Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Ballymurphy massacre
Options
Comments
-
Won't open a thread because of concerns for whataboutery
You're some ticket downcow.. that pretty much defines your entire contribution to this thread.
Why did you delete this bit from my post
“ Stick to the facts. I have repeatedly said the BM victims were entirely innocent and that it was entirely wrong.”
Looks like you have a nasty agenda0 -
-
Why did you delete this bit from my post
“ Stick to the facts. I have repeatedly said the BM victims were entirely innocent and that it was entirely wrong.”
Looks like you have a nasty agenda
If believing that makes you more comfortable in your relentless and offensive whataboutery then so be it.0 -
I came on here and affirmed the BM victims and there innocence.
I have since responded to two bits of nonsense from posters ie
They said that no government tried to prevent prosecutions of those who murdered Protestants - I pointed out the Tony blair assurances to ira murderers
They said that the victims of British state violence deserve investigations more than the rest of the victims - I pointed out that republicans have resisted any notion of hierarchy of victims, rendering this position total hypocrisy.
Simple, accurate, consistent
At your service
Its not about weather some victims deserve investigations over other victims.
Its the fact that on one hand you had terrorist organisations carrying out attrocities which were rightly condemned by all, they were called out for being terrorists and vilified in the british media because of it. They were investigated and prosecutions were made against the perpetrators.
But on the other hand you had the british army who were held up by the unionist community and british press as the heroes and keepers of the peace fighting evil terrorists.
When they themselves carried out horrific murders without any justification the truth was hidden away and instead the british just blamed the victims and tarred them as being linked to the IRA.
The victims families have had to deal with this cover up for 50 years.
So while all victims of violence in NI is tragic in there own ways you can not compare the two situations.0 -
They said that the victims of British state violence deserve investigations more than the rest of the victims - I pointed out that republicans have resisted any notion of hierarchy of victims, rendering this position total hypocrisy.
I notice you haven't responded to my posts so far, The argument isn't whether one deserves justice more than the other, it's the responsibility of the government to provide justice and they have failed, they have covered up and blacked the name of their citizens for 50 years to do so.
Perhaps a direct question, do you think the British state and it's representatives should be held to the same standards, provide the same honesty and justice for their victims as terrorists?0 -
Advertisement
-
-
Acknowledged!
It took 50 years for those citizens to get justice from the state , why? Is it possible that the state, from top to bottom, was rotten?
Of course its rotten , an example to look at would be the Canadian government disbanding a parachute regiment after war crimes including a murder along with racism and other questionable behaviours in Somalia.
Britain will fight to avoid prosecutions of its soldiers when it could disband 1 Para and dispatch the memory of those thugs to history. Instead Britain prefers to put these men on a pedestal.0 -
Bloody Sunday soldiers now suspected to have been involved in this.0
-
lurleen lumpkin wrote: »Bloody Sunday soldiers now suspected to have been involved in this.
Almost like it's not going away, you know...
Imagine if he'd apologised properly on Thursday in the Commons...
As always, it's not the crime that usually takes people down, it's the cover up.0 -
I notice you haven't responded to my posts so far, The argument isn't whether one deserves justice more than the other, it's the responsibility of the government to provide justice and they have failed, they have covered up and blacked the name of their citizens for 50 years to do so.
Perhaps a direct question, do you think the British state and it's representatives should be held to the same standards, provide the same honesty and justice for their victims as terrorists?
I like direct questions. Yes absolutely.
That means you cannot blacken the names of the many 10,000s who served with honour and honesty. Absolutely go after those who stepped outside the law, and indeed even more so those who gave the orders to go outside the law. But do it equally and fairly.
I am of the view (probably a minority view) that we can’t go on endlessly investigating old men with zero chance of convictions. I would rather see the police time being put into convicting the peadeos , rapists, etc who are a current risk to women and children. We can’t afford to do both.
But if we are going after those from the troubles then let’s start by rescinding the letters to Gerry Kelly etc and get the likes of him in jail along with the soldiers at BM.
Do you think we should also be investigating those soldiers that are dead and M McM etc?0 -
Advertisement
-
lurleen lumpkin wrote: »Bloody Sunday soldiers now suspected to have been involved in this.
Bloody Sunday paras were 1st Battalion support company , Ballymurphy were first battalion too .0 -
lurleen lumpkin wrote: »Bloody Sunday soldiers now suspected to have been involved in this.
I didn’t know a great deal about either case but I thought this was the case.0 -
I like direct questions. Yes absolutely.
That means you cannot blacken the names of the many 10,000s who served with honour and honesty. Absolutely go after those who stepped outside the law, and indeed even more so those who gave the orders to go outside the law. But do it equally and fairly.
I am of the view (probably a minority view) that we can’t go on endlessly investigating old men with zero chance of convictions. I would rather see the police time being put into convicting the peadeos , rapists, etc who are a current risk to women and children. We can’t afford to do both.
But if we are going after those from the troubles then let’s start by rescinding the letters to Gerry Kelly etc and get the likes of him in jail along with the soldiers at BM.
Do you think we should also be investigating those soldiers that are dead and M McM etc?
And you Downcow cannot blacken the names of the thousands who served in the IRA on the actions of a few who killed civilians.0 -
I like direct questions. Yes absolutely.
That means you cannot blacken the names of the many 10,000s who served with honour and honesty. Absolutely go after those who stepped outside the law, and indeed even more so those who gave the orders to go outside the law. But do it equally and fairly.
I am of the view (probably a minority view) that we can’t go on endlessly investigating old men with zero chance of convictions. I would rather see the police time being put into convicting the peadeos , rapists, etc who are a current risk to women and children. We can’t afford to do both.
But if we are going after those from the troubles then let’s start by rescinding the letters to Gerry Kelly etc and get the likes of him in jail along with the soldiers at BM.
Do you think we should also be investigating those soldiers that are dead and M McM etc?
You're right , its it's pointless trying to prosecute old men , a waste of time. Prosectue the battalion , recognise it for what it stands for and disband it .0 -
Why did you delete this bit from my post
“ Stick to the facts. I have repeatedly said the BM victims were entirely innocent and that it was entirely wrong.”
Looks like you have a nasty agenda
One of your first posts on this thread was derailment mentioning the IRA, deflection.
You also pointed that you were not aware of the Ballymurphy Massacre which as a resident in N. ireland, I simply do not believe. You are either ignorant or a troll, can't decide which.0 -
I didn’t know a great deal about either case but I thought this was the case.
You also claimed "hundreds of protestants tortured by the IRA before they were murdered".
Not just were you bringing up whataboutery but also making false claims in an attempt to deflect from BA killings, then when posters asked you to back up your false claims you give the old I don't want to derail the thread.
What a joke.0 -
-
One of your first posts on this thread was derailment mentioning the IRA, deflection.
You also pointed that you were not aware of the Ballymurphy Massacre which as a resident in N. ireland, I simply do not believe. You are either ignorant or a troll, can't decide which.
I absolutely did not say that. You guys are queuing up to misquote me or edit me my posts.
I said I was not aware of the extent of their innocence and the extent of the wrongdoing by those who killed them, until watching an extended news item the other night.
I thought I was being supportive of them with that post but you manage to twist it in your attempt to hold to the line that the brits are bad and the Irish are good0 -
What is so absurd about it? You said I cannot blacken the names of thousands of British soldiers who served in the troubles on the actions of a few, what is the difference between what you said and what I said?
What about the collusion between the state and loyalist forces, Loyalist gangs were little more than proxy gangs for the intelligence services it maybe only a few of the thousands of crown forces actually directly involved in it but it is state sponsored like the soldiers who commited many massacres in Ireland.
And yes Downcow if you want evidence for this that most people know already I will gladly provide it for you as you love to ask for evidence for claims but never like to give evidence for your own.0 -
To everyone jumping on Downcow - I don't mean to speak for him but he was clearly raised in the Unionist tradition and more than likely genuinely wasn't aware of all of the awful acts the British state carried out on this island, including BM. I don't know what to call it but those of us on the outside clearly see the willfull blindness perputuated in Unionism - quite a large proportion of Unionists would have absolutely been led to believe the British gov line, and that BM and BS massacres were carried out as a result of IRA gunmen. Correct me if I'm wrong downcow.
Now that you know this isn't the case Downcow, and that Catholics were being terrorised in their homes and communities and what is proven to be a murderous army (and also had to contend with violent Loyalism and a hostile police force) , I hope your next logical conclusion be the realization that for many Catholics the IRA was a nessecary evil, born out of a need for protection at any cost. Not only had Catholics been abandoned by their government while being firebombed out of their homes, but were being genuinely terrorised and even murdered with impunity by them. The massacres at BM and BS led to the rise of the IRA and in turn loyalist paras, and down the line thousands of deaths, including the unfortunate ones you mentioned in your community. I can understand if this is difficult to believe if you have grown up knowing a totally different line
For this alone, shouldn't the soldiers who murdered innocents, the generals who gave the orders, and the people in government who covered it up be held to account, at all costs? Without this, how can Unionism persuade the populace that remaining part of the UK is worth it when proven cold blooded murder of British citizens is allowed with impunity? What pride does Unionism really have in Britain if it never holds it to the highest standards for all of the people of Northern Ireland?
And for the poster who say the soldiers are too old, that makes no sense, what age is the cutoff?0 -
Advertisement
-
-
Considering everyone and their uncle knew they were innocent for the last fifty years, this is an admission of a huge blindspot on your part. Perhaps now would be a good time to take a step back and assess where you might have other blindspots with regards to the actions of British forces on this island... I doubt you will, however.I absolutely did not say that. You guys are queuing up to misquote me or edit me my posts.
I said I was not aware of the extent of their innocence and the extent of the wrongdoing by those who killed them, until watching an extended news item the other night.
I thought I was being supportive of them with that post but you manage to twist it in your attempt to hold to the line that the brits are bad and the Irish are good0 -
I like direct questions. Yes absolutely.
That means you cannot blacken the names of the many 10,000s who served with honour and honesty. Absolutely go after those who stepped outside the law, and indeed even more so those who gave the orders to go outside the law. But do it equally and fairly.
I am of the view (probably a minority view) that we can’t go on endlessly investigating old men with zero chance of convictions. I would rather see the police time being put into convicting the peadeos , rapists, etc who are a current risk to women and children. We can’t afford to do both.
But if we are going after those from the troubles then let’s start by rescinding the letters to Gerry Kelly etc and get the likes of him in jail along with the soldiers at BM.
Do you think we should also be investigating those soldiers that are dead and M McM etc?
So the question was do you think the state should be held to the same account as terrorists. It seems the answer is yes if I follow correctly?
Thought I've been clear that the state should be held to a higher account. The terrorists (or most of) are covered under the Belfast agreement, so it's time for a truth forum on that end. None of them were supposed to be protectors of the peace(edit-whatever they may do now). I would however make co-operation with the truth and reconciliation forum a condition to their protection from prosecution.
The state on the other hand were supposed to protect all its citizens, and have the information to be truthful and wasn't, blackening the names of their victims including former service men to cover their actions. The Canadian Judge Cory's investigation into finucane was raided by MI5, records sealed for 100years and we still await his recommendation for an inquiry, saville called up General Jackson (we know who he becomes) in an interview, the discrepancies in the hand written report of Mjr Loden provided and the press releases of the events on the night of Bloody sunday but it gets whitewashed at the end and the soldiers on the street take all the blame which isn't right either. The state investigations shouldn't require decades of police investigation or massively expensive public inquires. It should do it's duty and provide the evidence we know it has rather than seal it for 100 years. The unwillingness to do so is why, as you say the whole army gets tarnished
For the record, any collusion by the Irish state should also be investigated... But it is non exactly on a similar level0 -
-
To everyone jumping on Downcow - I don't mean to speak for him but he was clearly raised in the Unionist tradition and more than likely genuinely wasn't aware of all of the awful acts the British state carried out on this island, including BM. I don't know what to call it but those of us on the outside clearly see the willfull blindness perputuated in Unionism - quite a large proportion of Unionists would have absolutely been led to believe the British gov line, and that BM and BS massacres were carried out as a result of IRA gunmen. Correct me if I'm wrong downcow.
Now that you know this isn't the case Downcow, and that Catholics were being terrorised in their homes and communities and what is proven to be a murderous army (and also had to contend with violent Loyalism and a hostile police force) , I hope your next logical conclusion be the realization that for many Catholics the IRA was a nessecary evil, born out of a need for protection at any cost. Not only had Catholics been abandoned by their government while being firebombed out of their homes, but were being genuinely terrorised and even murdered with impunity by them. The massacres at BM and BS led to the rise of the IRA and in turn loyalist paras, and down the line thousands of deaths, including the unfortunate ones you mentioned in your community. I can understand if this is difficult to believe if you have grown up knowing a totally different line
For this alone, shouldn't the soldiers who murdered innocents, the generals who gave the orders, and the people in government who covered it up be held to account, at all costs? Without this, how can Unionism persuade the populace that remaining part of the UK is worth it when proven cold blooded murder of British citizens is allowed with impunity? What pride does Unionism really have in Britain if it never holds it to the highest standards for all of the people of Northern Ireland?
And for the poster who say the soldiers are too old, that makes no sense, what age is the cutoff?
That’s a fair challenge, but you present it in and entirely one sided manner with no context. It ignores ‘the willfull blindness perpetuated by nationalists’ (clearly evident on this thread)
It was a very dirty conflict. I think there is little doubt that, although not spotless, the cleanest hands of all the actors in this were the British soldiers. Of course they got stuff wrong, but to single them out for attention is just unfair.
Can I ask you a question?
We had a deputy first minister in power in this land who was responsible for numerous deaths in my community, carried out and order many tortures, and killing of innocence on both sides of the community. He maintained until his death that he left the ira in 1972 which obviously is lies.
We currently have SF MLAs including sitting in the executive (and the dail) who have murdered, tortured, hidden child abuse, set their so-called Comrads up to be killed by both the Ira and the brits, and driven my community out of areas. These people did not rule over us 50 years ago, they are currently ruling over us. Should they be through out of office and investigated.
Do you accept all of this?0 -
That’s a fair challenge, but you present it in and entirely one sided manner with no context. It ignores ‘the willfull blindness perpetuated by nationalists’ (clearly evident on this thread)
It was a very dirty conflict. I think there is little doubt that, although not spotless, the cleanest hands of all the actors in this were the British soldiers. Of course they got stuff wrong, but to single them out for attention is just unfair.
Can I ask you a question?
We had a deputy first minister in power in this land who was responsible for numerous deaths in my community, carried out and order many tortures, and killing of innocence on both sides of the community. He maintained until his death that he left the ira in 1972 which obviously is lies.
We currently have SF MLAs including sitting in the executive (and the dail) who have murdered, tortured, hidden child abuse, set their so-called Comrads up to be killed by both the Ira and the brits, and driven my community out of areas. These people did not rule over us 50 years ago, they are currently ruling over us. Should they be through out of office and investigated.
Do you accept all of this?
I can see how you think I'm a supporter of physical force Republicanism (I've reread my posts) but I'm not. I have never voted for Sinn Fein in my life, and I am not a supporter of the IRA (although as I have said, I can clearly see why they grew as they did, and why vulnerable and embattled communities adopted them as a necessary evil).
The IRA do not represent me or my views at all. I am in no position to answer for them or defend them, no more than I expect you to answer for or defend Loyalist paramilitaries (I assume by your posts that you don't support or feel their actions represent you?). I am from the ROI and come from a traditionally Fianna Fail family, which wont win me any plaudits on here with anyone. It also probably gave me the luxury of not having to make the choice to support armed Republicanism as I grew up far from the bigotry and sectarianism that was present in the North.
Anybody who covers up child abuse or who has murdered and tortured innocent people, should face justice, regardless of their political leanings or those of the victims. If anybody who represented me was guilty of those crimes I would absolutely feel they should face justice.
The difference here is that as a Unionist, the British state does represent you, has carried out proven murder of innocent British citizens on British soil, and you seem to not want to hold them to account, because other groups who do not represent you killed people too.
And your remark that "these people did not rule over us 50 years ago", the British state that carried this out, covered it up, and refuses to prosecute the people involved in this are still in power, and still "rule over" you.0 -
So the question was do you think the state should be held to the same account as terrorists. It seems the answer is yes if I follow correctly?
Thought I've been clear that the state should be held to a higher account. The terrorists (or most of) are covered under the Belfast agreement, so it's time for a truth forum on that end. None of them were supposed to be protectors of the peace(edit-whatever they may do now). I would however make co-operation with the truth and reconciliation forum a condition to their protection from prosecution.
The state on the other hand were supposed to protect all its citizens, and have the information to be truthful and wasn't, blackening the names of their victims including former service men to cover their actions. The Canadian Judge Cory's investigation into finucane was raided by MI5, records sealed for 100years and we still await his recommendation for an inquiry, saville called up General Jackson (we know who he becomes) in an interview, the discrepancies in the hand written report of Mjr Loden provided and the press releases of the events on the night of Bloody sunday but it gets whitewashed at the end and the soldiers on the street take all the blame which isn't right either. The state investigations shouldn't require decades of police investigation or massively expensive public inquires. It should do it's duty and provide the evidence we know it has rather than seal it for 100 years. The unwillingness to do so is why, as you say the whole army gets tarnished
For the record, any collusion by the Irish state should also be investigated... But it is non exactly on a similar level
Collusion with the Irish state is the same as the low level collusion with the UDR a few rogues but nothing high level and institutionalised.0 -
Collusion with the Irish state is the same as the low level collusion with the UDR a few rogues but nothing high level and institutionalised.
By comparison of scale, there was not the same amount on the irish side but i wont call out one and not the other, but are you sure on a "few rouges" on the UDR?...Concerns about collusion, however, can be traced back to 1973 in a document entitled 'Subversion in the UDR'. Military intelligence raised concerns in this document a significant proportion of UDR members - between five and 15 per cent - were members of the Ulster Defence Association, UVF, Orange Volunteers or Vanguard Service Corps.
Then again, how much was done?...
hard to get higher level than thatcher I'd say.... and still going on in the early 00s. Just to note, 2003 is the year the Para press officer, so ties to ballymurphy becoems head of the British ArmyA SENIOR RUC officer has revealed he personally raised concerns about paramilitary collusion with Margaret Thatcher but the issue was ignored.
Former Special Branch head Raymond White said he asked the British government for a legal framework for the handling of agents within paramilitary groups.
But in a new TV documentary he admits the Thatcher administration's attitude to using agents was "carry on, but don't get caught".
Ex-Police Ombudsman Nuala O'Loan has also claimed that in 2003 senior British government officials attempted to pressure her into stopping her investigation into new murders involving collusion.
and anotherThe (da silva) report claimed that employees of the state “actively facilitated” Finucane’s murder, through a dark web of collusion between elements of the British security forces and Loyalist paramilitaries. The De Silva Report also claimed that successive British governments knew about such collusion in relation to Finucane’s murder but ‘did nothing about it’.
and yet according to downcow and despite being directly responsible for 299 deaths (by comparison the garda siochana & irish army combined are responsible for 5, that 299 also excludes the UDR, and the various police bodies).
I asked if you thought the British state & its representatives at the time should be held to a higher level of account than terrorists, given they were the ones responsible for justice & protection of its citizens, apparantly its unfair to do so. ‘the willfull blindness perpetuated by nationalists'.... hmmmI think there is little doubt that, although not spotless, the cleanest hands of all the actors in this were the British soldiers. Of course they got stuff wrong, but to single them out for attention is just unfair.0 -
I can see how you think I'm a supporter of physical force Republicanism (I've reread my posts) but I'm not. I have never voted for Sinn Fein in my life, and I am not a supporter of the IRA (although as I have said, I can clearly see why they grew as they did, and why vulnerable and embattled communities adopted them as a necessary evil).
The IRA do not represent me or my views at all. I am in no position to answer for them or defend them, no more than I expect you to answer for or defend Loyalist paramilitaries (I assume by your posts that you don't support or feel their actions represent you?). I am from the ROI and come from a traditionally Fianna Fail family, which wont win me any plaudits on here with anyone. It also probably gave me the luxury of not having to make the choice to support armed Republicanism as I grew up far from the bigotry and sectarianism that was present in the North.
Anybody who covers up child abuse or who has murdered and tortured innocent people, should face justice, regardless of their political leanings or those of the victims. If anybody who represented me was guilty of those crimes I would absolutely feel they should face justice.
The difference here is that as a Unionist, the British state does represent you, has carried out proven murder of innocent British citizens on British soil, and you seem to not want to hold them to account, because other groups who do not represent you killed people too.
And your remark that "these people did not rule over us 50 years ago", the British state that carried this out, covered it up, and refuses to prosecute the people involved in this are still in power, and still "rule over" you.
I appreciate your honest engagement. I think part of the problem is that Republicanism wants to demonise 'the British'. I am British, and the British state has been a very positive contribution to my community (and by this I include the entire Northern Ireland community) and my quality of life.
Of course, like any state, individuals have got things wrong and acted in times in a disgraceful manner; that does not make the state bad.
I would be living with you in your country had your state not discriminated against my father. I am not obsessed with looking for apologies and raking over the past. There is not a country or community in the world that I am aware of who do not have big skeletons in their cupboards and not done terrible things to people. Where does this all stop. These killings we are referring to are 50 years ago.
If Sinn Fein get elected to power in your country, how will you feel about people who have been responsible for endless horrific damage to people's lives, sitting at your Parliament, some of them probably with letters assuring them that they will not be prosecuted? It is difficult to watch old men who have had nothing to do with politics etc for 50 years being hounded while we have people at the very top of power in both our countries who have committed horrendous crimes that they are proud of to this day0 -
Advertisement
-
By comparison of scale, there was not the same amount on the irish side but i wont call out one and not the other, but are you sure on a "few rouges" on the UDR?...
Then again, how much was done?...
hard to get higher level than thatcher I'd say.... and still going on in the early 00s. Just to note, 2003 is the year the Para press officer, so ties to ballymurphy becoems head of the British Army
and another
and yet according to downcow and despite being directly responsible for 299 deaths (by comparison the garda siochana & irish army combined are responsible for 5, that 299 also excludes the UDR, and the various police bodies).
I asked if you thought the British state & its representatives at the time should be held to a higher level of account than terrorists, given they were the ones responsible for justice & protection of its citizens, apparantly its unfair to do so. ‘the willfull blindness perpetuated by nationalists'.... hmmm
Who do you include as terrorists in the ni conflict and which players do you say were not terrorists?0
Advertisement