nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Still no answers for families of Dublin and Monaghan Bombings

wolfpawnat

Well it is 36 years later, and no one has ever served time for the atrocious attack on innocent people, of which most were women and children (including one unborn child).

There is strong proof that British Security Forces colluded in the bomb and yet we are bending over backwards to facilitate the UK, should we not be at least be forcing them to accept responsibility for their part in this.

It is really angering me to think these people are clearly not going to get justice. A family of 2 adults and their 2 daughters blown apart. Girls running for their trains. A mum killed while her child in her buggy miraculously survived. How were any of these people guilty of anything!

Why are we allowing this still?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Fratton Fred

wolfpawnat wrote: »

There is strong proof that British Security Forces colluded in the bomb and yet we are bending over backwards to facilitate the UK, should we not be at least be forcing them to accept responsibility for their part in this.

could you explain what this proof is?

There are a lot of unsolved crimes from the troubles, many, like this, will never be closed.

Seth Brundle

From memory after reading Don Mullen's book, there is no evidence as it was all destroyed. There are lots of claims and suggestions but IIRC nothing concrete.

moonpurple

one response to this and thousands of murders in these islands 1968 to 2010 is found in the good friday agreement which was approved in every one of the 32 counties of Eireann and which opens with the following:

DECLARATION OF SUPPORT

1. We, the participants in the multi-party negotiations, believe that the agreement we have negotiated offers a truly historic opportunity for a new beginning.

2. The tragedies of the past have left a deep and profoundly regrettable legacy of suffering. We must never forget those who have died or been injured, and their families. But we can best honour them through a fresh start, in which we firmly dedicate ourselves to the achievement of reconciliation, tolerance, and mutual trust, and to the protection and vindication of the human rights of all.

3. We are committed to partnership, equality and mutual respect as the basis of relationships within Northern Ireland, between North and South, and between these islands.

4. We reaffirm our total and absolute commitment to exclusively democratic and peaceful means of resolving differences on political issues, and our opposition to any use or threat of force by others for any political purpose, whether in regard to this agreement or otherwise.

Bottle_of_Smoke

What I find most suspicious is the UVF didn't claim it until 93.

I think its possible they built the bombs themselves to be honest. I also think they could have planted them without assistance. Civillians are soft targets.

I don't see why the British government would have wanted them to go off.

Nodin

They placed them themselves for the most part, however they were constructed and the operation was planned with British input. The loyalists never showed that kind of ability again.

The reasoning behind the bombs was to try to get the Irish Govt to impose internment south of the border.

wolfpawnat

why would 2 ex Brit soldiers admit to being involved though. That makes no sense as they were not discharged from the army so they dont appear to have had an axe to grind!

Very confusing.

wolfpawnat

Nodin wrote: »

They placed them themselves for the most part, however they were constructed and the operation was planned with British input. The loyalists never showed that kind of ability again.

The reasoning behind the bombs was to try to get the Irish Govt to impose internment south of the border.

well yes, they never had a "job" like that again. The bombs consisted of ingredients used by UVF BUT the cars used were Belfast cars that were not reported missing and when the police up north were asked for their help with anything, they refused!!!!

Bottle_of_Smoke

Nodin wrote: »

They placed them themselves for the most part, however they were constructed and the operation was planned with British input. The loyalists never showed that kind of ability again.

The reasoning behind the bombs was to try to get the Irish Govt to impose internment south of the border.

We'll never know and I'm not claiming I'm definitely right, but I think its possible crown forces had previously trained them in bomb-making techniques (I'm thinking of the McGurks bar bombing) and they used it in opposition to the Sunningdale Agreement for the Dublin/Monaghan bombings

Maybe it was to do with onternment in the south but it really seemed to be odd timing during the ulster workers strike.

Its true they didn't show that ability again but its also possible that they simply preferred the use of firearms. They didn't have commercial or security targets, Why bother with explosives when you can easily walk into a civillian pub and open fire.

Nodin

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

We'll never know and I'm not claiming I'm definitely right, but I think its possible crown forces had previously trained them in bomb-making techniques (I'm thinking of the McGurks bar bombing) and they used it in opposition to the Sunningdale Agreement for the Dublin/Monaghan bombings

Maybe it was to do with onternment in the south but it really seemed to be odd timing during the ulster workers strike.

Its true they didn't show that ability again but its also possible that they simply preferred the use of firearms. They didn't have commercial or security targets, Why bother with explosives when you can easily walk into a civillian pub and open fire.

Attacks down south wouldn't be as easy. Bombs are far more effective at that kind of thing. They're a force multiplier. Easier get away etc.

Bottle_of_Smoke

wolfpawnat wrote: »

well yes, they never had a "job" like that again. The bombs consisted of ingredients used by UVF BUT the cars used were Belfast cars that were not reported missing and when the police up north were asked for their help with anything, they refused!!!!

The RUC and the Gardai often didn't co-operate. RUC often believed Gardai were soft on the IRA. This pissed the Gardai off no end and there was a lot of bad blood.

Nodin wrote:

Attacks down south wouldn't be as easy. Bombs are far more effective at that kind of thing. They're a force multiplier. Easier get away etc.

Thats what I mean kind of. AFAIK they didn't have any other major attacks in the republic.

I was reading Shankill Butchers by Martin Dillon. At one point the gang wanted to place a bomb at a republican commeroration parade(in belfast). However to get access to the bomb-maker the (largely autonomous) gang would need approval from the UVF leaders. The author suggested the leadership would not approve of an indiscriminate attack on civillians so they had to convince them it would be primed to go off when hardline reoublicans/IRA members would be passing. They got it wrong and only a young boy was killed.

Perhaps something similar happened with Dub/Mon bombings. A different target approved but placed in the wrong spot intentionally or otherwise. Perhaps would explain them not claiming the massacre until they were pretty much exposed 20 years later.

Nodin

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

Perhaps something similar happened with Dub/Mon bombings. A different target approved but placed in the wrong spot intentionally or otherwise. Perhaps would explain them not claiming the massacre until they were pretty much exposed 20 years later.

One bomb might be placed in the wrong spot. However, there was a series of them.

Liam Byrne

Nodin wrote: »

One bomb might be placed in the wrong spot. However, there was a series of them.

Well we are expected to accept one "side's" stories of loads of mistakes and accidents, so why not accept the other side's story when it's similar ?

I'd love if EVERY innocent family had closure and we could leave the whole violent sorry mess behind.

Nodin

Liam Byrne wrote: »

I'd love if EVERY innocent family had closure and we could leave the whole violent sorry mess behind.

No Liam, I'm fairly sure you'd bring it all up at every and any occassion.

dlofnep

Liam, are you suggesting that there wasn't collusion involved?

Liam Byrne

dlofnep wrote: »

Liam, are you suggesting that there wasn't collusion involved?

Where did you see me even remotely suggest such a thing ?

Nodin wrote: »

No Liam, I'm fairly sure you'd bring it all up at every and any occassion.

So you're basically calling me a liar, then ?

There's a report button available to me if you repeat that claim.

The only reason I bring certain things up is when someone makes biased claims re closure for one side.

Ideally, I'd like to see closure and facts out in the open for EVERYONE - including, for example, Jerry McCabe's or Jean McConville's or Robert McCartney's families - and 100% unequivocal condemnation of those acts and those involved.

Anyone asking for closure or full disclosure on Dublin and Monaghan is within their rights; anyone asking for those while excusing other "mistakes" or without supporting the above is a biased hypocrite.

dlofnep

That's grand, I just wanted to clear it up.

FTA69

Anyone seriously trying to downplay the level of collusion between the British state and Loyalist death squads in this country obviously has a very clear agenda indeed. It wasn't a case of Sammy the UDR man slipping Trevor the UVF man the odd rifle like. British military organisations such as the Military Reconnaissance Force and the Force Research Unit answered directly to the British authorities, as did organisations such as MI5. These organisations facilitated the arming and the provision of intelligence to Loyalists since the 1970s, and also engaged in a myriad of other dirty tricks to boot; both in the north and also in the south.

An interesting case in point is that of Brian Nelson, a FRU agent who was actually at one stage in charge of UDA intelligence. In effect you had a British agent (working for an official British body) who was assisting illegal death squads to murder British citizens.

I for one would be very interested in seeing a truth and reconciliation committee established, but the fact is it won't due to the vested interests involved. For instance Gerry Adams is hardly going to help initiate a process which results in him admitting he was completely in charge of the IRA since the early 1980s and more importantly, the Brits are never in a million years going to disclose the facts they organised and sponsored hundreds of murders of their own citizens as well as a massacre in a neighbouring state.

Liam Byrne

dlofnep wrote: »

That's grand, I just wanted to clear it up.

Fair enough.

I was merely commenting on Nodin implying that because there was more than one that it must have been deliberate, which is what we're asked to believe in relation to all of the "other" bombings, e.g. Omagh where the car was "left in the wrong place".

I don't know the truth about either "side", so I won't assume, but I'll treat both with the same scepticism.

LordSutch

This thread was launched at 23.05 last night (right in the middle of the UK Election results), just wondering is there a reason why it was launched last night? was the report on the bombings due out yesterday or something?

wolfpawnat

Camelot wrote: »

This thread was launched at 23.05 last night (right in the middle of the UK Election results), just wondering is there a reason why it was launched last night? was the report on the bombings due out yesterday or something?

Actually I am reading a book on the bombings and as I thought about it, I got more and more pissed off at the fact there are families that still have not seen anyone put away for this. As a mum myself I was thinking of all the children killed that day, I walk past the monuments a lot and it boils my blood to think about it.

The elections had nothing to do with me posting this. Just ironic timing.

A Dub in Glasgo

The anniversary of the atrocity is coming up later this month as well

LordSutch

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

The anniversary of the atrocity is coming up later this month as well

Just one of many atrocities comitted over the last thirty five years (sadly), from Bloody Friday, to the 'La Mon' Restaurant Bombing, through Enniskillen, right up to Omagh (1998), with all the other atrocities in between. > So many Atrocity anniversaries, so depressing ..............

Nodin

Liam Byrne wrote: »

There's a report button available to me if you repeat that claim.
.

Wonderful, debate via threat.

Just for clarity - Are you stating that in certain circumstances you'd stop dragging the past up in virtually every Sinn Fein thread?

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Anyone asking for closure or full disclosure on Dublin and Monaghan is within their rights; anyone asking for those while excusing other "mistakes" or without supporting the above is a biased hypocrite.
.

...certainly at the time of that being posted, nobody had done so.

Poccington

Camelot wrote: »

Just one of many atrocities comitted over the last thirty five years (sadly), from Bloody Friday, to the 'La Mon' Restaurant Bombing, through Enniskillen, right up to Omagh (1998), with all the other atrocities in between. > So many Atrocity anniversaries, so depressing ..............

I'm sure it's a complete conincidence that in a thread regarding the Dublin and Monaghan bombings, which most likely involved collusion with British forces at some stage you decide to refer to other atrocities as "so depressing". Then of course, you go onto name atrocities carried out by the PIRA and RIRA and somehow, when talking about atrocities carried out during the Troubles, you manage to somehow forget Bloody Sunday or the Miami Showband massacre which is beyond me.

Of course, I'm sure the fact you only mentioned Republican acts and omitted acts carried out by Loyalists and British forces is a complete coincidence.

aDeener

If it came out officially that there was british collusion, what exactly would the repercussions of that be?
i mean wouldnt that be classed as an act of war? similiar to that of invading another country?

no fear of this coming out officially anyway, it will be all kept under wraps.

A Dub in Glasgo

Camelot wrote: »

Just one of many atrocities comitted over the last thirty five years (sadly), from Bloody Friday, to the 'La Mon' Restaurant Bombing, through Enniskillen, right up to Omagh (1998), with all the other atrocities in between. > So many Atrocity anniversaries, so depressing ..............

Yes and then there is whataboutery, which you apparantly excel at

wolfpawnat

Camelot wrote: »

Just one of many atrocities comitted over the last thirty five years (sadly), from Bloody Friday, to the 'La Mon' Restaurant Bombing, through Enniskillen, right up to Omagh (1998), with all the other atrocities in between. > So many Atrocity anniversaries, so depressing ..............

Eh, Where is Bloody Sunday in this???? I suppose 14 innocent protesters being cornered and shot at by paramilitaries as they flee does not enter into this at all. And before I am called a republican, I disagree with the injuring/maiming and killing of any civilians regardless of political/religious background. I do believe anyone who see themselves as in an army (seen as a legitamit or otherwise) can expect horrendous things to occur, but harming innocent civilians is something I feel bad for.

Poccington wrote: »

I'm sure it's a complete conincidence that in a thread regarding the Dublin and Monaghan bombings, which most likely involved collusion with British forces at some stage you decide to refer to other atrocities as "so depressing". Then of course, you go onto name atrocities carried out by the PIRA and RIRA and somehow, when talking about atrocities carried out during the Troubles, you manage to somehow forget Bloody Sunday or the Miami Showband massacre which is beyond me.

Of course, I'm sure the fact you only mentioned Republican acts and omitted acts carried out by Loyalists and British forces is a complete coincidence.

Well yes, I opened this thread solely because it seems to be a forgotten compared to other acts during that time as

A) It was not in the North, hence why it is seen as a separate act, it was not in an active war zone!

The Irish Gov (like their brothers today) seemed to bend over and take it when they got no co-operation from the Brits.

If you were to go into the acts for violence of the North it would turn into a tit for tat argument.

wolfpawnat

BTW its anniversary is the 17th. Is there any commemorations on for it?

lugha

wolfpawnat wrote: »

A) It was not in the North, hence why it is seen as a separate act, it was not in an active war zone!

You seem to be engaged in some confused reasoning here.

If you, as I, do not believe the troubles amounted to a legitimate war then it is certainly right to feel reprehension at the various alleged (and in all likelihood, actual) mid-deeds of British agents such as any involvement in the Dublin or Monaghan bombings or any other incidents of collusion.

If however, you believe the campaign waged by physical force republicans was legitimate then I don’t see how you can allege that any incidents of collusion were improper. After all, British forces and the various Loyalist groupings were broadly on the same side, so there was nothing amiss about them forming alliances / colluding (delete according to your political viewpoint).

Again I stress, I did not consider the 30 year republican campaign to be a legitimate war so there is no inconsistency with me expecting that British forces should have abided by the constraints imposed by civil society, and in particular, refrained from collusion. But I fail to see how anyone who did see the afore mentioned campaign as a legitimate war can take the same stand point.

Bottle_of_Smoke

wolfpawnat wrote: »

Well yes, I opened this thread solely because it seems to be a forgotten compared to other acts during that time as

A) It was not in the North, hence why it is seen as a separate act, it was not in an active war zone!

It was not a seperate act. It was carried out by the Ulster Volunteer Force. It was very connected.