BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Jun 10 - 08:48 AM

I did provide the passage that said there was "no doubt" about IRA fire.
I have not read it all but if those who did the unlawful killing were ordered to do it, I am sure it would have been reported prominently.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Jun 10 - 08:55 AM

"I have not read it all but if those who did the unlawful killing were ordered to do it, I am sure it would have been reported prominently."
In which case, we are about to see those responsible arrested and tried for murder, or at the very least, manslaughter - do you honestly believe that this is about to happen?
So far we have not even been told their names.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Jun 10 - 09:07 AM

"In which case, we are about to see ...."

Unlikely.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Jun 10 - 09:14 AM

"Unlikely. "
Game, set and match I think
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Jun 10 - 12:01 PM

I'm curious Keith - do you have any evidence that the massacre was carried out by a handful of rogue squaddies or have you decided this off your own bat?
I'm buggered if I can find any reference to it in the enquiry report.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Jun 10 - 12:24 PM

The immediate responsibility for the deaths and injuries on Bloody Sunday lies with those members of Support Company whose unjustifiable firing was the cause of those deaths and injuries. The question remains, however, as to whether others also bear direct or indirect responsibility for what happened.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Jun 10 - 12:52 PM

Should have been in quotes.
from vol 1

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Jun 10 - 01:00 PM

Yep -read that - says it was unjustifiable; doen't say it was unauthorised - that seems to be your own interpretation.
Never mind - that's what the squaddies are there for - to carry the can back when things go wrong.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Big Mick
Date: 18 Jun 10 - 03:02 PM

Same old crap. The most exhaustive study ever done shows conclusively that the Army fired first, was unjustified in firing, murdered innocent and peaceful demonstrators, one fellow crawling away was shot in the back .... and the apologists start looking to parse words. Even Bill D makes the insinuation that provocation caused the unjustified shootings. Would you have said that about King's march in Selma? Peaceful people, protesting the British occupation of their homeland (whether you think that is true or not is not relevant, it is what they felt), were fired upon. The fact that there were armed IRA and Nationalists in the crowd doesn't mean a lot, there always are. But there was no reason to open fire. The Army was wrong, the report proves it, the PM apologized upon full review of the report. Richard...... your comment boggles the mind ...... I expected different.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Jun 10 - 06:42 PM

The killimg may well have been unauthorised, but the subsequent cover-up was not.

The cover-up, which was organised at the highest level involved justifying what those soldiers did, and what their commanding officers did. The man who sent the death squad into the Bogside, apparently against orders, was given an OBE a few months after Bloody Sunday.

And the cover-up probably did even more to ensure that the war escalated and continued for a generation than the the Bloody Sunday killings did. If there had been an immediate recognition of the truth, immediate action to identify all those responsible and deal with them appropriately, and a sincere apology in the same teerms as Cameron made this week, thousands of lives over the years could well have been saved.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Noreen
Date: 18 Jun 10 - 06:59 PM

Totally agree, Kevin.
And it is the perjury which is the only thing worth pursuing and prosecuting at this stage.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 18 Jun 10 - 07:26 PM

Not just the perjury - the way in which the judicial system was corrupted and distorted in the process of the cover-up.

It should also be remembered that in March 1976 Lord Chief Justice Widgery dismissed the first appeal by the Birmingham Six in respect of the Birmingham pub bombings. It was 1991 before his finding was overthrown, and these innocent men freed from jail.

"A safe pair of hands" is how this kind of helpful public servant is decribed by those who find his services so useful, in the short run any rate.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Jun 10 - 03:36 AM

I agree that the cover up was what made this of such consequence in the escalation of the troubles.
It was likely done in the hope of reducing the impact. A hugely costly mistake.

Big Mick, members of this small unit killed indiscriminately, and shame on them, but please remember that small units of your army have done much worse things than Bloody Sunday.
In Iraq for instance I recall reprisal killings of innocent unarmed civillians including children, and a whole family killed to facilitate the rape of a young girl.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Teribus
Date: 19 Jun 10 - 03:44 AM

The evidence that the demonstrators fired at all comes from the army and MI6, whose evidence was given in secret, indeed, we're not allowed to know what it was. And they had every incentive to keep their own role in prolonging the war- because they'd have been out of a job otherwise. - Paul Burke

Somebody referred to the evidence presented and the balancing of that evidence by Lord Saville. Is the truth now known about the events of that day? No it is not because not everyone who should have gave evidence did they, all members of the OIRA and PIRA present in Londonderry on that day did not give evidence, and could not be compelled to give evidence as members of the Security Forces were, they have not been given the the opportunity to tell the truth and whatever evidence they might have given could not of course have been "balanced" by Lord Saville.

By the bye Paul I did not realise that MI6 and Army are or ever have been part time organisations. Your contention that:

they had every incentive to keep their own role in prolonging the war- because they'd have been out of a job otherwise.

Is utterly ridiculous.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Teribus
Date: 19 Jun 10 - 04:03 AM

On the subject of lies and cover ups. Please correct me if I am wrong here but with regard to that Civil Rights Demonstration:

At the time
1. According to the OIRA they were not present
2. According to the PIRA they were not present

After evidence came to light (photograph of Martin McGuinness in the crowd) it was stated that while they "might" have been present they were unarmed "observers".

Now it turns out that they were both there and that they were armed. In addition it turns out that not only were the OIRA and PIRA present and armed and Saville states that "no doubt" the OIRA fired shots prior to 1 Para entering the area.

Were the OIRA trying to provoke an incident that the PIRA would be blamed for? Who knows, it would not be unique or unusual. As to blame and possible prosecution of those covering things up and giving orders on the day, I do not think that you will find Gerry Adams or Martin McGuinness clamouring for any such action, and they have good cause to dread that anybody does adopt such a course. In Londonderry alone there are some 87 murders that could be linked to Mr McGuinness as Derry Brigade Commander/Deputy Commander, while over in Belfast around that time Gerry Adams undoubtely knew about and sanctioned actions taken against Mrs Jean McConville who was abducted, tortured and murdered. So I think that this will all be put to rest very quickly if they want the GFA and the "Peace Process" to remain in effect. Still no accounting for what might happen when loads of people run about demanding justice, what they get of course is law, which is not the same thing at all.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Penny S.
Date: 19 Jun 10 - 04:40 AM

The radio - Saturday Live, BBC Radio 4 - has just been interviewing a woman who was 16 and wrote a diary of the day. One of her points was that the shooting did not make sense to her. Here was the army which had arrived in NI to protect the civil rights activists from the Unionist majority, shooting those it was supposed to protect. Not quite an occupying army up to that point. Perhaps it would be proper for someone to investigate just where the PBI got their ideas from? (And get them - I've seen a website with far right leaning with a forum group "for squaddies") And work out how to improve their briefings on rules of engagement.

Penny

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Jun 10 - 08:29 AM

"1. According to the OIRA they were not present" "2. According to the PIRA they were not present"
According to previous enquiries the shooting down of thirteen unarmed Irish demonstrators demonstrators was fully justified.
The presence of armed OIRA or PIRA members is based entirely on undisclosed evidence by anonymous members of the force that carried out the killings.
Oh dear, what's a girl to believe!!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: GUEST,Neil D
Date: 19 Jun 10 - 10:15 AM

From: Arthur_itus
Date: 17 Jun 10 - 05:52 AM

Well of course it's true Jim. David Cameron is not a liar like Obama!





Just what in the bloody hell does Obama have to do with any of this?

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Jun 10 - 11:26 AM

Jim, "The presence of armed OIRA or PIRA members is based entirely on undisclosed evidence by anonymous members of the force that carried out the killings"

If you are referring to Saville, that is not true.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Teribus
Date: 19 Jun 10 - 11:46 AM

The presence of armed OIRA or PIRA members is based entirely on undisclosed evidence by anonymous members of the force that carried out the killings.
Oh dear, what's a girl to believe!!!

Anything a girl damn well likes Jim, but most important of all, irrespective of source, Saville believed it after balancing the evidence available to the extent that he made a specific comment on it.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 19 Jun 10 - 02:43 PM

"Saville believed it after balancing the evidence available to the extent that he made a specific comment on it."
Then why are you bringing in irrelevant speculation as to whether the "
"OIRA were trying to provoke an incident that the PIRA would be blamed for?" which was not considered in the report (other than to divert the thread from the fact that the British Army shot down thirteen unarmed (British) demonstrators.
Those responsible for the massacre have lied and covered up for well over thirt years - isn't it rather too late to try and get them off the hook by shifting the blame after they've actually got round to 'fessing up"?
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 19 Jun 10 - 03:12 PM

Not entirely speculative Jim.
The report has evidence that PIRA men tried to stop OIRA men from carrying out their operations.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 19 Jun 10 - 03:47 PM

Right then, the inquiry has been carried out at great cost, the conclusions have been drawn, and the results published.
It concludes that it was wrong to kill unarmed civilians, that's not news, we knew that the day it happened.
The PM has apologised, what more is required?
IF another endless post mortem is to be carried out in these threads it will NEVER come to a reconciliation of the opposing sides.
HOWEVER, if you want to rake it over, lets include, Brighton, Guildford, Warrington, Omagh, Warrenpoint, Nairac, Mountbatten, Wilson, etc etc etc, ad nauseam.
Again it will prove nothing, just further entrench viewpoints already held, and endlessly restated.
Why don't you all try living in the here and now, and put the past behind you?

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Jun 10 - 05:05 PM

We still have not any details about how the cover-up by the government and the army was organised, and who was involved in ordering it, in authorising it, in organising it or in colluding in it. If we are to be protected against that being done in future it is important that that information is revealed.

What is needed is a change of the culture so that covering up for the crimes of colleagues, in the army, the police, or indeed in any organisation, is not seen as loyalty, but as treachery. We are an awfully long way from that, as has been demonstrated time and time again up to the present time.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 19 Jun 10 - 06:23 PM

There are also no details of how and who organised many of the events I listed above. Why is it important that one side gets full information, but the other refuses to give evidence at the Saville enquiry.
Come on lets draw a line under all this.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Jun 10 - 06:48 PM

Because "one side", ie the government - is running the country.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Amos
Date: 19 Jun 10 - 08:47 PM

footnote (some light relief), November 1983:

U2 is in a studio in Dublin, playing its new song, ÒSunday Bloody Sunday,Ó to the record company. The melody is a good one but the lyric is, in hindsight, an inarticulate speech of the heart. ItÕs a small song that tries but fails to contrast big ideas ... atonement with forgiveness ... ÒBloody SundayÓ with Easter Sunday. The song will be sung wherever there are rock fans with mullets and rage, from Sarajevo to Tehran. Over time, the lyric will change and grow. But here, with the Cockneyed record company boss at the songÕs birth, the maternity ward goes quiet when the man announces that the baby is Òa hitÓ... with one caveat: ÒDrop the Ôbloody.Õ ÔBloodyÕ wonÕt bloody work on the radio.Ó

(Bono, writing in the New York Times)

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 02:20 AM

"Right then, the inquiry has been carried out at great cost, the conclusions have been drawn, and the results published.
It concludes that it was wrong to kill unarmed civilians, that's not news, we knew that the day it happened.
The PM has apologised, what more is required?
IF another endless post mortem is to be carried out in these threads it will NEVER come to a reconciliation of the opposing sides.
HOWEVER, if you want to rake it over, lets include, Brighton, Guildford, Warrington, Omagh, Warrenpoint, Nairac, Mountbatten, Wilson, etc etc etc, ad nauseam.
Again it will prove nothing, just further entrench viewpoints already held, and endlessly restated.
Why don't you all try living in the here and now, and put the past behind you?"

+1 for the most sensible contribution on this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 02:46 AM

McGrath, those responsible for all those other indiscriminate killings of innocent civillians are also in government now.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 03:52 AM

"The PM has apologised, what more is required?..."
There's still the small matter of six counties to be sorted yet - unless we want a replay.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 04:56 AM

We could ask the people who live in those counties.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 05:05 AM

"There's still the small matter of six counties to be sorted yet - unless we want a replay."

True enough Jim, but unless people (especially the people of Ireland) get their heads out of the past and into the now and the future, that matter never will be 'sorted out'.

Constantly replaying past wrongs won't 'sort out' anything - all it does is reinforce peoples' inbred hatreds. Finger-pointing and blame-laying is not positive and will not get anything 'sorted out'.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 05:52 AM

"We could ask the people who live in those counties."
That would be a first.
"......get their heads out of the past "
While six counties remain under British rule the past will continue to be the present into the forseeable future.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 06:09 AM

I thought they had been asked.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 06:15 AM

The creation of 'Northern Ireland' (sic) based on a gerrymandered border, in order to leave a Protestant majority in power, was a political act which led to 80 years of often bloody conflict.
Asking that gerrymandered (then two-thirds, much less now) majority whether they would like the situation to remain the same would achieve - what exactly?
They could, of course, ask the population of whole of the Province of Ulster (the only valid historical entity) whether they wished to be Irish or British - but I can't see them any more prepared to do that than they were in 1922 - can you?
Incidentally, in answer to the question "what now", the press this morning is full of suggestions, including putting those responsible on trial, (as you would any murderers and perjurers, no matter how long ago their crimes were committed) and even involving the Hague War Crimes Court - take your pick.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 06:59 AM

It is no good trying to change history.
Hardly anyone alive has known anything but the current status.
Why can't the people who live, work, and bring up their families there, now, have what they want now?

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Teribus
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 08:25 AM

In which case hold a referendum in Northern Ireland tomorrow and then abide by the decision made by the people the result will affect and put this to bed for good. At any point in the future should the inhabitants of Northern Ireland wish to revisit the issue they can hold another referendum.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 10:35 AM

"......get their heads out of the past "
"While six counties remain under British rule the past will continue to be the present into the forseeable future."

And there, my case rests, M'Lud.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 11:08 AM

Why not abide by the result of the 1922 referendum?
Mind you, I'm not too sure that the Irish Republic would welcome this.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Smedley
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 12:49 PM

Irish culture, much like Israeli culture, depends on a narrative of past persecutions for a substantial part of its identity.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 03:05 PM

"And there, my case rests, M'Lud."
Don't know where you are B. but I wonder how long and how hard the British would fight if say, Devon, Cornwall, Dorset, Hampshire, Sussex and Kent were annexed by France and became French - perhaps you'd care to speculate?
The 'troubles' will continue in Ireland until Britain takes a giant step into the 21st century and acknowleges that the days of Empire are all but gone (despite reports to the contrary from The Last Night At The Proms'.
Bloody Sunday, the violent suppression of the Civil Rights Marches, The Birmingham Six and Guildford Four fit-ups, internment without trial, the bombing campaigns, the hunger strikes...... are not 'the Irish problem' they are often claimed to be, but merely the symptoms - and pompous arrogance such as "people (especially the people of Ireland) get their heads out of the past" only confirms, to my mind at least, how just far in the past British thought is lodged.
"In which case hold a referendum in Northern Ireland tomorrow"
Are you referring to Northern Ireland proper or the gerrymandered one created politically in 1922 to produce a Protestant state?
"Why not abide by the result of the 1922 referendum?"
Isn't this what Backwoodsman describes as "Living in the past" - the partition of Ireland clearly has not worked and is never likely to.
Northern (sic) Ireland was a political creation which never worked, and never will - that is the lesson of Bloody Sunday. Leave things as they are at present and you are passing the problem on to the next generation.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 03:24 PM

Not arguing with any of that, Jim. Just saying that nothing will be solved by finger-pointing, blame-laying and shit-flinging over things that happened long ago, and which can't be 'un-happened'.

Without all sides stepping back from past wrongs, facing up to the uncontestable fact that there's blame on all parties, and vowing to put the future before all else, there's no solution.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 03:27 PM

I believe the referendum resulted in a massive vote in favour of seccession. (Only 4 counties voted to stay British)
That's what I mean when I say, abide by it.
Had it not been for Carson, and the refusal of British troops at the Curragh to partake in controlling the threats of armed insurrection, by him and his followers, then, as I understand it, the whole of Ireland would have become an independant republic.
I'm not 100% sure of my facts on that, so I'm willing to stand corrected if I misunderstand the situation in 1922.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 03:40 PM

There you go with your ancient history again.
Try to catch up with the present.
It is what people want now that counts.
If, years ago, any 6 counties such as Jim mentioned ended up being governed by France, and if the people of those counties wanted to stay French, only a fascist would put a gun to their head and force them back to British rule.
Scotland only has to vote for independence and it will get it.
Likewise Wales, Cornwall or any other part of Britain.
Never mind what happened before any of us alive now were born.
Let people choose their future if they cannot change the past.

And, believe me, no one will be more overjoyed than the people of mainland Britain if you ever manage to persuade 51% to vote to leave!
As soon as you like.
Please.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 05:14 PM

".....shit-flinging over things that happened long ago,"
How long is long ago - 38 years ago is long ago for some people - why hold a Bloody Sunday enquiry - why not just gloss it over as Widgery tried to do?
More recently, the Birmingham Six, Guildford Four - are these too long ago - why were they released, exonertated and held up as classic cases of injustice - why bother - all in the past?
"and if the people of those counties wanted to stay French,"
What utter bollocks - apart from the fact the the people of Ireland as a whole have never at any time been asked if they wanted the return of the six counties forcibly retained under the threat of invasion as part of Britain - in fact, they had a civil war over it.
Empire is a thing of the past.
What on earth do you people think 'The Troubles' were about, Bloody Sunday, The Civil Rights Movement, The Hunger Strikers....?
I asked before; how long would British people go on fighting if Nazi Germany had won the last war - or would they have cosied down into the Third Reich and put Britain as an independant nation down to 'a thing of the past'?
THe situation as it stands TODAY is that six Irish counties remain under British rule long after the British Empire has become a thing of the past - this has led to bloodshed and protest it is this that has to be dealt with - if it is not, it will remain a festering sore within these islands.
The circle that has to be squared is that the people of those six Irish counties are just that - Irish (I'm not aware that any of us have the right to opt out of our nationality).
Not sure of the point you are point you are making about Carson, Keith; he led a military mutiny against Home Rule in 1914 - if he had led it in favour, he would have been executed, as were the Easter Week rebels.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 05:52 PM

Keith, you have taken nothing from Saville if you still think Boody Sunday was down to three of four rogue squaddies. Have a look at what Saville says about General Ford (re deploying the Paras to Derry) and the odious Colonel Wilford (re disobeying orders).

Jim has a fair point (too subtle for Teribus) about partition. The border was indeed drawn carefully (and in fact logically, if there had to be a border at all) to ensure that as far as was reasonable Northern Ireland would be comprised ony of people who wanted to be in it. That simple fact undermines the credibility of any referendum carried out only in Northern Ireland.

The downside of Jim's position is that through most of the history of partition, any referendum undertaken across the whole island of Ireland would also, in all probability, have supported partition.

Various factors point to this conclusion. First partition was supported by Ireland's elected parliament when Collins took the deal back to the Dail. (Had it not been for Dev's refusal to accept parliament's will (a refusal which tore the state apart) partition would have ended generations ago, exactly as Collins had intended.) Second the anecdotal evidence that anyone can glean by travelling around the republic (and far more so "beyond the pale") is that indifference and apathy towards the whole question of Northern Ireland is huge. Third, there is the evidence of the republic's referendum in 1998 about whether to abandoning the constitutional claim on the territory of Northern Ireland. It produced a majority of 94 per cent in favour of amending the constitution, unpalatable as Jim must find that fact.

To answer jim's question about referenda in Northern Ireland, there was one in 1993 specifically on the status of Northern Ireland. The vote in favour of staying in the UK was 57 per cent, with less than one per cent against. (It was obviously boycotted by nationalists.) In 1998 there was a referendum on the Good Friday Agreement, contemporaneously with the one in the republic. The vote in favour of the agreement (which of course recognised NI's status as part of the UK) was 71 per cent.

At the time of the 1998 referenda, Ireland had one of the fastest-growing economies in the developed world. More recently its fortunes have been dramatically reversed, making it even more unlikely than it has always been hitherto, that Dublin would be even slightly interested in taking on the challenge of several hundred thousand belligerent prods. Likewise unification must look at least a little less attractive than previously to the Northern Ireland population. Jim has quite a lot of canvassing to do before he can claim any kind of democractic support for a united Ireland.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 06:28 PM

Accepting and tolerating Partition as something that has to be lived with for now is not the same as "supporting" it. (And as for that "anecdotal evidence that anyone can glean", it's not in line with what I've ever gleaned. But that's the trouble with anecdotal evidence. It all depends on whom you happen to pass your time with.
..............................

But focusing all our attention on Ireland alone here is to my mind to miss the point. The signs from recent episodes of violence towards innocent people by agents of the state - remember the way the butchery of Jean de Menezes was dealt with - are that the attitudes that underpinned and orchestrated the cover-up, with all its lies, are still very much present and active.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 20 Jun 10 - 10:43 PM

McG, I don't know how much time you've spent in Ireland, north or south, but you would find that for many Northern Ireland catholics, one of the most distressing aspects of the reunification campaign has been the lack of support it has had from their fellow catholics in the republic. i hesitate to take his name in vain, but I think you might find that our friend Ard Mhacha of this parish is one who holds this view.

I think it's a bit harsh to suggest that state attitudes have not changed a lot.The Widgery report was produced at a time when there was a strong belief within the judiciary that the state and its agents could do no wrong. In all probability Widgery believed the co-ordinated lies and deceptions put forward by the Paras and senior officers - in muh the way that Lord Denning was unable to uphold the Birmingham Six appeal on the grounds that to do so would mean police officer had lied - which any right-minded peron would regard as unthinkable.

Catastrophic failings in the judicial system such a the Birmingham ix, Judith Ward, the Guildford Four and several cases unconnected with Ireland, stripped lawyers and judges of their godlike status in much the same way as child abuse did for the catholic hierarchies in several countries. In both cases overwheening arrogance has had to be tempered with a little bit of humility. And in the case of the judiciary, establishing a Criminal Cases Review Commission has been an important step in the right direction.

Bloody Sunday was an exception even among exceptions and it is right and inevitable that the Saville report and debate about the report (including a parliamentay debate in autumn ) should treat it as such.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jun 10 - 01:51 AM

Jim, how long is long ago?
38 years is long, but the people of NI wanted the enquiry.
They were belatedly given it, at great expence.
Pity IRAs decided not to provide evidence.
The OIRA witness said he did so because local people wanted it.
Fair play to him.
Shame on the IRAs.

I can not agree that the aspirations of the people now should be denied them bacause of disputed events of 90 years ago.
Your message would be , accept Dublin rule or we kill you?

Back to the present, the report finds that the overwhelming majority of the soldiers did not disobey orders and shoot protesters.
Decisions were taken that hind sight shows to be mistaken, but no one was ordered or allowed to shoot protesters, and it was in clear breach of the rules of engagement.
I have acknowledged that the effect of the cover up by army, government and IRAs was disasterous.

Subject: RE: BS: Bloody Sunday Report - AT LAST
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jun 10 - 05:28 AM

...and Jim, I said nothing about Carson.
Ancient history.