# Bloody Sunday



## Baron (Jun 16, 2010)

More than 38 years after it happened, the Saville report has finally cleared the victims of blame and found that the soldiers fired first.  The report is critical of sending "aggressive" paratroopers into confrontation with the civilian polulation.  

David Cameron has made a public apology and calls the killings, which happened during a demonstration in the Bogside area of Derry, unjustified and unjustifiable.

It comes as no surprise to find that paratroopers, who falsified statements according to the report, are now critical of the findings.  

The 5,000-page, 10-volume report concluded that: 

the order to go into the Bogside should never have been given;
none of the victims had a firearm;
no warnings were given by the paratroopers – in breach of the soldiers’ terms of engagement;
none of the shots was fired in response to attacks or threatened attacks;
some of those killed and injured were fleeing or going to assistance of the dying.

[video=youtube;JFM7Ty1EEvs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFM7Ty1EEvs[/video]


----------



## Olly Buckle (Jun 16, 2010)

I was pretty sure of most of that 38 years and several million pounds ago. What amazes me is that the idiots are *still* trying to use hired killers as policemen in Afghanistan.


----------



## spider8 (Jun 16, 2010)

Olly Buckle said:


> I was pretty sure of most of that 38 years and several million pounds ago. What amazes me is that the idiots are *still* trying to use hired killers as policemen in Afghanistan.


Same here.

Lesson for the day: Don't throw stones at people with guns.


----------



## Baron (Jun 16, 2010)

Olly Buckle said:


> I was pretty sure of most of that 38 years and several million pounds ago. What amazes me is that the idiots are *still* trying to use hired killers as policemen in Afghanistan.


 
I was 19 and in an RAF outfit that was working with the parachute regiment at the time this happened.  I had some first hand knowledge of what actually happened and I was appalled that the original report, produced at the time, made a complete whitewash of it all.

Making war on unarmed civilians, including women and children, seems to be the nature of things now.  Perhaps the fact that there's talk of prosecuting soldiers involved in the Bloody Sunday incident might cause pause for thought about how soldiers are being used to police areas today.  I somehow doubt it.  Bloody Sunday is certainly not the only unjustified action in the Irish troubles.  It is the one that's drawn most publicity.  Perhaps I'm cynical but I think any prosecutions will be little more than a token gesture.  It should make people think about and change the way things are done.  It probably won't.


----------



## darknite_johanne (Jun 16, 2010)

spider8 said:


> Lesson for the day: Don't throw stones at people with guns.



I'll remember that when we go on riots.


----------



## Olly Buckle (Jun 17, 2010)

It won't necessarily save you, darknite. Some of those shot that day were running away.




> Making war on unarmed civilians, including women and children, seems to be the nature of things now


New tactics are continually being invented in warfare, the model of set piece battles on battlefields is outdated and the dominance of the mechanised industrial society means its opponents can not confront it in materiel terms. We now have "War amongst the people" where combatants are as hidden as "Fish in the ocean".


----------



## KangTheMad (Jun 17, 2010)

The problem is that Al-Qaeda and Taliban don't have any respect for proper codes of conduct in engagement. No uniforms, not so much as an armband to ID themselves in battle. They dress up as a normal person and hide bombs under their clothing, or guns, and shoot up train stations ect. Its the same thing as what the Viet Cong did in Vietnam, which led to the Mai Lai massacre.


----------



## Edgewise (Jun 17, 2010)

Guerrilla warfare is an uphill battle for the invader.  A lot like jujitsu.


----------



## Baron (Jun 17, 2010)

The fact that Prime Minister David Cameron has made an apology to the Irish people makes him a better man than any of his predecessors.


----------



## JosephB (Jun 17, 2010)

Bill Clinton went on big apologizing rampage - apologizing for practically everything unjust that happened in the country's history. I think a lot of it was posturing done for political expediency. I have a hard time seeing how an individual can apologize for something with which he had nothing to do.


----------



## caelum (Jun 17, 2010)

It's politics, Joseph.  Politicians are always fake.  It's all about presenting the proper face.


----------



## JosephB (Jun 17, 2010)

Heh. That was pretty much my point. Here's the giveaway -- "I think a lot of it was posturing done for political expediency."


----------



## caelum (Jun 17, 2010)

Okay, yeah.  Though once in a blue moon, a real revolutionary comes along.  They're pretty rare, though.


----------



## Baron (Jun 17, 2010)

This is pretty condemning of the British Army by a British Prime Minister.  That doesn't read like posturing.



> The Prime Minister said:
> 
> No warning had been given to any civilians before the soldiers opened fire
> None of the soldiers fired in response to attacks by petrol bombers or stone throwers
> ...


----------



## JosephB (Jun 17, 2010)

That sounds more  like he's setting the record straight -- and acknowledging who's at fault for  what happened. That's important of course -- especially for relatives and loved  ones. But I think a real apology would have to come from those who were involved  -- and those involved with covering up the facts. He's simply not in a position  to apologize, in my opinion -- not in any meaningful way.

P.S. -- I'd be interested in knowing who initiated the inquiry and was responsible for the report in the first place. Seems like that's who deserves the kudos. Did he just grab it and read it on TV?


----------



## wacker (Jun 17, 2010)

I would just like to say that I hope this brings some piece of mind to the families of the victims. As a real token Gesture, The families should be paid at least £1.5 million sterling plus interest for each and every year per person, they had to wait for this victory.

Also The victims and their families should be shown the utmost respect for all that hardship and ridicule they suffered (victims families of course)
It was a sad day when they where wiped out without a second thought.

As I mentioned above this will only be a token gesture to the families... no amount of money could ever replace the lives of lost ones.


wacker


----------



## Baron (Jun 17, 2010)

JosephB said:


> That sounds more  like he's setting the record straight -- and acknowledging who's at fault for  what happened. That's important of course -- especially for relatives and loved  ones. But I think a real apology would have to come from those who were involved  -- and those involved with covering up the facts. He's simply not in a position  to apologize, in my opinion -- not in any meaningful way.
> 
> P.S. -- I'd be interested in knowing who initiated the inquiry and was responsible for the report in the first place. Seems like that's who deserves the kudos. Did he just grab it and read it on TV?



The Rt Hon Lord Saville of Newdigate (Chairman)
The Hon Mr William L. Hoyt
The Hon Mr John L. Toohey



> "... it is expedient that a Tribunal be established for inquiring into a definite matter of urgent public importance, namely the events on Sunday 30th January 1972 which led to loss of life in connection with the procession in Londonderry on that day, taking account of any new information relevant to events on that day"
> 
> Resolution of the House of Commons, 30th January 1998,
> and of the House of Lords, 2nd February 1998


 
The report.


----------



## JosephB (Jun 17, 2010)

From what I read, Blair initiated the inquiry.


----------



## wacker (Jun 18, 2010)

It doesn't really matter who initiated the enquiry. What matters most and will be remembered in the history books is which Prime Minister was the one to apologize for that massacre and to absolve them from any wrong doing... i.e. innocent of all charges.


----------



## JosephB (Jun 18, 2010)

Well, I'm going to disagree with that. Apparently, there would be no report if Blair hadn't called for it. It took 12 years -- so if it had taken less time, or more time, someone else might have been in office when it was released. And so it happened that David Cameron was in office at the time the report was released. Did he have a choice, from a political standpoint, other than to endorse the findings? What would be the ramifications of disputing or ignoring them? Also, I have yet to see, despite reading a few articles, that Cameron actually said the word "apology" or "apologize." Did he say that, in no uncertain terms?


----------



## Sam (Jun 19, 2010)

I love the way Cameron says he had a "hard time" believing that British soldiers -- who he believes are the best soldiers in the world -- could have done what they did and lied about it. Give me a feckin' break. The amount of atrocities committed by British soldiers in this country was unbelievable. Bloody Sunday was just the most severe. 

For me, personally, David Cameron can stick his "apology" where the sun don't shine. It doesn't matter how heartfelt or sincere it was; fourteen people, seven of whom were teenagers, were murdered that day. None of them were armed, none caused any threat, and five of them were shot in the back. How can you be a threat if you're running away from someone? 

The IRA, in the years following Bloody Sunday, killed a lot of British soldiers in retaliation for those events. Some were only doing their jobs, but the reality is that I can't have any sympathy for them -- not after what their compatriots did in Derry.


----------



## The Backward OX (Jun 19, 2010)

The English army - from the top down - have always been famous as murderers.

Amritsar
Harry Morant 
Agincourt


----------

