National Humiliation

Happyman42

Godge wrote: »

You use the words "accidental" and "irresponsible" to describe what happened. These words are political in themselves as they try to contextualise and trivialise the nature of what happened.

To suggest that I have attempted to trivialise the deaths of children is just more proof of the pointlessness and laziness of the politics of condemmnation. Pathetic, you should ring a radio station.

gurramok

Anyone old enough remember the Dublin woman Susan McHugh(think that was her name) who organised rallies in protest at the Warrington killings?

Fine and dandy in her leading the condemnation but horrifically quiet when Castlerock happened and also quiet on killings of kids by the BA\Loyalists. There were protests in Belfast in reaction to her rallies whereby the relatives of the forgotten victims held giant photos of their lost loved ones on the roads.

After Warrington, the parents actually went to the interface areas in Belfast to see for themselves what NI was about. They learnt alot from their experience which was a jump from the propaganda machine of the Dailymail type nonsense. They have campaigned vigorously for peace since then.

K-9

T runner wrote: »

Another long piece on the Warrington bombing today on The John Murray show....

It was heartbreaking stuff.....but if people are selective in which atrocities are remembered...then these victims are simply being used for political ends.

That is wrong. I cant remember any airtime at all being given to the Ballymurphy massacres on their 40th anniversity. This was part of an operation where 7000 Roman Catholics had to flee their homes..and no loyalists were targetted.

In 1973 250+ people were killed in the troubles. Taking rough proportions 80-90 of these were Catholic civilians murdered by BA or Loyalists.
(50% of BA killings were civilians, 85% of Loylaist killings were civilians)

I havent heard a single one of these 40th anniversity murders covered on Irish or British media this year. Not once.

Anyone else..anyone at all?

Remembering atrocities so they aren't tolerated again is not wrong. Remembering only the atrocities of one side to influence the prsesent by distorting the past
is very wrong.

I don't think people are being selective at all, I could pick 1985 and ask why others haven't mentioned, or why you didn't pick it as significant? The simple fact is with over 3,000 deaths and over such a timeframe, certain events stick out, whether that be Bloody Sunday, Bloody Friday, Mountbatten, the Shankhill Butchers/Bomb, Hunger Strikes, Enniskillen, Greysteel etc., unfortunately there are too many to mention.

I hope I didn't offend any political persuasion and didn't leave any side out, you've to be so PC these days.

djpbarry wrote: »

The Ballymurphy Massacre was all over the news last year:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-19234527

Indeed, it has attracted significant coverage recently.

gurramok wrote: »

Anyone old enough remember the Dublin woman Susan McHugh(think that was her name) who organised rallies in protest at the Warrington killings?

Fine and dandy in her leading the condemnation but horrifically quiet when Castlerock happened and also quiet on killings of kids by the BA\Loyalists. There were protests in Belfast in reaction to her rallies whereby the relatives of the forgotten victims held giant photos of their lost loved ones on the roads.

After Warrington, the parents actually went to the interface areas in Belfast to see for themselves what NI was about. They learnt alot from their experience which was a jump from the propaganda machine of the Dailymail type nonsense. They have campaigned vigorously for peace since then.

Tbh I think that is part of the reason it still resonates, the parents reaction was atypical, and it became one of the watershed moments, like Enniskillen or the 14 days around the Gibraltar 3, Miltown and the 2 soldiers murdered. They all were milestone events that contributed to the start of the peace process.

BBC showed a documentary about those 14 days last week, and I'd forgot that there was a couple of isolated murders during that time. Is that disrespectful to those victims? No, its just "iconic" events over shadow them.

I just wish people weren't so sensitive about tings like this, if the town of Warrington wants to hold a commemoration, so beit, that's for them to decide, what's the big deal?

murphaph

Happyman42 wrote: »

Parry's who where accidently killed in an irresponsible bombing

Wow, you're still apologising for them. It wasn't an accident. It was a deliberate act of murder. Btw, for all the harping on you've been doing about how well remembered the Warrington bombings are, you seem to think both children were related or at least had the same surname. They didn't. One was called Parry, the other Ball.

Happyman42

murphaph wrote: »

Wow, you're still apologising for them.

It wasn't an accident. It was a deliberate act of murder.

Apologising for whom? How ia calling it what it most likely was 'apologising'. The fact that they gave warnings means to me that it was not the intention to kill children, but cause maximum upheaval and terror, therefore....
It was however an irresponsible act and needed to stop. But I have always felt that way about indiscrimate bombings by anybody.

Btw, for all the harping on you've been doing about how well remembered the Warrington bombings are, you seem to think both children were related or at least had the same surname. They didn't. One was called Parry, the other Ball.

Apologies, I was posting on the fly.

Fratton Fred

Happyman42 wrote: »

Apologising for whom? How ia calling it what it most likely was 'apologising'. The fact that they gave warnings means to me that it was not the intention to kill children, but cause maximum upheaval and terror, therefore....
It was however an irresponsible act and needed to stop. But I have always felt that way about indiscrimate bombings by anybody.



Apologies, I was posting on the fly.

Throwing a cigarette put of a car window is irresponsible. Putting your chewing gum under a table is irresponsible.

Putting TWO bombs in a shopping centre is an act of wanton murder.

K-9

Happyman42 wrote: »

Apologising for whom? How ia calling it what it most likely was 'apologising'. The fact that they gave warnings means to me that it was not the intention to kill children, but cause maximum upheaval and terror, therefore....
It was however an irresponsible act and needed to stop. But I have always felt that way about indiscrimate bombings by anybody.

Accidental occurrences aren't the results of irresponsible acts. The Bloody Sunday deaths weren't an accidental result of the reckless leadership, to give an example.

Apologies, I was posting on the fly.

I don't think that was a singular occurrence.

I hate zero-sum game politics, though I recognise it is part of N.I. politics, I find it distasteful to be mild when it is deployed in commemorations of deaths, tbf, I find it morally abhorrent.

Happyman42

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Throwing a cigarette put of a car window is irresponsible. Putting your chewing gum under a table is irresponsible.

Putting TWO bombs in a shopping centre is an act of wanton murder.

Why would you ring in two warnings if your intention was to kill indiscriminately?

I don't mean that as any form of defence of the act by the way,

Fratton Fred

Happyman42 wrote: »

Why would you ring in two warnings if your intention was to kill indiscriminately?

I don't mean that as any form of defence of the act by the way,

Why would you plant two bombs if your intention was not to kill.

K-9

Happyman42 wrote: »

Why would you ring in two warnings if your intention was to kill indiscriminately?

I don't mean that as any form of defence of the act by the way,

Why ask the question then? Maybe they did indeed phone in 2 warnings, not that I'd automatically take the IRA's word for it, even taking them at their word, I don't think the police just sat there and did nothing.

There could be a whole host of reasons why those 2 calls didn't result in the police saving the day, negligence or laziness, or maybe simply it wasn't enough time, they just weren't just prepared for it, maybe resources were stretched after the gas bombing the night before?

Anyway, you don't defend the act, so this is all rather mute.

I assume you don't really see the deaths as accidental?

gurramok

K-9 wrote: »

Indeed, it has attracted significant coverage recently.

Most Irish people nevermind British people have never heard of the Ballymurphy massacre, killings of unarmed civilians in the name of the British people, practically zero coverage at all. It was on the BBC NI page but I remember back then it was not on the BBC UK main page or of ITN\Sky. Its a don't care mentality from the British press.

K-9 wrote:

I just wish people weren't so sensitive about tings like this, if the town of Warrington wants to hold a commemoration, so beit, that's for them to decide, what's the big deal?

Its the media coverage thats the big deal, the media are there to inform people about events NI related and they haven't.

A recent example would be the recent RIRA murders at Masserene, absolute blanket widespread coverage in both the British and Irish press for days on end.

A short while later, an Irishman was kicked to death in Coleraine by a Loyalist mob, hardly anything mentioned in the British press and page 5 type coverage in the Irish press. Plus the usual suspects that post here condemning anything Nationalist\republican related all went silent in their personal roles, zero interest at all in Nationalist victims of violence.

Equality of coverage for all victims ain't there in the media, that's the problem.

K-9

gurramok wrote: »

Most Irish people nevermind British people have never heard of the Ballymurphy massacre, killings of unarmed civilians in the name of the British people, practically zero coverage at all. It was on the BBC NI page but I remember back then it was not on the BBC UK main page or of ITN\Sky. Its a don't care mentality from the British press.

The odd thing here is, you're actually giving a reason that the IRA used as justification for "mainland" campaigns in the 70's, 80's and indeed the 90's, resulting in Warrington. N.I. had an acceptable level of deaths so the war must be brought to the mainland. I'd blame all sides in that. People must start getting over stuff like this, trotting out stuff from 25/30 years ago.

Its the media coverage thats the big deal, the media are there to inform people about events NI related and they haven't.

A recent example would be the recent RIRA murders at Masserene, absolute blanket widespread coverage in both the British and Irish press for days on end.

The media care about shocking events. This isn't just a N.I. revelation.

A short while later, an Irishman was kicked to death in Coleraine by a Loyalist mob, hardly anything mentioned in the British press and page 5 type coverage in the Irish press. Plus the usual suspects that post here condemning anything Nationalist\republican related all went silent in their personal roles, zero interest at all in Nationalist victims of violence.

Equality of coverage for all victims ain't there in the media, that's the problem.

You have highlighted a far wider problem than even N.I., and pinpointed a particular reason.

To give an example, put up a You Tube video about Greysteel, you'll get hundreds of terrible sectarian comments within a few hours, put up a video about say, Martin Luther King, you'll get hundreds of racist comments within minutes. Media exposure proves or matters little.

Happyman42

K-9 wrote: »

I assume you don't really see the deaths as accidental?

I ain't going into the gutter with you K9.

I believe the deaths where not intended. Whether they were or not is not really the point of the thread either, it's about media bias.

K-9

Happyman42 wrote: »

I believe the deaths where not intended. Whether they were or not is not really the point of the thread either, it's about media bias.

I agree those who planted the bomb never thought they'd murder 2 children.

They did, that it was never there intention doesn't mean they aren't murderers.

I ain't going into the gutter with you K9.

I'd prefer to be reaching for the stars from the gutter, than diving to the sewers.

AlekSmart

Happyman42 wrote: »

What is it governments call the unintended victims of carpet bombing again???
I don't believe they were killed or targeted purposefully, therefore it was an accident as the result of an irresponsible placing of a bomb.Every killing in the North and beyond could have been avoided, everyone of them was needless.

It doesn't mean I condone it, support it or ever encouraged it,less of the amateur physco-analyitics please.

Fully admit to the amateur nature of the psycho-analysis,but if you still prefer "accident" and "irresponsible" as worthy descriptions for the murders of these two children,then perhaps only the professional variety could explain it any better ?

At this remove,it's all kinda irrelevant,as the passage of time and more pressing realities of living have already sidelined both Republicanism and Loyalism in their age-old accepted forms.

The era of mass support for either of them is slipping far behind as the very notion of what either of them stand for is seen in the context of it being increasingly meaningless in 21st Century Europe.

Happyman42

gurramok wrote: »

Equality of coverage for all victims ain't there in the media, that's the problem.

And to even things up they have to give a couple of SF members access to the national airwares to have their own petulant rants.

gurramok

K-9 wrote: »

The odd thing here is, you're actually giving a reason that the IRA used as justification for "mainland" campaigns in the 70's, 80's and indeed the 90's, resulting in Warrington. N.I. had an acceptable level of deaths so the war must be brought to the mainland. I'd blame all sides in that. People must start getting over stuff like this, trotting out stuff from 25/30 years ago.

The media care about shocking events. This isn't just a N.I. revelation.

You have highlighted a far wider problem than even N.I., and pinpointed a particular reason.

Which is why the Press problem has to be addressed to stop a hierarchy of victims or else extremists have fertile ground to breed.

K-9 wrote: »

To give an example, put up a You Tube video about Greysteel, you'll get hundreds of terrible sectarian comments within a few hours, put up a video about say, Martin Luther King, you'll get hundreds of racist comments within minutes. Media exposure proves or matters little.

Not talking about Youtube, the mainstream press. It would be nice now and then for the likes of BBC national , ITN and Sky actually gave parity of esteem of coverage to Nationalist victims as well as British\Unionist victims of violence.

golfball37

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Why would you plant two bombs if your intention was not to kill.

Like Manchester 96 you mean?

gallag

Why is there more media content about ira killings? Is it a bias? Mabey a government plot? Or the fact that the ira killed many times more people than any other group? Who knows.

K-9

gurramok wrote: »

Which is why the Press problem has to be addressed to stop a hierarchy of victims or else extremists have fertile ground to breed.



Not talking about Youtube, the mainstream press. It would be nice now and then for the likes of BBC national , ITN and Sky actually gave parity of esteem of coverage to Nationalist victims as well as British\Unionist victims of violence.

I don't notice any particular bias tbh, are you keeping count? Zero sum politics again which is a bit sad when it comes to commemorations of deaths.

Is remembering Omagh anti-Republican?

T runner

K-9 wrote: »

I don't think people are being selective at all, I could pick 1985 and ask why others haven't mentioned, or why you didn't pick it as significant? The simple fact is with over 3,000 deaths and over such a timeframe, certain events stick out, whether that be Bloody Sunday, Bloody Friday, Mountbatten, the Shankhill Butchers/Bomb, Hunger Strikes, Enniskillen, Greysteel etc., unfortunately there are too many to mention.

Its the 40th anniversary year (warrington) this year that's why I mentioned anniversaries of events from 40 years ago. There has been quite a few civilian deaths from the British/Unionist/loyalist angle covered this year: there has been no civilian deaths from the Irish/nationalist/republican side even though this group received the highest number of murders.

All the media retrospective talk of terrorist violence has also centred on the Republican side.

The apartheid state ruled from Stormont conveniently forgotten, the endless UVF attacks and bombs on Catholics through the 60s forgotten, the brutal attacks on legitimate peaceful civil rights marches by loyalists, UDR, off and on-duty RUC men again all forgotten. You can only keep kicking a people so often.

The fact that 85% of loyalist victims were civilians more or less randomly targetted is hugely significant. It points to the roots of the sectarian conflict in NI: That is fundamental anti-Catholic religious beliefs been allowed to trickle down into animosity to individual Catholics and the entire Catholic population..and inevitable being allowed to develop into sectarian hatred in Loyalist communities. This hatred has been used and still is being used by the privelaged to hold their position. (DUP handing out flyers about the flag issue in Loyalist areas to inflame the situation in a constituency they had lost to the alliance party. Resulting in attacks on the sitting loyalist MLA).

These are huge lessons which are being airbrushed by lazy and biased media deciding which side they felt was to blame and covering victims accordingly.

I hope I didn't offend any political persuasion and didn't leave any side out, you've to be so PC these days.

Its nothing to do with being PC. Its everything to do with the past being distorted to influence opinions in the present.

You said somehere else that a video of Greysteel on UTube would produce tons of sectarian comments (against Catholics). Would a video of the Shankhill bombing produce tons of sectarian comments against Protestants? The answer is no...the two sides are NOT mirror images of each other.

Airbrushing the killings of civilians by Loyalists has a particular imminent danger: I dont think i was the only person who feared walking up one morning during the flag protests to hear that a random Catholic had been murdered.
I think it came/is close to that. Not remembering Loyalist sectarian murder reinforces what the Loyalists believe: that they were right to murder Catholics during the troubles.

We all need to learn our lessons from history to avoid it repeating itself. The troubles in NI have been recurring in Ulster about twice a century since the plantation. The pattern is suppressed Catholics seeking more freedoms and power, culminating in being beaten down by Protestant armed groups.
The roots of the conflict are sectarian. With a triple lock on the Union now in place there is absolutely NO excuse for the masssive sectarian problem not to be addressed within the Protestant community. It is simply wrong in this or any other age to believe a person is inferior due to his/her religion.
Sort that out and the National question can become more objective. And Unionists shouldnt fear that it they believe right is on their side.

murphaph

Happyman42 wrote: »

Why would you ring in two warnings if your intention was to kill indiscriminately?

I don't mean that as any form of defence of the act by the way,

Bombs can and do go off before the timer dictates, so even if everything runs to "plan" and the warnings are accurate. people can die. an IRA man blew himself up on a bus in Britain when just that very thing happened. No loss that one of course.

Leaving a bomb in a shopping centre is an act of murder. Even just bringing a bomb in your bag into such a place is murder. The chances of causing someone to be killed are just so high.

I find it incredible that you still believe these deaths were in some way an accident.

gallag

T runner wrote: »

The fact that 85% of loyalist victims were civilians more or less randomly targetted is hugely significant. It points to the roots of the sectarian conflict in NI: That is fundamental anti-Catholic religious

You dont seem to understand this 85% statistic, I does not show that the loyalists targeted more civilians than the IRA, it just shows that they did not target the security forces. The IRA killed far more civilians than the loyalists, they killed more catholics than the loyalists but they also killed lots of police men, army and prison guards etc so they have a lower civilian kill percentage, that is not a good thing.

Happyman42

murphaph wrote: »

Leaving a bomb in a shopping centre is an act of murder. Even just bringing a bomb in your bag into such a place is murder. The chances of causing someone to be killed are just so high.

I find it incredible that you still believe these deaths were in some way an accident.

I don't disagree with you, indiscriminate bombing to achieve your goals is wrong, and always was wrong.
Putting a heavily armed soldier in a residential estate is murder as well and it is intended to achieve the same thing, terror. How many times have we listened to the excuse that a soldier killing somebody was an 'accident'?

Where was the outrage and horror of the Irish public and where is the investigative reportage and respectful remembrance of the killing of nationalist children in our media?

gurramok

K-9 wrote: »

I don't notice any particular bias tbh, are you keeping count? Zero sum politics again which is a bit sad when it comes to commemorations of deaths.

Is remembering Omagh anti-Republican?

No to both, where did you spring that from? You never read my post properly, its nothing to do with the commemorations themselves, its the media attention they get.

The only atrocity which has garnered widespread media attention on the Nationalist side has been Bloody Sunday due to the campaign for justice from the relatives, McGurks bombing(15 dead) which happened before that for example has never received attention in the British press. Your average British person will know about Enniskillen\Shankill but does not know about McGurks. That is very unfair, the British press are responsible for the lack of coverage.

Most atrocities committed against the British\Unionist side have received widespread media attention in the British press. You just named a few a few posts back.

gallag

Happyman42 wrote: »

I don't disagree with you, indiscriminate bombing to achieve your goals is wrong, and always was wrong.
Putting a heavily armed soldier in a residential estate is murder as well and it is intended to achieve the same thing, terror. How many times have we listened to the excuse that a soldier killing somebody was an 'accident'?

Where was the outrage and horror of the Irish public and where is the investigative reportage and respectful remembrance of the killing of nationalist children in our media?

There are no nationalist children, or loyalist, as a father I see the death of any child, be they boomed by terrorism or shot by the army as the most terrible thing humanity can achieve. You would be more constructive encouraging people to remember the children instead of worrying about people remembering the wrong kind of child.

Happyman42

gurramok wrote: »

No to both, where did you spring that from? You never read my post properly, its nothing to do with the commemorations themselves, its the media attention they get.

The only atrocity which has garnered widespread media attention on the Nationalist side has been Bloody Sunday due to the campaign for justice from the relatives, McGurks bombing(15 dead) which happened before that for example has never received attention in the British press. Your average British person will know about Enniskillen\Shankill but does not know about McGurks. That is very unfair, the British press are responsible for the lack of coverage.

Most atrocities committed against the British\Unionist side have received widespread media attention in the British press. You just named a few a few posts back.

And the Irish media should never have left that atoricity alone. Had they continually called for a proper inquiry and done what 'journalism' should have done...investigate, then that incident would never have had the tragic impact it did have. The Irish media most definately took a side and that should be an abiding stain on it's character. We only have to look at how they report on government here, every dog in the street knows that a politician is corrupt, every dog on the street knew that there was abuse in the church before the press get around to revealing it. They are a media on 'perpetual sale'.

Happyman42

gallag wrote: »

There are no nationalist children, or loyalist, as a father I see the death of any child, be they boomed by terrorism or shot by the army as the most terrible thing humanity can achieve. You would be more constructive encouraging people to remember the children instead of worrying about people remembering the wrong kind of child.

And I totally agree with you, the problem is the Irish/British media and public do not, evidently.

K-9

gurramok wrote: »

No to both, where did you spring that from? You never read my post properly, its nothing to do with the commemorations themselves, its the media attention they get.

The only atrocity which has garnered widespread media attention on the Nationalist side has been Bloody Sunday due to the campaign for justice from the relatives, McGurks bombing(15 dead) which happened before that for example has never received attention in the British press. Your average British person will know about Enniskillen\Shankill but does not know about McGurks. That is very unfair, the British press are responsible for the lack of coverage.

Most atrocities committed against the British\Unionist side have received widespread media attention in the British press. You just named a few a few posts back.

I thought it was obvious I was referring to media coverage as that was your point. I'll make it again, do you keep count of the media coverage?

Shankhill doesn't get that much coverage in the British press, Enniskillen and Bloody Sunday would be the 2 with, by far, the most coverage. Shankhill, Greysteel, stuff like that, would get coverage around anniversaries. The Shankhill butchers gets coverage now and again, but they don't really have anniversary dates as it was a prolonged period. The Hunger Strikes gets a lot as well.

Its "iconic" events that get remembered, this bias is because of peoples mindset.

K-9

T runner wrote: »

Its the 40th anniversary year (warrington) this year that's why I mentioned anniversaries of events from 40 years ago. There has been quite a few civilian deaths from the British/Unionist/loyalist angle covered this year: there has been no civilian deaths from the Irish/nationalist/republican side even though this group received the highest number of murders.

All the media retrospective talk of terrorist violence has also centred on the Republican side.

What events are these?

You said somehere else that a video of Greysteel on UTube would produce tons of sectarian comments (against Catholics). Would a video of the Shankhill bombing produce tons of sectarian comments against Protestants? The answer is no...the two sides are NOT mirror images of each other.

Not sure about that at all, I don't think there are more shall we say, reserved people in Repunlicanism and less capable of terrible comments. Bias on your side I'd have to say.

Airbrushing the killings of civilians by Loyalists has a particular imminent danger: I dont think i was the only person who feared walking up one morning during the flag protests to hear that a random Catholic had been murdered.
I think it came/is close to that. Not remembering Loyalist sectarian murder reinforces what the Loyalists believe: that they were right to murder Catholics during the troubles.

We all need to learn our lessons from history to avoid it repeating itself. The troubles in NI have been recurring in Ulster about twice a century since the plantation. The pattern is suppressed Catholics seeking more freedoms and power, culminating in being beaten down by Protestant armed groups.
The roots of the conflict are sectarian. With a triple lock on the Union now in place there is absolutely NO excuse for the masssive sectarian problem not to be addressed within the Protestant community. It is simply wrong in this or any other age to believe a person is inferior due to his/her religion.
Sort that out and the National question can become more objective. And Unionists shouldnt fear that it they believe right is on their side.

I really don't know where you are getting this air brushing from, its like speaking to somebody from 20/30 years ago. People are moving on.

Chuck Stone

gallag wrote: »

does not show that the loyalists targeted more civilians than the IRA

Loyalists paramilitaries made the PIRA look positively discerning when it came to their campaign.

Anyway you're wrong. Republicans killed 699 civilians (approx 35% of total). Loyalists killed 850 (approx 85% of total). They killed far more of each other in feuding than they did Republican paramilitaries.

http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/cgi-bin/tab2.pl

gurramok

K-9 wrote: »

I thought it was obvious I was referring to media coverage as that was your point. I'll make it again, do you keep count of the media coverage?

Shankhill doesn't get that much coverage in the British press, Enniskillen and Bloody Sunday would be the 2 with, by far, the most coverage. Shankhill, Greysteel, stuff like that, would get coverage around anniversaries. The Shankhill butchers gets coverage now and again, but they don't really have anniversary dates as it was a prolonged period. The Hunger Strikes gets a lot as well.

Its "iconic" events that get remembered, this bias is because of peoples mindset.

No I do not keep count, its called analysis of the media coverage. Again contrast the media coverage to the recent events of the Masserene\Prison officer killing to the Coleraine murder, heavy bias of the former in the British press. You genuinely cannot deny this has happened in these cases.

I don't know what TV\press you are watching\reading, Greysteel does not get much attention outside NI in the UK. Most British people do not know anything about the Shankhill Butchers, and the reason why is because of the lack of British mainstream coverage to educate them.

Its offensive to say its a mindset as you are wrong, NI issues(unless its an atrocity on the security forces in either NI or England) do not get much attention in the British media, that's a fact.

Happyman42

K-9 wrote: »

People are moving on.

That is just a dangerous dream of Irish partitionists, who always want the problem to 'just go away' and will sweep it under the carpet whenever the opportunity arises.
Nothing 'has gone away', we have a chance to make sure it 'goes away'. You can't 'move on' and leave the ball behind again.

K-9

gurramok wrote: »

No I do not keep count, its called analysis of the media coverage. Again contrast the media coverage to the recent events of the Masserene\Prison officer killing to the Coleraine murder, heavy bias of the former in the British press. You genuinely cannot deny this has happened in these cases.

I don't know what TV\press you are watching\reading, Greysteel does not get much attention outside NI in the UK. Most British people do not know anything about the Shankhill Butchers, and the reason why is because of the lack of British mainstream coverage to educate them.

Its offensive to say its a mindset as you are wrong, NI issues(unless its an atrocity on the security forces in either NI or England) do not get much attention in the British media, that's a fact.

I haven't seen much coverage of the Shankhill bomb on English channels tbh, nor Greysteel, I don't think Loyalist/Republican murders get much coverage at all, the vast majority of British Army/RUC murders go unremembered as well. I'm sorry if you think my pointing out your obvious bias on this issue is offensive.

I'm not seeing the media bias, as it is usually spectacular and stand out moments that get remembered, McGurks doesn't get mentioned, the Miami showband would, is that bias?

The Prison Officer, Ronan Kerr etc. gets more attention because unfortunately its more newsworthy. English media are only really interested if there's a chance the troubles might start again. Bias? Nope, that's the way media works these days.

Take the model that died due to a drug overdose, how come she still gets coverage while the 2 lads in Waterford get little? Because she was deemed more newsworthy, horrible way of doing things, but that's the media.

K-9

Happyman42 wrote: »

That is just a dangerous dream of Irish partitionists, who always want the problem to 'just go away' and will sweep it under the carpet whenever the opportunity arises.
Nothing 'has gone away', we have a chance to make sure it 'goes away'. You can't 'move on' and leave the ball behind again.

What is it with Republicans and Loyalists and this upmanship over every single thing? The 20th anniversary of Warrington gets a bit of coverage and all this whataboutery.

AlekSmart

murphaph wrote: »

I find it incredible that you still believe these deaths were in some way an accident.

I don't have any problem with beliefs.

The problem for me,is when these personal beliefs are used to deny reality,as in,

Place Bombs in an Urban Gasworks Storage Facility,non military afaik.

Shoot a Policeman.

Steal a civilians Car and Kidnap the owner.

Get Caught-Learn Lessons ?

Not quite the strategy pursued in 1993 Warrington....we can only assume that some higher level revolutionary takes umbrage at the catching bit and decides to teach them uppity Northerner's a lesson....so

Place TWO Bombs in the same City,but in a more Central Location.

Place each bomb in a Cast Iron Litter Bin.

Give a 30 Minute warning,the actual contents of which are still contentious.

Kill a 3 and 12 year old child and injure 55 other civilians.

However,for me,the real human issue is'nt whether some means can be found to justify the decision to plant a Bin-Bomb in a City Centre.

It's irrelevant whether we can be made believe it was "Accidental" murder or that the command decision itself was "Irresponsible".

What I find interesting is that for 20 years,the individual(s) who killed these two boys have walked free,perhaps repentant,perhaps not.

I wonder if they,in a moment of humanity ever visited these boys graves,or looked at their photo's with their lively smiling eyes and wondered inwardly about the relevance of the words of Eric Bogle's song,"Willie McBride"

I hope you died well and I hope you died clean,

Or young Willie McBride was it slow and obscene?

Somewhere out here,perhaps still within the warm embrace of "a cause",the individuals directly responsible for killing these two innocent young lads may stride purposefully about,possibly still devising and structuring more "irresponsible" actions in the name of "Freedom".

True bravery and belief in a cause,for me,would have been far more forcefully underlined had they surrendered and faced some form of Legal process,wherein they could have outlined their rationale and left it to the People to decide on whether the deaths of Tim Parry and Jonathan Ball were in any way "Accidental".

I wonder does responsibility for actions such as Warrington,I mean real hands-on,dirty responsibility,leave any emotional residue at all with these people.

The effects of PTSD are,by know at least recognized and documented within Military Structures,including the British Army,but we know far less about whether it even exists to any great extent within the irregular armed resistance movements.

If its worth asking in relation to one side,then it's equally relevant to the other ?

maithanfear

Perhaps that's the way the media works but it isn't healthy imposing a 'war guilt' mentality on Irish people when none is warranted. Germany suffered similar treatment following world war 1 and this only served to promote the cause of extremists. Perhaps a lesson ought to be learned in this instance.

gurramok

K-9 wrote: »

I'm not seeing the media bias, as it is usually spectacular and stand out moments that get remembered, McGurks doesn't get mentioned, the Miami showband would, is that bias?

Where has the Miami showband murders got lots of publicity in Britain?

K-9 wrote: »

The Prison Officer, Ronan Kerr etc. gets more attention because unfortunately its more newsworthy. English media are only really interested if there's a chance the troubles might start again. Bias? Nope, that's the way media works these days.

No, they are only interested if there is a successful attack on a member of the security forces rather than civilian casualties in NI. In Britain itself, civilian casualties with a NI background get widespread coverage.

You cannot compare the drug OD model coverage to this, we're strictly talking about NI and the events associated with it. There has always been class bias in both the Irish and British media.

Chuck Stone

On topic as regards press hierarchy of victims.

CAIN Web Service
The Damien Walsh Memorial Lecture by Roy Greenslade, 4 August 1998

I soon discovered that different standards have been applied in the reporting of deaths throughout the troubles, and it emerged that there has been what I've since called a "hierarchy of death." This clearly discernible pattern has to be seen in the context of contemporaneous political situations, but that, if anything, tends to reinforce the theory. So how does it run?

In the first rank - getting the most prominent coverage - are British people killed in Britain. In Warrington this was compounded by the tender years of the victims. But it's always been the case that violence, or even the threat of violence in Britain, is greeted with huge headlines.

In the second rank are members of the security forces, whether army or RUC. These murders have usually been reported on front pages and have generated leading articles and follow-up features.

Sometimes prison officers have been included in the second rank. Generally, though, they've slipped into the third category. In this third rank are the civilian victims of republicans.

In the fourth rank are members of the IRA, or Sinn Fein, killed by the security forces.

And, finally, in the fifth rank, are the victims of loyalist paramilitaries, whether they are Catholics, Protestants, IRA members or innocent passers-by.

http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/othelem/media/greenslade.htm

That's snipped up a bit to keep it short.

T runner

K-9 wrote: »

What events are these?

Warrington, keep up.

Not sure about that at all, I don't think there are more shall we say, reserved people in Repunlicanism and less capable of terrible comments. Bias on your side I'd have to say.

Youre not sure about my comment yet you're sure it is biased?

Easy to accuse someone of bias when you dont have the strenght of argument, not so easy to substantiate it.
You referred to "sectarian" comments specifically. Sectarianism in Ulster Protestantism occurs at levels. There are literally hundreds of examples in John D Brewers study here "Anti-Catholicism in Northern Ireland, 1600-1998"

Brewer maintains that anti-catholicism in NI is used to define the ethnic groups in NI, and also to maintain that segregation. Anti-Protestantism is on a much smaller scale and usually manifests itself either as a reaction oe as anti-Britishness.

The absorption of space and territory into identity is reflected in other incidents in the late 1990s where Protestants have defended a locality against what is seen as encroaching Irishness and Catholicism, the antinomies against which Protestants define their identity. Thus, in June 1997, residents in a working-class Protestant area drew on such themes to understand the social changes affecting their area as a result of the operation of the housing market. The area is near to Queen's University and two hospitals and has become a popular location for students and young professionals. House prices have risen, properties have been converted to flats, outsiders are moving in, and local families feel squeezed. However, these processes were presented to residents in terms of the identity concerns of Britishness and Protestantism. Posters were displayed in the area saying that Loyalist people have 'tolerated long enough the nationalist scum that have flooded into the area due to the unscrupulous behaviour of greedy landlords'. The detrimental effects this had on the Loyalist community were understood as increasing the risk to them from Republican terrorists. 'Do you know who lives next door to you', the poster asked, and it went on to warn that it is 'unwise to have a nationalist as a neighbour and even worse to befriend them'. 'As from 12 noon on the 1 July 1997,' the poster read, 'the Loyalist people will no longer be able to guarantee the safety of any nationalist who chooses to remain within the area, nor can they guarantee the safety of any property where nationalists are dwelling.' It was perceived by others as a Catholic witch-hunt.

Before condemning Brewer as biased, find out who he is.

I really don't know where you are getting this air brushing from, its like speaking to somebody from 20/30 years ago. People are moving on.

No they are not. Sectarianism in Loyalist areas is at its worst. They are not moving on. They still despise Catholics.

K-9

gurramok wrote: »

Where has the Miami showband murders got lots of publicity in Britain?

No, the N.I channels and RTE give it coverage now and again. Again, Bloody Sunday and Enniskillen would be the most covered in England as far as I see, the rest not much.

No, they are only interested if there is a successful attack on a member of the security forces rather than civilian casualties in NI.

Well really there hasn't been a major event to cover, a single civilian death in N.I. just isn't going to get big coverage on the main English news bulletins, it isn't bias, it just isn't seen as a big newsworthy story. A prison officer or PSNI attracts attention because it is rare thankfully, 30 years ago 1 officer killed wouldn't have got much attention in England at all, acceptable level of violence and all that.

In Britain itself, civilian casualties with a NI background get widespread coverage.

How do you mean?

You cannot compare the drug OD model coverage to this, we're strictly talking about NI and the events associated with it. There has always been class bias in both the Irish and British media.

Why not compare it? Because it doesn't suit your argument? The media picks and chooses what to give more coverage, people that are well known get more coverage, Michaella Harte for example. The media will refer to the models death in the future and basically ignore other deaths due to drugs.

Similarly the vast, vast majority of the over 3,000 deaths on all sides attract little or no attention.

K-9

T runner wrote: »

Warrington, keep up.

No, you mentioned 1973, so I asked for an example, shouldn't be too hard to highlight this bias.

Youre not sure about my comment yet you're sure it is biased?

Tbh its a bit of a juvenile comment, my side wouldn't leave horrendous comments on youtube. I wouldn't be so sure of that at all, you seem certain, I'm doubting your certainty, you seem to find that difficult to comprehend.

Before condemning Brewer as biased, find out who he is.

Maybe give me a chance to read the thing first, no need for the aggressiveness seeing as you've just given me the information. Funny moment though!

No they are not. Sectarianism in Loyalist areas is at its worst. They are not moving on. They still despise Catholics.

I don't think they've a monopoly on it, which is the impression I'm getting from you.

gurramok

K-9 wrote: »

No, the N.I channels and RTE give it coverage now and again. Again, Bloody Sunday and Enniskillen would be the most covered in England as far as I see, the rest not much.

You need to exclude NI channels and RTE in this, they mostly have always covered local events in NI to be fair. Its the mainstream media in Britain(and some Irish media) which have not.

K-9 wrote: »

Well really there hasn't been a major event to cover, a single civilian death in N.I. just isn't going to get big coverage on the main English news bulletins, it isn't bias, it just isn't seen as a big newsworthy story. A prison officer or PSNI attracts attention because it is rare thankfully, 30 years ago 1 officer killed wouldn't have got much attention in England at all, acceptable level of violence and all that.

And you agree that this is ok and fair??!

K-9 wrote: »

How do you mean?

Events with a NI background visiting Britain's shores.

K-9 wrote: »

Why not compare it? Because it doesn't suit your argument? The media picks and chooses what to give more coverage, people that are well known get more coverage, Michaella Harte for example. The media will refer to the models death in the future and basically ignore other deaths due to drugs.

Similarly the vast, vast majority of the over 3,000 deaths on all sides attract little or no attention.

Wrong, people who are well known in social circles get more coverage, that will always be the case.

Members of the security forces or civilians in Britain who are victims of violence are not well known and get massive coverage.

K-9

T runner wrote: »

Easy to accuse someone of bias when you dont have the strenght of argument, not so easy to substantiate it.
You referred to "sectarian" comments specifically. Sectarianism in Ulster Protestantism occurs at levels. There are literally hundreds of examples in John D Brewers study here "Anti-Catholicism in Northern Ireland, 1600-1998"

Wait a second here, I think you are reading a different thread to me. I haven't contested that there wasn't huge discrimination against Catholics between 1600 and 1998. To say otherwise would be absurd, so I'm at a loss as to why you posted that.

K-9

gurramok wrote: »

And you agree that this is ok and fair??!

Nope, I specifically said it was a horrible way of doing things a few posts back, so I don't why you are even asking that. The media across the world often react to whatever sells most copies or internet hits, or gets more ratings.

Events with a NI background visiting Britain's shores.

Well yes, if its a big enough story, its hardly surprising or shocking. A English police office murdered would attract more attention than Ronan Kerr.

Wrong, people who are well known in social circles get more coverage, that will always be the case.

Is that ok and fair?

Members of the security forces or civilians in Britain who are victims of violence are not well known and get massive coverage.

From the past? Can you point out this massive coverage? I see loads of generalisations on this thread but very little examples.

djpbarry

gurramok wrote: »

Your average British person will know about Enniskillen\Shankill...

Not they won't. The average British person neither knows nor cares about anything that happens in Northern Ireland.

Fratton Fred

I think most British people (over a certain age) would remember the Shankill bomb, Greysteel or the Loughinisland massacre.

What they would struggle with is who carried them out.

T runner

K-9 wrote: »

Wait a second here, I think you are reading a different thread to me. I haven't contested that there wasn't huge discrimination against Catholics between 1600 and 1998. To say otherwise would be absurd, so I'm at a loss as to why you posted that.

You implied Catholic sectarianism was just as problematic as Protestant sectrianism, which it is not. It is minor in comparison.

The relevance to this thread is that low media coverage of Loyalist murder of Catholic civilians means that it is not challenged and attacked as sectarian murder. In my opinion we are not far from a sectarian murder on a Catholic as evidenced by the flag protests. Biased, agenda driven media coverage means that it is easier for this type of murder to resurface again. National humiliation might be one consequence of this biased coverage: assisting the re-emergence of sectarian murder by down playing it, is surely another.

Happyman42

K-9 wrote: »

What is it with Republicans and Loyalists and this upmanship over every single thing? The 20th anniversary of Warrington gets a bit of coverage and all this whataboutery.

What is it with posters claiming something is unimportant or inconsequential on a thread they are all over, defending a viewpoint? Deal with the subject matter and stop trying to deflect when it gets too much for you.

T runner

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I think most British people (over a certain age) would remember the Shankill bomb, Greysteel or the Loughinisland massacre.

What they would struggle with is who carried them out.

Would they remember the Ballymurphy massacre? And if they did would they struggle with who carried those 11 killings out? Why Not?