Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Columbia 3 given 17-year sentences

Options
12345679»

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,264 ✭✭✭RicardoSmith


    BCB wrote:
    The majority of killings carried out by the IRA were justified.

    Thats a different topic. Unless you have some stats, and criteria for those stats its meaningless.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 121 ✭✭BCB


    Thats a different topic. Unless you have some stats, and criteria for those stats its meaningless.

    the "stats" are that the majority they killed were enemy personnel which in my book is justifiable.....


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,924 ✭✭✭Cork


    BCB wrote:
    The majority of killings carried out by the IRA were justified.

    "The IRA killed 73 children under the age of 18. It killed building workers on their way home, shoppers having a cup of tea, women collecting census forms, young couples having a drink in a pub in Birmingham, people honouring the dead of two world wars, mothers looking for a bit of cod in the local fish shop."
    the "stats" are that the majority they killed were enemy personnel which in my book is justifiable.....

    Could you provide us a link to your stats? (Apart from SF/IRA propaganda)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,264 ✭✭✭RicardoSmith


    BCB wrote:
    the "stats" are that the majority they killed were enemy personnel which in my book is justifiable.....

    Since its panto season...."oh no they didn't"....


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 121 ✭✭BCB


    Cork wrote:
    "


    Could you provide us a link to your stats? (Apart from SF/IRA propaganda)

    there you go.......
    :p

    http://www.wesleyjohnston.com/users/ireland/past/troubles/troubles_stats.html#statusperpetrator


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 14,483 ✭✭✭✭daveirl


    This post has been deleted.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,264 ✭✭✭RicardoSmith


    BCB wrote:


    Looks like 60/40. I knew it was bad but thats horrific.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,761 ✭✭✭cdebru


    Cork wrote:
    "The IRA killed 73 children under the age of 18. It killed building workers on their way home, shoppers having a cup of tea, women collecting census forms, young couples having a drink in a pub in Birmingham, people honouring the dead of two world wars, mothers looking for a bit of cod in the local fish shop."

    british crown forces killed 193 unarmed civilians

    among them are
    <LI>
    Carol Ann Kelly, aged 12, was found by the coroner to be an innocent victim who had been walking home from a shop carrying a carton of milk.
    <LI>
    Julie Livingstone, aged 14, was walking towards her home when she was hit in the head by a plastic bullet fired from an army saracen. She also was described by the inquest jury as “an innocent victim”
    <LI>
    Paul Whitters, aged 15, was killed, and an independent investigation into his death conducted in 1982 by Lord Gifford, concluded that there was “no possible defence” for the boy’s killing.
    <LI>
    Nora McCabe, one of the four adults killed that same year had three young children of her own, aged 7, 2, and 3 months old.
    all killed by plastic bullets in 1981 alone
    of the 193 murders only 18 resulted in prosecutions only 3 in convictions
    pt Ian thain received a life sentence he served 2 years and was readmitted back to his regiment
    pt lee clegg received a life sentence he served 2 years was readmitted to his regiment and later promoted
    the other soldier convicted received 12 months in a young offenders institute
    these figures do not include the numerous people murdered by loyalist agents acting on behalf of the the crown forces.
    so do we keep counting the dead see if we can work out who had the best score or who should feel more aggrieved or do we try to work our way out of this.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 88,978 ✭✭✭✭mike65


    ..and don't you think the :p is sooooooo appropriate? :rolleyes:

    the full list of the dead up to end 2001 can be found here -

    http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/sutton/alpha/index.html

    Mike.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 14,483 ✭✭✭✭daveirl


    This post has been deleted.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 17,194 ✭✭✭✭A Dub in Glasgo


    Sorry Dave, I think it has been proven that the British Forces are answerable to nobody. Just look at the amount of soldiers prosecuted. Look at the amount convicted. Look at the length of time served. Look at what happens when they get out. The British Forces can murder in Ireland with impunity.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,264 ✭✭✭RicardoSmith


    Sorry Dave, I think it has been proven that the British Forces are answerable to nobody. Just look at the amount of soldiers prosecuted. Look at the amount convicted. Look at the length of time served. Look at what happens when they get out. The British Forces can murder in Ireland with impunity.

    Thats not right either. But look at the total killings. IRA 49% BF 9%.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,194 ✭✭✭✭A Dub in Glasgo


    But look at the total killings. IRA 49% BF 9%.

    That has nothing to do with what I posted, I was referring to the amount of BF who get investigated/prosecuted/convicted for the killings.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,264 ✭✭✭RicardoSmith


    That has nothing to do with what I posted, I was referring to the amount of BF who get investigated/prosecuted/convicted for the killings.

    I don't get what point you are making. Are you saying The amount is out of proportion to the 9% vs 49% ? Or that the number of BF prosecuted has no relationship to the numbers of those killed. Thats not logical. But justifying murder is just not something I will discuss anymore. I also don't see how this relates to to Columbia.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,406 ✭✭✭arcadegame2004


    Originally posted by BCB
    The majority of killings carried out by the IRA were justified.

    No they weren't! They killed around 2,000 people. Which victims do you consider to have been justifiably killed? The Shankill bombings victims maybe? Or the 2 children killed at Warrington? How did their deaths benefit Ireland? :mad:

    cdebru while you are completely correct to mention the catalogue of killings of innocent civilians at the hands of brutal elements of the British security forces, possibly acting on higher ie political, authority, that does not justify what the IRA did in maiming and murdering thousands of innocent men, women and children for the 'crime' of being a Protestant or being in a mixed marriage.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,761 ✭✭✭cdebru


    Cork wrote:
    "The IRA killed 73 children under the age of 18. It killed building workers on their way home, shoppers having a cup of tea, women collecting census forms, young couples having a drink in a pub in Birmingham, people honouring the dead of two world wars, mothers looking for a bit of cod in the local fish shop."


    Could you provide us a link to your stats? (Apart from SF/IRA propaganda)
    I just had a look through the list of victims provided by the link by mike

    the figure you have given of 73 does not tally with that list i reckon it is about 60 under 18 years of age
    that would include about about 14 IRA or Na fianna members accidently killed by premature explosions or shot accidently by fellow IRA members
    so take that figure away
    the actual figure is around 46 under 18 years of age killed by the provisionals


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,761 ✭✭✭cdebru


    No they weren't! They killed around 2,000 people. Which victims do you consider to have been justifiably killed? The Shankill bombings victims maybe? Or the 2 children killed at Warrington? How did their deaths benefit Ireland? :mad:

    cdebru while you are completely correct to mention the catalogue of killings of innocent civilians at the hands of brutal elements of the British security forces, possibly acting on higher ie political, authority, that does not justify what the IRA did in maiming and murdering thousands of innocent men, women and children for the 'crime' of being a Protestant or being in a mixed marriage.
    can you go to the list on the link provided by mike and show me the thousands
    of men women and children killed because of their religion by the provisional IRA or because they were in a mixed marriage
    that is patently untrue

    My point was this is not one sided the IRA are not alone in having killed Children or innocent civilians
    But you would never guess that by alot of the posts on here


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,761 ✭✭✭cdebru


    I don't get what point you are making. Are you saying The amount is out of proportion to the 9% vs 49% ? Or that the number of BF prosecuted has no relationship to the numbers of those killed. Thats not logical. But justifying murder is just not something I will discuss anymore. I also don't see how this relates to to Columbia.
    the point he is making is that the British army were not held accountable for their actions in Ireland

    193 unarmed civilians including many children killed by the british crown forces

    18 prosecutions

    3 convictions

    2 life sentences both served 2 years of their life sentence and were released and readmitted to theit former regiment one was then promoted

    1 12 month sentence in a young offenders institute

    Bloody Sunday whitewashed no one even charged

    that is not being held to account


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,811 ✭✭✭✭billy the squid


    troubles_deaths_by_status_organisation.gif

    the number of civilians killed by the IRA outnumber the number of anything killed by the brittish army.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,761 ✭✭✭cdebru



    the number of civilians killed by the IRA outnumber the number of anything killed by the brittish army.
    You should edit that and rephrase it I know what you are trying to say but it just sounds offensive

    next point its not a numbers game

    you can make numbers say what you want

    the IRA killed many times more crown forces than the crown forces killed IRA members
    if you take into account the number of civilians killed by loyalists at the behest of the british security services how many are the British responsible for then
    are the British responsible for civilians killed by loyalists were they turned a blind eye we know loyalist were riddled with british agents and informers
    what are those numbers no one can be sure

    None of this moves the situation on


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 40,038 ✭✭✭✭Sparks


    cdebru wrote:
    You should edit that and rephrase it I know what you are trying to say but it just sounds offensive
    It doesn't sound offensive, it's relating an offensive fact. Now if you could show it was false, that'd be different. You can't, though, can you?
    next point its not a numbers game
    It's not even a game.


  • Registered Users Posts: 26,458 ✭✭✭✭gandalf


    This thread has totally gone off topic and was going around in circles anyway. Thread Closed.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement