Bloody Sunday killings 'unjustifiable'

MoonpigMoonpig Posts: 659
edited June 2010 in A Moving Train
Perhaps some parrallels to what happened last week on the flotilla. The British troops on the day maintained that they had been fired on first, and that those shot were "terrorists" - sound familiar. Well done to Britian though, it is a long time coming, but the truth will always be welcome.

Speaking as an Irishman, it is great to see that this can finally be put to rest. A horrible episode in Irish and British history.

Hopefully now the men who pulled the trigger can be brought to bear, very very doubtful though


"The Saville Inquiry into the Bloody Sunday killings found the actions of British soldiers was 'both unjustified and unjustifiable', British Prime Minister David Cameron told MPs.

Read the Report Conclusions and Assessment / Full Saville Report

The order that sent British soldiers into the Bogside 'should not have been given', the inquiry finds, said Mr Cameron.

The casualties were down to the soldiers 'losing their self control', said Mr Cameron - who told MPs: 'I am deeply, deeply sorry.'

Bloody Sunday Timeline

Bereaved families march to Guildhall

Mr Cameron said the tribunal found some soldiers had 'knowingly put forward false accounts'.

Beginning his speech, Mr Cameron said: 'I'm deeply patriotic, I never want to believe anything bad about our country, soldiers, officers who are finest in the world.

'But, the conclusions are absolutely clear. There's no doubt, nothing equivocal, no ambiguities,' Mr Cameron said.

The inquiry found that the soldiers of the support company who went into the Bogside, where the march was taking place, did so 'as a result of an order which should not have been given' by their commander.

It concluded that 'on balance' the first shot in the vicinity of the march was fired by British soldiers.

None of the casualties was carrying a firearm and while there was some shooting by republican paramilitaries, 'none of this firing provided any justification for the shooting of civilian casualties'.

In no case was any warning given by the soldiers before opening fire and the support company 'reacted by losing their self-control ... forgetting or ignoring their instructions and training'.

The result was a 'serious and widespread loss of fire discipline'.

Afterwards, many of the soldiers involved 'knowingly put forward false accounts in order to seek to justify their firing'.

The inquiry found that some of those who were killed or injured were clearly fleeing or going to the assistance of others who were dying.

Families of the Bloody Sunday victims gave a triumphant thumbs-up as the report into the deaths was published.

They waved a copy of Lord Saville's mammoth report at the Guildhall in Derry as they prepared to listen to the Mr Cameron's assessment.

Crowds watched on a big outdoor screen as the British leader said he could not defend the British army by defending the indefensible.

Key findings of the Saville Inquiry

* 'The firing by soldiers of 1 Para caused the deaths of 13 people and injury to a similar number, none of whom was posing a threat of causing death or serious injury. This also applied to the 14th victim, who died later from injuries.'
* 'Despite the contrary evidence given by soldiers, we have concluded that none of them fired in response to attacks or threatened attacks by nail or petrol bombers.'
* The report added that no one threw, or threatened to throw, nail or petrol bombs at soldiers.
* The accounts of soldiers were rejected, with a number said to have 'knowingly put forward false accounts'.
* Members of the official IRA fired a number of shots, though it was concluded it was the paratroopers who shot first.
* Northern Ireland Deputy First Minister Martin McGuinness, second in command of the provisional IRA in Derry in 1972, was 'probably armed with a Thompson submachine gun', and though it is possible he fired the weapon, this cannot be proved.

The report concluded: 'He did not engage in any activity that provided any of the soldiers with any justification for opening fire.'
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    the main difference here is who gave the orders ... in the case of the floatilla - it appears to be an assasination attemp on certain activists ... so, orders from up top ...
  • MoonpigMoonpig Posts: 659
    Absolutly.

    There was an intial investigation held by the British, called Widgery (spelling?), which was a whitewash, pretty much running the line that the soldiers came under sustained sniper attack, and only shot at people they had identified as terrorists.

    What is it that is said about not learning from our past? Israel should really take note
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    it's pretty straightforward with the floatilla ...

    raid in the middle of the night + confiscate all recording devices = something to hide
  • MoonpigMoonpig Posts: 659
    polaris_x wrote:
    it's pretty straightforward with the floatilla ...

    raid in the middle of the night + confiscate all recording devices = something to hide

    Straight forward in so far as - someone fucked up and has tried to cover it up, as mentioned, that is the parrallel.

    Anyway, for what it's worth - here is the video of the apology
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vMZ3CtC8KEY

    And here is the reaction to the apology
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qp4_DkG- ... re=related
Sign In or Register to comment.