Prosecutions of British military veterans in Northern Ireland.

It is a very reasonable question to ask if one is talking about the sensitivities of the matter, especially from elected officials. It's pure hypocrisy but par of the course really.

I see your reading comprehension is on par with your ability to remain on topic, Mark.

Especially from elected officials?! No, Mark. I commented suggesting that posters could show sensitivity.....your buddy Blanch went off on a non-sequitur about elected officials. It would take a pretty skewed reading to come away thinking the topic was especially referring to elected officials.

Pure hypocrisy? Perhaps we'll take you with Blanch when we're off having basic definitions explained to him.....or you could explain precisely what is hypocritical about my position, which while acknowledging your continued whataboutery still explicitly confirmed that I found the tweet in question highly distasteful. It's like you didn't even bother reading what you were replying to and just decided to have another off topic whinge. Quite sad really.

I will remind you again that 'Republicans' have worked (as they said they would) with the ICLVR. A process in which has resulted in this being said by those who ran it.

They have also consistently called for a Truth Recovery process to deal with Legacy issues. The British/Unionists/Loyalists have actually ruled this out and like the Protocol have offered no alternative. The Irish government has also reneged on coming up for any plan to deal with legacy issues, but has to it's credit dealt with revelations about collusion that has emerged.

So my point stands, those responsible - the governments - have failed to deal with these legacy issues as they committed to in various agreements.

I will add why I think that is - because one of them was a major combatant in the conflict/war here and is majorly responsible for what happened here.

dempster180418.pdf (niassembly.gov.uk)

There is no one stopping anyone from terrorist organisations coming out with the truth.

No one is going to prosecute anyone, hence why there is no humane reason why terrorist outfits cannot come out and help victims get some peace with what happened.

Do people like yourself think through their suggestions before typing them?

What Loyalist or Republican leader is going to start handing up people? Have you any idea what would hapen if they unilaterally began that process?

The only way this is going to happen is in a process similar to the LVR one. Where there is trust and where EVERYONE who was a combatant or involved in the conflict/war is at the table in an open and transparent process.

There is NO 'other' way it is going to happen and that is why the torturously delicate agreement to set up a legacy framework was agreed in the Stormont House agreement. The first and biggest finger you should be pointing is at the two governments who have so far welched on that agreement.

You give a very good insight into what the leadership of terrorist outfits thinks. Optics above all else.

As I said, you missed the keyword of my sentence, so I will repeat it.

There is no humane reason why terrorist outfits cannot come out and help victims get some peace with what happened.

No, of course, we know terrorists are not humane, they are the opposite, of course, so I guess you may be right, a leopard doesn't change its spots. They couldn't care less about the victims of their atrocities. At least the British tried to help after the fact with some inquests and inquiries.

What are you blathering on about? Why are you talking about handing people over to be 'executed' in some way, as if this will usher in a new conflict. Are you mad?

I am talking about helping the victims of the troubles get to the truth of the matter, as is the most humane thing to do, after all these years. E.g. The Birmingham Bombings happened 47 years ago. The people who did that are at least in their late 60's now. The victims are not looking for revenge, they are looking for truth. The hows and why. Maybe even a 'sorry' or some passing regret, maybe even a statement saying it was wrong and shouldn't have happened. Crumbs maybe but it could be something. Instead, we get...... nothing but silence, omerta and no passing regret, no sorry, no remorse..... nothing.

But, you make a good political case for the status quo, hence why one should take with a piece of salt the talk about truth and reconciliation from those parties with terrorist links in the North. Talk a good game, but never deliver on the field of play.

And still not a word from Mark about British Military Veterans on this thread about British Military Veterans. I thought you'd already been told to knock it off with the whataboutery?

It won't happen, because those terrorists involved are thinking politically about the issue, not humanely about the issue. That's the nub of it. At least you agree that politics trump humanity.

The British could have done better for sure, but if you want to rank them, then the British are far more open and transparent than any of the Terrorist organisations. Multiple Prime Ministers have apologised in the House of Commons for misdeeds by the British Security forces.

On the other side.... tumbleweed, deflection and feigned ignorance on the issues. Indeed we have politicians extolling the virtues of terrorists, celebrating them, their actions and their murders and when questioned we are told, that 'we dont understand'. We understand alright, there is a core group of people who to this day will defend murder carried out for a political non-democratic cause.

A glib general apology doesn't cut the mustard, Francie, nor did it include the relatives, the mother and fathers who had to bury their sons killed by the PIRA. It would go a long way to actually helping victims find some truth, if they were bothered.

It is also a fact that the British have been far more open and transparent than any Terrorist organisation. This is just a fact. That is not to say they are 100% open or transparent, indeed I would like them to be more so, but it's still a fact that they have held public inquiries into things like Bloody Sunday, while terrorists keep quiet and indeed protect their own against the wishes of victims for some truth. Sure, SF was against the extradition of Real IRA members, who were accused of killing 29 people at Omagh. Why was that?

I am just stating the fact here.

And what does that post reveal about your goal here - vindication of the British at any cost to your credibility or self respect.

How satisfying it is to see that!

I didn't try to nullify anything, I pointed out the facts in relation to the thread topic and apparently annoyed your deferential allegiances.

yeh, the 'rogues' in the British Army which neatly avoids the whitewashing and cover-ups which required more than rogue elements. Which neatly avoids the pointed attempts by the British to face up to what they did and their failure to implement legacy frameworks to continue avoiding it.

You insulted the campaigning of Irish victims with your simpering admission that it was just naughty rogues involved.

BTW, when your standards for the behaviour of a government sink to the same as those you have for a paramilitary organisation then it is YOU that has the problem not me.

The IRA have and will be brought to justice when there is evidence. That is NOT the case with the British.

I know this family personally. Delighted for them. Amnesty nonsense rubbished too.

Hutchings has died from Covid in Belfast.