TOPIC: Bloody Sunday

Former para arrested today because of his part in the murder of civil rights marchers in 1972. It seems he's one of the soldiers who appeared during the most recent inquiry (Saville). I imagine he won't be the last arrest.

I'm not so sure there should be any arrests for this now, particularly when we hear about some of the UDA and IRA killers who were guaranteed their freedom by the authorities. The other side of the argument is, I suppose, they were there to keep the peace and it has been found that they fired first and did so without warning, at civilians, so maybe deserve whatever punishment they get.

Having stayed in the Bogside in the past few years, I would say that the bad feeling towards the armed forces is mainly a thing of the past (I made no secret of the fact that I'd been in the forces), although there are a few families who very much hold on to their hatred. I just wonder whether putting former soldiers on trial for these events might just reopen divisions that had almost been sorted.

'Sunday Bloody Sunday'. What a great song. It really encapsulates the frustration of a Sunday, doesn't it? You wake up in the morning, you've got to read all the Sunday papers, the kids are running round, you've got to mow the lawn, wash the car, and you think "Sunday, bloody Sunday!".

Moorlad wrote:
Is there a genuine sense they are moving on and the troubles are behind them?

That's actually what I found mate. More so than in Belfast, and in Belfast much more seems to have been done to facilitate more integration. There still aren't protestants living in the Bogside, and there are still exclusively protestant areas as well. However there are pubs where the people are mixed religion. In Belfast there were people who would still not go in particular pubs (although they all told me I'd have no problems).

It is a great place to visit by the way.

Moorlad wrote:
I visited Belfast about this time last year. I felt safe in the city but was warned by a taxi driver not to venture out into the estates /pubs on my own, this was backed up by the bloke I was going to see to buy a car off. He gave me a little tour round which was absolutely fascinating. He said there were pubs He could take me in and I would be fine but things could be different if I went in alone. A shame that some sections do still want to perpetuate the troubles as , I agree, it's a great city to visit. I will be going back sometime in the future.

Edit to add, as regards this new legal issue, time to move on, nothing to be gained from opening this up again in my opinion. None of the factions, and I include the British army and security services in that, involved should claim any glory fro what were terrible times for the ordinary folk of NI that just wanted to get on with life.

If they're prepared to start arresting British Soldiers for Bloody Sunday, then they can round up those murdering [censored] Adams and McGuiness...

Went to NI once for a wedding, stayed a few days. Great place, great people. Lets hope it remains peaceful

The fact that bloody sunday involved british citizens being killed in cold blood on british streets by the british army would suggest to me that the killers should be brought to trail not matter how long ago it was .

To be fair, how many of our cities, towns and local pubs would you feel safe in these days and it can be worse particularly when you are a complete stranger?

These people were paid to defend and protect the united kingdom, just because others were not brought to justice it doesn't stop them from being guilty killing in cold blood, A minority of the people in the army are not in it to serve the country they're part of the arm to kill, the problem is people in this country let them away with murder as they are soldiers. Murder is murder!

Dunaskinblue wrote:
I always head for pubs in the many places in the UK I have visited to get a feel for the place.

Having a good crack with the locals and all that is good stuff and folk are more than happy to tell you where and not to go.

Go looking for trouble like anywhere and you will find it.

Saying that I would feel a bit uncomfortable if I was from somewhere else and walked into The Currock for a pint lol.

Sold down the river by Blair and the peace treaty.
If you pardon murderers on one side then it should happen on the other too.

cyberslob wrote:
You should never pardon a murder they shouldnt of pardoned the irish but they did, did no one ever tell you two wrongs dont make a right

Happyblue wrote:
I've heard two Wongs don't make a White.

More closer to his normal spelling though

I agree murderers shouldn't be pardoned but it is very unfair to wipe clean the slate on convicted killers and then put on trial someone else. Bearing in mind the the situation the army was put in over there, sniping and bombs from hidden corners etc with a hand tied behind their back. It isn't the army's job police a country yet they were pushed into it without proper training or choice. It's hardly surprising this type of thing happened.

As an ex serviceman this really boils my piss. A free pass has been given by politicians to murdering scum who slaughtered men women and children on the streets of Britain. If the terrorist can be given a free pass then surely the same should have been given to any of the forces who erred. But no it's all one sided yet again the politicians ask young men to take on unforgiving enemy with rules of engagement that ties one arm behind their back then when it goes wrong they hang the squad die out to dry.

Whether their is a case against these soldiers or not, isn't really the issue. You cannot let Republican/Loyalist terrorists out of jail in order to facilitate peace, and then start arresting soldiers. Hypocrisy that will stir up bad feeling and achieve nothing. Are they going to start arresting everyone within the British establishment who gave the orders during the Troubles? Top politicians etc.? Or is it just going to be lowly soldiers? Think we all know the answer to that. If i was serving in the Army right now, it wouldn't fill me with confidence that i might be ordered into a situation and then end up getting arrested for it in 40 years time.

There are still huge divisions in NI, it will take decades and decades to lose that and even then it will always remain to a degree. What is going to be achieved by starting to dig up things from decades ago again? Wasn't the point of the massively overblown Bloody Sunday inquiry to put the issue to rest?

Shocking arresting this fella now, I bet there is hundreds on both sides who done worse than him, no one knows the pressure these young soilders were put under.
Our corrupt leaders have been doing this for years, bomber Harris for example.

It isn't completely straightforward any of the Northern Irish stuff though.

The initial problems in the 60s stems from inequality in the province, jobs, housing etc were routinely only given to protestants and catholics were really struggling. There was also gerrymandering of votes on a huge scale (onlt one person per household allowed to vote. That was the reason that the Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association was formed. In the summer of '68 they had their first march, it was around Dungannon, Later that year one was arranged in Derry, which the Norther Ireland government banned, the march went ahead anyway, but the RUC inrecepted it and beat hundreds of the marchers senseless (it was shown on American tv). That caused the first riot in Derry.

6 Months later another group of civil rights activists marched from Belfast to Derry, when it reached Derry it was attacked by over 200 loyalists, including off duty RUC officers, and later that night the RUC went mental in the Bogside area of Derry attacking the residents without any provocation. That was what led to the residents sealing off the area and proclaiming it a no go area called "Free Derry". Ian Paisley's fairly newly formed paramilitary groups were systematically bombing utilities (leaving Belfast without power for a while) and blaming the IRA, which was largely still dormant at the time. That was when British troops were sent to guard power installations.

Then in '69 even though the civil rights marches were still routinely banned the Derry apprentice boys (that's another story, very interesting in it's own right) were allowed to march by the Bogside. Stones and bottles and petrol bombs were thrown from both sides, and the RUC tried to storm the Bogside using water canon, CS gas and armoured vehicles, this turned into the battle of the Bogside.

Around about this time the IRA started to become involved, with people joining them to become involved in protests about the treatment of nationalists. That was when a major IRA sympathiser was killed by the RUC with machine gun fire in Belfast (a 9 year old boy called Patrick Rooney). August '69 was when troops went to Belfast and Derry to restore order, and that stopped the Battle of the Bogside. Also the first RUC officer to be killed in the troubles was shot in Belfast around that same time, he was killed by the UVF after a report suggested they should be an unarmed force (the RUC) and the B specials should be disbanded.

The IRA then split into the Official IRA (in 1971 the Official IRA sanctioned attacks on British soldiers) and the Provisional IRA (their campaign against the military also started in '71) and they took control of a lot of the protests and shored up the barricades in "Free Derry" between 1970 and 1972 or so. The Provisionals, instead of being a nationalist group decided it was to protect the interests of just the catholic community. The government introduced internment without trial during this time and there were huge battles on the Falls Road in Belfast where troops fought against the Official IRA. All of this lot led up to bloody Sunday in 1972.

So it is perfectly understandable that the young soldiers sent out there initially to protect the general public would be absolutely cacking themselves. I certainly would have been, there were threats all around them. However it was caused by the government of Northern Ireland and the UK, the policies (and they were actual policies) of keeping down the catholic working class in the province were disgusting, in a democratic country in the second half of the 20th century, and weren't much better than apartheid in South Africa. It was a real melting pot and it was almost certain to kick off at some stage, people will not take that treatment forever. The rights and wrongs of it all can be discussed forever, but it certainly was not as one sided as it was reported over here.

Between 1969 and 2001, 3,500 people were killed in the troubles (60% by republicans, 30% by loyalists and 10% by the army). The bad crack is that only just over 500 of those killed were paramilitaries on either side. More civilians were killed by loyalist paramilitaries than by republicans, and republican paramilitaries killed as many of their own side as the army and the loyalists managed. It all seems pretty pointless in all honesty, but the crap put out by the press in this country does not come close to what actually happened, there are now 6 or 7 families on either side in Belfast who want it all kept going (so I was told by the former mayor of the city last time I was there) and the vast majority of the population want peace. It is nowhere near as bad as what it was, but arresting former British troops is not at all helpful, and could quite easily bring back some former tensions, I don't see ant good reason why this should be done.

Interesting read Moorlad, might educate a few (me included). Never heard of Patrick Rooney before, are you sure he was a major IRA sympathiser at the age of 9 though?

Like you say and it's been well documented over the last few years, most of the population of Ireland want peace. Makes it all the more embarrassing and pathetic when you get young English lads who weren't even born at the height of the troubles travelling up to Ibrox on a weekend to sing No Surrender in some sort of misguided sense of loyalty to the UK.

As with this soldiers arrest why can't people just let it lie?

That was my idea of a joke. I only know his name because it is the same as my uncle.

"Pawn in the game" springs to mind - horrible situation to be in from all sides, and after all the water under the bridge for this to come back to haunt you must be awful.

I have no idea which soldier this is, to be honest, but to me that doesn't really matter, I imagine he was just one of the lads on the ground, now the army are going to throw him to the wolves in order to ensure that his leaders don't need to take any of the blame.

Those lads were spectacularly ill led on that day, that won't really come as too much of a surprise for anybody who has ever served in the forces. There is a culture of the buck stopping at the bottom (or as near the bottom as it reasonably can) in the armed forces. You can be absolutely certain that General Ford, who deployed 1 Para to Derry to "arrest possible rioters and looters" will never be charged, nor will Major Loden, who carried on having his soldiers shoot (at the backs of) the dispersing crowd). Neither will Colonel Willford (commander of 1 Para), who without telling Brigadier McLellan (the head of ground forces) sent his troops into the Bogside against specific orders. General Sir Mike Jackson was also involved that day, he was a Captain then, and you can be absolutely certain there'll be nothing to connect him to any wrongdoing, even though he was the one who coached the soldiers concerned in what to say at the Widgery tribunal.

Martin McGuinness was there, and he had a sub-machine gun with him, but never fired it. There was an IRA sniper too, but he fired only after the first 2 civilians had been shot, so who ordered the men to open fire? Why did Wilfrd order men into the Bogside? Why didn't they get brought out when a ceasefire was declared? Why were 1 Para used? Those are questions for the officers and not for the poor sods who were faced with a huge crowd of potential nail bombers (as they must have seen it).

If anybody is really interested the link is to the full Saville inquiry report, I've only read extracts to be honest:

webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20101...-sunday-inquiry.org/

cyberslob wrote:
Terrorists on both sides were pardoned. The loyalists won't publish their list. Also not just pardoned (both sides) but they were assured no action would be brought for terrorist related crimes before 1998.

Both sides, loyalist and republican, and as I said before loyalist terrorists killed more civilians than republican terrorists did.

I think you're getting mixed up with "on the runs". There weren't too many loyalist "on the runs", after all they weren't really going to get much of a reception in the Republic to be fair.