If you are a young member of the Parachute Regiment, who has never been under fire before, and you hear shots fired nearby, you, of course, being absolutely omnipresent, know that it is another member of the Parachute Regiment, and not the ‘enemy’ you have been briefed to possibly expect…

All well and good but why is there not a massacre every time paras go on the street, go on patrol, hold on to a gun? And yet there were no casualty’s, other than the civilians (and the one later revealed to be a member of the IRA youth movement was only fingered as having the weapons, found on his body in the morgue, by a police informer and not by the army medic or the civilian doctor nor his rescuers who turned out his pockets to try and find his identity. Of those deceased able to be tested later it was decided none had the usual residue associated with having handled a weapon).

But that is not the point – no one fired at them but they fired into the crowd, and in some cases took deliberate aimed shots at people waving white hankies, people trying to help the wounded, and even people not involved in the original march. Those soldiers panicked – but since it would not be right to admit the troops were frightened the lie had to be spread that they were fired on.

…and, knowing also, that everybody else, including ‘hostile’ civilians and the IRA, always tell the absolute truth, even in a situation where telling the truth will help their ‘enemy’, the British Army…

There was no need to worry about anyone else trying to tell the truth – the military were (still are) considered the tellers of the truth and anyone who said different (that sound familiar?) was lying.
That will have been the problem the Iraqis will have faced – there are laws and rules about what can and can not be done to prisoners but who can you tell when the authorities are the ones in whose prisons you have been abused? No point in appealing to the British public: they believe that butter wouldn’t melt in the mouths of our boys…

…the only possible explanation is that every member of the Parachute Regiment who thinks, or thought, that he was being fired at, is lying, and knows he is lying, and is lying to ‘justify’ a massacre.

I do like this bit, not least because that was the same conclusion that the Saville inquiry came to – but then you knew that, didn’t you…

Look at the timeline of the event. It wasn’t once but twice that troops fired on unarmed protesters (apparently there was a chance that two soldiers may have been fired at by an IRA sniper some 15 minutes before the main shooting, but only after the soldiers had fired on the crowd, according to Saville; one marcher later died of his injuries, but was still not a member of the IRA). Look at the inquiries, search for ‘Soldier F’ (actually a lance corporal) and see just how skilled he was at shooting to kill.
In fact Bloody Sunday doesn’t appear to be the action of a frightened, under trained unit, jumping when a car door slams or motorbike backfires – read this statement issued by Derry’s coroner at the time, retired British Army Major Hubert O’Neill:

This Sunday became known as Bloody Sunday and bloody it was. It was quite unnecessary. It strikes me that the Army ran amok that day and shot without thinking what they were doing. They were shooting innocent people. These people may have been taking part in a march that was banned but that does not justify the troops coming in and firing live rounds indiscriminately. I would say without hesitation that it was sheer, unadulterated murder. It was murder.

Widgery’s rushed report (published less than eleven weeks after the event) backed the army’s account, surprise surprise, even though witnesses who had initially planned to boycott it for presumed bias were convinced to take part. The fact that it blindly backed up everything the army said and was regarded, even within the army itself, as a whitewash boosted terrorist recruitment – not helped by the secretary for state, Reginald Maudling, declaring that the army had only fired in self defence (which got him punched by Bernadette Devlin, who had witnessed the event but was denied the opportunity to speak – her right as an MP – in parliament about it). But then the whitewash faded and when someone like General Sir Mike Jackson (Who had been a captain and present on the day) said he believed that he had no doubt that innocent people were killed then the writing was on the wall.
The Saville inquiry was more thorough than Widgery, but attempts were still made to obstruct it; original army photo’s and film taken at the time were not produced and despite the MoD’s claim that all the guns used at the time were either lost or destroyed some were discovered to have been sold on to Beirut, Sierra Leone and possibly other countries.

Lord Saville…: “What happened on Bloody Sunday strengthened the Provisional IRA, increased nationalist resentment and hostility towards the Army and exacerbated the violent conflict of the years that followed. Bloody Sunday was a tragedy for the bereaved and the wounded, and a catastrophe for the people of Northern Ireland.”…

…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”.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/northernireland/7829208/Bloody-Sunday-Inquiry-Cameron-apologises-as-Saville-says-shootings-unjustified.html

Saville concluded that no stones or petrol bombs were thrown before the soldiers opened fire, and that the civilian crowd posed no viable threat at any time. In addition Saville decided that Lt Colonel Wilford, in command of 1 Para, disobeyed orders and went into the Bogside, exacerbating the situation…

But I dare say that if you want any more info you can look it up yourself.

Ridicule them? Hell, why not stone them to death… Kill the unbelievers!

Of course, it does depend on what you disbelieve in…

Pregnant woman given death sentence in Sudan is kept shackled in her cell

An eight-months pregnant woman is being kept shackled to the wall of her cell as she awaits hanging, her husband has said after visiting her in prison.
Meriam Ibrahim, 26, was sentenced to death in Sudan on Thursday for refusing to recant her Christianity and for marrying Christian Daniel Wani – a Sudanese man with US citizenship who lives in New Hampshire
The court found her guilty of apostasy – leaving Islam – even though Miss Ibrahim testified that she was never a Muslim, and was brought up as a Christian by her Ethiopia-born mother…

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/sudan/10844205/Pregnant-woman-given-death-sentence-in-Sudan-is-kept-shackled-in-her-cell.html

They used to lock up people who believed in invisible friends; now the looney bins are closed and (as has always been, unfortunately) religion is out there, being religious.

Re 164

It was such a lovely day and now I’m unaccountably depressed. Strange.

Love you too.

But keep your hands to yourself…

I think the words “is believed” ,so no facts yet.

Well, the republicans really do believe it – gives them another reason to slag Obama…

If these stories about him are true then i suspect he could be in for a rough ride when he gets home–almost an embarrasment to the USA government if this is the case.
We do need to know what happened.

Guess we will, unless he happens to ‘forget’ whilst being questioned…

US army chief Dempsey: Bowe Bergdahl could be prosecuted

The top-ranking US military officer has raised the possibility Sgt Bowe Bergdahl could be prosecuted if he abandoned his post before his capture.

Gen Martin Dempsey said the Army would not ignore misconduct but the 28-year-old was “innocent until proven guilty“.

The US Army later confirmed it will launch a new review into the circumstances surrounding Sgt Bergdahl’s capture.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-27682668

“Innocent until proven guilty“… At the moment that appears to be a forgone conclusion as far as the reports so far go.

Apparently good men died trying to get this guy back so I can understand their reaction. This is the 21st Century I am sure that if he went to his superior officer and said he had lost his nerve he would have been on the first plane out 100 years ago he probably would have been shot but I don’t believe the USA do that now.

Not read anything about others apparently being killed in the search – guess you’ve got a link?

http://time.com/2809352/bowe-bergdahl-deserter-army-taliban/

Looking at the soldiers mentioned in the story on the above website, there are six names seemingly from his unit apparently listed as being killed in action looking for Bergdahl around three months after his disappearance; they appear to be no more than losses in action by IED’s – you could make the same claim about any of the other US soldiers killed around the same time in Afghanistan, and in fact only two of them are said (in the story, anyway) to have been searching for the missing soldier. when killed.

Maybe they were all involved in the search but, equally. after looking through the casualty lists for the period ( http://icasualties.org/oef/Fatalities.aspx, pages 41-45), it also appears to be the units casualties… Was the unit taken off all other duties for several months to search for Bergdahl? No, one of the KIA’s died supporting Afghan forces at the end of August; others died from IED’s and rocket propelled grenada attacks – more likely moving targets of opportunity rather than part of a deliberate search operation.

So if we are allowed to make stabs in the dark without solid facts concerning this story – just like apparent former colleagues have – then I would say Bergdahl is rather unfairly being blamed for all his units KIA’s. Shoot me down if you like (and you will, undoubtedly…) but a convenient coincidence?

Anyone thought about his complaints, given prior to his walkout?

NICE of them to cap up the IMPORTANT bits in the story, so that you DON’T have to read the ENTIRE article.

Wonder if I can sue them for SHOCKING over egging?

My opinion is based on the fact that the Guardian is full of left wing drivel.

Ah, got you – that opinion for that sort of centre ground. Stick with the herd and don’t bleat too loud.

And the Daily Mail continues to be the banner carrier for fascism that it was in the 1930s. Although these days it has as just much interest in celebrity…

Snafu, I would expect you of all people, to be more supportive.

Supportive of voter intimidation and postal vote fraud?

I’m not standing for Ukip, you know…;o)