Bloody Sunday Report

[RedBrian84]

Apologies if this has been posted already, if so then please attach to the correct thread.

 

This is from the Guardian (Henry McDonald and Owen Bowcott):

 

After a 38-year struggle for truth and justice campaigners for those killed in Derry on Bloody Sunday tonight celebrated the Saville Report's exoneration of the victims and the report's unequivocal conclusion that the shootings were "unjustified".

 

The Bloody Sunday tribunal's repeated use of the term "unjustifiable" throughout the 5,000-page report, and its verdict that soldiers had lied to the inquiry, now opens up the possibility of legal action against former troops involved in the atrocity.

 

Fourteen unarmed civilians were shot dead by the Parachute Regiment which had been sent into Derry's Bogside on 30 January 1972. The deaths propelled a generation of nationalists into the Provisional IRA.

 

Saville's conclusion that none of the 14 dead was carrying a gun, no warnings were given, no soldiers were under threat and the troops were the first to open fire, marked a final declaration of innocence for the victims of the biggest British military killing of civilians on UK soil since the Peterloo massacre in 1819.

 

Northern Ireland's director of public prosecutions confirmed tonight that he was considering whether prosecutions for murder, perjury or perverting the course of justice could arise from the report.

 

Sir Alasdair Fraser QC will be asked to assess the report to decide whether there is sufficient evidence for "a reasonable prospect for conviction" of paratroopers found to have participated in the killings.

 

Lord Gifford QC, who represented the family of civil rights marcher Jim Wray who died on Bloody Sunday, said: "There are a number of possible charges arising from this report which has been thorough and even-handed. Murder is of course the obvious one. But the report also found that soldiers deliberately attempted to mislead the inquiry."

 

As David Cameron announced the findings and apologised on behalf of the British state, a crowd of up to 10,000 people watching his statement on a television screen in Derry's Guildhall Square cheered wildly.

 

"I never want to call into question the behaviour of our soldiers and our army, who I believe to be the finest in the world," Cameron told the Commons.

 

"But the conclusions of this report are absolutely clear. There is no doubt, there is nothing equivocal, there are no ambiguities. What happened on Bloody Sunday was both unjustified and unjustifiable. It was wrong."

 

It was a previous Tory prime minister, Ted Heath, whose troops carried out the massacre in the bloodiest year of the Troubles.

 

In a measured and dispassionate report Saville, a supreme court judge, concluded there was no justification for shooting at any of those killed or wounded on the banned civil rights march.

 

"None of the firing by the Support Company (Paratroopers) was aimed at people posing a threat or causing death or serious injury," he said. "Despite the contrary evidence given by the soldiers, we have concluded that none of them fired in response to attacks or threatened attacks by nail or petrol bombers. No one threw or threatened to throw a nail or petrol bomb at the soldiers on Bloody Sunday."

 

A copy of the discredited 1972 report by Lord Widgery, which accused the victims of firing weapons or handling bombs, was torn apart by one of the families' representatives in Derry . "My brother was running away from the soldiers when he was shot," Joe Duddy said of his brother, Jackie. "He was posing no threat. [The Widgery report] destroyed our loved ones' good names. Today we clear them. I'm delighted to say that Jackie was innocent."

 

Saville's 10-volume report also found that some of the paratroopers who gave evidence to the tribunal had lied to it.

 

It said these soldiers had "knowingly put forward false accounts in order to seek to justify their firing".

 

But the report did not find any conspiracy in the government or in the higher echelons of the army to use lethal force against either rioters or demonstrators in Derry. The shootings "were not the result of any plan to shoot selected ringleaders", the report said.

 

During the 12-year tribunal a number of players in the peace process testified including Martin McGuinness, who admitted that at the time of Bloody Sunday he was the IRA's second-in-command in Derry. McGuinness "was probably armed with a Thompson sub-machine gun" but it was insufficient evidence that he actually fired the weapon, Saville said.

 

Although Republican gunmen from the Official IRA took up firing positions, the report said, it was the soldiers who fired first and the paramilitaries' presence provided no justification for them doing so.

 

The report appeared to exonerate the army's then commander of land forces, in Northern Ireland General Robert Ford, of any blame. He had agreed to deploy the Parachute Regiment in the city against the advice of a senior police officer in Derry.

 

The report concluded that Ford "neither knew nor had reason to know at any stage that his decision would or was likely to result in soldiers firing unjustifiably on that day".

 

There was strong criticism of Lt Colonel Derek Wilford, the officer directly in charge of the paratroopers. Wilford ignored orders from his brigadier that he should not order troops beyond a barrier deeper into the Bogside, the report said.

 

The operation was "not a justifiable response to a lethal attack by republican paramilitaries but instead soldiers opening fire unjustifiably," the report said.

 

Kate Allen, Amnesty's UK director, said: "The right to redress of the victims and their families is only partly met by establishing the facts about what happened that day; full accountability for any unlawful actions by state agents will also need to be ensured."

 

But Stephen Pollard, a solicitor representing soldiers who gave evidence to the inquiry, said Saville did not have any justification for his findings and said he would fight any moves to prosecute the soldiers. "The evidence has been cherry-picked. I think Lord Saville felt under considerable pressure to give very clear findings even when the evidence did not support it," Pollard said.

 

What are the thoughts of people on here? I find the last bit particuarly interesting, the solicitor Pollard really seems like he's going to keep fighting it. Clutching at straws?

 

It looked a fairly conclusive report to me.

 

It was- and still is and will always be- an incredibly controversial event, a defining moment in the history of Ireland and Britain, and the wounds are as raw today as they were in the immediate aftermath. My thoughts are, as always, with the families and friends of those who died on that day.

[RobbieOR]

38 years too late.

[RedBrian84]

38 years too late.

 

Could you not argue that it's better late than never? I'm not trying to be arsey but at least it has been done.

[RobbieOR]

Could you not argue that it's better late than never? I'm not trying to be arsey but at least it has been done.

 

You're right it is better late than never. But it should never have taken 38 years for this report to come out or for someone to take the blame.

[R Kid]

I don't take sides with all this shit cause they are both as bad as each other. The thing is though now all the everybody who lost people to the IRA will want their justice.

 

I do understand though that people would want the world to officially know that the peopel who were killed were innocent bystanders.

 

I think also what should be pointed out is that 200,000 soldiers have served in NI and the actions of 7 shoudn't tarnish the good work that the British Armed Forces have done in the provence.

 

They have kept the rule of law and as a result of that we now have a peace process with people solving their problems sat around the table instead of blowing people up.

[RobbieOR]

I don't take sides with all this shit cause they are both as bad as each other. The thing is though now all the everybody who lost people to the IRA will want their justice.

 

I do understand though that people would want the world to officially know that the peopel who were killed were innocent bystanders.

 

I think also what should be pointed out is that 200,000 soldiers have served in NI and the actions of 7 shoudn't tarnish the good work that the British Armed Forces have done in the provence.

 

They have kept the rule of law and as a result of that we now have a peace process with people solving their problems sat around the table instead of blowing people up.

 

Its more than 7.

[R Kid]

Its more than 7.

 

It was 7 soldiers wasn't who opened fire and took aimed shots at the civilians wasn't it.

 

There were more soldiers there but not all opened fire, please do correct me if I am wrong.

[RedBrian84]

You're right it is better late than never. But it should never have taken 38 years for this report to come out or for someone to take the blame.

 

You're absolutely right I completely agree Robbie.

[RobbieOR]

It was 7 soldiers wasn't who opened fire and took aimed shots at the civilians wasn't it.

 

There were more soldiers there but not all opened fire, please do correct me if I am wrong.

 

I'm talking about the troubles in General. You said the 'actions of 7 shouldnt tarnish the good work'. There was far more than 7 British Soldiers up the North acting the cunt during the troubles and I'm sure there were some decent ones aswell.

[R Kid]

I'm talking about the troubles in General. You said the 'actions of 7 shouldnt tarnish the good work'. There was far more than 7 British Soldiers up the North acting the cunt during the troubles and I'm sure there were some decent ones aswell.

 

Well yeah that is a good point, there would no doubt have been trouble causes as well.

 

The point is though you get bad ones everywhere you go but you shouldn't let the few tarnish the majority.

 

I know one half of the dived will say that the armed forces never done nothing good while there, but if they weren't there I beleive things would have been a lot bloodier with all anarchy ensuing.

[dennis tooth]

If only we'd had twitter in them days............

 

 

 

"The systematic attempt and very deliberate first priority for the Israeli soldiers as they came on the ships was to shut down the story, to confiscate all cameras, to shut down satellites, to smash the CCTV cameras that were on the Mavi Marmara, to make sure that nothing was going out. They were hellbent on controlling the story," commented Australian journalist Paul McGeough, one of the hundreds of activists and reporters who witnessed the deadly morning attack on the Gaza Freedom Flotilla on 31 May ("Framing the Narrative: Israeli Commandos Seize Videotape and Equipment from Journalists After Deadly Raid," Democracy Now, 9 June 2010). McGeough was one of at least 60 journalists aboard the flotilla who were detained and their footage confiscated.

 

Within hours of the Gaza-bound aid flotilla being intercepted and besieged in international waters by Israeli commandos, who killed at least nine -- some at point-blank range -- aboard the Mavi Marmara, news of the bloody attack had spread across the globe. Rage, condemnation and calls for an international investigation followed.

 

Meanwhile, Israel's campaign to spin the attack, distort the facts and quell an outraged public was already in full swing. Concurrently, activists and skeptical journalists began deconstructing the official story and assembling evidence to uncover the truth behind the violent deaths of activists on a humanitarian mission to the besieged Gaza Strip.

 

From the time the Israeli military apparently jammed the flotilla's communications, and for the next 48 hours as survivors were held incommunicado, their cameras and potentially incriminating footage seized, Israel's account of the raid dominated international headlines.

 

Central to Israel's media strategy was the rapid release of selected video and audio clips which, the government said, validated its claim that passengers had violently attempted to kill troops without provocation -- thereby forcing the soldiers to use live fire in self-defense. However, the initially and most widely-distributed clips bore signs of heavy editing, including the obscuring or removal of time stamps.

 

Although the clips apparently depicted passengers aboard the Mavi Marmara hitting Israeli troops with poles and other objects, the context of the images was completely unclear. It was impossible to determine at what point during the assault the clips had been filmed, raising questions about exactly which party had been acting in self-defense.

 

Al-Jazeera's Jamal Elshayyal, among others, corroborated accounts by other flotilla passengers, including Israeli Knesset member Hanin Zoabi, that the Israeli commandos had allegedly started firing before commandos began rappelling to the deck of the ship ("MK Zoabi: Israel wanted highest number of fatalities," YNet, 1 June 2010; "Kidnapped by Israel, forsaken by Britain," Al-Jazeera, 6 June 2010).

 

These clips were quickly supplemented by footage put on YouTube, also heavily edited, which Israel said had been taken from the ship's security cameras and from the journalists whose equipment had been seized ("Flotilla Rioters Prepare Rods, Slingshots, Broken Bottles and Metal Objects to Attack IDF Soldiers," 2 June 2010). The Israeli military spokesperson's office also distributed numerous still images allegedly documenting fighting on the deck.

 

After the commandeered flotilla ships were brought to the Israeli port of Ashdod and were unloaded, on 1 June the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) began distributing via the Flickr website photographs of objects it said were found aboard. Materials the MFA classified as "weapons"-- thus supposedly supporting its claim that activists had planned to conduct a "lynching" of Israeli troops -- were identifiable to the public as standard nautical equipment and kitchen utensils ("Weapons found on Mavi Marmara").

 

In addition, the ships were inspected multiple times prior to setting sail for Gaza, both by Turkish customs authorities and by an independent security firm, and had been found at both points to contain no weapons, according to a Free Gaza Movement press release ("Did Israel deliberately murder civilians aboard Freedom Flotilla?," 3 June 2010). Participants also say that all passengers were subject to thorough security checks before boarding, regardless of where they embarked.

 

These photographs of "weapons" became the first flashpoint in the effort to analyze and expose inconsistencies in Israel's claims. Shortly after the release of the images which appeared on the MFA's official Flickr page on 1 June, commentators began calling attention to the fact that several of the images included digitally-encoded information indicating that they had been shot several years prior. The MFA responded to this by modifying the dates, and issuing a statement that one of its cameras had been incorrectly calibrated.

 

While this claim can be neither confirmed nor disproved, the gaffe exposed the fact that Israel's rush to promote its version of events in the media was leading to significant mistakes and oversights. As surviving flotilla passengers began to be released and expelled following detention in Israel, the accounts they gave of events aboard the ships -- and on the Mavi Marmara in particular -- clearly diverged from the official Israeli narrative.

 

Journalists aboard the ship, some of whom had been able to broadcast via satellite for a limited time during the assault, told interviewers that they had been singled out for attack by Israeli troops. "We had cameras round our necks and our press cards in our hands, but the soldiers kept aiming the lasers of their guns at our eyes in order to intimidate us," Turkish journalist Yuecel Velioglu of the AA news agency told Reporters Without Borders ("As Turkish photographer is buried, other journalists aboard flotilla speak out," 9 June 2010).

 

In addition, much of the footage released by Israel (after heavy editing) was taken from journalists aboard the ship after their equipment had been confiscated. The move was strongly denounced by Israel's Foreign Press Association (FPA), which stated on 4 June: "the use of this material without permission from the relevant media organizations is a clear violation of journalistic ethics and unacceptable."

 

Determined not to allow the Israeli government to continue dominating public discourse on the flotilla attack with its questionable version of events, independent journalists around the world analyzed and identified inconsistencies with the Israeli narrative. This work played a pivotal role in making a more complete and accurate picture of the events available to an English-speaking audience: the vast majority of English-language corporate media outlets, with the notable exception of Al-Jazeera English, simply restated Israeli claims and conducted little or no investigative work to ascertain their validity.

 

Images and the elimination of context

 

Another photograph released by the Israeli military spokesperson's office aroused additional controversy when it began appearing in news articles about the incident. The image, which featured an anonymous, bearded man holding a curved knife, was generally presented with a caption, also sourced from the Israeli military, claiming that the knife-wielder was an activist aboard the Mavi Marmara photographed after Israeli troops boarded the ship.

 

Ali Abunimah, co-founder of The Electronic Intifada, immediately noticed clear inconsistencies with the context of the photo, casting its veracity into doubt. Abunimah pointed out on his blog that behind the man, natural light could be seen streaming in through a window -- despite the fact that the raid was conducted during pre-dawn hours. Additionally, the man was surrounded by photographers who seemed unusually calm for onlookers in the midst of a firefight ("Israeli propaganda photo in Haaretz of man with knife make no sense #FreedomFlotilla," 31 May 2010). Finally, a few days after the image first appeared, the image was re-used in a video montage, published on YouTube under the newly-registered handle "gazaflotilliatruth", but this time with less cropping. In the new version of the image, the bearded man can be seen to be sitting down, not standing -- again, an unusual physical position to display during a melee ("Gaza Flotillia - The Love Boat," 2 June 2010).

 

Investigative journalist Max Blumenthal reports that the Israeli military-sourced caption -- repeatedly used by media outlets such as the Israeli daily Haaretz -- indicated that the bearded man was holding the knife after the commandos boarded the ship ("Nailed Again: IDF Description of Suspicious Photo It Distributed Is Retracted," 8 June 2010).

 

Following his query to the Israeli military spokesman's office, Haaretz "scrubbed its caption of the suspicious photo." Blumenthal adds that Haaretz "did not mention the retraction, probably assuming no one would notice. The retraction raises disturbing questions about the level of coordination between the IDF [israeli army] and the Israeli media." Nor did they mention that the bearded man was Yemeni Minister of Parliament Mohammad al-Hazmi, who was displaying his ceremonial dagger -- an essential part of traditional Yemeni dress -- to "curious journalists and foreigners on the ship," as Blumenthal points out, obviously well before the attack.

 

New accusations instantly dismantled

 

As the accounts of surviving passengers began receiving increased attention in the mainstream Western press, Israel retaliated with a series of increasingly dire accusations to discredit them. The serious nature these accusations makes it difficult to understand why the Israeli government would have waited so long to issue them. As journalists began evaluating the new claims, they found Israel's supporting evidence to be flimsy and periodically even nonexistent.

 

One such accusation, published in a 2 June MFA press release, was that 40 Mavi Marmara passengers had been identified as mercenaries in the employ of al-Qaeda ("Attackers of the IDF soldiers found to be Al Qaeda mercenaries," 2 June 2010). Later that day, US State Department spokesperson Philip Crowley said that his office could not validate Israel's story, and independent journalists on the ground in Tel Aviv promptly set out to investigate for themselves.

 

Blumenthal and his colleague Lia Tarachansky were told bluntly by the Israeli army's press office that the military didn't "have any evidence" to support the MFA's contention. By the morning of 3 June, all references to al-Qaeda had been removed from the online version of the press release ("Under Scrutiny IDF Retracts Claims About Flotillas Al Qaeda Links").

 

More significantly, on 4 June, Israel released a YouTube clip which it claimed was an excerpt from radio communications between the Israeli navy and the Mavi Marmara. The clip included a voice telling the Israelis to "go back to Auschwitz," and another voice stating "We're helping Arabs go against the US," in response to Israeli statements that the vessel was "approaching an area which is under a naval blockade" ("Flotilla Ship to Israeli Navy: "We're Helping Arabs Go Against the US, Don't Forget 9/11 Guys," 4 June 2010). The latter statement was made in an accent resembling that of the American south, despite the fact that no one from that region was present aboard any of the ships. Numerous bloggers commented that the accents sounded as though they had been faked, and ridiculed the quality of the apparent forgery.

 

One of the flotilla organizers, US citizen Huwaida Arraf, was astonished to find that the clip included her own voice as well -- even though she had not been aboard the Mavi Marmara, but was on a different vessel. Tel Aviv-based journalist and blogger Mya Guarnieri noted that Arraf told the Bethlehem-based Maan News Agency that the clip of her voice, saying "we have permission from the Gaza Port Authority to enter," seemed to have been excerpted from communications during a previous flotilla trip (there have been nine trips since 2008) ("Israel under fire for doctoring flotilla recordings," 5 June 2010). "When they radioed us [on this trip], we were still 100 miles away," Arraf remarked.

 

Blumenthal called attention to the mysterious presence of Arraf and other discrepancies in the clip in an article he posted on 4 June. The following day, the MFA issued a statement admitting that the clip had been substantially edited ("Clarification/Correction Regarding Audio Transmission Between Israeli Navy and Flotilla on 31 May 2010," 5 June 2010). However, the clip including the "Auschwitz" statement remains on the MFA website in a new "unedited" version of the alleged transmission.

 

High-tech sleuthing uncovers a web of deceit

 

Perhaps most damaging to the credibility of Israeli accounts was a map published by Ali Abunimah on his blog and which was produced by using archived transmissions of Automatic Identification System (AIS) data to plot the position of the Mavi Marmara as it sailed on the morning of the raid ("Did Israel press on with bloody attack on Mavi Marmara even as ship fled at full-speed?," 7 June 2010). Using the map, Abunimah was able to determine the location and heading of the ship as it broadcast updates on its status. The map also plotted the position of the Mavi Marmara at the exact points when surveillance camera footage from the ship -- which Israel had released without obscured time stamps -- was apparently recorded.

 

According to AIS data, the Mavi Marmara had been heading south -- parallel to the Israeli coast and more than 80 miles from the shore -- until approximately 4:35am local time. At this point, the ship abruptly turned west, heading away from the Gaza coast.

 

The attack, which surviving passengers say began shortly after 4:00am, was reported to Greek activists in direct communication with the ship at some point before 4:51am. However, the time stamp seen in the released security camera footage and described in a caption as being the point at which "rioters initiate confrontation with Israeli soldiers," indicates that the clip was filmed at 5:03am. This is reinforced by the fact that the sea is apparently lit by natural light, which would not have been possible an hour earlier.

 

This evidence directly contradicts Israeli claims regarding the sequence and timing of events, and throws its overarching narrative into doubt. While the vast majority of footage of the raid has been seized by Israel, along the flotilla's Voyage Data Recorders (VDRs, the nautical equivalent of aircraft's "black boxes"), activists have been diligently archiving all available evidence to prevent Israel from altering or destroying it. As more time stamped data becomes available, it will be aggregated by activists and plotted on mapping applications not only to help reveal what happened aboard the Mavi Marmara, but guarantee a greater level of accountability when Israel responds to future flotillas.

 

A significant amount of data is already emerging. Several of the survivors managed to conceal memory cards from their Israeli captors, the contents of which they proceeded to make available to journalists upon their return home. Some photos, published in the Turkish newspaper HaberTurk, depict passengers administering medical care to wounded Israeli soldiers and even protecting them from being photographed -- which seemed to contradict Israel's claims that passengers were intent on a premeditated "lynching" of the Israeli commandoes ("İsrail'den kaçırılan fotoğraflar," 4 June 2010).

 

Recently-released video clips from flotilla survivors show Israeli soldiers kicking, beating and shooting passengers, including footage which Turkey's Cihan News Agency says depicts the close-range killing of Furkan Dogan, a 19-year-old US citizen, with automatic weaponry ("Israeli Soldiers Murdering Man Identified as Furkan Dogan," 10 June 2010). An autopsy determined that Dogan was shot five times, including once in the back and twice in the head from almost point-blank range. Other footage shows helicopters hovering above the flotilla, with apparent muzzle flashes and sounds of gunfire, supporting the survivors' contention that commandos were already firing before boarding the vessels, thus prompting the limited resistance demonstrated by terrified passengers.

 

International vs. internal investigations

 

The Israeli government continues to reject the idea of an international investigation in favor of pursuing its own. On 5 June, the United Nation's Secretary General proposed an international panel to examine the killing of nine flotilla passengers, but Israel's ambassador to the US, Michael Oren, announced on FOX News the next day that Israel would refuse "to be investigated by any international board" ("Transcript: Amb. Michael Oren on 'FNS'," 7 June 2010).

 

Those who demand an international probe have good reason to doubt Israel's ability to investigate itself. According to Human Rights Watch (HRW), which cited statistics from the Israeli human rights organization Yesh Din, between 2000 and 2008, "Israeli soldiers in the Occupied Palestinian Territories killed more than 2,000 Palestinian civilians not involved in combat. Of 1,246 criminal investigations initiated during the same period into suspected offenses of all kinds by soldiers against Palestinian civilians, only 6 percent (78 cases) resulted in indictments. Only 13 of those indictments charged soldiers with killing civilians. As of September 2008, five soldiers had been convicted for the deaths of four civilians" ("Why No Justice in Gaza? Israel Is Different, and so ...," 1 October 2009).

 

HRW found a similar pattern in cases stemming from Israel's infamous three-week attack on Gaza beginning on 27 December 2008. The invasion, which caused the deaths of more than 1,400 Palestinians, resulted in only one criminal conviction -- for the theft of a credit card belonging to a Palestinian family after soldiers looted their home.

 

Regarding the flotilla attack, some sources in the Israeli government have indicated that they would consider permitting one or more international "observers" to be included in their internal investigation. Governments around the world have insisted that this is not an acceptable alternative to a genuine international investigation. However, even a completely impartial group charged with investigating the raid would be analyzing "evidence" (such as seized footage and VDRs) that had been under the full control of the Israeli military since the time of the assault.

 

Accountability and independent journalism

 

With little hope for a formal investigation with any degree of credibility, independent journalists around the world have recognized the need to mount their own. The work of independent journalists is achieving a growing level of influence in the mainstream. And the story of the Mavi Marmara killings, despite the unwillingness of many professional reporters to publicly challenge Israel's version of events, is no exception.

 

"This is an issue where, in the flotilla incident, the legal and moral circumstances of Israeli abuse were so flagrant and visible that independent media have a greater opportunity of being heard," said Richard Falk, international law expert and United Nations Special Rapporteur for Human Rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. Should the UN or another impartial body mount an international probe, it would "benefit greatly from [independent media's] active undertaking to reinforce whatever investigation took place," Falk commented for this story.

 

Independent journalists have already succeeded in cracking the wall of Israel's narrative in the corporate media. For nearly an hour on the morning of 5 June, most mainstream reports about the status of the delayed fourth ship in the flotilla that had included the Mavi Marmara relied almost exclusively on information gleaned from messages shared between activists and independent journalists via Twitter. The work of Abunimah and Blumenthal in debunking much of the Israeli narrative was cited extensively in a post by The New York Times blogger Robert Mackey ("Photographs of Battered Israeli Commandos Show New Side of Raid," 7 June 2010).

 

On 10 June, a United Nations press conference was devoted to presenting uncensored footage of the assault captured by filmmaker Iara Lee, which promises to make global headlines with countless images contradicting the Israeli version of events.

 

Paul Larudee, a San Francisco Bay Area-based activist who participated in the flotilla and endured a severe beating which required him to him to be hospitalized, believes that the success of independent journalists in unraveling Israel's disjointed narrative has had a transformative effect on the popular consciousness.

 

"Something's happening here. Perceptions begin to move," Larudee said. "People are getting it -- they understand that a humanitarian aid convoy was attacked, and the passengers were defending themselves, despite the spin that Israel is creating in the media. Israel is not going to be able to keep this up much longer. It's all starting to crumble."

[JohnnyH]

What has that got to do with the Saville report?

[johnshields83]

At last its finally over. Though what'll happen next is anybodies guess. Prosecute the para's, prosecute McGuinness, find the other shooters and bombers (acid, nail and other) from that day, dole out the compensation?

 

Had the report went the other way what sort of reaction would there have been? There is absolutely no doubt that it was a travisty that the 13/4 people lost there lives innocently but if this was a peaceful protest why where people throwing stones and bombs? Bombs aren't the sort of thing you have in the boot of your car just in case you need it.

 

How about enquiries into Claudy, La Mon, Warrenpoint, Tullyvallen, Bloody Friday, Omagh, Kingsmill, Dropin Well, Darkley, Birmingham, Enniskillen and the Shankill?

 

Any wonder we are all fcuked up over here.

[Guest The Chimp]

I hope that the acknowledgement by Cameron gave at least a little peace or dignity back to those who suffered from seeing their loved ones reputations tarnished. I say this, not as a Catholic or as the son of a soldier who served fours tours in Ireland, but (I'd hope) as a decent human being.

 

Attrocities were committed on all sides, this isn't a thread to speak about those imho, but to pay respects, both to those who died nearly forty years ago and to their families for continuing to fight on for them.

[R Kid]

I hope that the acknowledgement by Cameron gave at least a little peace or dignity back to those who suffered from seeing their loved ones reputations tarnished. I say this, not as a Catholic or as the son of a soldier who served fours tours in Ireland, but (I'd hope) as a decent human being.

 

Attrocities were committed on all sides, this isn't a thread to speak about those imho, but to pay respects, both to those who died nearly forty years ago and to their families for continuing to fight on for them.

 

I agree with you 100%, I think this should be achnowledgement that eveyside done things they shouldn't have and noone is blameless, and we should all be thankfull that there is now a peace process so all involved can move on.

[RobbieOR]

I hope that the acknowledgement by Cameron gave at least a little peace or dignity back to those who suffered from seeing their loved ones reputations tarnished. I say this, not as a Catholic or as the son of a soldier who served fours tours in Ireland, but (I'd hope) as a decent human being.

 

Attrocities were committed on all sides, this isn't a thread to speak about those imho, but to pay respects, both to those who died nearly forty years ago and to their families for continuing to fight on for them.

 

Spot on.

[Soleilrouge]

Jim'll fix it

[RedBrian84]

I hope that the acknowledgement by Cameron gave at least a little peace or dignity back to those who suffered from seeing their loved ones reputations tarnished. I say this, not as a Catholic or as the son of a soldier who served fours tours in Ireland, but (I'd hope) as a decent human being.

 

Attrocities were committed on all sides, this isn't a thread to speak about those imho, but to pay respects, both to those who died nearly forty years ago and to their families for continuing to fight on for them.

 

Very well said.

[johnshields83]

I hope that the acknowledgement by Cameron gave at least a little peace or dignity back to those who suffered from seeing their loved ones reputations tarnished. I say this, not as a Catholic or as the son of a soldier who served fours tours in Ireland, but (I'd hope) as a decent human being.

 

Attrocities were committed on all sides, this isn't a thread to speak about those imho, but to pay respects, both to those who died nearly forty years ago and to their families for continuing to fight on for them.

 

Respect, well said.

[Hermes]

Total waste of £200m.

[Section_31]

I hope that the acknowledgement by Cameron gave at least a little peace or dignity back to those who suffered from seeing their loved ones reputations tarnished. I say this, not as a Catholic or as the son of a soldier who served fours tours in Ireland, but (I'd hope) as a decent human being.

 

Attrocities were committed on all sides, this isn't a thread to speak about those imho, but to pay respects, both to those who died nearly forty years ago and to their families for continuing to fight on for them.

 

Brilliant post mate, just brilliant.

[WaltonRed]

I wonder if we'd have the same attitudes if the report was about Hillsborough.

 

Some of the posts in this thread are a joke.

[halewood pete]

I hope that the acknowledgement by Cameron gave at least a little peace or dignity back to those who suffered from seeing their loved ones reputations tarnished. I say this, not as a Catholic or as the son of a soldier who served fours tours in Ireland, but (I'd hope) as a decent human being.

 

Attrocities were committed on all sides, this isn't a thread to speak about those imho, but to pay respects, both to those who died nearly forty years ago and to their families for continuing to fight on for them.

 

cannot argue with that

[Gav]

36 years late but better late than ever I suppose.Never thought I'd live to see the day that a British Government would apologise for it,never mind a fucking Tory..Hermes is right though (even if he was acting the cunt with his comment) it was a total waste of £200mill,told us nothing we didnt already know and stuck the blame on a bunch of cowards in uniform while ignoring the role their commanders had and bypassed the political wrangling between the unionists and the tories ,along with the role that Irish hating cunt widgery had in causing untold hurt to the families.

 

I'm delighted for the families,it puts to rest a lot of shit they have had to put up with and finally lets those still alive to finally put their murdered loved ones to rest.I hope with all my heart that the families of the 96 get the same closure

[Faustus]

Good to see that justice has been done.

 

In my opinion, any prosecution should be carried out at the wish of the deceased's families. If they are happy with the names of their loved ones being cleared of any wrongdoing and wish to let it lie, then that's fine. If they want to take it further, then that also has to be respected.