Bloody Sunday killings to be ruled unlawful

BlaasForRafa

T.W.H Byron wrote: »

This comes across as emotional and political blackmail. We can't criticise the killing of innocent civilians in Ireland 30 years ago because it will affect the morale of troops in Afghanistan? Pull the other one. God forbid that soldiers need to be held responsible for indiscriminately firing on civilians.

I don't see how it will affect anyone in Afghanistan or any other theatre. Why should any current troops be affected by a 38 year old case?

citytillidie

in the city centre its fantastic that the wrong has been made right and the truth is out now that all those who died are innocent and the world knows at long last

amacachi

T.W.H Byron wrote: »

This comes across as emotional and political blackmail. We can't criticise the killing of innocent civilians in Ireland 30 years ago because it will affect the morale of troops in Afghanistan? Pull the other one. God forbid that soldiers need to be held responsible for indiscriminately firing on civilians.

He can **** right off tbh. That statement should be met with nothing but derision.

Promac

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Quite surprised. Did not expect to see an apology quite like that.

Same here. The families must be pleased with it.

Still the question of legal action to cover though.

gurramok

Sofa King Great wrote: »

Republican =/= IRA

In British/Unionist eyes, Republican=IRA. (try telling a FF'er that )

BlaasForRafa

amacachi wrote: »

Aye, the British didn't bring any of the anti-British sentiment on themselves.:rolleyes:


I'm torn on this, it's a ridiculous amount of money to be spent, and in a way it's hard to reconcile this with the whole moving-on buzz that's meant to be policy up there, but the UK Government should've ****ing copped themselves on long ago and admit what happened.

I think my problem is more with the selectivity of what constitutes a crime worthy of investigation. The nazis and japanese were indicted for war crimes after world war 2 but no soviets were despite the crimes they commited. Its a different scale of events but a £100m+ investigation into one incident in a conflict when there were many incidents worthy of investigation just seems out of kilter a bit.

Wolfe Tone

Promac wrote: »

Same here. The families must be pleased with it.

Still the question of legal action to cover though.

They should follow. Quite clear that the soldiers acted wrongly, then lied about their actions.

Nodin

Mr Cameron said:

• No warning had been given to any civilians before the soldiers opened fire

• None of the soldiers fired in response to attacks by petrol bombers or stone throwers

• Some of those killed or injured were clearly fleeing or going to help those injured or dying
• None of the casualties was posing a threat or doing anything that would justify their shooting
• There was no point in trying to soften or equivocate - the events of Bloody Sunday were not justified
• Many of the soldiers lied about their actions
• What happened should never, ever have happened
• Some members of the British armed forces acted wrongly
• On behalf of the government and the country, he said he was "deeply sorry"
• The events of Bloody Sunday were not premeditated

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/northern_ireland/10320609.stm

Hundreds would be alive today if they'd done this right the first time.

invinciblePRSTV

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

You have no right to presume who I have sympathy for.

I grew up during the 80's and Sinn Fein/IRA used things like Bloody Sunday and the Hunger Strikes to drum up a lot of anti-British feeling. I used to be very much anti-British/anti-Unionist when I was a kid and felt good when I'd hear about a British soldier being shot but thankfully I grew out of that phase and recognised Sinn Fein/IRA for what they are.

SF/IRA had nothing to with Bloody Sunday, the British Army killed 13 innocent civilians, do you have sympathy for them?

BlaasForRafa

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

SF/IRA had nothing to with Bloody Sunday, the British Army killed 13 innocent civilians, do you have sympathy for them?

Yes I do. And SF/IRA were there on that day with guns and bombs although as the report says the death of the marchers was entirely the fault of the soldiers. The report is damning in that regard.

The IRA did capitalise on the killings though and that cannot surely be doubted. They used it in a cynical recruiting drive which ended up in the murders of many more people. None of which justifies the actions of the soldiers but it is a point that has to be made. The killings on Bloody Sunday were not a justification for the IRA to go out and murder people.

amacachi

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

I think my problem is more with the selectivity of what constitutes a crime worthy of investigation. The nazis and japanese were indicted for war crimes after world war 2 but no soviets were despite the crimes they commited. Its a different scale of events but a £100m+ investigation into one incident in a conflict when there were many incidents worthy of investigation just seems out of kilter a bit.

Let's just stay on the one conflict if we can, what the Russians did and had done to them was disgusting without a doubt.

People down here don't know what it was actually like up there and never will, even I can't say what it would've been like up there at the time. Off the top of my head I can't think of many other incidents that require an inquiry like this. In most cases the perpetrators were caught. If more people this side of the border were more informed there may well be public pressure for inquiries into many of the Gardaí's actions through the years as well.

Nodin

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Yes I do. And SF/IRA were there on that day with guns and bombs although as the report says the death of the marchers was entirely the fault of the soldiers. .

...then why do you keep dragging the RA into it?

nessie911

fryup wrote: »

exactly, do we really have to go on and on about past misdeads

i mean millions upon millions was spent on Bloody Sunday inquiry is it going to bring back the deceased >no........surely that money would have been better spent on hospitals, schools, job creation etc something constructive

and if we are going to go down that route why not have an inquiry into bloody friday as well:cool:

I would like to see you moving on if that was your brother or father or family member who had been called a terrorist, Like the Widger report had found that all the people who had been killed were involved in terrorist attacks. The families needed justice of some form, and i'm so happy that they have finally gotten the innocent verdict that they got.


From the Saville Report: "What happened on Bloody Sunday strengthened the Provisional IRA, increased nationalist resentment and hostility towards the army and exacerbated the violent conflict of the years that followed. Bloody Sunday was a tragedy for the bereaved and the wounded, and a catastrophe for the people of Northern Ireland."

amacachi

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

The killings on Bloody Sunday were not a justification for the IRA to go out and murder people.

Of course not.


Who is this **** on Sky News at the moment?

invinciblePRSTV

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Yes I do. And SF/IRA were there on that day with guns and bombs although as the report says the death of the marchers was entirely the fault of the soldiers. The report is damning in that regard.

Its irrelevant to mention that the IRA were in Derry that day so i don't know why you even mention it tbh, the march was organised by the NICRA.

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

The IRA did capitalise on the killings though and that cannot surely be doubted. They used it in a cynical recruiting drive which ended up in the murders of many more people. None of which justifies the actions of the soldiers but it is a point that has to be made. The killings on Bloody Sunday were not a justification for the IRA to go out and murder people.

It's easy to say that in 2010 but i'd recommend reading some literature and books about the period to give an insight as to what living in late 1960s Derry was like before alleging the IRA 'cynically' recruited people, if anything it's the complete opposite with people wishing to join any group/organisation willing to defend Nationalist Derry.

Promac

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Yes I do. And SF/IRA were there on that day with guns and bombs although as the report says the death of the marchers was entirely the fault of the soldiers. The report is damning in that regard.

The IRA did capitalise on the killings though and that cannot surely be doubted. They used it in a cynical recruiting drive which ended up in the murders of many more people. None of which justifies the actions of the soldiers but it is a point that has to be made. The killings on Bloody Sunday were not a justification for the IRA to go out and murder people.

There was no recruitment drive needed after bloody sunday - people were signing up in droves on their own. People were driven to retaliation, in the only way they knew how. For some that was signing up for SF or the SDLP but for others it was joining the IRA.

amacachi

invinciblePRSTV wrote: »

It's easy to say that in 2010 but i'd recommend reading some literature and books about the period to give an insight as to what living in late 1960s Derry was like before alleging the IRA 'cynically' recruited people, if anything it's the complete opposite with people wishing to join any group/organisation willing to defend Nationalist Derry.

Exactly, it's not like they needed to go out and make an effort, who wouldn't consider joining if people you had been marching with were shot by your own government?

gsxr1

As a Derry man and a friend to some of the victims family, I would like to congratulate the good people of Derry and spit in the face of the British Army.

dlofnep

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Yes I do. And SF/IRA were there on that day with guns and bombs although as the report says the death of the marchers was entirely the fault of the soldiers. The report is damning in that regard.

The IRA did capitalise on the killings though and that cannot surely be doubted. They used it in a cynical recruiting drive which ended up in the murders of many more people. None of which justifies the actions of the soldiers but it is a point that has to be made. The killings on Bloody Sunday were not a justification for the IRA to go out and murder people.

The report has quite categorically stated that the British army was 100% responsible, and that there was no justification whatsoever for the deaths.

So could you by any chance, stick on topic and acknowledge the elephant in the room.

maccored

its about time this came out. at least we wont have to listen to that 'they shot at us' bullsh!t anymore.

BlaasForRafa

dlofnep wrote: »

The report has quite categorically stated that the British army was 100% responsible, and that there was no justification whatsoever for the deaths.

So could you by any chance, stick on topic and acknowledge the elephant in the room.

Perhaps you might have missed where I said "the report says the death of the marchers was entirely the fault of the soldiers. The report is damning in that regard. "

Perhaps you also ignored where the report said

"# Members of the official IRA fired a number of shots, though it was concluded it was the paratroopers who shot first.
# Northern Ireland Deputy First Minister Martin McGuinness, second in command of the provisional IRA in Derry in 1972, was 'probably armed with a Thompson submachine gun', and though it is possible he fired the weapon, this cannot be proved.

The report concluded: 'He did not engage in any activity that provided any of the soldiers with any justification for opening fire.'"

It wasn't a justification for the soldiers opening fire but the IRA should still not have been there.

dlofnep

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Perhaps you might have missed where I said "the report says the death of the marchers was entirely the fault of the soldiers. The report is damning in that regard. "

I didn't ignore it, and it would have been fine in it's own, before you attempted to drag the IRA into the thread in yet another case of whataboutery. This is a discussion about Bloody Sunday. It is not a discussion about the IRA. If you wish to discuss the IRA, create a thread for it.

Nodin

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Perhaps you might have missed where I said "the report says the death of the marchers was entirely the fault of the soldiers. The report is damning in that regard. "

Perhaps you also ignored where the report said



It wasn't a justification for the soldiers opening fire but the IRA should still not have been there.

And again, trying to drag the focus off the guilty. Why do you feel compelled to do this?

amacachi

That **** Maginnis on BBC now.

doncarlos

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

It wasn't a justification for the soldiers opening fire but the IRA should still not have been there.

But you are trying to make it into one or else you wouldn't have brought it up.

Nodin

Mr "two birds with the one stone". No point in watching him at this stage - he's nothing new to say and he's retired. Yesterdays man, in many ways.

Byron85

For those of you intent on bringing McGuinness into it:

Northern Ireland Deputy First Minister Martin McGuinness, second in command of the provisional IRA in Derry in 1972, was 'probably armed with a Thompson submachine gun', and though it is possible he fired the weapon, this cannot be proved.

The report concluded: 'He did not engage in any activity that provided any of the soldiers with any justification for opening fire.'

celticbest

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Yes I do. And SF/IRA were there on that day with guns and bombs although as the report says the death of the marchers was entirely the fault of the soldiers. The report is damning in that regard.

The Truth comes out but at the end of the day it was still the IRA's fault even though they took no active part according to some on here

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

The IRA did capitalise on the killings though and that cannot surely be doubted. They used it in a cynical recruiting drive which ended up in the murders of many more people. None of which justifies the actions of the soldiers but it is a point that has to be made. The killings on Bloody Sunday were not a justification for the IRA to go out and murder people.

What was cynical about the IRA defending the people of the six counties against a foreign force in there home country?

If it had not been for the IRA over the course of the troubles we would not be were we are now? If British soldiers were capable of murder in such a blanant way what else would they have done if the IRA did not stand up and fight back.

In the long term we now have equality for all which is the very thing those innocent marchers were looking for in a peaceful way before the British Army decided to murdered them.

Sadly something's need to happen in order for others to follow.

It could have been all so different if it had not been for that day, if only the British government gave the marchers there simple demands, then maybe the darkest days of the troubles could have been avoided.......

amacachi

celticbest wrote: »

What was cynical about the IRA defending the people of the six counties against a foreign force in there home country?

Don't start that, the IRA was strengthened around that time for civil rights, not nationalism. Later that's the road it took but around the time of Bloody Sunday it was to defend themselves from, as far as they were concerned, the state, not a foreign state.

johngalway

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/northern_ireland/10320609.stm

Army fired first shot

Mr Cameron said:

* No warning had been given to any civilians before the soldiers opened fire
* None of the soldiers fired in response to attacks by petrol bombers or stone throwers
* Some of those killed or injured were clearly fleeing or going to help those injured or dying
* None of the casualties was posing a threat or doing anything that would justify their shooting
* There was no point in trying to soften or equivocate - the events of Bloody Sunday were not justified
* Many of the soldiers lied about their actions
* What happened should never, ever have happened
* Some members of the British armed forces acted wrongly
* On behalf of the government and the country, he said he was "deeply sorry"
* The events of Bloody Sunday were not premeditated
* Northern Ireland's Deputy First Minister Martin McGuinness, Sinn Fein, was present at the time of the violence and "probably armed with a submachine gun" but did not engage in "any activity that provided any of the soldiers with any justification for opening fire"

Wolfe Tone

Good to see the facts out in the open now, everyone can now see what Bloody Sunday was: a massacre of innocent civilians, with zero justification.

gsxr1

The people that where killed where NOT in the IRA. They where the children and residents of the Bogside or where out marching for their basic civil rights.


SIMPLE AS THAT.


Today is NOT about the IRA.

Its about justice for the INNOCENT victims.

alastair

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Yes I do. And SF/IRA were there on that day with guns and bombs

Eh, they lived/live there. You wanted them to take a day trip to Coleraine?

prinz

Now some people can get back to name calling, finger pointing and spitting. Awesome. We've come a long way.

karma_

prinz wrote: »

Now some people can get back to name calling, finger pointing and spitting. Awesome. We've come a long way.

Great contribution thanks.

I happen to be from Derry. I am not related to anyone who died or knew them but what I do know is that the hurt of the people of Derry goes very deep over this issue. To have your kin and neighbours killed was bad enough, worse was then to have them labelled as armed terrorists.

The people of Derry did not ask for teh massive figure to be spent of telling everyone what they already knew. Widgery could have told the truth the first time around and none of this would have been necessary.

Basically the people of Derry and the victims deserved this result, it is almost 40 years too late, but better than to not have it.

citytillidie

holy crap the truth is out and some people still cant take the facts

nessie911

karma_ wrote: »

Great contribution thanks.

I happen to be from Derry. I am not related to anyone who died or knew them but what I do know is that the hurt of the people of Derry goes very deep over this issue. To have your kin and neighbours killed was bad enough, worse was then to have them labelled as armed terrorists.

The people of Derry did not ask for teh massive figure to be spent of telling everyone what they already knew. Widgery could have told the truth the first time around and none of this would have been necessary.

Basically the people of Derry and the victims deserved this result, it is almost 40 years too late, but better than to not have it.

Well said. They did not ask for this and they deserve for the whole truth to come out. I can't imagine how hard it was for the families to be dealing with the death of a family member who was being called a terrorist, even tho they knew they were not. The truth could have been out 28 years ago if the lies were not told.

sensibleken

"My primary thoughts today are with the thousands of innocent victims of the IRA who have never had justice, nor benefitted from any inquiry into why their loved ones died.
"Thus today's jamboree over the Saville report throws into very sharp relief the unacceptable and perverse hierarchy of victims which the preferential treatment of 'Bloody Sunday' has created."
- Jim Allister

way to be a dick Jim

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/10322708.stm

who the fug

citytillidie wrote: »

holy crap the truth is out and some people still cant take the facts

Hang on I am still trying to recover from the fact , that they let the truth out

prinz

karma_ wrote: »

Basically the people of Derry and the victims deserved this result, it is almost 40 years too late, but better than to not have it.

Indeedy. Don't dispute that for a second, I am glad the report is out, I am happy with the findings etc.

What I am not suprised about are some posters who have posted here the same after the report as they would have before. So has any minute sense of closure occurred at all, apparently not for some, and that's sad.

doncarlos

prinz wrote: »

What I am not suprised about are some posters who have posted here the same after the report as they would have before. So has any minute sense of closure occurred at all, apparently not for some, and that's sad.

Who cares?? This report isn't for a few lads on an internet forum, it's for the families of those murdered.

Wolfe Tone

Personally I am very pleased with the report and in Particular Cameron's apology. Was pretty agog at that, was expecting a "regretful" type thing. Fair play, a huge step in the right direction. Huge.

Otacon

prinz wrote: »

What I am not suprised about are some posters who have posted here the same after the report as they would have before. So has any minute sense of closure occurred at all, apparently not for some, and that's sad.

So people who were genuinely angry and disappointed over the events on Bloody Sunday, who have now been proven right, should no longer feel just as angry or disappointed?

alastair

sensibleken wrote: »

"My primary thoughts today are with the thousands of innocent victims of the IRA who have never had justice, nor benefitted from any inquiry into why their loved ones died.
"Thus today's jamboree over the Saville report throws into very sharp relief the unacceptable and perverse hierarchy of victims which the preferential treatment of 'Bloody Sunday' has created."
- Jim Allister

way to be a dick Jim

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/10322708.stm

Way to hold the British military to the values and morality of the IRA, Jim.

prinz

Otacon wrote: »

So people who were genuinely angry and disappointed over the events on Bloody Sunday, who have now been proven right, should no longer feel just as angry or disappointed?

Essentially yes. They have been vindicated. Their loved ones have been vindicated. No amount of anger and disappointment is going to bring them back or change what happened.

Wolfe Tone

Stephen Pollard, a solicitor representing the soldiers' who appeared before the Saville Inquiry tells BBC defence correspondent Jonathan Beale that Lord Saville does not have justification for his findings and accuses him of cherry-picking the evidence. He says that Lord Saville's conclusions are not sustained by proper analysis of the evidence. "There is just as much evidence for the opposite conclusion," he says.

Thats from the BBC.

Pure ****e.

Sofa King Great

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Thats from the BBC.

Pure ****e.

What did you expect the Solicitor for the soldiers to say exactly?

A Dub in Glasgo

Hope that ****er Widgery rots in hell

Well done to the people of Derry for the long fight

Otacon

prinz wrote: »

Essentially yes. They have been vindicated. Their loved ones have been vindicated. No amount of anger and disappointment is going to bring them back or change what happened.

All we have today is the truth, not justice. Once the people responsible for this tragedy are behind bars, then there will be vindication.

aDeener

Otacon wrote: »

All we have today is the truth, not justice. Once the people responsible for this tragedy are behind bars, then there will be vindication.

exactly!


and the truth was known from the start anyway, well with anyone with an ounce of sense