that he used a dum dum bullet to his friend which would account for the massive wound..Not that it can be proven unless they dig him up.

• bob mcbride | Aug 19, 2012, 10:36 PM EDT

  I think Develera was a RAT! Collins death was untimely and very unforunate. Have the guns solved anything?

• curtisjohnson | Aug 19, 2012, 10:11 PM EDT

  @RichardP " When the Head of State of a country, or some senior figure - such as an Army Chief of Staff is killed in a civil war it is usually called assassination - particularly when it happens in an ambush for that purpose - to call it otherwise in splitting hairs and doesn't alter facts" What do you call it when it's done by the british terror state, which only obeys international conventions at its convenience?

• simmo | Aug 19, 2012, 09:10 PM EDT

  why has the truth about Collins still hidden ? he was the first to be released from jail in 1916 why ?because he was working with a group of Brit politians who wanted to kill some of their own , Collins was promised by the Brits that if he helped them they would give Ireland back, he was not in jail long only 8 months while the real hero's like James Connolly was executed,Collins should not have signed the Free State aggreement cutting Ireland ,millions of people have suffered since , Ireland belongs to the people of 32 counties of Ireland

• handsome68 | Aug 19, 2012, 09:01 PM EDT

  My dad (1909-1972), born and bred in Leitrim, told me he shook hands with Michael Collins. To me, Collins is on the same plane with other personal heroes like Braveheart and Joan of Arc. Several years back, while in the New York University Library, I remember seeing some rather eerie photos in a book about Collins. The photos were taken, I believe, from then recently discovered film footage. In the very last frames, he has a concerned, worried, or doomed look. God rest his mighty soul.

• aloistmartin | Aug 19, 2012, 07:01 PM EDT

  Darts !

• seanomelb | Aug 19, 2012, 06:45 PM EDT

  ballylanger is a petty small minded little fool

• misneac | Aug 19, 2012, 06:39 PM EDT

  Can you image going out on convoy with a dirty little snake like Ballylanger !

• cillowen | Aug 19, 2012, 05:57 PM EDT

  Kennedy and Collins had something in common - the 22nd of months Nov and Aug. Stupidly went, out in the open while armor plated vehicles were available. Collin's greatest enemy was England's Greatest Spy, Dev. Kennedy's venture into well publicised hostile Texas territory which even helpless, new citizen, I, kept thinking and praying "don't go don't go."

• ballylanger | Aug 19, 2012, 05:41 PM EDT

  If he had lived he would have ended up with a pension of €150,000 a year, or the equivalent, while those who elected him would end up on the breadline, just like today. He would still have to ask the dirty little occupying vatican for instructions in the unlikely event that he would like to improve the lot of the god-fearing gobshites. I'm looking forward to the day when scientists figure out a way to make stupidity painful.

• WoundedKnee | Aug 19, 2012, 04:25 PM EDT

  RichardP; Knock off the bullying and vitriol. You just appear like a nut. The body in question was of course the Free State Army. What the hell was the government they served called? It was the SaorStat--the Free State. As to atrocities by that body, I have neither the time nor the energy to write out a catalog for you; it is well documented, but you're too bigoted to learn from it anyway. As to Collins actions pre-Treaty being acceptable, don't be such a fool. I never said anything about the pre-Treaty Collins. Inventing a lie that someone else supposedly said is the argument of a half-wit. As to an Ireland under Collins being "progressive" that's just stupid speculation on your part--I can't argue with something that never happened. Of course I can point to the reactionary governments of Collins' buddies in the Free State of the 1920s. I suppose you'll tell us Cosgrave was a great progressive. Have some sense, you sound really dumb now. As to Sonny O'Neill being from Tipperary, that's ignorant nonsense. He was a West Cork man, from Bandon. And it looks like you made up the yarn about him being proud of killing Collins, there's not a shred of evidence for him saying that, but that doesn't stop you of course. And your claim that a man who has been killed in action in a fight in open country between two armed groups has been "assassinated" shows as much for your poor command of English as for your hate and bigotry.

• WoundedKnee | Aug 19, 2012, 04:05 PM EDT

  Scotchtommy: This is the second time I am correcting you. The guy's name was not MacTeague. If you want to know his name see my earlier post.

• Scotchtommy | Aug 19, 2012, 03:41 PM EDT

  Rumor has it he was shot in the back of the head by the armored car driver.A man named Mcteague -born in Scotland to Irish parents.McTague had seved all thru WWII (very bravely)- laterly as an armored car driver.After the war he moved to Ireland and enlisted in the Free State Army.Cause of the rumors was that MTeague was armed (or had possession of ) a large caliber British Army issue pistol.To be used to fire into the mechanism of the armored car to disable it if it had to be abandoned in combat.It all hinges on the wound to Collins'head -Front (IRA rifle bullet /small entry) Rear -(large caliber McTeague- as British revenge?).Was there an autopsy on Collins and was the bullet recovered?Mcteague later left Ireland and settled in London (with his payoff?)Anybody have any information on this?

• RichardP | Aug 19, 2012, 03:21 PM EDT

  @ Woundedkneee: Your characterization of the Irish Army/Irish Free State Army (along with that of Seanmor) is typical of the refusal by diehard IRA supporters to recognize reality. Furthermore, there were ex-British soldiers, people who had taken no part in the war of Independence and lunatic cut-throats in abundance in the IRA/Irregulars also. War crimes? The IRA were just as responsible for atrocities as the Free State Army. There is plenty to be ashamed of on all sides and it's funny how Collins actions pre-Treaty are so laudable but his actions post-Treaty are deemed so reprehensible by you. de Valera is the real criminal - he sent Collins to get the best deal possible, the Dail voted in favour of it the Dev stabbed him in the back. An Ireland under Collins would have been far more progressive than Ireland under that hypocritical puritan turned out to be. By the way,Mr O'Shea, Sonny O'Neill was NOT a local IRA man - he was from Nenagh in North Tipperary and he was never 'proud' of the fact he had killed Collins but he did acknowledge it was his bullet that probably killed Collins. When the Head of State of a country, or some senior figure - such as an Army Chief of Staff is killed in a civil war it is usually called assassination - particularly when it happens in an ambush for that purpose - to call it otherwise in splitting hairs and doesn't alter facts

• WoundedKnee | Aug 19, 2012, 03:02 PM EDT

  Scotchtommy: You have the name wrong. His name was John (Jock) McPeak. And you miss an important element of the McPeak conspiracy theory, namely the fact that he subsequently deserted the Free Staters and joined the Republicans (with his armored car). As regards wound on Collins' head, there is some conjecture that it may have been a ricochet. You pays your money and your get your choice of conspiracy theories. I have even heard it suggested that Emmett Dalton, a fellow Free-Stater, shot Collins in the confusion, because he was of the ultra wing of the Free Staters and he feared that Collins wanted to do business with the republicans. Pretty fanciful, you may say, but it is a fact that Emmet Dalton was a particularly murderous Free Stater in the time after Collins' death.

• MichaelJTully | Aug 19, 2012, 02:42 PM EDT

  People will still try and rewrite history, to suite their own agenda. People die in war,so what is the big deal. Political point scoring is there for ever.

• Scotchtommy | Aug 19, 2012, 02:31 PM EDT

  There is also a rumor that he was shot in the back of the head by his own armored car driver.A man named McTeague- born in Scotland to Irish parents.McTeague served (very bravely) all thru WWII with the British Army.Laterly as an armored car driver.After the war he moved to Ireland and enlisted in the Free State Army.The suspicion arose because McTeague was armed with (or had access to) a large caliber British made special pistol to be used only to fire into the armored car's mechanism if it had to be abandoned during combat.The question is where was Michael Collins death wound.Front-IRA (small entry).Rear -large entry -Mcteague - large caliber pistol.Motive -revenge by British Army.Later McTeague left Ireland and settled in London (with his payoff?)Anyone have any more information on this?

• KingPuk | Aug 19, 2012, 12:09 PM EDT

  Lets look at the facts: The state army protecting Collins took a wrong turn in the middle of now where only to be blocked by a cart in the middle of the road. A 20minute gun battle allegedly ensued resulting in zero causalities on either side. The only body carried out of that gun battle was Michael. Any written testimony by witnesses could be easily falsified. The state army are hardly a beacon of truth. The truth: Michael was taken out to the woods and executed by single pistol shot to the back of the head. Cui bono? E de Valera. "It is my considered opinion that in the fullness of time history will record the greatness of Michael Collins and it will be recorded at my expense" De Valera

• KingPuk | Aug 19, 2012, 11:57 AM EDT

  He and his men reportedly had a belly full of beer; perhaps that made a smart man not at that time.. The range of fire - having examined the site - was incredibly close - perhaps 20 yards (maybe less), with the IRA shooting with rifles down on the convoy. RIP.

• Mousemess | Aug 19, 2012, 11:53 AM EDT

  I nDil-Chuimhne ar Micheal O Coileain.

• hermitTalker | Aug 19, 2012, 11:37 AM EDT

  The whole era was tragic, a fratricidal war, which was the basis of the political division of the nation until recently, where it makes little difference in today's economic mess. And the cost of life and treasure and divisiveness since 1969 in the North resurrected all the treacheries of the Treaty. That period stirred up feelings and outrage that made the island a place of evil, false understanding of what was at stake, hateful ignorance and bigotry for all that time for everyone at home and those outside.

• WoundedKnee | Aug 19, 2012, 11:02 AM EDT

  eileenkny--Don't want to disillusion you, but it is most probable that your father was not a Free Stater. First, because you say he was "against partition". The Free Staters, once Collins was dead, quickly accepted partition. Second, if he emigrated to the US in the 1920s, he was very possibly a victim of the discrimination that the Free Staters mounted against men who had fought on the Republican side. From 1923 to the end of the decade many men who had fought with the Irregulars were forced to leave Ireland, as they were blacklisted by employers at the behest of the Free State police or priests. Some of my own family arrived in the US as a result of having stood by the Irish Republic proclaimed by Pearse and Connolly. Not all of the Republicans who were pushed out of Ireland ended up in the US. Some went as far as Argentina or Australia. It is an aspect of Irish history that hasn't received the study it merits.

• WoundedKnee | Aug 19, 2012, 10:03 AM EDT

  This is nothing new, but at least this article doesn't repeat the canard that Irish Central regularly prints, namely the lie that Collins was "assassinated" or even "murdered". The story that the ambush unit were on the point of leaving the scene is already well known. O'Shea is puzzled by the actions of Collins. Why did he not simply accelerate thru the ambush area? Once he decided to stay, why did he take such a rash part in the gun fight? The answer is quite simple. Collins was drunk. He had been drinking since noon on that day. On another issue, Seanmor is quite right to object to the title "Irish Army" for the outfit that Collins led. It was actually the Free State Army, which at the time did not control the majority of Irish territory, namely the six northeastern counties, combined with a substantial swathe of territory in the south and west of the country. This Free State Army represented an extraordinary marriage of two disparate forces. On the one hand, it gathered in a large contingent of former British soldiers and people who had taken no part in the Republican struggle. On the other hand, it included some of the most bloodthirsty killers that the War of Independence had produced, many drawn from Collins' private death squad. Had Collins lived he might have controlled the monster he helped create, but after his death the Free State Government and Army ran amock and committed countless war crimes.

• eileenkny | Aug 19, 2012, 10:03 AM EDT

  My father came to the States in 1928; he would never talk about what he did during the Irish Civil War. He was a Corkman, through and through, and I know he was against partition. I want to think he was a "Free Stater", along with Michael Collins. I know he said he could never go home.

• Seanmor | Aug 19, 2012, 08:46 AM EDT

  How very interesting,indeed! The article describes Collins as "the Chief-of-Staff of the Irish army" which is very misleading. Collins position was Chief-of-Staff of the IRISH FREE STATE ARMY at the time of his unfortunate death. In any military organization could then claim to be an Irish army, it was the I.R.A. which still had active active units troughout the whole country, including the North. It should also be noted that Michael Collins was strongly opposed to Partition and wold have sought to remove the artificial Border if he had survived the Civil War.