Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 15, 2010 21:51:47 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by QuorndonShrew on Jun 15, 2010 23:35:43 GMT 1
100% behind every point Dont Believe the Hype made.
Another publicity stunt I'm afraid.
A bit like the Hillsborough inquiry. Offering comfort to the relatives of those who died irrelevant of the facts
|
|
|
Post by R6ix on Jun 16, 2010 0:24:39 GMT 1
this is like a rock around the govts neck,they want it away, its a bind, they will say anything to cut themselves some slack,i spent a lot of time in ulster, and was into all of this, and i do think the army were lose cannon on this occasion,
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2010 8:47:04 GMT 1
100% behind every point Dont Believe the Hype made. Another publicity stunt I'm afraid. A bit like the Hillsborough inquiry. Offering comfort to the relatives of those who died irrelevant of the facts ok, and just so we know, (making the same point i made to DBTH) would you like to share your insight or evidence for this, or like him, is it just some random made up hypothesis?
|
|
|
Post by neilsalop on Jun 16, 2010 9:19:13 GMT 1
I think it is right for the government to apologise and they have. This should be an end to it and all those involved should move on, but it's highly unlikely that this will happen. The relatives will now be looking for compensation from the British tax payer and the payouts will in all probability far exceed any payouts recieved by victims of the IRA. Both military and civilian casualties of the troubles have had no such apology from the terrorist organisations or their leaders.
As for the day in question, our armed forces in Northern Ireland were fair game to any wannabe hard man with access to a gun and there were some of these people on the streets that day. Nervous squaddies, poor leadership, angry crowds (with God knows how many armed) and a very uncomfortable situation made mistakes inevitable. I don't think for one moment that the soldiers involved or their officers went out that morning with the intention of killing anyone, let alone innocent protestors. Can the IRA say that about Warrington, Omagh, Manchester, too many to mention in London, Brighton, Enniskillen, Birmingham, Guildford, etc, etc, etc?
When are the lives that the IRA have ruined over the years going be given the same significance? Those killed on Bloody Sunday could have kept out of it, the civilian victims of the IRA didn't even realise that they were any part of it. Innocence is relative in this context.
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Jun 16, 2010 10:50:05 GMT 1
Best thing the government of the day could have done was cut ties with Ireland altogether stop them traveling over to britain and let them get on with it same with Afghanistan let the stupid religious ****s kill each other all in the name of their gods. Or even better still, what about the past English and British governments of their day completely leaving both Ireland and Afghanistan to their own devices rather than looking to invade and occupy them? Surely that would have been the best approach from the off or? Because, you know, without our fliping about in Ireland I doubt we’d be seeing ‘stupid religious ****s kill each other all in the name of their gods’…
|
|
|
Post by QuorndonShrew on Jun 16, 2010 11:34:16 GMT 1
100% behind every point Dont Believe the Hype made. Another publicity stunt I'm afraid. A bit like the Hillsborough inquiry. Offering comfort to the relatives of those who died irrelevant of the facts ok, and just so we know, (making the same point i made to DBTH) would you like to share your insight or evidence for this, or like him, is it just some random made up hypothesis? Well I think to use the phrase 'British Shame' is sensationalism beyond the evidence you've offered. It seems in recent years there has been a culture of apologising for past 'indifferences' long after the incident occured. The Australian migrants from the UK in the 50's I think it was, marking of the 200 years of slavery and now it seems 'Bloody Sunday' has followed suit. Just seems to be the 'done' thing at the moment. Public Relations and saving face being the key issue I believe. Much a-do about nothing really. We'll be apologising for the Falklands next I fear.
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Jun 16, 2010 11:45:34 GMT 1
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 16, 2010 19:30:18 GMT 1
[ Well I think to use the phrase 'British Shame' is sensationalism beyond the evidence you've offered. It seems in recent years there has been a culture of apologising for past 'indifferences' long after the incident occured. The Australian migrants from the UK in the 50's I think it was, marking of the 200 years of slavery and now it seems 'Bloody Sunday' has followed suit. Just seems to be the 'done' thing at the moment. Public Relations and saving face being the key issue I believe. Much a-do about nothing really. We'll be apologising for the Falklands next I fear. so you dont think that the british army opening fire on unarmed civil rights protesters is a cause for british shame? im british, sometimes i feel very proud of what our soldiers do, on this occassion i feel ashamed that they where, in the eyes of many, acting on behalf of the british when they shot those people. as for apologising, quite right to. britain is one of the most influential and powerful countries on the planet, we have achieved so much and there is much we should be proud of. but on the road to where we are now, we have committed some acts that, as a proud and grown up country, we should have the balls and the courage to face up to and say "sorry, we got it wrong". nothing wrong with that, and as far as i can see, only improves our standing in the rest of the world.
|
|
|
Post by Dont believe the HYPE on Jun 16, 2010 20:18:31 GMT 1
[ Well I think to use the phrase 'British Shame' is sensationalism beyond the evidence you've offered. It seems in recent years there has been a culture of apologising for past 'indifferences' long after the incident occured. The Australian migrants from the UK in the 50's I think it was, marking of the 200 years of slavery and now it seems 'Bloody Sunday' has followed suit. Just seems to be the 'done' thing at the moment. Public Relations and saving face being the key issue I believe. Much a-do about nothing really. We'll be apologising for the Falklands next I fear. so you dont think that the british army opening fire on unarmed civil rights protesters is a cause for british shame? im british, sometimes i feel very proud of what our soldiers do, on this occassion i feel ashamed that they where, in the eyes of many, acting on behalf of the british when they shot those people. as for apologising, quite right to. britain is one of the most influential and powerful countries on the planet, we have achieved so much and there is much we should be proud of. but on the road to where we are now, we have committed some acts that, as a proud and grown up country, we should have the balls and the courage to face up to and say "sorry, we got it wrong". nothing wrong with that, and as far as i can see, only improves our standing in the rest of the world. Should America apologise to Japan for killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people by dropping the atom bomb? Should We apologise for killing innocent people by bombing Berlin? Or is it just the Irish you have sympathy for and feel imense shame of behalf of the English?
|
|
|
Post by Jonah on Jun 16, 2010 20:24:34 GMT 1
Matron have you ever been in that sort of situation? These were trained soldiers in a no win situation. Admittedley aledgedley innocent people died but what about the revenge?
Are we going to have a £200m investigation into the revenge killings?
|
|
|
Post by WindsorShrew on Jun 16, 2010 20:42:52 GMT 1
I think the point in case is that this incident is different to any comparison put forward.
Firstly this happened on homeland soil, it was a civil rights march conducted by home citizens.
Our Army opened fire on these people. Our army was serving the Government of the day.
We were not at war, no foreign power or weapon/terrorism was used.
I should point out that at this time the Paras were very aggressive in their dealing with the local populace thus they were moved up to Londonderry to deal with the situation. Also at that time training was minimal in terms of todays standards for civil unrest.
A truly saddening episode but a very British one nonetheless.
|
|
|
Post by El Presidente on Jun 16, 2010 21:03:25 GMT 1
Indeed, with Windy...as mentioned in my previous post, NI was and still is a complex situation...one I liken to a Pandora's Box...(no Windy, not the Pandora's box you met in the NAAFI in week 3 of basic training).
You have to look at all facets - the subjugation of Catholic families by the Protestant power brokers; social unrest; civil rights abuses; punishment beatings; a corrupt police force; the desire for fair self governance...this was the situation prior to Westminster and Army intervention...the army was deployed essentially to protect the Catholic families . Sadly all parties concerned became more entrenched in their views, and the squaddies were seen as the best way of venting anger...
There were so many mistakes in NI, many made long before 1972...B Specials; terrorist gangs; abuse of power and position; social disparity; civil rights abuses; a broken criminal justice system...its no wonder the lid blew off....but at least hope continues to be been nurtured...
|
|
|
Post by Shrewed on Jun 16, 2010 22:40:52 GMT 1
Should America apologise to Japan for killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people by dropping the atom bomb? The Americans should definitely apologise for dropping 2 atomic bombs on Japan which not only killed on the day but continued to kill for years later.
|
|
|
Post by El Presidente on Jun 16, 2010 22:46:47 GMT 1
Should America apologise to Japan for killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people by dropping the atom bomb? The Americans should definitely apologise for dropping 2 atomic bombs on Japan which not only killed on the day but continued to kill for years later. I disagree...quite possibly, the only way the war in the pacific would have been resolved without the invasion of Okinawa and mainland Japan. It was war, and war is tragic, but desperate times call for desperate measures...
|
|
|
Post by Shrewed on Jun 16, 2010 22:48:46 GMT 1
Matron have you ever been in that sort of situation? These were trained soldiers in a no win situation. Admittedley aledgedley innocent people died but what about the revenge? Are we going to have a £200m investigation into the revenge killings? And how many less people would have been murdered had not Bloody Sunday taken place. In 1971, 176 people were killed in 1972 this figure rose to 479 an increase of 172%. In no year after 1972 did the number of deaths due to the troubles exceed 300. The figures prove nothing but maybe their is a correlation.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2010 10:04:36 GMT 1
Matron have you ever been in that sort of situation? These were trained soldiers in a no win situation. Admittedley aledgedley innocent people died but what about the revenge? Are we going to have a £200m investigation into the revenge killings? Jonah, have you ever managed a football league team? Have you ever bed bathed an old man 4 times in an hour because of prefuse uncontrollable diahorrea? No i guess not, but it doesnt mean you cannot have an opinion based on your beliefs and knowledge of football or the nhs does it? So, no i have never been in that kind of situation. im not military. i fail to see how that makes the slightest difference. truth is, it doesnt does it? its a diversionary kind of tactic to divert people away from the issue, save them having to face up to the fact that innocent people where killed whilst taking part in a civil rights march. Do you remember this? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiananmen_Square_protests_of_1989Tell me honestly, in what way do you see these two being different other than a) the numbers killed b) that BS involved "good, honest british army heros", and TS involved nasty, yellow commy chinese. how about this? www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/02/g20-protests-man-dies-londonshould still be fresh in the mind. do you recall the uproar on here when this one man died of a heart attack after being pushed by a policeman? the government where slated and the crys of police state blah blah blah could be heard from every corner of b and a land. one more, (although the examples of hypocrisy are endless) news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/4291388.stmwhat about this guy? he had an apology for being thrown out of a Labour Party conference FFS, remember the outcry on here? would it have been ok if he was an irish catholic? but apparently, 12 (13) irish republican catholics (as british citizens as you or i) get shot at a demo calling for their civil rights to be recognised, and they dont deserve an apology. everyside in the northern irish conflict over the centuries bares shame and disgrace in some part for their actions, in some cases, for their lack of actions. i am in no way a supporter of the ira or any other terror group in that conflict. all are equally guilty of attrocities. but the terrorists are just that, terrorists. the army where there to protect and keep the peace, something they failed to do on this occassion, not just costing lives on the day, but also costing many lives of british service men over the decades that followed.
|
|
|
Post by Dont believe the HYPE on Jun 17, 2010 10:16:48 GMT 1
You will be calling for prosecutions against the soldiers next.
I think your above post adds credence to my argument, during times of conflict and civil unrest innocent people will die,it`s does not make it right,but the fact remains it happens across the world.
If any apology should have been made it should have been made at the time, why should a man have to apologise for events that place while he was still playing scalaextric and watching Jamie and the magic torch?
Would you like Cameron to stand infront of the worlds media and denounce the British Army while that Adams smiles in the background?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2010 11:15:52 GMT 1
You will be calling for prosecutions against the soldiers next. if it is proved beyond doubt that someone gave the order for those soldiers to open fire on unarmed civilians then absolutely. anyone in their right mind would.I think your above post adds credence to my argument, during times of conflict and civil unrest innocent people will die,it`s does not make it right,but the fact remains it happens across the world. I think your admission that its not right supports my view. imagine the uproar in this country if police had opened fire on the G20 protesters last year, imagine it more so if people had been shot and killed. what about the countryside alliance march, what if the police had shot a dozen of them, would that be an acceptable loss?If any apology should have been made it should have been made at the time, Lord Widgerys investigation was flawed and biased and covered up the truth
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/northern_ireland/2000/bloody_sunday_inquiry/665100.stmwhy should a man have to apologies for events that place while he was still playing scalaextric and watching Jamie and the magic torch? Jamie and His Magic Torch didnt start till 1976. Because he is our prime minister ( ) and he represents the people and government, just like those soldiers represented the people and government when they shot those civil rights protestersWould you like Cameron to stand in front of the worlds media and denounce the British Army while that t***** Adams smiles in the background? Nope, dont think i have said, or even implied that anywhere have i? i think what cameron said and how it said it was spot on (as mentioned previously) I think you referring to Gerry Adams as a perhaps signals some bias on your part which may reflect why you cant seem to accept something as simple as the truth here
|
|
|
Post by Dont believe the HYPE on Jun 17, 2010 11:25:52 GMT 1
So Lord Widgerys investigation was "flawed and biased and covered up the truth", yet you accept these findings without question, very strange indeed.
Yes I called Gerry Adams a , do you disagree?
|
|
|
Post by ambergambler on Jun 17, 2010 11:49:45 GMT 1
so you dint think that the British army opening fire on unarmed civil rights protesters is a cause for British shame? I'm British, sometimes i feel very proud of what our soldiers do, on this occasion i feel ashamed that they where, in the eyes of many, acting on behalf of the British when they shot those people. as for apologizing, quite right to. Britain is one of the most influential and powerful countries on the planet, we have achieved so much and there is much we should be proud of. but on the road to where we are now, we have committed some acts that, as a proud and grown up country, we should have the balls and the courage to face up to and say "sorry, we got it wrong". nothing wrong with that, and as far as i can see, only improves our standing in the rest of the world. Should America apologise to Japan for killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people by dropping the atom bomb? Should We apologise for killing innocent people by bombing Berlin? Or is it just the Irish you have sympathy for and feel imense shame of behalf of the English? An apology would have been more forthcoming and alot sooner if the IRA was not mainland bombing.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Jun 17, 2010 13:51:54 GMT 1
It's pointless being offended by the actions of McGuinness and Adams. They were on one side of the conflict but that has to be put behind us. All sides must keep working to build on the huge progress that's been made in the last decade or so. Oh I see, Forget what Adams and McGuinness did, but spend millions and over a decade investigating British soldiers, makes perfect sense now It does if you ever want the conflict to end. History teaches that the only way conflicts of this sort end is when the opponents compromise. Given that, as the report has found, British soldiers shot unarmed civilians and given that this event was a primary cause of the bloodshed that followed, this has been money well spent if it helps to conclude the civil war in Ireland. "No surrender" really means "no end". Only a fool wants that.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Jun 17, 2010 14:03:57 GMT 1
I think it is right for the government to apologise and they have. This should be an end to it and all those involved should move on, but it's highly unlikely that this will happen. The relatives will now be looking for compensation from the British tax payer and the payouts will in all probability far exceed any payouts recieved by victims of the IRA. Both military and civilian casualties of the troubles have had no such apology from the terrorist organisations or their leaders. As for the day in question, our armed forces in Northern Ireland were fair game to any wannabe hard man with access to a gun and there were some of these people on the streets that day. Nervous squaddies, poor leadership, angry crowds (with God knows how many armed) and a very uncomfortable situation made mistakes inevitable. I don't think for one moment that the soldiers involved or their officers went out that morning with the intention of killing anyone, let alone innocent protestors. Can the IRA say that about Warrington, Omagh, Manchester, too many to mention in London, Brighton, Enniskillen, Birmingham, Guildford, etc, etc, etc? When are the lives that the IRA have ruined over the years going be given the same significance? Those killed on Bloody Sunday could have kept out of it, the civilian victims of the IRA didn't even realise that they were any part of it. Innocence is relative in this context. There is no such thing as relative innocence. Unarmed protesters were killed. They were entitled to protest and they were innocent. Will those families claim compensation? Why not? Wouldn't you if it had been your brother/son/husband etc killed? Yes the IRA murdered many innocent people (as did Loyalist paramilitaries). But they're a terrorist organisation aren't they? Is that the same standard by which we'd want the British Army to be measured? I hope not. Do we want the war in Ireland to end? I hope we all do. If so, compromises have to be made on all sides. And before anyone asks what compromises the republicans have made, I'd remind them that they've renounced the armed struggle, even though Northern Ireland remains part of the UK - which is a big part of what they were trying to overthrow.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2010 14:47:33 GMT 1
So Lord Widgerys investigation was "flawed and biased and covered up the truth", yet you accept these findings without question, very strange indeed. Yes I called Gerry Adams a t*****, do you disagree? yes i do disagree, very much so. like nelson mandela, he was once a terrorist who has had the guts to turn his back on violence and has worked hard for peace, at considerable risk to himself from many different areas. and not strange really. if you read many of the reports into widgery and his findings, commentators from all sides point out these flaws, cover ups and bias. as i have mentioned (three times now ), if you have any evidence to the contrary about this report, or the events of the day, then please enlighten us. sure we would love to hear it.
|
|
|
Post by Dont believe the HYPE on Jun 17, 2010 15:32:13 GMT 1
So Lord Widgerys investigation was "flawed and biased and covered up the truth", yet you accept these findings without question, very strange indeed. Yes I called Gerry Adams a t*****, do you disagree? yes i do disagree, very much so. like nelson mandela, he was once a terrorist who has had the guts to turn his back on violence and has worked hard for peace, at considerable risk to himself from many different areas. and not strange really. if you read many of the reports into widgery and his findings, commentators from all sides point out these flaws, cover ups and bias. as i have mentioned (three times now ), if you have any evidence to the contrary about this report, or the events of the day, then please enlighten us. sure we would love to hear it. Brilliant, comparing Nelson Mandela to Gerry Adams, Evenly you with your ridiculously leftist views have surpassed yourself this time. Gerry Adams is a of the highest order and frankly defending this man beggars belief, He is a murdering terrorist who has been responsible for more British deaths than Bin Laden. He should be treated in the same way as Bin Laden would be, wanted dead or alive preferable dead.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 17, 2010 15:42:40 GMT 1
yes i do disagree, very much so. like nelson mandela, he was once a terrorist who has had the guts to turn his back on violence and has worked hard for peace, at considerable risk to himself from many different areas. and not strange really. if you read many of the reports into widgery and his findings, commentators from all sides point out these flaws, cover ups and bias. as i have mentioned (three times now ), if you have any evidence to the contrary about this report, or the events of the day, then please enlighten us. sure we would love to hear it. Brilliant, comparing Nelson Mandela to Gerry Adams, Evenly you with your ridiculously leftist views have surpassed yourself this time. Gerry Adams is a t***** of the highest order and frankly defending this man beggars belief, He is a murdering terrorist who has been responsible for more British deaths than Bin Laden. He should be treated in the same way as Bin Laden would be, wanted dead or alive preferable dead.go on, dont stop there, explain why?
|
|
|
Post by Shrewed on Jun 17, 2010 15:55:26 GMT 1
Brilliant, comparing Nelson Mandela to Gerry Adams, You really are bigotted you would fit in well in Northern Ireland. I am sure if you had asked many white South Africans in 1990 they would have told you that Mandela was a far bigger threat than Gerry Adams. Without Gerry Adams post 1992 there would have been no peace in Ulster, he is not the first terrorist and probably not the last to end up working for peace. Two things I see you constantly refuse to condemn the Loyalist paramilitary campaign. Secondly are British lives more important than all others surely the number of people killed at the behest of Bin Laden is important not just the British Ones.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Jun 17, 2010 18:20:09 GMT 1
There were more than a few Conservative politicians that described Mandela as a terrorist before he was released. It was just as ridiculous a view then as it seems now.
I wouldn't compare Adams to Mandela but where is the evidence for the number of deaths for which Adams is supposedly responsible, British or otherwise? The fact that he's on the republican side and sympathetic to the IRA doesn't make him a "murdering terrorist".
Hope2010 is right. How do you think peace came about in Northern Ireland? How were the IRA persuaded to put their weapons beyond use? Did they just suddenly think the British were right? Course not. Had they lost the war? No.
Adams and McGuinness were key figures in arriving at the Good Friday agreement. If they hadn't been, there'd still be bombs going off today. I'm not saying they deserve a Nobel Peace Prize but it's simplistic nonsense to think anything can be settled without there being people on both sides willing to take the risk of alienating their allies and negotiating a compromise.
If you want to go on seeing the IRA and the UVF and the INLA and the UDA (and while we're at it, Hamas and Hezbollah etc etc) as a single faceless unified group that can never be brought to the negotiating table other than by force, well, you'll never live in a peaceful world.
|
|
|
Post by jamo on Jun 17, 2010 18:40:02 GMT 1
Brilliant, comparing Nelson Mandela to Gerry Adams, Why is the comparison between Mandela and Adams so hiliarious ? Both were nationalists who sought to take the terrosist route to further their cause and beliefs.. None of the apologists for the dreadful action of the british army that day have cared to deal with the issue of how that one atrocious act fueled the troubles like no other incident-like pouring petrol onto a fire, and was without doubt the biggest and most consistant recruiting tool of the IRA, which undoubtedly led to reprisals against the British mainland. There is no shame in saying you got something wrong.
|
|
|
Post by dawleyshrew59 on Jun 17, 2010 19:03:10 GMT 1
Unless you were there,or experienced anything like it [as I did when I was a raw 18 year old ] you will not understand what some of them lads went through. And I can tell you some stories what I witness and I went through,and what I know what ADAMS & MCGUNNIESS got up to,so don't go passing judgment on things you now nowt about,until those two murdering barstewards make an apology!!! my sentiment isn't with the government's.and to think I mcgunniess in my gun sights
|
|