Soldier F

Feisar

Odhinn wrote: »

Agreeing, while pointing out that soldiers were routinely used as police throughout the Empire.

Ah!

I’m picking up a bit of heat for apparently justifying murder.

I’m not, it’s just that a hostile crowd mixed with trained soldiers will lead to cold bodies.

biko

An Claidheamh wrote: »

Soldier F is named as Dave ****

https://villagemagazine.ie/soldier-f-the-cold-blooded-bloody-sunday-murderer-is-named/

No reason for Irish media not to name all of them

Fat chance though

The article you link to doesn't give the full name. Where did you get his full name?

tdf7187

blanch152 wrote: »

I think Coveney has it right. Anyone who committed a crime should stand trial, no amnesty. That applies to all, I hope you agree.

If there wasn't a crime, no trial.

Can you explain what the purpose of a trial is? Silly old me thought that trials were to adjudge on defendants guilt or otherwise of crimes they have been accused of.

tdf7187

FrancieBrady wrote: »

They all should stand trial. You should also include all those who conspired to whitewash and cover it up.

It is the only way the British government gets it integrity back. They have conspired here to kick this ball down the years until we reached this point.

Unfortunately the whitewashing does not just extend to the Brit government and military, to quote Padraig Pease, "Mo chlannféin a dhíol a máthair. "

Michael McDowell (for example) is not part of the British government (that we are aware of).

FrancieBrady

tdf7187 wrote: »

Can you explain what the purpose of a trial is? Silly old me thought that trials were to adjudge on defendants guilt or otherwise of crimes they have been accused of.

No doubt the angle now, in tandem with belligerent Unionism, will be to claim Bloody Sunday wasn't a crime because the state that committed it, says so and there was no trial.

blanch152

tdf7187 wrote: »

Can you explain what the purpose of a trial is? Silly old me thought that trials were to adjudge on defendants guilt or otherwise of crimes they have been accused of.

Before you can have a trial, there has to have been a crime. If there isn't a crime, then there isn't a trial.

FrancieBrady

blanch152 wrote: »

Before you can have a trial, there has to have been a crime. If there isn't a crime, then there isn't a trial.

The inquiry decided that, that was why Soldier F was charged.

Obscene wriggling redolent once again of belligerent Unionism and right wing British elements.

Fuascailteoir

biko wrote: »

The article you link to doesn't give the full name. Where did you get his full name?

His name is well known at this stage and the previous poster had it correct

Feisar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The inquiry decided that, that was why Soldier F was charged.

Obscene wriggling redolent once again of belligerent Unionism and right wing British elements.

Is there another kind of Unionism:pac:

Shebean

blanch152 wrote: »

Before you can have a trial, there has to have been a crime. If there isn't a crime, then there isn't a trial.

What category would you put a trained, armed, official state sanctioned soldier killing dead unarmed British civilians on British soil?


Can the British armed forces just randomly kill British people on British soil with no come back?


Trials happen when the authorities feel there is enough evidence to warrant charges.
Does 'innocent until proven guilty' ring any bells? How can you be guilty of a crime before a trial?

FrancieBrady

Shebean wrote: »

Does 'innocent until proven guilty' ring any bells? How can you be guilty of a crime before a trial?

blanch has shown before that 'allegations' are enough to convict if they are against certain people.

corner of hells

FrancieBrady wrote: »

blanch has shown before that 'allegations' are enough to convict if they are against certain people.

Well worth having a read of Lord Glendennings comments about the Guildford Four and the Birmingham Six to give you an idea of the British Judiciary mindset nevermind the likes of West Midlands serious crime squad.

mikethecop

corner of hells wrote: »

Well worth having a read of Lord Glendennings comments about the Guildford Four and the Birmingham Six to give you an idea of the British Judiciary mindset nevermind the likes of West Midlands serious crime squad.

as bad a bobby story and the nutting squad ?

FrancieBrady

mikethecop wrote: »

as bad a bobby story and the nutting squad ?

If the standard for the state is being measured against those of paramilitaries, don't you think that is a dangerous place to be?

Shebean

mikethecop wrote: »

as bad a bobby story and the nutting squad ?

You see no difference between the IRA and British army. We do often hear how the BA were 'legitimate', but I can see your point.

mikethecop

FrancieBrady wrote: »

If the standard for the state is being measured against those of paramilitaries, don't you think that is a dangerous place to be?

i always find it strange that sf claim that they targeted legitimate targets when they murdered a prison officer or some other civil servant but then claim to be innocent victims of state oppression when their members are caught in return fire


seems to only be a war when it suits them doesn't it ?

hardly relevant to this thread though .

far too many war criminals walking free on all sides

mikethecop

Shebean wrote: »

You see no difference between the IRA and British army. We do often hear how the BA were 'legitimate', but I can see your point.

as above

FrancieBrady

mikethecop wrote: »

i always find it strange that sf claim that they targeted legitimate targets when they murdered a prison officer or some other civil servant but then claim to be innocent victims of state oppression when their members are caught in return fire


seems to only be a war when it suits them doesn't it ?

hardly relevant to this thread though .

far too many war criminals walking free on all sides

The people shot dead on Bloody Sunday were civilians. If you cannot see the importance of that fact and the consequent irrelevance of the above ^ that's on you.

mikethecop

FrancieBrady wrote: »

The people shot dead on Bloody Sunday were civilians. If you cannot see the importance of that fact and the consequent irrelevance of the above ^ that's on you.

see the bit i said about it not really being relevant to this thread ?

Shebean

mikethecop wrote: »

i always find it strange that sf claim that they targeted legitimate targets when they murdered a prison officer or some other civil servant but then claim to be innocent victims of state oppression when their members are caught in return fire


seems to only be a war when it suits them doesn't it ?

hardly relevant to this thread though .

far too many war criminals walking free on all sides

Soldier F shot dead peaceful civilians. Neither those victims nor their families had anything to do with the UVF/BA/IRA.

mikethecop wrote: »

see the bit i said about it not really being relevant to this thread ?

You brought it in. The equivalent of saying 'this is off the point, deflection, and I don't want to be questioned on it'.

FrancieBrady

mikethecop wrote: »

see the bit i said about it not really being relevant to this thread ?

So you had a little wander off topic.

Can you answer the question now?

If the standard for the state is being measured against those of paramilitaries, don't you think that is a dangerous place to be?

A Dub in Glasgo

mikethecop wrote: »

i always find it strange that sf claim that they targeted legitimate targets when they murdered a prison officer or some other civil servant but then claim to be innocent victims of state oppression when their members are caught in return fire


seems to only be a war when it suits them doesn't it ?

hardly relevant to this thread though .

far too many war criminals walking free on all sides

Soldier F, the psychopath protected by the British govt, murdered civilians and got away with murder. It has nothing to do with the IRA

mikethecop

Shebean wrote: »

Soldier F shot dead peaceful civilians. Neither those victims nor their families had anything to do with the UVF/BA/IRA.



You brought it in. The equivalent of saying 'this is off the point, deflection, and I don't want to be questioned on it'.

do you see me defending the soldier ?

what i did say is that sf has many many war criminals that hid behind the silence of a "political party" and gfa and have victims that will never see justice

mikethecop

FrancieBrady wrote: »

So you had a little wander off topic.

Can you answer the question now?

Isnt sf the state in NI right now ?

should they be compelled to hand over all the war criminals in their ranks for imprisonment do you think ?

mikethecop

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Soldier F, the psychopath protected by the British govt, murdered civilians and got away with murder. It has nothing to do with the IRA

And so was bobby story and many others .

they should all be judged equally dont you think ?

or should only the ira be allowed to murder with impunity

FrancieBrady

mikethecop wrote: »

Isnt sf the state in NI right now ?

should they be compelled to hand over all the war criminals in their ranks for imprisonment do you think ?

Desperately trying to deflect the conversation and avoiding answering a simple question.

If the standard for the state is being measured against those of paramilitaries, don't you think that is a dangerous place to be?

FrancieBrady

mikethecop wrote: »

And so was bobby story and many others .

they should all be judged equally dont you think ?

or should only the ira be allowed to murder with impunity

Hundreds of members of the IRA have served sentences for what they did.

Any one IRA member has served more time than the total amount of time British soldiers have served.

You are way out on a very sick, apologist limb here.

A Dub in Glasgo

mikethecop wrote: »

do you see me defending the soldier ?

That is exactly what you are doing

mikethecop

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Desperately trying to deflect the conversation and avoiding answering a simple question.

you not understanding my answer isnt the same as me not answering

mikethecop

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

That is exactly what you are doing

where , stick up a example