Perhaps instead of shouting GSS you should do some research yourself.

The Conclusions of Lord Saville's Report into the events of "Bloody Sunday" are as follows:

Chapter 5: The overall assessment

5.1 The early firing in William Street resulted in two wounded casualties, neither of whom was doing anything that justified either of them being shot. It is possible that the soldiers concerned mistakenly believed that they had identified someone posing a threat of causing death or serious injury. Equally, each of those soldiers may have fired, not believing that his target was posing a threat of causing death or serious injury, but only suspecting that this might have been the case.

5.2 The soldiers of Support Company who went into the Bogside did so as the result of an order by Colonel Wilford, which should not have been given and which was contrary to the orders that he had received from Brigadier MacLellan.

5.3 With the exception of Private T and with the probable exception of shots Sergeant O said that he fired at someone on a balcony of Block 3 of the Rossville Flats and which, (despite his assertion to the contrary) did not hit anyone, none of the firing by the soldiers of Support Company was aimed at people posing a threat of causing death or serious injury.

5.4 We have concluded that the explanation for such firing by Support Company soldiers after they had gone into the Bogside was in most cases probably the mistaken belief among them that republican paramilitaries were responding in force to their arrival in the Bogside. This belief was initiated by the first shots fired by Lieutenant N and reinforced by the further shots that followed soon after. In this belief soldiers reacted by losing their self-control and firing themselves, forgetting or ignoring their instructions and training and failing to satisfy themselves that they had identified targets posing a threat of causing death or serious injury. In the case of those soldiers who fired in either the knowledge or belief that no-one in the areas into which they fired was posing a threat of causing death or serious injury, or not caring whether or not anyone there was posing such a threat, it is at least possible that they did so in the indefensible belief that all the civilians they fired at were probably either members of the Provisional or Official IRA or were supporters of one or other of these paramilitary organisations; and so deserved to be shot notwithstanding that they were not armed or posing any threat of causing death or serious injury. Our overall conclusion is that there was a serious and widespread loss of fire discipline among the soldiers of Support Company.

5.5 The firing by soldiers of 1 PARA on Bloody Sunday caused the deaths of 13 people and injury to a similar number, none of whom was posing a threat of causing death or serious injury. What happened on Bloody Sunday strengthened the Provisional IRA, increased nationalist resentment and hostility towards the Army and exacerbated the violent conflict of the years that followed. Bloody Sunday was a tragedy for the bereaved and the wounded, and a catastrophe for the people of Northern Ireland.

Now if the Saville Inquiry into the events is to be believed as far as the actions of the security forces are concerned (They after all were the only people required by the Inquiry to give a full account of their actions before, during and after the event) Please tell me GSS where in his conclusions does Lord Saville state any of the following:

1: That orders to fire on the protesters came directly from the Prime Minister.

2: That there was anything at all to substantiate any claim that the soldiers of 1 Parachute Regiment, prior to their entry into the Bogside, were given deliberate orders beforehand to kill anyone.

As stated previously - on the basis of evidence - you have great difficulty in showing that Prime Minister Sir Edward Heath was culpable of any crime in relation to the events of Bloody Sunday.

As for your rather naïve assertion that he must be guilty because he was "in charge" - "in charge" of what? who? On the day the troops deployed in the Bogside were under a very clearly defined operational chain of command - On the day the man actually "in charge", actually in operational command was Brigadier Pat MacLellan, who was cleared of any wrongdoing as he was under the impression that Lieutenant Colonel Derek Wilford (Commander of 1 Para and directly responsible for arresting rioters and returning to base) would obey the orders he had been given. Lieutenant Colonel Derek Wilford, however, directly disobeyed the orders given to him via the chain of command and committed 1 Para Support Company without informing his superiors.

Were the OIRA and PIRA present and armed in the Bogside that day? Yes they most certainly were.

Did the soldiers come under fire from an OIRA sniper? Yes they did, see 5.3 above. This fire was claimed by the OIRA to have been retaliatory in reprisal after Lieutenant N fired warning shoots but this claim of retaliatory fire was rejected by the Inquiry as it required forethought and planning to place snipers.