Viking Warrior Posted 20 November, 2013 Share Posted 20 November, 2013 A highly controversial remark by NI's Attorney General John Larkin who said there should be an end to investigations into killings before the 1998 Good Friday Agreement. Prime Minister David Cameron said such a move would be "rather dangerous". Interesting but not surpriising the BBC show a picture of one of the victims from bloody sunday and have memebers of the bloody sunday relatives giving it large. They want justice, and soldiers jailed for life etc but i dont hear anything coming from them about all the murders or atrocities their IRA friends committed That includes innocent civilians, mountbattains family and soldiers I wish the bbc and the IRA sympathy groups would stop focussing on those killed by the british Army. Oh they will not as all their murdering mates that were sentenced were released by the blair government And Im not surprised at camerons stance, he wants to see british soldiers convicted. particulary those involved in a very tense situation that arose now referred to as bloody sunday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horley CTFC Saint Posted 20 November, 2013 Share Posted 20 November, 2013 I thought there had pretty much been a 'gentleman's agreement' not to pursue anything in a sort of truth and reconciliation type ethos and in return info would be given on such as the whereabouts of the 'missing' as a quid pro quo - something to do with the nasty compromises needed to move forward? Cant think of too many paramilitaries on either side that have been done for acts before 1998 since the agreement despite the somewhat psychotic nature of quite a few of them (Michael Stone?!?! who incidentally was convicted for a post 1998 act) - however the troops and police were there in an official capacity as agents of the UK Government so are treated as a different matter and in my view should be accountable. As in particular the early actions of the troops arguably worsened the situation back in the late 60's/early 70's of which Bloody Sunday was the defining moment - I don't have a problem with that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 20 November, 2013 Author Share Posted 20 November, 2013 John Larkin May have a point . But he should have consulted with his politicians and victim support groups first . At least one member of ira was convicted and given two life's for killing a colleague of mine Phil cross RAMC and a driver Craig pantry . There were others seriously injured . That day . The lads and lasses were watching the rugby World Cup final between England and the Aussies in the rest area of the JR club The bomb went off at half time at musgrave park hospital What was so evil is the 20 odd pounds of Semtex was carried by a hospital porter through the children's ward and then hidden in the Keller bar area of the jr club. This guy went to court but only served a pittence of his sentence due to the Good Friday agreement . I don't here the BBC or ira sympathisers showing any r Phil and Craig's families . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Saint Posted 20 November, 2013 Share Posted 20 November, 2013 This is a thorny old issue. i understand the sentiment of the attorney general, it makes sense given the Good Friday agreement. However, how on earth you will be able to bring the relatives of the dead from both sides to a place where they let bygones be bygones, god only knows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horley CTFC Saint Posted 20 November, 2013 Share Posted 20 November, 2013 John Larkin May have a point . But he should have consulted with his politicians and victim support groups first . At least one member of ira was convicted and given two life's for killing a colleague of mine Phil cross RAMC and a driver Craig pantry . There were others seriously injured . That day . The lads and lasses were watching the rugby World Cup final between England and the Aussies in the rest area of the JR club The bomb went off at half time at musgrave park hospital What was so evil is the 20 odd pounds of Semtex was carried by a hospital porter through the children's ward and then hidden in the Keller bar area of the jr club. This guy went to court but only served a pittence of his sentence due to the Good Friday agreement . I don't here the BBC or ira sympathisers showing any r Phil and Craig's families . That's sentiment though - a lot innocent and guilty people died on all sides of the Troubles. For the killing to stop some tough and unpalatable decisions had to be made - for every death there were grieving relatives and friends. Just because someone was a soldier doing his or her job does that make their friends and relatives any more or less worthy of sympathy than the run of the mill victim? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 20 November, 2013 Share Posted 20 November, 2013 This is a thorny old issue. i understand the sentiment of the attorney general, it makes sense given the Good Friday agreement. However, how on earth you will be able to bring the relatives of the dead from both sides to a place where they let bygones be bygones, god only knows. Which is why the Cameron has, probably rightly, refused to rule out any future prosecutions even though he knows there is a de facto moratorium. If you declare a policy its bound to be divisive, if you just carry on without new prosecutions but saying nothing its less contentious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 20 November, 2013 Author Share Posted 20 November, 2013 That's the danger with such suggestion of amnesties etc one group or another will not be happy . The bomb explosion aimed at medics in the military wing of musgrave park hospital could have had even more devastating outcomes , just imagine if the bomb had detonated early when the porter was walking through the kids ward . My point us that the ira didn't give a toss who they killed . Dr nurses , children innocent civilians the list goes on . But those who were responsible on either side of the para militaries will never apologise. I don't have any time for Adams macguiness or paisley and his side kicks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horley CTFC Saint Posted 20 November, 2013 Share Posted 20 November, 2013 Which is why the Cameron has, probably rightly, refused to rule out any future prosecutions even though he knows there is a de facto moratorium. If you declare a policy its bound to be divisive, if you just carry on without new prosecutions but saying nothing its less contentious. Correct - I don't see how else you can ensure a sustainable peace and keep organisations like the Real IRA marginalised and despised by the vast majority on both sides of the sectarian divide. Its not so much about the current generations but future generations untainted by the Troubles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 20 November, 2013 Share Posted 20 November, 2013 Adams macguiness or paisley and his side kicks You can't lump Paisley in with those two. They were senior members of the IRA ( although Adams still.continues to deny it) that ordered killings. Paisley never was a terrorist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 20 November, 2013 Author Share Posted 20 November, 2013 Lord duckhunter . I wasn't going to name paisley but I thought I better put his name in the frame to show a balanced view Pira ira etc UFV uda etc Paisley was a terrorist but his more extreme followers did commit atrocities etc But I detest Adams and macguiness they both have blood on their hands . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hockey_saint Posted 21 November, 2013 Share Posted 21 November, 2013 Actually, I watched the BBC report, they had relatives of soldiers and civilians killed by the IRA on it too....It was actually pretty fair reporting despite what appears to be the case for the large proportion of right-wingers on this board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hutch Posted 21 November, 2013 Share Posted 21 November, 2013 I thought there had pretty much been a 'gentleman's agreement' not to pursue anything in a sort of truth and reconciliation type ethos and in return info would be given on such as the whereabouts of the 'missing' as a quid pro quo - something to do with the nasty compromises needed to move forward? Cant think of too many paramilitaries on either side that have been done for acts before 1998 since the agreement despite the somewhat psychotic nature of quite a few of them (Michael Stone?!?! who incidentally was convicted for a post 1998 act) - however the troops and police were there in an official capacity as agents of the UK Government so are treated as a different matter and in my view should be accountable. As in particular the early actions of the troops arguably worsened the situation back in the late 60's/early 70's of which Bloody Sunday was the defining moment - I don't have a problem with that To be fair, not to pursue anything is actually the antithesis of Truth and Reconciliation. I was here in SA during the TRC process, although not during "the troubles". It was clearly a very emotional time for those involved, but it certainly laid all the ghosts. Post apartheid problems in South Africa since then are predominantly based on socio-economic issues, not violence. Those involved in Northern Ireland, on all sides, are still struggling to come to terms with what happened. Judicial reviews, and public enquiries, and ministerial inquisitions or whatever, will go on ad infinitum. And when it's done in the UK it will start all over again in Brussels, or Strasbourg, or somewhere else. It would have been much better to get it all out in the open, then close the book (permanently) and move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 21 November, 2013 Author Share Posted 21 November, 2013 Hockey saint . The later reports were changed to include soldiers and civilian relatives of those killed . I saw that to But the BBC when the Larkin story first broke did not have a balanced report . They interviewed some one from the Bloody Sunday campaign and both of them were very vocal re what they wanted . The BBC had not taken into account at the time the views of the victims of other campaign groups . Oh an d to prove a point the BBC panorama referers to a new documentary about the British armies secret terror group the MRF All units had an MRF mobile reaction force or more recently rapid relation force . There was nothing secret about the MRF . They BBC have used sensationalist headlines yet again . As for who has spoken to the beeb I will watch wis interest . An ex soldier so I will watch this programme next Monday before adding more Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hockey_saint Posted 21 November, 2013 Share Posted 21 November, 2013 Hockey saint . The later reports were changed to include soldiers and civilian relatives of those killed . I saw that to But the BBC when the Larkin story first broke did not have a balanced report . They interviewed some one from the Bloody Sunday campaign and both of them were very vocal re what they wanted . The BBC had not taken into account at the time the views of the victims of other campaign groups . Oh an d to prove a point the BBC panorama referers to a new documentary about the British armies secret terror group the MRF All units had an MRF mobile reaction force or more recently rapid relation force . There was nothing secret about the MRF . They BBC have used sensationalist headlines yet again . As for who has spoken to the beeb I will watch wis interest . An ex soldier so I will watch this programme next Monday before adding more So they did include both sides then? And the second point; this is nothing new (i.e. I don't see why the BBC feel the need to show it)...Everyone knows who the black and tans were in clandestine operations so it's nothing new (actually, if Collins hadn't sought agreement (which is part of the problems today), it's likely all of Ireland would still be part of the UK) so I have no idea why they are reporting this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 21 November, 2013 Author Share Posted 21 November, 2013 Hockey I have no idea why they are reporting these stories unless there is some negative stories relating to or about to be released about the BBC I dont hear anything about the B Specials. Yes the MRF did snatch a few folk , thats what happened when incidents occurred I can remember if it was the MRF or other soldiers that lifted adams and was brought into the PHC Also BBC Newsnight are bragging that they have an exclusive interview with an al queda terrorist who lived in Soussea until he joined up with the JIHAD of having an islamic state in iraq and Syria The BBC should be reporting the news not making it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 21 November, 2013 Share Posted 21 November, 2013 It's time to let the past stay there. Trying to resurrect more victims on either side isn't going to further peace. The people of Northern Ireland whatever their persuasion want peace. Only new crimes committed in peacetime should be pursued. It's time for reconciliation not lawyers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 21 November, 2013 Share Posted 21 November, 2013 So they did include both sides then? And the second point; this is nothing new (i.e. I don't see why the BBC feel the need to show it)...Everyone knows who the black and tans were in clandestine operations so it's nothing new (actually, if Collins hadn't sought agreement (which is part of the problems today), it's likely all of Ireland would still be part of the UK) so I have no idea why they are reporting this. DeValera wanted a fall guy. That was why Collins was sent to London. In the end he got the best deal he could. The Dail voted for it and the people accepted it in a referendum. The IRA then took on the Irish Government in a civil war and lost. The strategic six counties weren't on the table but there was supposed to be a referendum of the Border Counties, Armagh, Fermanagh, Derry with large ethnic Irish population to allow them to join the Free State but the British government reneged on the promise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toadhall Saint Posted 21 November, 2013 Share Posted 21 November, 2013 DeValera wanted a fall guy. That was why Collins was sent to London. In the end he got the best deal he could. The Dail voted for it and the people accepted it in a referendum. The IRA then took on the Irish Government in a civil war and lost. The strategic six counties weren't on the table but there was supposed to be a referendum of the Border Counties, Armagh, Fermanagh, Derry with large ethnic Irish population to allow them to join the Free State but the British government reneged on the promise. Ah someone who knows their history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint in Paradise Posted 21 November, 2013 Share Posted 21 November, 2013 Being old and cynical I just wonder a little bit if the reason the BBC appear to be trying to stir up bad feelings against the British Army is to try and dilute the attention being given to own long running major stuff up re saville etc? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horley CTFC Saint Posted 21 November, 2013 Share Posted 21 November, 2013 To be fair, not to pursue anything is actually the antithesis of Truth and Reconciliation. I was here in SA during the TRC process, although not during "the troubles". It was clearly a very emotional time for those involved, but it certainly laid all the ghosts. Post apartheid problems in South Africa since then are predominantly based on socio-economic issues, not violence. Those involved in Northern Ireland, on all sides, are still struggling to come to terms with what happened. Judicial reviews, and public enquiries, and ministerial inquisitions or whatever, will go on ad infinitum. And when it's done in the UK it will start all over again in Brussels, or Strasbourg, or somewhere else. It would have been much better to get it all out in the open, then close the book (permanently) and move on. I'd disagree to some extent it is a type of TRC hence the IRA giving info on the missing albeit in a somewhat cagey fashion - the reconciliation speaks for itself really. Agree its not the same as SA but it does have synergies. As mentioned previously I think that the general way forward is the long game - really in many ways its about future generations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 22 November, 2013 Author Share Posted 22 November, 2013 I watched part of the panorama programme on Iplayer in the early hours before \I fell asleep I will watch it again. I think the guys in the programme have embellished their stories somewhat, They referred to the compound in palace barracks as looking like a builders yard. and no normal soldiers were allowed in. That was simply not true. I will say no more It was a compound with high walls but didnt resemble a builders yard inside Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hockey_saint Posted 22 November, 2013 Share Posted 22 November, 2013 DeValera wanted a fall guy. That was why Collins was sent to London. In the end he got the best deal he could. The Dail voted for it and the people accepted it in a referendum. The IRA then took on the Irish Government in a civil war and lost. The strategic six counties weren't on the table but there was supposed to be a referendum of the Border Counties, Armagh, Fermanagh, Derry with large ethnic Irish population to allow them to join the Free State but the British government reneged on the promise. I like the quote from Lord Birkenhead to Collins at the agreement "this may very cost me my career" to which Collins replied "yeah?? well this may very well cost me my life"...Yeah Collins knew full well he was the fall guy. I mean, in a similar fashion to what they reported about how this unconventional warfare is suppose to have brought the IRA round the table it reminded me of another supposed quote from Collins "you had me beat, we were running out of weapons, ammo and the will to fight" (supposely about the tactics of the Essex's). I do agree though, DeValera knew what Collins had to agree to and essesntially gave it his blessing *that's not to say Collins didn;t already have plans for a covert war in N. Ireland himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 23 November, 2013 Share Posted 23 November, 2013 Probably right to end investigations, on both sides. The IRA did some ****ed up stuff but we shouldn't be over there anyway IMO. Time to draw a line under the whole thing and move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 23 November, 2013 Share Posted 23 November, 2013 A highly controversial remark by NI's Attorney General John Larkin who said there should be an end to investigations into killings before the 1998 Good Friday Agreement. Prime Minister David Cameron said such a move would be "rather dangerous". Interesting but not surpriising the BBC show a picture of one of the victims from bloody sunday and have memebers of the bloody sunday relatives giving it large. They want justice, and soldiers jailed for life etc but i dont hear anything coming from them about all the murders or atrocities their IRA friends committed That includes innocent civilians, mountbattains family and soldiers I wish the bbc and the IRA sympathy groups would stop focussing on those killed by the british Army. Oh they will not as all their murdering mates that were sentenced were released by the blair government And Im not surprised at camerons stance, he wants to see british soldiers convicted. particulary those involved in a very tense situation that arose now referred to as bloody sunday. Has to be all murders, or none. I dont see Gerry Adams coming to trial for Jean McConville, do you ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 23 November, 2013 Author Share Posted 23 November, 2013 Sadly alpine no he will not. Come to trial . Blair has seen to that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 24 November, 2013 Author Share Posted 24 November, 2013 Have just watched the programme . This programme raises a lot of questions . The BBC is very anti British Army and very pro ira and why do they BBC spend thousands sending a reporter and his team tracking down an ex soldier cleared of manslaughter . The beeb has spun this programme so far in favour of the ira it completely distorts the truth . Yes the MRF existed and were mainly there for surveillance and quick reaction . But the BBC have seriously spun this. They certainly were not a secret terror force . A lot of ira atrocities were avoided because of the MRF surveillance . I have to laugh about . As for the compound inside palace barracks well let's just leave it at that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horley CTFC Saint Posted 24 November, 2013 Share Posted 24 November, 2013 Have just watched the programme . This programme raises a lot of questions . The BBC is very anti British Army and very pro ira and why do they BBC spend thousands sending a reporter and his team tracking down an ex soldier cleared of manslaughter . The beeb has spun this programme so far in favour of the ira it completely distorts the truth . Yes the MRF existed and were mainly there for surveillance and quick reaction . But the BBC have seriously spun this. They certainly were not a secret terror force . A lot of ira atrocities were avoided because of the MRF surveillance . I have to laugh about . As for the compound inside palace barracks well let's just leave it at that ....and I'm guessing you're pro British Army? Come on Viking spill the beans did the MRF they undertake shoot to kill patrols and if so what procedures were in place to ensure that they didn't kill innocent 'civilians' or is that just the collateral damage of war? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 24 November, 2013 Author Share Posted 24 November, 2013 Yep very much pro British Army . Having served in NI in 1972 and was based in palace barracks for a few months . The, MRF , RUC and army lads would regularly bring guys into the compound before being interned or released. Members of the ira whichever sect would deny they were ever a member of the paramilitary .its became second nature to say not me giuv. That's why guys like the. MRF were fundamentally carrying out covert srvellience work. . I'm pretty sure they did not arry out shoot to kill patrols . In those days these the IRA would have a shooter . If they got shot or disappeared there were others who were there to spirit away the weapon . Yes innocents got killed but the IRA were responsible for the majority of the killings .but don't let that cloud your veiws. Remember the IRA bombed part of musgrave park hospital . A colleague also a medic was killed in the explosion . The BBC programme is very pro IRA . Why the brought in Bloody Sunday into the equation is beyond me . Have you seen the programme and did you ever serve. ? Also former members of the b specials were still around or joined the RUC. I don't hear. The beeb mentioning them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horley CTFC Saint Posted 24 November, 2013 Share Posted 24 November, 2013 Yep very much pro British Army . Having served in NI in 1972 and was based in palace barracks for a few months . The, MRF , RUC and army lads would regularly bring guys into the compound before being interned or released. Members of the ira whichever sect would deny they were ever a member of the paramilitary .its became second nature to say not me giuv. That's why guys like the. MRF were fundamentally carrying out covert srvellience work. . I'm pretty sure they did not arry out shoot to kill patrols . In those days these the IRA would have a shooter . If they got shot or disappeared there were others who were there to spirit away the weapon . Yes innocents got killed but the IRA were responsible for the majority of the killings .but don't let that cloud your veiws. Remember the IRA bombed part of musgrave park hospital . A colleague also a medic was killed in the explosion . The BBC programme is very pro IRA . Why the brought in Bloody Sunday into the equation is beyond me . Have you seen the programme and did you ever serve. ? Also former members of the b specials were still around or joined the RUC. I don't hear. The beeb mentioning them I think the reason for the mention of Bloody Sunday is that its largely seen as a turning point in the Troubles when the IRA started to gain real support from the Catholic community at large and true militarisation of the Troubles really started - the likes of Noraid became a recognised fundraiser internationally for the IRA (particularly in the US where there was a significant groundswell of support for the IRA). Also after Bloody Sunday any vestige of mass support for the troops from the Catholics was pretty much expunged - that's really sad because when we first sent in the troops they were seen as being there to protect the Catholic communities in the sink estates from Protestant attack. Its easy to look back in hindsight but Bloody Sunday really was the death knell for any peace in Northern Ireland for a very long time. I also remember the time when the Beeb would report IRA killings as murders but UDA killings as assassinations - its subtle but it just gives the scent of legitimacy to one but not the other. I guess that was the British Government at work though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 24 November, 2013 Author Share Posted 24 November, 2013 Some good points made Horley . When I went in 69 for only a week by the way . Due to the non requirement of all the fld ambulance . It was a friendly scene . And we were welcomed by the Catholics. But how times changed . In 72 it was different I don't think you can blame Bloody Sunday per sae but it didn't help . There were things going on on both sides that rarely got reported . But all the troops just put up with the crap from both sides . I would like to see the BBC balance the debate. . Ask ira sympathises etc for their responses and then they will give you very angry one sided views. The BBC reporter was using leading question techniques to get the answers he wanted . Hence an unbalanced programme . I did wonder what the programme was about . I really believe that it was anti army . The reason the guys agreed to appear was they wanted some recognition for the danger they put themselves under . But the BBC shafted them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The9 Posted 24 November, 2013 Share Posted 24 November, 2013 How do you draw a line UNDER the sand, anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now