Bloody Sunday inquiry - coming soon

[ViolentPanda]

Having had the experience of actually knowing two of the Paras who were there, it was less clear cut than that. However, what is not at issue is that those marchers who were shot dead were not armed, and had not fired at the Paras.

You were in NI, you know how chaotic it could be.

Yes, which is why I'm hostile to the Para case. They acted like a bunch of bloody NAAFI girls, not like professional soldiers. If any of my oppos had gone off like that on a patrol or while covering a demo, I'd have stuck my size 10 so far up their arsehole they'd have puked Parade Gloss.

 

[butchersapron]

It depends whether the evidence was on oath, and also depends on the type of inquiry. From what I can gather, no one can be prosecuted on evidence that they have given.

Anyone who perjured themselves in this inquiry or the previous ones can be prosecuted.

 

[danny la rouge]

British people, I assumed the abbreviation would have been obvious?

No, it isn't obvious.

So, all British people are responsible, and owe an apology? Is that your view?

 

[LiamO]

It was an utter waste of £191m. The enquiry should have reported in considerably less time, and at considerably less cost.

I think you must have fallen on your head as a child. Even a cursory examination of the Inquiry will reveal that the main reason it dragged on so long and cost so much was because of a sustained campaign of obstruction, delaying tactics, court cases and protracted appeals conducted against it - both by various institutions of State and by paras and cops forced to testify against their will.

 

[articul8]

It depends whether the evidence was on oath, and also depends on the type of inquiry. From what I can gather, no one can be prosecuted on evidence that they have given.

Soldier S effectively admitted perjury. But I don't think that prosecuting someone who was 18 at the time and told to lie by the military police is necessarily "in the public interest". but there should be prosecutions of those at the top who essentially gave them the wink to do it, and helped to cover it up.

 

[Sasaferrato]

That was a war, and while you may not recognize a guerilla army the populace did. Shit, it was messy. But that does not mean an apology for bloody sunday should not be issued. Half the problem of a guerilla army supported by the populace is that eventually the conventional occupying force will simply start opening up on the civilians. As we have seen.

As I said, the Paras were fired on. They didn't know where the shots had come from, but, there was an assertion that they had come from the crowd. When another shot was fired, the Paras opened up on the crowd. It was a fuck up, not a conspiracy.

 

[Sasaferrato]

Christ, Sas mate, the actions of that day were nasty.

Yes, we understand the confusion of the times, the fear the soldiers felt, but there is a responsibility that soldiers accept and they abrogated it on that day. They then acted to cover this up, in doing so adding insult to the significant injury caused to the families of those killed.

As a separate point, the actions of those 'on the other side' were equally brutal, and I for one find the deaths of your colleagues dreadful, but we're talking about the deaths of innocent people here, killed by representatives of the state. That just cannot, in any way, shape or form, be acceptable.

I'm not defending the actions of the Paras. What happened shouldn't have happened, but the conspiracy theorists on here are not correct. It was not sanctioned, or sought, by senior officers.

 

[ViolentPanda]

That was not my experience.

Perhaps you're too ready to take offence on behalf of the dead.
Speaking as one of the 5,000+ soldiers injured there, I've thought long and hard about the whys and the wherefores of Northern Ireland/Ulster/The Six Counties, and it strikes me now, as it has done for the past 28 years, that if the state whose army I served in had been a little more honest and a little less willing to help maintain the status quo with regard to the Protestant hegemony, the dead and the injured would have numbered far fewer.
So I don't hold the various paramilitary units to the same standards as I do the British state. What the paramilitaries did was react to a situation created by the British state (whether directly or through the Protestant-slanted power structures in NI).

 

[articul8]

As I said, the Paras were fired on. They didn't know where the shots had come from, but, there was an assertion that they had come from the crowd. When another shot was fired, the Paras opened up on the crowd. It was a fuck up, not a conspiracy.

"there was an assertion" - what kind of fucking mealy mouthed statement is this? And it was pure coincidence that Major-General Ford had previously sent a memo advocating shooting ringleaders?

 

[butchersapron]

As I said, the Paras were fired on. They didn't know where the shots had come from, but, there was an assertion that they had come from the crowd. When another shot was fired, the Paras opened up on the crowd. It was a fuck up, not a conspiracy.

The inquiry finds different. It finds that these claims were lies concocted post-shooting to offer justifications for their actions. It finds this claim of yours to be a lie.

 

[LiamO]

As I said, the Paras were fired on. They didn't know where the shots had come from, but, there was an assertion that they had come from the crowd.

Maybe you should have given evidence yourself then?

You could have been the Expert 'fat bloke down the pub reckons...' witness. In fact they could have saved £200 million if they'd just given you a ring.

By the way, a post-event rationalisation is termed a confabulation. I'm not even suggesting your two 'mates' are lying... just confabulating.

 

[Sasaferrato]

Anyone who perjured themselves in this inquiry or the previous ones can be prosecuted.

Perhaps, if they have perjured themselves; they cannot however be prosecuted for anything incriminating that they said in their evidence.

I think that there is little likelihood of anyone being prosecuted.

 

[butchersapron]

There's no perhaps about it - they can be done for perjury.

 

[LiamO]

It was not sanctioned, or sought, by senior officers.

So the naughty squaddies did it all by themselves? Glad you cleared that up and that working-class Oiks are once more to shoulder the blame. Would hate to have to consider the 'appalling vista' that any Sandhurst types had any responsibility.

Now perhaps you can detail precisely what steps the 'senior officers' did to reel them back in once the slaughter had started.

 

[ViolentPanda]

There's no perhaps about it - they can be done for perjury.

But they won't be, and even if it did miraculously come about, there are so many strategies they could follow to avoid admission, that a conviction would be unlikely.

 

[Sasaferrato]

Maybe you should have given evidence yourself then?

You could have been the Expert 'fat bloke down the pub reckons...' witness. In fact they could have saved £200 million if they'd just given you a ring.

By the way, a post-event rationalisation is termed a confabulation. I'm not even suggesting your two 'mates' are lying... just confabulating.

No. Remember, at the time I knew them, the matter was dead and buried, there was no indication of a further inquiry. As to giving evidence, hearsay is not admissible.

 

[Sasaferrato]

So the naughty squaddies did it all by themselves? Glad you cleared that up and that working-class Oiks are once more to shoulder the blame. Would hate to have to consider the 'appalling vista' that any Sandhurst types had any responsibility.

Now perhaps you can detail precisely what steps the 'senior officers' did to reel them back in once the slaughter had started.

Look, I've humoured your shite up to now, however, it is patently clear that you really do not know what you are talking about.

Sorry, but that is actually quite funny.

 

[Sasaferrato]

The inquiry finds different. It finds that these claims were lies concocted post-shooting to offer justifications for their actions. It finds this claim of yours to be a lie.

When guys have brick dust falling on their heads, it tends to be bullets that cause it.

 

[butchersapron]

Or a skin-saving lie.

 

[Sasaferrato]

Perhaps you're too ready to take offence on behalf of the dead.
Speaking as one of the 5,000+ soldiers injured there, I've thought long and hard about the whys and the wherefores of Northern Ireland/Ulster/The Six Counties, and it strikes me now, as it has done for the past 28 years, that if the state whose army I served in had been a little more honest and a little less willing to help maintain the status quo with regard to the Protestant hegemony, the dead and the injured would have numbered far fewer.
So I don't hold the various paramilitary units to the same standards as I do the British state. What the paramilitaries did was react to a situation created by the British state (whether directly or through the Protestant-slanted power structures in NI).

Everyone is entitled to their view. Their view is not necessarily correct though.

 

[DotCommunist]

But they won't be, and even if it did miraculously come about, there are so many strategies they could follow to avoid admission, that a conviction would be unlikely.

Of course they won't. Like the police, state tools operate under that knowledge that 'We'll back you up, regardless' or until it is politically expedient anyway.

 

[Sasaferrato]

Or a skin-saving lie.

Fine. You have your view, I have mine.

 

[Sasaferrato]

Of course they won't. Like the police, state tools operate under that knowledge that 'We'll back you up, regardless' or until it is politically expedient anyway.

Like the failure to prosecute Adams and McGuinees you mean? Two men with blood on their hands.

Edited to add:

I think that you will find that quid pro quo will prevail.

 

[audiotech]

Those shot and killed:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/foyle_and_west/10138851.stm

 

[Sasaferrato]

"there was an assertion" - what kind of fucking mealy mouthed statement is this? And it was pure coincidence that Major-General Ford had previously sent a memo advocating shooting ringleaders?

No problem with that, had they shot the right people.

 

[DotCommunist]

Like the failure to prosecute Adams and McGuinees you mean? Two men with blood on their hands.

Edited to add:

I think that you will find the quid pro quo will prevail.

tell me when the paras responsible starve to death in prison eh?

e2a

seen your edit, and yeah it probably will end in that unsatisfying but grudgingly accepted by both parties solution.

 

[Sasaferrato]

tell me when the paras responsible starve to death in prison eh?

Eh? Those that starved themselves to death chose to do so. They wanted to be martyrs, they got their wish. Do you think that their human rights should have been breached by force feeding them?

 

[Sasaferrato]

tell me when the paras responsible starve to death in prison eh?

e2a

seen your edit, and yeah it probably will end in that unsatisfying but grudgingly accepted by both parties solution.

The time comes when you have to let go.

 

[pesh]

i agree. walk into the light Sas.

 

[LiamO]

No. Remember, at the time I knew them, the matter was dead and buried, there was no indication of a further inquiry.

how the fuck can any of us 'remember' when you allegedly knew people none of us have never met? We don't live in your head, do we? Although I am beginning to think that there may well be more than one occupant of your thick skull.