Bloody Sunday inquiry

I don't wish to be premature but..........according the 'Guardian'...

Bloody Sunday killings to be ruled unlawful
Soldiers face prosecution over fatal civilian shootings after 12-year inquiry publishes findings

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/ju...rthern-ireland

Quote:

---

The long-awaited report into the Bloody Sunday massacre will conclude that a number of the fatal shootings of civilians by British soldiers were unlawful killings, the Guardian has learned.

Lord Saville's 12-year inquiry into the deaths, the longest public inquiry in British legal history, will conclude with a report published next Tuesday, putting severe pressure on the Public Prosecution Service in Northern Ireland to prosecute soldiers.

Lord Trimble, the former leader of the Ulster Unionists and one of the architects of the Good Friday agreement, revealed to the Guardian that when Tony Blair agreed to the inquiry in 1998, he warned the then prime minister that any conclusion that departed "one millimetre" from the earlier 1972 Widgery report into the killings would lead to "soldiers in the dock".

---

There is a shock, who would have thought they were guilty?

To be honest, I'd argue there's should be an even bigger case for anyone still alive associated with Widgery to go in the dock. Bloody Sunday was a disgrace (as were many, many actions on all sides during the Troubles), but the subsequent cover-up was even more disgusting IMO and effectively makes Britain and its political and legal system look like a tinpot democracy for the 38 years it has taken to clear this up (again in expectation that that is what Saville will do).

I don't see how this is going to solve anything.

If you're going to haul soldiers before the courts, then in the interests of fairness and justice, McGuinness and the rest of the IRA boys from the time should be hauled before the courts too.

Then it's just going to be can of worms after can of worms being opened, it'll cost a fortune and it'll solve absolutely nothing.

Draw a line and move on, as harsh as that sounds. It may seem crass, but it's the best option. You cannot be selective with justice, if the Bloody Sunday victims are getting justice (and I don't want to sound like a begrudge them justice) then the victims of IRA atrocities deserve justice too. And again, I don't see how that will help the situation at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by awec

I don't see how this is going to solve anything.

If you're going to haul soldiers before the courts, then in the interests of fairness and justice, McGuinness and the rest of the IRA boys from the time should be hauled before the courts too.

Then it's just going to be can of worms after can of worms being opened, it'll cost a fortune and it'll solve absolutely nothing.

Draw a line and move on, as harsh as that sounds. It may seem crass, but it's the best option. You cannot be selective with justice, if the Bloody Sunday victims are getting justice (and I don't want to sound like a begrudge them justice) then the victims of IRA atrocities deserve justice too. And again, I don't see how that will help the situation at all.

---

The Cold Case Review team are and have been doing exactly what you say is "a can of worms" for unsolved crimes committed during the Troubles.

I also disagree that Governments and their agents be held to the same standard as terrorist organisations, which is effectively what you are arguing. Surely its proper and correct to hold them to a higher moral standard?

In any case, I believe for many families (but not all)
1)finding the victims innocent, as Widgery should have done; and
2) discrediting those senior individuals in the armed forces, civil service, Government, legal profession and judiciary who falsified evidence will be enough.

Remember, the only reason all this money had to be "wasted" is because senior figures in the employment of the British Government willfully engaged in a sham inquiry. In the circumstances maybe Bloody Sunday itself couldn't have been stopped, but had the aftermath been handled different, maybe some of the 3,000 odd people who died subsequently may still be alive now.

Bloody Sunday wasn't just another barbic episode in the Troubles, it was almost singularly responsible for strengthening and empowering the Provisional IRA and therefore a key act in shaping 25 years of murder and terror.

The fact that there are lots of other acts of terror that require closure isn't a good enough reason to stop the relatives belatedly clearing the names of those that died.

But what about all those who lost loved ones to IRA bombs and bullets?

Will there be an enquiry into those?

Whilst Bloody Sunday was one massive screw up by the brits, it does not excuse 30 years of terrorism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by awec

But what about all those who lost loved ones to IRA bombs and bullets?

Will there be an enquiry into those?

Whilst Bloody Sunday was one massive screw up by the brits, it does not excuse 30 years of terrorism.

---

For all serious crimes that are "unsolved", then these already fall under the remit of the Historical Enquiry Team (aka Cold Case Review). There is no amnesty for unsolved crimes, never was and as far as I'm aware isn't proposed to be one.

Regardless of who the perpetrator was, the victims and their families wishes for information must be reflected (through an inquiry, Truth & Reconciliation Commission or whatever) and if needs be, the legal process must be allowed to run its course in the absence of a formal amnesty.

Just my 2 cents and my comments apply to any act committed during the troubles by any side.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by awec

But what about all those who lost loved ones to IRA bombs and bullets?

Will there be an enquiry into those?

Whilst Bloody Sunday was one massive screw up by the brits, it does not excuse 30 years of terrorism.

---

Nobody is excusing 30 years of terrorism, and there are victims on each side of the divide, with each one as tragic and unnecessary as the last. This isn't about deciding that some victims are more worthy of having an inquiry than others. Rather, as ORA has pointed out, this inquiry is about ensuring (or attempting to ensure) that goverments and their legitimate armies are held to a higher moral standard than terrorist organisations.

a good thing in my opinion as it will hopefully help give some element of closure (however late) to the families of the victims. Has the British government ever officially apologised for it? Are they likely to do so now?

to awec: although the lives taken by the IRA were tragic and absolutely unneccessary, you are not comparing like with like. Bloody Sunday was murder committed by a State.

Murder is murder.

Awec, can you seriously not see the difference between a killing carried out by an illegal organisation like the IRA, who operate beyond any law, and a killing carried out by a legitimate army who are bound by the law?

There's no reason to hold an inquiry into the the legitimacy of killings by an organisation which, as it is itself illegitimate, cannot act legitimately.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by awec

Murder is murder.

---

But the Widgery report concluded that this was not the case. Whereas an atrocity carried out by the IRA or any other paramilitary organisation is rightly condemned as 'murder', the Widgery report concluded (falsely, if rumours of the Saville report turn out to be true) that the killings were in self-defence, and therefore not 'murder'.

I think there's a slightly dangerous line of logic there- it seems like acts carried out by people (now in government) were not as bad as those carried out by soldiers. I can see the distinction when the IRA were only a minor political force and were mostly engaged in terrorism and organised crime, but now these guys have ministries. Now that they are in the tent, I can certainly see the argument: should not the same standards apply? Especially since there are claims that they still are involved in organised crime?

At the same time, Bloody Sunday was such a pivotal moment in the history of the troubles that it's very important that the truth comes out. But the cost was staggering, and ultimately how many people's views will it change in Northern Ireland?

I appreciate that fudge is necessary to make things work, and things are a million times better than they used to be, but it's little wonder people wonder why they must look the other way from some people's past yet in other cases hundreds of millions are spent to get to the truth.

No wonder Northern Ireland has problems when section of the community (on both sides) seem more intent on denying "the other side" the right to civil liberties, rather than trying to ensure that EVERYONE gets access to these necessitities.

Depressing, but oh so predictable.

EDIT: Mr A, you, and many other in the media, seem to miss the point. If you undertake causal analysis, Bloody Sunday didn't cause the Bloody Sunday Inquiry, Widgery did. I know that might sound obtuse, but I'll repeat again: had Widgery exonerated the innocent, then we wouldn't have needed a £200m inquiry. This inquiry is only investigating Bloody Sunday to undo the wrongs perpetrated by Widgery & the various arms of the British State.

The "why don't we have investigations into Enniskillen, Warrenpoint" argument is also a complete red-herring and a crude attention diverter to stop the Bloody Sunday inquiry. IMO the vast majority of those who support the Bloody Sunday inquiry would certainly not oppose similar inquiries into IRA atrocities and a fair percentage would actually welcome them. But do those asking these questions actually want inquiries into IRA atrocities? Do the loved ones want an inquiry? Or is it just bluster and a clumsy attempt to hide from the truth.

Second, even the mention of IRA atrocities as somehow "opposite" events to Bloody Sunday that act as a counterweight is completely disingenuous. It wasn't IRA members who suffered as a result of Bloody Sunday. It was innocent civilians.

Put simply, Bloody Sunday is the UK's Tianamen Square and I doubt many of the anti-inquiry camp were supporting the Chinese government to brush it under the carpet and asking the UN not to investigate it.

Bloody Sunday report states those killed were innocent.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_...d/10320609.stm

Quote:

---

All those killed on Bloody Sunday were innocent, the Saville Report has ruled.
Thirteen marchers were shot dead on 30 January 1972 in Londonderry when British paratroopers opened fire on crowds at a civil rights demonstration.

Fourteen others were wounded, one of whom later died.
A huge cheer erupted in Guildhall Square in Derry as Prime Minister David Cameron delivered the findings which unequivocally blamed the Army. The report said that the Army fired the first shot of the day in one of the most controversial state killings in the Northern Ireland conflict.

Speaking in the House of Commons, Mr Cameron said what happened on Bloody Sunday was unjustifiable and wrong. He said his government and the country were "deeply sorry" and the findings were "shocking".

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OneRedArmy

No wonder Northern Ireland has problems when section of the community (on both sides) seem more intent on denying "the other side" the right to civil liberties, rather than trying to ensure that EVERYONE gets access to these necessitities.

Depressing, but oh so predictable.

EDIT: Mr A, you, and many other in the media, seem to miss the point. If you undertake causal analysis, Bloody Sunday didn't cause the Bloody Sunday Inquiry, Widgery did. I know that might sound obtuse, but I'll repeat again: had Widgery exonerated the innocent, then we wouldn't have needed a £200m inquiry. This inquiry is only investigating Bloody Sunday to undo the wrongs perpetrated by Widgery & the various arms of the British State.

The "why don't we have investigations into Enniskillen, Warrenpoint" argument is also a complete red-herring and a crude attention diverter to stop the Bloody Sunday inquiry. IMO the vast majority of those who support the Bloody Sunday inquiry would certainly not oppose similar inquiries into IRA atrocities and a fair percentage would actually welcome them. But do those asking these questions actually want inquiries into IRA atrocities? Do the loved ones want an inquiry? Or is it just bluster and a clumsy attempt to hide from the truth.

Second, even the mention of IRA atrocities as somehow "opposite" events to Bloody Sunday that act as a counterweight is completely disingenuous. It wasn't IRA members who suffered as a result of Bloody Sunday. It was innocent civilians.

Put simply, Bloody Sunday is the UK's Tianamen Square and I doubt many of the anti-inquiry camp were supporting the Chinese government to brush it under the carpet and asking the UN not to investigate it.

---

Fair points, well put ORA.

Still, the points about not ignoring the past of some of the people now in positions of power in Northern Ireland, regardless of what side of the divide they come from, stands, even if not entirely relevant to the Bloody Sunday inquiry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr A

Fair points, well put ORA.

Still, the points about not ignoring the past of some of the people now in positions of power in Northern Ireland, regardless of what side of the divide they come from, stands, even if not entirely relevant to the Bloody Sunday inquiry.

---

Absolutely.

But as you say whether or not the British Government and/or judiciary had/have the evidence/appetite to pursue those individuals should not be dependent or seen as a quid pro quo for the Bloody Sunday Inquiry, which many unionist politicians seem to try and equate it to.

I can only assume that certain sections of the community are uncomfortable with the truth being released, as it challenges the same stereotypes and tit-for-tat justifications that the North is built on.
EDIT
As predicted, the bigots get their speak in (ecxerpts from BBC)
JEFFREY DONALDSON, DUP MP FOR LAGAN VALLEY

"The difficulty is that we have the truth on one side, but not the truth on the other.

"We don't know the truth about what Martin McGuinness and the IRA were doing on that day.

"While we regret every death... we must not lose sight of the need for balance."

JIM ALLISTER, TRADITIONAL UNIONIST VOICE LEADER

"My primary thoughts today are with the thousands of innocent victims of the IRA who have never had justice, nor benefitted from any inquiry into why their loved ones died.

"Thus today's jamboree over the Saville report throws into very sharp relief the unacceptable and perverse hierarchy of victims which the preferential treatment of 'Bloody Sunday' has created."

Donaldson the little twerp that he is clearly states that those killed on Bloody Sunday are on the same side as the IRA as if it's some kind of zero sum gain. Mindblowing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OneRedArmy

Put simply, Bloody Sunday is the UK's Tianamen Square and I doubt many of the anti-inquiry camp were supporting the Chinese government to brush it under the carpet and asking the UN not to investigate it.

---

Wow ORA thats an excellent point, made me think, thanks

Just to follow up on the criticism from Unionists like Gregory Campbell, Donaldson and Allister. They talk a lot about Bloody Sunday creating a "hierarchy of victims".

These are the same people that for 30 years have claimed that the Troubles were not a war and were an act of terrorism. Now all of a sudden all the deaths are equal. Convenient. I never thought I'd see Unionists legitimising the IRA, but it shows you what lengths people will go to contort their position to avoid acknowledging an inconvenient truth.

The problem for these bigots is that they HAVE preached consistently throughout the Troubles that there IS very much a hierarchy of victims, and yesterdays findings don't sit easily with their personal hierarchy, which put the Bloody Sunday victims down at the bottom rung of the ladder along with IRA men and the like.

To Allister and his cronies, you can't have your cake and eat it. The various arms of the British forces can't be the victims of terrorism AND be above the law, otherwise they effectively become the terrorists.

Riddle me that one.

It doesn't help that you have Martin McGuinness all over the media saying about how good the verdict was etc. And yet at the same time he was adjudged to have probably been carrying a sub-machine gun on the day. He's part of the reason (albeit a peripheral one) such a terrible thing happened and the IRA weren't slow about using the events to make hay and cause further mayhem for so many years afterwards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OneRedArmy

The problem for these bigots is that they HAVE preached consistently throughout the Troubles that there IS very much a hierarchy of victims, and yesterdays findings don't sit easily with their personal hierarchy, which put the Bloody Sunday victims down at the bottom rung of the ladder along with IRA men and the like.

---

And McAllister is still doing it in the quote you mentioned below.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OneRedArmy

JIM ALLISTER, TRADITIONAL UNIONIST VOICE LEADER
"My primary thoughts today are with the thousands of innocent victims of the IRA who have never had justice, nor benefitted from any inquiry into why their loved ones died.

---

On a day when the aspersions cast upon dead innocent civilians by the British Army in order to make their actions justifiable have finally been revealed as false, thus finally accepting that they were simply innocent victims, McAllister's thoughts are with other victims (whose deaths, let me repeat, are absolutely no less tragic and unnecesssary) whose status as innocent victims has never been questioned. It's a mind-boggling statement really.

Because that's all that Saville has really done - exhonerate the dead, and describe them as just as innocent as victims of other atrocities. McAllister, however, doesn't seem to agree.