PSNI rejects British Army version of 1988 shooting

djpbarry

dlofnep wrote: »

djpbarry - what's your thoughts on this cold blooded murder of Aidan by British troops?

How many times do I have to answer this question?

stovelid

djpbarry wrote: »

How many times do I have to answer this question?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Googolplex

RSF Cill Dara

djpbarry wrote: »

Oh, is that all? Well, when you put it like that, where do I sign up? :rolleyes:

This included prision guards, british royal family and politians (which are legitimate targets)

Fratton Fred

RSF Cill Dara wrote: »

This included prision guards, british royal family and politians (which are legitimate targets)

why are they?

stovelid

RSF Cill Dara wrote: »

This included prision guards, british royal family and politians (which are legitimate targets)

Let's not be coy. What you really mean is:

Prison guards, British royal family, politicians, workmen, census collectors, mothers of 10, 'free state' policeman, retired octogenarian military figures, mentally disabled teenagers, unborn children, Spanish students, horses, cleaners, toddlers....

.....one could never accuse the IRA of not being inclusive anyway.

Fratton Fred

stovelid wrote: »

Let's not be coy. What you really mean is:

Prison guards, British royal family, politicians, workmen, census collectors, mothers of 10, 'free state' policeman, retired octogenarian military figures, mentally disabled teenagers, unborn children, Spanish students, horses, cleaners, toddlers....

.....one could never accuse the IRA of not being inclusive anyway.

Childrens TV presenters, don't forget them.

Throughout its history, Britain and its imperialist forces have relied heavily on Childrens TV presenters to carry out their campaign of terror.

TOMASJ

stovelid wrote: »

The mention of brain would suggest insight and as such is a charitable overstatement in this context.

Isn't it great to be in the company of such self proclaimed superior intelligent British posters.

dlofnep

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Throughout its history, Britain and its imperialist forces have relied heavily on Childrens TV presenters to carry out their campaign of terror.

Just like Iraq relied heavily on 8 year old girls, right?

TOMASJ

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Childrens TV presenters, don't forget them.

Throughout its history, Britain and its imperialist forces have relied heavily on Childrens TV presenters to carry out their campaign of terror.

stovelid wrote: »

Let's not be coy. What you really mean is:

Prison guards, British royal family, politicians, workmen, census collectors, mothers of 10, 'free state' policeman, retired octogenarian military figures, mentally disabled teenagers, unborn children, Spanish students, horses, cleaners, toddlers....

.....one could never accuse the IRA of not being inclusive anyway.

Oh I don't think the IRA had a monopoly on murdering innocent people,
Ghastly Brit murders include Pregnant woman and unborn babys, children in sweet shops, baby's in Dublin Monaghan bombs pensioners sitting watching TV children coming from school, Teachers, solicitors, schoolboys,sportsmen, the list goes one

stovelid

Originally Posted by stovelid

Prison guards, British royal family, politicians, workmen, census collectors, mothers of 10, 'free state' policeman, retired octogenarian military figures, mentally disabled teenagers, unborn children, Spanish students, horses, cleaners, toddlers....

TOMASJ wrote: »

Ghastly Brit murders include Pregnant woman and unborn babys, children in sweet shops, baby's in Dublin Monaghan bombs pensioners sitting watching TV children coming from school, Teachers, solicitors, schoolboys,sportsmen, the list goes one

Excellent. I agree.

Why did it take 10 pages for us to come to the conclusion that both the British Army and the IRA have committed "cold blooded muderers" in NI and that it's pointless to discuss one without reference to the other?

TOMASJ

Excellent. I agree.

Why did it take 10 pages for us to come to the conclusion that both the British Army and the IRA have committed "cold blooded muderers" in NI and that it's pointless to discuss one without reference to the other?

I think the heading on the post is the key, PSNI rejects British Army version of 1988 shooting the British Army ( Got away scot free with all of the cold blooded murders they carried out)

McArmalite

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Childrens TV presenters, don't forget them.

Throughout its history, Britain and its imperialist forces have relied heavily on Childrens TV presenters to carry out their campaign of terror.

Not as much as they relied on -

Concentration camps, decades before the Nazi's, to murder tens of thousands of mainly children and women in the Boer war.

Poisionius gas, on thousands of Kurds in Iraq by the gallant RAF under the command of the british war ' hero ' Bomber Harris and supported by the war criminal Winston Churchill.

Racial Extermination Yes, britian even managed to achieve something even the Nazi's couldn't do, the extermination of a race of people, the Tasmainian Aborigines. Now that's a history to be proud of.

And then these people talk about terrorism ??

djpbarry

McArmalite wrote: »

Not as much as they relied on -

Concentration camps, decades before the Nazi's, to murder tens of thousands of mainly children and women in the Boer war.

Poisionius gas, on thousands of Kurds in Iraq by the gallant RAF under the command of the british war ' hero ' Bomber Harris and supported by the war criminal Winston Churchill.

Racial Extermination Yes, britian even managed to achieve something even the Nazi's couldn't do, the extermination of a race of people, the Tasmainian Aborigines. Now that's a history to be proud of.

And then these people talk about terrorism ??

Yes, how dare British people condemn terrorism when so many bad things happened in the past :rolleyes:.

McArmalite

djpbarry wrote: »

Yes, how dare British people condemn terrorism when so many bad things happened in the past :rolleyes:.

:rolleyes: Your point ??

Fratton Fred

McArmalite wrote: »

Not as much as they relied on -

Concentration camps, decades before the Nazi's, to murder tens of thousands of mainly children and women in the Boer war.

Poisionius gas, on thousands of Kurds in Iraq by the gallant RAF under the command of the british war ' hero ' Bomber Harris and supported by the war criminal Winston Churchill.

Racial Extermination Yes, britian even managed to achieve something even the Nazi's couldn't do, the extermination of a race of people, the Tasmainian Aborigines. Now that's a history to be proud of.

And then these people talk about terrorism ??

christ you are boring. these have nothing to do with the topic, it is just you trolling again.

It would be nice if you got your facts right as well.

dlofnep

Fratton Fred wrote: »

these have nothing to do with the topic

The same way Begley has nothing to do with the topic?

Fratton Fred wrote: »

it is just you trolling again.

So anyone that dare criticise Britain's past is trolling? I see.

Fratton Fred

dlofnep wrote: »

The same way Begley has nothing to do with the topic?

So anyone that dare criticise Britain's past is trolling? I see.

Begley was a relevant example of how Sinn Fein are arm in arm with the IRA and therefore is relevant to the discussion.

Britains "Supposed" gassing of kurds is not.

dlofnep

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Begley was a relevant example of how Sinn Fein are arm in arm with the IRA and therefore is relevant to the discussion.

And here was me thinking that the thread was about a British soldier who shot a civilian dead and never owning up the responsibility of it. Silly me.

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Britains "Supposed" gassing of kurds is not.

So you deny that they gassed the Kurds. Very well. It should be noted that Churchill himself stated the following. Keep this in mind when denying the possible gassing.

Winston Churchill wrote:

"I do not understand this squeamishness about the use of gas. I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes."

djpbarry

dlofnep wrote: »

He was responding to someone who had taken it off topic prior to that. Poor choice of logic. Aka, weaksauce.

Well, you've just done it yourself:

dlofnep wrote: »

And here was me thinking that the thread was about a British soldier who shot a civilian dead and never owning up the responsibility of it. Silly me.

So anything that can be construed as anti-IRA is off-topic, even if it may be relevant to the subject of this thread...

dlofnep wrote: »

So you deny that they gassed the Kurds. Very well. It should be noted that Churchill himself stated the following. Keep this in mind when denying the possible gassing.

...but anything anti-British, no matter how irrelevant to the subject of this thread, is entirely welcome.

dlofnep

I was responding to a discussion already underway, or did you not read the posts prior to mine? Now have a look at my post that I have just quoted and you'll see that it's the exact same circumstances. The discussion was taken off topic and I was responding to it.

dlofnep

Fratton Fred - Do you believe there is a problem within British military, where they fail to own up to the responsibility of their killing of civilians and can you see, given the evidence placed in this thread on numerous posts - why we have come to the conclusion that British forces do not own up to the responsibility of their wrong-doings?

JWAD

McArmalite wrote: »

Racial Extermination Yes, britian even managed to achieve something even the Nazi's couldn't do, the extermination of a race of people, the Tasmainian Aborigines. Now that's a history to be proud of

Palawa are not where they are today because of the 'British' Army or otherwise. They were nearly and infamously wiped out by Settlers. These "settlers" comprised of English, Irish, Scottish and Welsh people.

Fratton Fred

dlofnep wrote: »

So you deny that they gassed the Kurds. Very well. It should be noted that Churchill himself stated the following. Keep this in mind when denying the possible gassing.

Why did you only quote a portion of the letter churchill sent, because he also goes on to say "I do not understand this squeamishness about the use of gas. We have definitely adopted the position at the Peace Conference of arguing in favour of the retention of gas as a permanent method of warfare. It is sheer affectation to lacerate a man with the poisonous fragment of a bursting shell and to boggle at making his eyes water by means of lachrymatory gas. I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes. The moral effect should be so good that the loss of life should be reduced to a minimum. It is not necessary to use only the most deadly gasses: gasses can be used which cause great inconvenience and would spread a lively terror and yet would leave no serious permanent effects on most of those affected" (I lifted this off Wiki so it may not be 100% correct, but the gist of it is)

Also, Churchill was advocating its use, but that was never approved and no gas was dropped in Iraq. The author Geoff Simons mentions (Quite rightly) that Britain considered using gas, he also goes on to talk about the british use of aircraft in the uprising. After that people have put two and two together and got five.

The British were brutal, there is no doubt about that, but all this talk of tens of thousands of Kurds being gassed is bollocks.

dlofnep wrote: »

Fratton Fred - Do you believe there is a problem within British military, where they fail to own up to the responsibility of their killing of civilians and can you see, given the evidence placed in this thread on numerous posts - why we have come to the conclusion that British forces do not own up to the responsibility of their wrong-doings?

No, I don't think there is a problem. There are inquests into abuses in Iraq at the moment and witnesses have been given certain degrees of immunity if they testify.

The problem the army has is that if they own up and admit a killing, a lawyer will have a field day in a compensation claim. A lot of this is done behind closed doors to prevent the vultures circling.

There is a problem though in that they haven't managed to prevent civilians from being killed in conflict, something which I believe no army has achieved.

getz

gas was a weapon used in all warfare mustard gas was used in the first world war by both the british and german army,s --at the start of the second world was all people living in the UK had gas masks -funny enough i still remember mine and i was only 3 it was a micky mouse gas mask i do not know if ever any gas was used in ww2

dlofnep

Fratton Fred wrote: »

No, I don't think there is a problem. There are inquests into abuses in Iraq at the moment and witnesses have been given certain degrees of immunity if they testify.

But yet, there was no apology offered for the death of an 8 year old girl in Iraq, and no responsibility taken for Bloody Sunday? You're unable to accept the wrong-doings of the British Army. That's the fact.

Fratton Fred wrote: »

There is a problem though in that they haven't managed to prevent civilians from being killed in conflict, something which I believe no army has achieved.

They have purposely shot and killed civilians, who were unarmed and of no threat to them. So your logic doesn't excuse any of these points.

Fratton Fred

getz wrote: »

gas was a weapon used in all warfare mustard gas was used in the first world war by both the british and german army,s --at the start of the second world was all people living in the UK had gas masks -funny enough i still remember mine and i was only 3 it was a micky mouse gas mask i do not know if ever any gas was used in ww2

No it wasn't, not against troops anyway. There was plenty of consideration for it, there was also examinations into anthrax, but it never got beyond the experimental stage.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gruinard_Island

Fratton Fred

dlofnep wrote: »

But yet, there was no apology offered for the death of an 8 year old girl in Iraq, and no responsibility taken for Bloody Sunday? You're unable to accept the wrong-doings of the British Army. That's the fact.




They have purposely shot and killed civilians, who were unarmed and of no threat to them. So your logic doesn't excuse any of these points.

if this thread goes around in circles long enough, will it disappear up its own arse?

dlofnep

So you can't respond to the points I have just made. Fair enough.

Hendrix89

I don't intend to get caught up in any lengthy arguments here. Although I will say that this is a disgrace and that soldier should be locked away for life. I can't understand how people can defend him when faced with proven facts here.. Even though things aren't exactly the same now, British soldiers have always done as they liked and gotten away with it and this has to end. It's an outrage..

Fratton Fred

dlofnep wrote: »

So you can't respond to the points I have just made. Fair enough.

I think I have, on more than one occasion.

Yes it is wrong what they have done, is there a problem? no, no more than any other army.

what the **** do you want me to say?

(dlofnep will be mentioning an 8 year old girl in 5...4...3...2...)