PSNI rejects British Army version of 1988 shooting

menoscemo

Fratton Fred wrote: »

really, that's interesting. can you provide me a map showing this.

I can't provide you with a map, but in my home town, Dungannon, the largest army Barracks in the area was attatched (seprated only by a high wall) to the local catholic Grammar secondary school (my old school) which had over 2,000 pupils from all over the surrounding areas. Helicopters could be heard landing and taking off all through the school day. I know that was also the case in most other medium or large towns.

Fratton Fred

menoscemo wrote: »

I can't provide you with a map, but in my home town, Dungannon, the largest army Barracks in the area was attatched (seprated only by a high wall) to the local catholic Grammar secondary school (my old school) which had over 2,000 pupils from all over the surrounding areas. Helicopters could be heard landing and taking off all through the school day. I know that was also the case in most other medium or large towns.

I would have loved it if my school had an army bas next door, but i would imagine it is a lot different in NI.

Was there any reason given for this? the accusation of hiding behind civilians is a bit of a naff imho, schools aren't exactly much of a shield, unless the IRA took weekends off and didn't work nights.

When these bases recent, or built early days when the Army was sent over to protect the nationalist community?

dlofnep

Why are we still discussing the IRA? Fred, stop derailing the thread please. This is a thread discussing the death of a civilian at the hands of a British soldier. Not a thread about the IRA or any other group.

With that in mind - Why is it that there are so many cover ups of civilian death within the British army? This is supposed to be a mandated army with which civilians can trust, but their truth was broken on numerous occasions to fill the void of bored soldiers.

Hagar

If the Army was truly sent over to protect the Nationalist community it would have made more sense to build the bases in the Loyalist areas where they could have by their very presence surpressed the problems before they started. Prevention rather than cure. Surely its more effective to curtail the criminal than try to protect every possible victim.

Of course since the bases went into Nationalist areas from the word go they must have already decided who they were really curtailing and who they were protecting.

dlofnep

Correct.

Also - Given the fact that the defense forces were riddled with allegations of collusion - How on earth was the nationalist community supposed to trust these newly found saviours of the Catholic community? Would it not make perfect sense that the backlash would be less than positive?

menoscemo

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I would have loved it if my school had an army bas next door, but i would imagine it is a lot different in NI.

Was there any reason given for this? the accusation of hiding behind civilians is a bit of a naff imho, schools aren't exactly much of a shield, unless the IRA took weekends off and didn't work nights.

When these bases recent, or built early days when the Army was sent over to protect the nationalist community?

I don't know, but it was there as far as I can remember (early 80's) and we always found it annoying and Intimidating. They were no doubt used for spying on the local area while feeling safe from attack, that is the feeling we got anyway.

Back on topic, sorry dlofnep for going off it- Yes I feel the soldier should be punished. As pointed out earlier, the troubles were technically never seen as a war and also technically the Soldiers were supposed to be Neutral arbiters of peace. I am almost certain that army actions are not covered by the GFA as they were not supposed to be on one side or the other but in the middle enforcing peace :pac:

dlofnep

That sounds about right menoscemo.

stovelid

Hagar wrote: »

If the Army was truly sent over to protect the Nationalist community it would have made more sense to build the bases in the Loyalist areas where they could have by their very presence surpressed the problems before they started.

Actually the first two civilian deaths at the hands of the British Army were two protestants, on the Shankill Road. I assume that this was because early army deployments were, by the nature of the disturbances, along interface areas.

Fratton Fred

menoscemo wrote: »

Back on topic, sorry dlofnep for going off it- Yes I feel the soldier should be punished. As pointed out earlier, the troubles were technically never seen as a war and also technically the Soldiers were supposed to be Neutral arbiters of peace. I am almost certain that army actions are not covered by the GFA as they were not supposed to be on one side or the other but in the middle enforcing peace :pac:

Which is why you should never get involved in an arguement between siblings. it always ends up being your fault.

Fratton Fred

dlofnep wrote: »

Correct.

Also - Given the fact that the defense forces were riddled with allegations of collusion - How on earth was the nationalist community supposed to trust these newly found saviours of the Catholic community? Would it not make perfect sense that the backlash would be less than positive?

I thought they were welcomed by cheering crowds when they first went in.

stovelid

dlofnep wrote: »

Also - Given the fact that the defense forces were riddled with allegations of collusion - How on earth was the nationalist community supposed to trust these newly found saviours of the Catholic community? Would it not make perfect sense that the backlash would be less than positive?

By defense forces, do you mean Army or RUC? Obviously the RUC was riddled because it was a nearly a wholly protestant force. The army eventually became the defacto police of the nationalist communities because the RUC were targeted in those areas.

Fratton Fred

dlofnep wrote: »

Why are we still discussing the IRA? Fred, stop derailing the thread please. This is a thread discussing the death of a civilian at the hands of a British soldier. Not a thread about the IRA or any other group.

Because it is relevant to the way the thread has panned out. I didn't raise the subject of Bases next to schools.

carry on with your witch hunt, I'm sure you are enjoying it.,

getz

it must be very hard to stay neutral when the people you are there to protect are being used as a cover to shoot you in the back.

dlofnep

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I thought they were welcomed by cheering crowds when they first went in.

I doubt they were cheering when they found out their true intentions, when 17 year old children were laying dead in Derry, now were they Fred?

stovelid wrote: »

By defense forces, do you mean Army or RUC? Obviously the RUC was riddled because it was a nearly a wholly protestant force. The army eventually became the defacto police of the nationalist communities because the RUC were targeted in those areas.

Both. The Army (in most part, the UDR) and RUC, and there are many documented events to back that up. It wasn't the RUC that attacked civilians on Bloody Sunday and lied about the events. It wasn't the RUC that killed civilians on a bus in the Miami Showband Massacre.

menoscemo

stovelid wrote: »

By defense forces, do you mean Army or RUC? Obviously the RUC was riddled because it was a nearly a wholly protestant force. The army eventually became the defacto police of the nationalist communities because the RUC were targeted in those areas.

The army were much more despised and feared in nationalist communities than the RUC. The army would regularly set up check points in Nationalist areas, demanding to see documentation driving licenses etc with their machine guns at their side, even though they had no legal right to do so (they are not a police force) As a child I personally witnessed a soldier take my father out of the car and beat seven shades out of him for refusing to show him any documentation at such a checkpoint, after pointing out he had no right to ask for it. (They had a right to search cars but nothing more.)
Despite their bad press, the RUC were never as crass and brutal as this.

stovelid

menoscemo wrote: »

The army were much more despised and feared in nationalist communities than the RUC. The army would regularly set up check points in Nationalist areas, demanding to see documentation driving licenses etc with their machine guns at their side, even though they had no legal right to do so (they are not a police force) As a child I personally witnessed a soldier take my father out of the car and beat seven shades out of him for refusing to show him any documentation at such a checkpoint, after pointing out he had no right to ask for it. (They had a right to search cars but nothing more.)
Despite their bad press, the RUC were never as crass and brutal as this.

dlofnep wrote: »

Both. The Army (in most part, the UDR) and RUC, and there are many documented events to back that up. It wasn't the RUC that attacked civilians on Bloody Sunday and lied about the events. It wasn't the RUC that killed civilians on a bus in the Miami Showband Massacre.

Sigh.

Again: quit tarring me with the army apologist brush..

My post was in response to the poster (Hagar?) who questioned why the Army were only deployed in nationalist areas. They were initially deployed because the RUC could not police those areas. Especially so, once the IRA began targeting the R.U.C.

How you can take my post to be broadly supportive of army wrongdoing, or supportive of the bleeding UDR, is completely beyond me.

I am beginning to wonder if this thread is of any discursive use? Haven't people swapped enough emotive army horror stories at this stage?

dlofnep

If you don't like reading about the atrocities inflicted by the British army, you don't have to read the thread. Freedom of choice. Make use of it. It's not our fault that there is a long list of atrocities. Believe me you, I'd rather it was shorter.

menoscemo

stovelid wrote: »

Sigh.

Again: quit tarring me with the army apologist brush..

My post was in response to the poster (Hagar?) who questioned why the Army were only deployed in nationalist areas. They were initially deployed because the RUC could not police those areas. Especially so, once the IRA began targeting the R.U.C.

How you can take my post to be broadly supportive of army wrongdoing, or supportive of the bleeding UDR, is completely beyond me.

I am beginning to wonder if this thread is of any discursive use? Haven't people swapped enough emotive army horror stories at this stage?

I never accused you of being an Army apologist, I am just pointing out the facts. Yes in many ways the Army did become a defacto Police force in nationalist Areas, mainly beacuse they gathered in droves and were armed to the teeth. Also they would accompany The RUC on street patrols, 2 or 3 soldiers to back up every Police-man, kind of body-guards or enforcers.
To nationalists, the Army were the strong arm of the law, the SS backing up the Gestapo if you will

Hagar

stovelid wrote: »

I am beginning to wonder if this thread is of any discursive use? Haven't people swapped enough emotive army horror stories at this stage?

All threads regarding NI end up this way. It's impossible to discuss any single topic in isolation and it's equally impossible to resolve every issue at once.

Lyrics >> The Town I loved so well wrote:

They will not forget but their hearts are set
on tomorrow and peace once again
For what's done is done and what's won is won
and what's lost is lost and gone forever
I can only pray for a bright, brand new day
in the town I loved so well

Unless both sides of the debate resolve to let the many horrible events fade into the past and only look forward, the next thread will be just like the last. If Iain could sit with Gerry, albeit uncomfortably, we Internet Warriors of all shades and colours should be able to do the same.

stovelid

dlofnep wrote: »

If you don't like reading about the atrocities inflicted by the British army, you don't have to read the thread. Freedom of choice. Make use of it.

I asked this about three times on this thread with no answer. Would you make use of your own freedom of choice to completely ignore a 6 page thread authored by a unionist saying that Sean Kelly was a killer who shouldn't have been released under the GFA?

Why should anybody else butt out of this thread just because they have differing views to you? Not a single person has said that the Army were right in this instance, but the forum is for rational politcial discussion, not for rehashing old war stories.

dlofnep

stovelid wrote: »

I asked this about three times on this thread with no answer. Would you make use of your own freedom of choice to completely ignore a 6 page thread authored by a unionist saying that Sean Kelly was a killer who shouldn't have been released under the GFA?

I didn't see the said thread. It has absolutely nothing to do with this thread however. And like I said, just another attempt by you to deflect the attention elsewhere. I don't feel the need to answer you, as it would allow you to divert the thread anywhere but to the topic at hand.

stovelid wrote: »

Why should anybody else butt out of this thread just because they have differing views to you? Not a single person has said that the Army were right in this instance, but the forum is for rational politcial discussion, not for rehashing old war stories.

Old war stories? Since when was the slaying of a civilian a war? You were the one who stated you didn't want to see stories being posted about civilian casualties who died as a result of British army terrorism - in a thread ABOUT a British army attack on a civilian. What do you expect us to discuss, ham sandwiches and the pretty shapes clouds make?

McArmalite

Fratton Fred wrote: »

My friend's father, who i mentioned in another post told us once that on his first tour, one of the older corporals got a guy, who they claimed was a known player, outside a pub, put a gun to his head and told him that if anything happened to one of his lads, he would kill him whether it was him or not. Professional? no of course not, legal, definately not, understandable under the circumstances at the time? yes, I believe it is. These are soldiers, not policemen, diplomats of nurse maids.

Yet more porkies from the very imaginitve Fred. Just like his previous one -

" I have had several friends who have been to NI, in particular two friends who were cousins and both in the Royal Hampshires. Their view was pretty much that one minute you are being fired at by one lot, then the next day you are protecting those same people's kids from a bunch of snarling animals who are throwing bricks at you because they don't want 5 year old girls walking through their estate on the way to school . "

When TOMASJ replied - " Fred I think if you check your dates, you will find there was no republican activity of any type in that area on your friends in the Royal Hampshires, as a ceasefire was in affect for several years previous, A bit of honesty about the situations at the time of that diabolical incident would be appreciated. "

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055376988&page=26

And what about the one about the Paddy nationalists and unionists beating up one another in a secterian row in your local pub and been the best of buddies the next day, before a benign and bewildered English crowd ??

Can you just put in a bit of reality in your posts Fred and leave the Walt stuff out

Fratton Fred

McArmalite wrote: »

Yet more porkies from the very imaginitve Fred. Just like his previous one -

" I have had several friends who have been to NI, in particular two friends who were cousins and both in the Royal Hampshires. Their view was pretty much that one minute you are being fired at by one lot, then the next day you are protecting those same people's kids from a bunch of snarling animals who are throwing bricks at you because they don't want 5 year old girls walking through their estate on the way to school . "

When TOMASJ replied - " Fred I think if you check your dates, you will find there was no republican activity of any type in that area on your friends in the Royal Hampshires, as a ceasefire was in affect for several years previous, A bit of honesty about the situations at the time of that diabolical incident would be appreciated. "

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055376988&page=26

And what about the one about the Paddy nationalists and unionists beating up one another in a secterian row in your local pub and been the best of buddies the next day, before a benign and bewildered English crowd ??

Can you just put in a bit of reality in your posts Fred and leave the Walt stuff out

sorry, why are they porkies? what gives any reason (or the right) to doubt me?

btw, I couldn't reply to Tomas because the thread was locked, but it was an example, that is all. I know when the Holy Child incidents happend. The guy I spoke about, he was the father of one of the cousins, all three in the Royal Hampshire regiment.

TOMASJ

Fratton Fred wrote: »

sorry, why are they porkies? what gives any reason (or the right) to doubt me?

btw, I couldn't reply to Tomas because the thread was locked, but it was an example, that is all. I know when the Holy Child incidents happend. The guy I spoke about, he was the father of one of the cousins, all three in the Royal Hampshire regiment.

Fred
your good friends in the Royal Hampshire regiment must have told there dad porkies, You should check your bed time stories about what the whiter than white British army got up to in Ireland , before you post them as fact

Fratton Fred

TOMASJ wrote: »

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Fred
your good friends in the Royal Hampshire regiment must have told there dad porkies, You should check your bed time stories about what the whiter than white British army got up to in Ireland , before you post them as fact

taken in the context of the posts, how are they porkies?

A Dub in Glasgo

Why is this surprising? The dogs in the street knew that the soldier aimed his gun at McAnespie and killed him. All the BA apologists claimed from day one it was an accident and some still do claim it. It is irrational.

'To say it was an accident is the greatest crime of all
To his heart-broken family the worst had `er befalled
A cross it marks the lonely spot where Aiden was gunned down
As he strolled on that sunny evening on his way to the Gaelic ground'

TOMASJ

Fratton Fred wrote: »

TOMASJ wrote: »

taken in the context of the posts, how are they porkies

Fred
read again post 390 in the now closed Would you like to see a united Ireland
were you wrote the following

(Their view was pretty much that one minute you are being fired at by one lot,) :pac: porkie

then the next day you are protecting those same people's kids from a bunch of snarling animals who are throwing bricks at you because they don't want 5 year old girls walking through their estate on the way to school

And the reply to that

Fred
I think if you check your dates,
you will find there was no republican activity of any type in that area on your friends in the Royal Hampshires,
as a ceasefire was in affect for several years previous,
A bit of honesty about the situations at the time of that diabolical incident would be appreciated.

Fratton Fred

TOMASJ wrote: »

Fratton Fred wrote: »

TOMASJ wrote: »

Fred
read again post 390 in the now closed Would you like to see a united Ireland
were you wrote the following

(Their view was pretty much that one minute you are being fired at by one lot,) :pac: porkie

then the next day you are protecting those same people's kids from a bunch of snarling animals who are throwing bricks at you because they don't want 5 year old girls walking through their estate on the way to school

And the reply to that

Fred
I think if you check your dates,
you will find there was no republican activity of any type in that area on your friends in the Royal Hampshires,
as a ceasefire was in affect for several years previous,
A bit of honesty about the situations at the time of that diabolical incident would be appreciated.

like I said, it was an example of why the British army that were doing tours of ireland had little trust in anyone in Ireland. What do you want me to say, one day they were getting petrol bombed by one lot, the next day the other.

It is a raional statement, what's the problem.

Erin Go Brath

TOMASJ wrote: »

Fratton Fred wrote: »

TOMASJ wrote: »

Fred
read again post 390 in the now closed Would you like to see a united Ireland
were you wrote the following

(Their view was pretty much that one minute you are being fired at by one lot,) :pac: porkie

then the next day you are protecting those same people's kids from a bunch of snarling animals who are throwing bricks at you because they don't want 5 year old girls walking through their estate on the way to school

And the reply to that

Fred
I think if you check your dates,
you will find there was no republican activity of any type in that area on your friends in the Royal Hampshires,
as a ceasefire was in affect for several years previous,
A bit of honesty about the situations at the time of that diabolical incident would be appreciated.

Freds fairytales coming to a book store near you soon. Read about how the Brit army soldiers were just plain misunderstood by the natives, and how the boys in the regiments based in Ireland over the years were really just a bunch of Mary Poppins type do-gooders here to help all. Will you be signing copies in easons fred?

Fratton Fred

Erin Go Brath wrote: »

Freds fairytales coming to a book store near you soon. Read about how the Brit army soldiers were just plain misunderstood by the natives, and how the boys in the regiments based in Ireland over the years were really just a bunch of Mary Poppins type do-gooders here to help all. Will you be signing copies in easons fred?

Ooh, lets all join in with McArmalites cheap wise cracks. Who'd have guessed it, the sheep all following each other.

Thought you were better than that Erin :rolleyes: