BS: British Army at it again

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Oct 12 - 09:42 AM

He (Malcolm Sutton) is aware of a lot of the names Keith

Not true Martin.
He has been updating his data continuously, most recently last month.
All updates listed here.http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/sutton/updates.html

Dead Horse merely points out that only those Security Forces actually killed by terrorist action are counted, not all those who died on active service by accident etc.

The Sutton figures are definitive of all those who died by violence.
The chart is accurate and shows all violent deaths and the perpetrators.
If it conflicts with your views, it is time to review them.

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: Dead Horse
Date: 16 Oct 12 - 06:19 AM

We certainly were pretty stupid 40 odd years ago.
But as to those Royal Marines who have been arrested I am not so sure.
I (and all of you) do not know the circumstances of their 'crime' and it is wrong to speculate. I guess we know that it is wrong to do so, so we have trawled up old arguements instead.
I suspect that all that will come out of the trial will be the reinforcement of the old wise words known to soldiers the world over - If you are going to do something naughty, make sure there are no witnesses. That goes for iphones too.

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Oct 12 - 03:17 AM

We had moved on and were only discussing the veracity of the various historians' work.
I think we are done.

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: Raedwulf
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 05:57 PM

I'm fully aware of that, Keith. I called him out on it too. Did you notice? But whilst he, for whatever (bad) reason saw fit to do so, about 70% of the responses have been from you.

Give it a rest? Please? It IS history now. We can't change it. But instead of arguing about the hatred, maybe we can try to be slightly less fucking idiotic than we were 40-odd years ago? I think DH might agree with that one...

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: Allan Conn
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 05:27 PM

I imagine young men in the British army put under intense pressure are the same as young men in other armies. Sometimes a few may overstep the mark and act in a criminal way. Would they be better or worse than anyone else just because they are British? However the fact that this crime was discovered by the British themselves, and action is being taken by the British themselves, actually says something positive about how we are in the 2010s!

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 05:01 PM

Raedwulf, Martin reopened this thread to attack the army.(Marines actually)
He was quite open about that, and fine.
He then tried to rewrite the history of the Troubles, denouncing the army for killing civilians, despite what his people did.
That is why I put the chart up.

Martin, if he was aware of more names he would update his work.
The Republican Rolls of Honour would also recognise the sacrifices.
You are being dishonest about this Martin.
His figures are accepted as definitive.
If you challenge that, show us just a scrap of evidence.

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: Raedwulf
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 04:25 PM

Keith - give it a rest. My initial impression of Martin wasn't great but, you know what? He's just like me - he'd like the world to be a better place. Charts don't help that.

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: GUEST,Martin
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 11:37 AM

He is aware of a lot of the names Keith. It is not as simple as that. Some families record their dead on family headstones, others thought their loved ones went south "on the run" until told at a later date, it is very complex Keith.

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 10:18 AM

I could list a lot of names not on any of them

Your friend Sutton would be so grateful if you would supply that list at your next meeting.
He is clearly very serious and earnest about the thoroughness and completeness of his work.
I doubt that "he will confirm that both sides suffered losses that were not recorded." because he would have mentioned that along with the other discrepancies and exclusions he meticulously listed.

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 10:02 AM

"Keith seems to love these charts"

I do like to have objective evidence.
I would not expect anyone to believe something just because I say it is so.

If my views are contradicted by the facts, I change my view.
You have provided no contradictory facts or evidence, or anything to support your claims.
You even ask us to dismiss the accepted historical facts.

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: GUEST,Martin
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 09:42 AM

Interesting story on the Belfast Telegraph site.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northern-ireland/plans-for-more-secrecy-slammed-16224281.html

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: GUEST,Martin
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 09:32 AM

Sorry Dead Horse about that. Funny enough, I had a close friend called "the Dark" from Belfast. The bus tour is well spirited, I agree. Also a good site to see is the republican museum in Conway Mill. Johnny Haddock and Paddy Hickey are the two guides, it holds a wealth of history, including items relating to the British army. They will also show you the crafts made by republican prisoners held in the Isle of Wight, Full Sutton and Whitemoor Prison.The names are beside each piece (look for the matchcraft from the Isle of Wight and two wood carvings from Whitemoor) they are the best :-)

Soldiers who served over there often return on a nostalgia tour with their family, I have never heard of any unsavory incidents, sorry about that ass in the bar, clearly fought his war from his armchair.

Keith seems to love these charts, if you are happy with them, well that is good enough, but I could list a lot of names not on any of them. Keith, do treat yourself to one of the tours sometime, bus, walking tour and museum at the mill, it is a great short mid week break and you will honesty enjoy it.

Sadly there is no loyalist museum, they started one but it failed, think former UVF adjutant David Ervine was behind it, sadly he died suddenly. David was a serious loss to the process.


My apologies for my earlier comments before I was enlightened by your excellent accounts.

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 06:16 AM

"Malcolm Sutton
(updated October 2002)


This index lists 3,529 deaths which are directly linked to the conflict in Northern Ireland, and which occurred between July 1969 and 31st December 2001. The discrepancy between this figure and the official British figure arises because of differences of interpretation in a small number of cases, and because Northern Ireland Office figures relate to deaths occurring in Northern Ireland only. The following types of death have been excluded from this index because they are not regarded as directly due to the conflict, or I have considered it inappropriate to include them.

Accidental shootings of any individual, whether by a member of a military organisation or by a civilian. That is, the accidental discharge of a firearm with no intention to harm the victim.

Persons killed during rows or fights between individual people, whether they are members of a military organisation or not.

Persons killed during casual street violence, which is clearly not politically motivated.

Persons dying of natural causes, for example heart attacks, brought on by an incident during the conflict.

Suicides.

Road accidents, whether they involve military vehicles, or are driven by persons involved in a military operation, unless there is evidence of a deliberate intention to run down the victim.

Helicopter crashes and accidents.

Of the total deaths, 3,271 have occurred in Northern Ireland, 115 in the Irish Republic, 125 in Britain, and 18 elsewhere in Europe. Republican groups have been responsible for 2,061 of the deaths, Loyalist groups for 1,016, British Forces for 363, and the Irish Republic's Forces for 5. For the remaining 84 deaths, it has not been possible or appropriate to identify the killing group. In the analysis that follows, the deaths caused by the perpetrators are further broken down by broad category of victim. "

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 06:13 AM

I need some reason to dismiss the work of Sutton.
Read his own words about his work here.
http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/sutton/book/

The correlation between his work and others is substantial.
He explains which cases he did not count and why.

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: Dead Horse
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 06:00 AM

Disjointed thoughts on the subject:
The chart is NOT accurate. At best it relies on available information.
There is still a lot of information that is not available.
I am sure Malcolm Sutton will admit to that.
All sides tried to cover up so many details and will not admit those details to the general public.
I have seen transcripts and spoken directly with soldiers who were at some of the disputed events, particularly Bloody Sunday.
I am quite satisfied that shots were fired at the troops before the paras engaged. McGuiness has admitted (after first denying) that he was there.
My cynical side leads me to believe that the republican terrorist of today is merely putting on a face of being against the ongoing drug problem among their own youth, while unofficially backing their own suppliers to the trade. But then I am biased by my more formative years in the province. I admit to that.
The whole trouble lies with folks not letting go of history - in many cases they delight in perpetuating that history and to instilling it in their kids.
Some of my colleagues have returned to the province and have come back amazed at the difference now. One of them told me that he actually had a pint in a well known drinking haunt on the Lower Falls and was asked by a local if he had been there before. "Yes" he replied, "but last time I came in here we kicked the doors in to gain entrance" The barmen overheard and gave my mate a pint 'on the house' and the locals wished him well. All except one who said something in gaelic and was promptly told to shut up by the others. What an example of modern progressive thinking, eh?
The open-top bus tours are always a source of amusement too, especially when the 'auld boyo' acting as tour guide realises who he has got as passengers. The commentary gets a bit more interesting then. lol
"And if ye look to yor roit, you will see where dem bold bastards blew up da post office, causing widespread hardship among all de publicans and bingo halls for moils around on dat Froiday night."
By the way Martin, I am not Dark Horse, I am Dead Horse, named after the sea shanty and not anything sinister. I often forget how my chosen name may tend to give the wrong idea about me. :-)

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 05:58 AM

Historians like Sutton did not just work from official sources.
The figures are good to within a hundred or so.
The chart is accurate.
You have nothing to support any of your claims, so while keeping an open mind, there is no reason for anyone to believe any of your claims.

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: GUEST,Martin
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 05:31 AM

I will leave it to others to decide. I stand by my facts Keith. Both Dark Horse and myself have stated BOTH sides in the WAR did not record ALL their losses. I do not dismiss the work of historians, they worked with the material made available to them from official sources.

Was I there, yes I was and I hope another generation doesn't have to go through it. It is unlikely they ever will. Active republican groups are small in number and do not have the support within the community and are infiltrated by agent provocateurs. There are three active groups now, they are ripping eachother apart in and outside of the prisons and will never unite as a creditable threat.

The basic principles of republicanism was sold at a cost. Many republicans of renown and standing just walked away from it, including myself. Adams played a very shrewd game, I repeat, there is a senior British agent within the leadership of Sinn Fein.

As a party, they were rewarded by the British government in a number of ways, that included ditching the 1996 plan, the St, Andrews agreement with of a threat of join sovereignty by Tony Blair who arrived at the meeting that Sunday afternoon in a foul mood, spoke for 20 minutes and left, requesting an solution by the next day.

The inclusion of ranked Provisionals in a financial pension package that had just been agreed for the RUC, Prison Service and Ulster Defence Regiment did take place, it was the only way Sinn Fein could sell it to certain individuals. I repeat, their pension package came by a more unorthodox route.

Keith, your choice to believe me matters little to me, there will come a time in your life you will hear the truth about these matters from other sources and won't be as quick to dismiss them.

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 05:01 AM

I claim no knowledge of the Troubles.
I was not there.
You need to explain what your estimate of the losses is based on.
How much research have you done?
Is it peer reviewed?
Why should we dismiss all the work of all the professional historians of the period, and listen to you?

The chart is accurate.
The truth hurts Martin.
Right?

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: GUEST,Martin
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 04:53 AM

Well I think Dark Horse and myself are in a much better position to reflect on this subject than you Keith. Malcolm Sutton is a gentleman, I met him several times, he is very approachable Keith. Email him and talk to him on the subject of figures, he will confirm that both sides suffered losses that were not recorded.

Clearly you disagree with what Dark Horse and myself state as fact.
It doesn't really matter to me. Maybe best you just go and wind Mr. Carroll up today.

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 04:40 AM

Source for the chart.
For almost twenty years Malcolm Sutton has been recording the details of every death arising from the present conflict in Ireland. He has collected newspaper cuttings, observed funerals, checked coroners' court records, visited cemetries and studied books and pamphlets. He has painstakingly verified the personal details of victims, the organisations responsible for the killings and the circumstances in which the deaths occurred.

Malcolm Sutton has compiled this index as a memorial for the dead and as a tribute to the families and friends of the 3,529 people killed between July 1969 and 31 December 2001.

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 04:33 AM

Martin, you put up unbelievable stories with nothing to back them up and expect to be believed.
I put up thoroughly researched figures from respected and authoritative historians of the Troubles, and you rubbish them.
Again with no justification.
If you look at the Cain website you will see various data sets with figures that vary only slightly depending on the criteria used.
If you have better data, put it up.
(No chance!)

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: GUEST,Martin
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 04:15 AM

Five British soldiers have now been charged with murder as I reported last week. Seems one of them recorded the murder on video, the police have are now in receipt of this recording.

Full story here.
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/five-royal-marines-charged-murder-065822096.html

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: GUEST,Martin
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 03:53 AM

It was a war Dark Horse, no one involved in it would call it otherwise.

The province is a much different place today. Young people are more concerned about lifestyle than politics.

Sadly there is a serious drug problem over there,it is worse in nationalist/republican areas. They no longer take people to the bog hole or dispatch them to England. Everyone knows the drug dealers, the police there have the lowest apprehension rate in the UK against drug dealers and distributors. Many believe the police ignore the drugs problem as payback to a people that never came forward with information on people who murdered their officers.

I agree with Dark Horse about that bloody doctored chart Keith keeps putting up here. You and I know the casualty figures on BOTH SIDES were much higher.

There are three or four areas in Milltown Cemetery that families visit and will acquire a memorial stone at some point. There were many late night burials in Milltown that went unrecorded, not that Keith will believe that either.

Dark Horse,you have my admiration for the contribution you brought to this thread. I can't run with you regarding shots being fired in Derry in 1972,if so, it would have been the OIRA and they never admitted it. Marty McGuinness was an OC at the time, but not for that area of Derry. He claims a little more credit than he should and he knows that.

The reason being, him and Adams loved the good cop bad cop approach during meetings with the British and Ulster Unionists. It kept the questions and focus away from the Commander in Chief who always claimed he was never in the army. McGunniess was always disliked in Derry, as for Adams, I just hope the full truth will come out and no one tries a cover up.

Sinn Fein are currently cleaning up their party, you will see more and more ex prisoners and army members in ministerial roles. They are looking "clean skins" with no luggage for the prime jobs.

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 02:51 AM

I agree.
Nothing would have happened had not the Civil Rights movement brought it to our attention.

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: GUEST,Allan Conn
Date: 15 Oct 12 - 02:41 AM

"The kind of arrangement that now exists could have been had decades ago."

Surely all sides hold some responsibility for that and not just the extremists on the Nationalist side? As far as the British govt goes then in the past they were content to let sleeping dogs lie. That is as long as Northern Ireland was quiet they turned a blind eye to the injusticies imposed by the devolved govt there against the minority population. It seems to me that it wasn't until unrest started brewing again in the Civil Rights period that the British govt started taking notice of said injustices - and I imagine that until then most British people didn't even really know about them! I think you are probably right in that had the Nationalist cause remained peaceful then they would have been viewed as the innocents on the defensive and we would maybe have got to where we are now a whole lot quicker. However surely it is also true that had the British govt imposed themselves on the Loyalist devolved govt a whole lot sooner then the extemists among the Republicans would have been fewer and they would have had less water in which to swim. Just my thoughts!

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: Dead Horse
Date: 14 Oct 12 - 01:37 PM

We at http://www.nivets.org.uk have a more updated site. We are constantly adding to the figure of 1400 Security Forces personnel killed on active duty.
Not all were as the result of terrorist action, but are still marked on the national Roll Of Honour maintained by the RBL. One of the last names added was of a young army cadet who tripped an explosive device planted in his school cadet hut. He arrived early and was killed with two of his chums being injured. What possible justification can there be for deliberately targetting cadets as young as 13 yrs old?

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Oct 12 - 09:16 AM

The Op. Banner Roll of Honour site "1104 Army, Police and Prison Officers."
http://www.operationbanner.com/roh/

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Oct 12 - 09:05 AM

I agree with that entirely DH.
It is sometimes said that keeping NI is an imperial thing, a last gasp of empire.
Like the Falklanders, the majority demand to remain British, but otherwise we would gladly let them go.
The british government of the day never wanted partition in the first place, but the army refused to fight them.

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: Dead Horse
Date: 14 Oct 12 - 08:47 AM

As for the comment "The Brit government and the Brit people do not and never wanted NI."
I hate that remark. It is an insult to the many loyal and decent members of the British Province of Northern Ireland, many of whom gave their lives to keep it so.
The same remark can be said of The Falklands, but we would be damned if we let a bunch of idiots walk in and take over British territory against the wishes of the majority of British citizens.

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: Dead Horse
Date: 14 Oct 12 - 08:37 AM

I wasnt going to post to this thread again as there seemed no point. It has all been said and it really makes no difference.
But I cant sit idly by and see the continued rubbish that is assumed to be the truth - by both sides.
Where did the compiler of those statistical charts get their information?
I can state for a fact that over 1400 security forces personnel died on active service as a result of being deployed on Op Banner between 1969 - 2007. The MOD will only admit to about half that figure.
The other figures I can only guess at - as I believe the compiler also did. Statistics and damn lies seem to be the same thing when it comes to casualty figures.
The mention of Bloody Sunday always figures prominently in any discussion about 'The Troubles' but little regard is ever paid to the events which led up to this tragic event.
I wont bore you with the details, but can assure you all that there was no Black or White cut & dried answer to the whole sorry mess.
Shote WERE fired at security forces before the so called massacre of the 'innocents'.
Martin McGuinness WAS there and he WAS armed.
The people on that march WERE acting in an illegal and provocative manner.
The paras DID react in a fashion that evoked shame and revulsion from
the rest of the world.
It was the BEST result the Provisional IRA could have ever in their wildest dreams have hoped for. Their recruiting figures soared as a result.
The first OFFICIAL death reported by security forces in NI was Gunner Curtis, who was killed during a riot. Five other soldiers were wounded by the same burst of machine gun fire. 6-Feb-1971.
Those rioters were NOT children. They were an organised and very clever means to bring British forces out into a situation where a gunman could exploit the situation to his advantage. The troops lined up to face the rioters.
In the words of one who was there (not me)

"There were two troops deployed in the street both in anti riot formation. The Battery Commander was B**** M**** with D*** H***** as the Tp Comd of Curtis' troop. My troop was also deployed alongside ****'s and we were ordered to advance towards the junction and the rioting crowd. Our objective being to prevent them from reaching Tiger bay. It was our very first deployment in Belfast having been based in Armagh for the first few weeks of the tour.
The mob was angry and various missiles were hurled towards us including a nail bomb. We kept formation as ordered; the crowd suddenly opened and the automatic weapon sprayed the street. It was miraculous that so few were hit. We took cover but were unable to return fire because the crowd drew together again and the gunman disappeared. The injured lay on the road and we gave first aid as best we could until backup arrived."

I will stress that the British soldiers were mostly armed with riot shields and batons, cover being provided by two or three men with rifles/baton guns. (rubber bullets for the firing of)
The gunman, a scrote named Reid, was later shot & killed in, ironically, Curtis Street.
The events of Bloody Sunday came one year later. A year which saw increasing use of 'come-on' tactics employed by the provos.
This is rarely taken into account.
As a rough comparison there have been about 400 British Forces personnel killed on active duty in Afghanistan in the last ten years.
There were over 1400 British Forces personnel killed on active service during Op Banner 1969 - 2007.
You work the math and then tell me it wasnt a war.

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Oct 12 - 03:07 AM

Why do I not believe your story of 96?
The Brit government and the Brit people do not and never wanted NI.
That government did not need yet another bomb to make them continue to do all they could to end the war.
But, your people needed to be given a myth about a military victory because what you were actually fighting for was not achievable.
After 30 years of death and destruction, still no-one either side of the border was interested.

All your terror bombs did was cause revulsion, especially in America where they were equated with the Islamic terror bombs used against them.

Your only legacy to the land you claimed to fight for was decades of death, destruction, misery and impoverishment.
And all for nothing.

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Oct 12 - 07:01 PM

If there were no troubles, the Army would not even have been there Martin.
This neat chart shows who took which lives.
Do look.
And it was all for nothing Martin.
It just put the clock back 30 years.
http://www.wesleyjohnston.com/users/ireland/past/troubles/troubles_stats.html#statusperpetrator

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: Raedwulf
Date: 13 Oct 12 - 04:59 PM

Keith, I don't know why you start threads like this.

May I just point out AGAIN that this thread died 5 years ago (shortly after it started). Maybe Keith is a complete idiot. Maybe Martin is a complete idiot. Maybe we ALL are complete idiots. ;-)

I'm pretty bloody sure that we'd all like the world to be a better place. As far as Nationalist & Republican goes, it does seem to be a better place now. Hallelujah for that, even if some of the actors carry some unsavoury reputations. If we gain anything by raking over old coals, then rake. But do we gain anything? Or would it be better to let the thread die?

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: GUEST,Martin
Date: 13 Oct 12 - 01:18 PM

I was referring to British army actions Keith, not loyalist paramilitaries. You seem to have trouble accepting the actions of the British army shooting civilians were often covered up, look at bloody Sunday as an example.

I understand both the events of 96 and the bank job are hard to believe, but I state them as fact, in time the truth will out, maybe you will believe another source.

As for Don's illogical comment that the people of the North of Ireland ended the war, it lacks credibility and knowledge, maybe he should recall the failed Peace movement of 1976, it vanished off the face of the earth when Betty Williams and Mairead Corrigan gained fame, then after receiving the award and a cash sum took the money and ran.

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Oct 12 - 11:18 AM

I am glad to see you acknowledged the fact the nationalist community suffered at the hands of Ulster loyalist and unionist injustice. Something Keith often failed to notice.
Not true at all Martin.
I have always acknowledged that obvious fact, and denounced Loyalist paramilitaries with equal vigour.

I am equally certain that as with the US Civil Rights movement, you could have had what you now have back in the mid 70s and the "armed struggle" was entirely counter productive.

I am sure you believe that story Martin, but it is unbelievable.

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 13 Oct 12 - 11:05 AM

""I do feel the military campaign by the Provisionals brought about change. Britain was well aware the device used in London in February 1996 had siblings and the panic calls from London to an Irish government official requesting a meeting with Provisional representatives the next day proved that. It will always remain a bone of contention among senior members of the movement, fortunately a certain will known individual got his way.""

That may have got 'em talking in the first instance, but the Northern Irish people brought the troubles to an end when they told both sets of Mad Dog killers "Enough is enough, and we want our lives back".

But for that, the "death crazed fanatics" on both sides would still be fighting.

Keith, I don't know why you start threads like this. You must be aware that they will bring every Brit hating Irishman out of the woodwork, in a fury of righteous rage.

That's why you won't see them starting threads about the baby killing PIRA, or LDV heroes, who between them nearly destroyed Northern Ireland.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: GUEST,Martin
Date: 13 Oct 12 - 11:03 AM

An excellent account Dead Horse, I have to agree with almost everything you said in that post, I thank you for your clarity. Yes I agree, anyone throwing a coffee jar device at personnel poses a threat to life and that falls into category of responsive action. A child throwing a stone is somewhat different.

I am glad to see you acknowledged the fact the nationalist community suffered at the hands of Ulster loyalist and unionist injustice. Something Keith often failed to notice.

Dead Horse, I am no fan of Gerard Adams or Marty McGuinness, please understand that. If I am honest, I am still at odds with myself which one was a British agent, one sure thing is, one of them were.

Once Adams had Marie Drum out of the way,his political path was clear, he then wormed his way through Seamus Twomey, Joe Cahill and Ivor Bell to achieve his ultimate aim, the tail should never have been allowed to wag the dog.

Keith, history will deliver the truth regarding the February 96 deal and the Northern Bank, I have no reason to lie to you or mislead you, but take my word on both. The British government knew what they had to do and did it. Regarding 96, it was the right call, the window of opportunity of the Northern Bank occurred during a three week transition of sale between an Australian Banking company and a Danish one, very convenient. No paper trail leading back to number 10 I think the term used was.

Keith, there were many underhand deals done by the British government, and in turn many republican principles there sold by the cunning architect who has since walked away from his creation.

I wish you well Dead Horse.

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: Dead Horse
Date: 13 Oct 12 - 09:36 AM

It is interesting to see how my words have been interpreted by some on here.
I expect you think that I ate babies and went out of my way to look for trouble in a troubled land.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
As an uninformed soldier in training for Northern Ireland I was under the impression that we were going to meet and fight with the IRA and to protect the rest of the population against them.
It didnt take long for that idea to melt away.
After seeing how the catholic minority were being deprived of decent housing, jobs, and general acceptance into a bigotted society I felt nothing but sympathy for their cause.
The rioters, bombers, murderers and thugs were a different matter.
They were NOT children. They used children as cover, knowing that we could not fire into a crowd where their snipers were taking advantage.
Would you not want to shoot some scum that had just thrown a nail bomb at you and your mates, killing and injuring many?
Would you be happy to know that the bomber went on to be regarded as a hero for planting a device in school grounds that killed one of your colleagues?
Would you like to have seen Bin Laden jailed for a few years then be released and lauded as another Nelson Mandela?
I am not in favour of shooting innocents, but how much better would it have been if some unknown squaddie in WW1 had shot and killed a certain little Austrian corporal?
Just saying - not dreaming about it.
So Guest Martin, get back to your own dream world where Saint Gerry Adams et al reside.

P.S. I find it laughable that you castigate Keith for interpreting my words without permission, yet you have done the very same thing.

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Oct 12 - 09:30 AM

It is not "a story" Keith anymore than the Northern Bank pension fund is.
I do not believe the story, but I am prepared to be convinced.
What evidence is there please?

I do believe that the Northern Bank was robbed by Republicans for their personal gain, and I think it was a base crime made worse because it cynically broke the promises made in the GFA.

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: GUEST,Martin
Date: 13 Oct 12 - 08:56 AM

Thankfully I am fortunate enough Alan not to suffer from delusional fantasies or grandiose ideas.

This individual didn't elaborate on his harrowing first hand experiences or confirmed diagnosis of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder attributed to his service, so it seems you have an advantage over the rest us.

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 13 Oct 12 - 08:47 AM

were all allowed our fantasies. if you'd been through what he had, maybe you'd be fantasising the same way.

Leave Dead Horse his troubled thoughts and dreams - you take care of your own. make sure they don't become reality.

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: GUEST,Martin
Date: 13 Oct 12 - 08:34 AM

Or ex British soldier Dead Horse.

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: mayomick
Date: 13 Oct 12 - 08:28 AM

Yes, the marines arrested last week are innocent until proven guilty . They are entitled to a fair trial and not the sort of "sleeping pill" justice that the Taliban would probably want to mete out to them .

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: GUEST,Martin
Date: 13 Oct 12 - 08:24 AM

Raedwulf, the bad apples within republicanism are incarcerated in Maghaberry prison.

That is the difference, do you recall any British soldiers being sent to the cages or the blocks in Long Kesh ?

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: GUEST,Martin
Date: 13 Oct 12 - 08:11 AM

It is not "a story" Keith anymore than the Northern Bank pension fund is.

Understand that the British government dealt with the Provisional leadership in a manner you would not be impressed with or clearly wish to accept as reality.

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: Raedwulf
Date: 13 Oct 12 - 08:08 AM

"the British army went home without a battle honour"
The British army wasn't fighting a war, hence its rules of engagement. Something your bias, Martin, seems to blind you to. Let's ALL be thankful they weren't given RoEs appropriate for war. It would have been a lot messier for both sides, and the "war" would probably still be going on. Instead, a better world is being built, and has been being built for a number of years.

I fail to see the worth in your resurrecting a 5 year old thread. There are undoubtedly bad apples in the British Army. These Marines may, or may not, be guilty as (not yet) charged. Are you telling us there are no bad apples in the Republican movement these days?

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: mayomick
Date: 13 Oct 12 - 08:04 AM

.
Can't you understand how Irish people wouldn't want to "buy" what the former soldier, Dead Horse, is selling , Keith ? He doesn't say whether or not he actually murdered anybody while on duty over here , but has obviously been fantasizing about the notion of putting a " a 7.62 sleeping pill" into some Irish kid's head ever since he left the army .

After the Royal Military Police arrested seven Royal Marines last week on suspicion of murder in relation to an incident that occurred in Afghanistan in 2011, an armed forces' spokesman told the media :

"These arrests demonstrate the department and the armed forces' determination to ensure UK personnel act in accordance with their rules of engagement and our standards."

Your military top-brass obviously doesn't want their lower ranks being regarded as a bunch of " death crazed fanatics ", but that's the impression that Death Horse seems anxious to promote here. Please don't indulge him .

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Oct 12 - 07:54 AM

I suspect that the story was used to sell the GFA to the rank and file.
They thought they were fighting and dying for a United Ireland, not a bit more electoral reform.
If it is true, it is not a progressive way to gain political power is it?
Direct Rule came in 1972, the Civil Rights movement in the North of Ireland was all but dead by that stage. British public opinion didn't come into it,
NICRA did not die.
It was wound up because all its aims were achieved, and it became the SDLP.
British public opinion certainly did come into it.
No referendum was needed to know that we were all appalled at what had been going on.
We supported the Civil Rights movements in NI and US.

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: GUEST,Martin
Date: 13 Oct 12 - 07:24 AM

I agree with your sentiments Keith, the SDLP are now a minority party, Sinn Fein speak for Nationalists and republicans.

Sinn Fein never openly supported violence, they took the conventional political route from 1986, I think you will agree that a lot happened over there after that date much of it involved Sinn Fein members being charged with terrorist activity, so their success wasn't as a result of their 1986 approach.

Direct Rule came in 1972, the Civil Rights movement in the North of Ireland was all but dead by that stage. British public opinion didn't come into it, there was never a referendum held. American pressure of Britain's abuse of Human Rights such as the torture of political suspects in 1971 "The Hooded Men" something they were later found guilty of in a European Court, also played a part.

I do feel the military campaign by the Provisionals brought about change. Britain was well aware the device used in London in February 1996 had siblings and the panic calls from London to an Irish government official requesting a meeting with Provisional representatives the next day proved that. It will always remain a bone of contention among senior members of the movement, fortunately a certain will known individual got his way. That was the day Keith that changed the political situation.

Subject: RE: BS: British Army at it again
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Oct 12 - 06:54 AM

Those bandsmen deserve their fate.
Sinn Fein would never have gained seats or a voice in local government,
The Nationalist SDLP used democratic means to represent Nationalists.
Sinn Fein started to get electoral success when it stopped supporting violence.
The British government was forced to remove the Unionist government not by paramilitary might, but by the Civil Rights movement and British public opinion.
The bombings and shootings just entrenched enmity and hatred and derailed the progress that was being made.

If you believe violence is acceptable against a people who do not like or want what you are selling, you are just the same as the Taliban.
No difference in bombing Canary Wharf or flying a plane into it.
Death crazed fanatics.