Saville: A good day for reconcilation
For those who don’t remember or haven’t studied the history, the only false note was struck when the claim was repeated several times on news channels, that Bloody Sunday marked the end of the civil rights era and Derry’s association with the northern State. Culled from some news cutting, no doubt.
In fact, whatever the banners said on the day, the original civil rights campaign had long ago been superseded by a war of attrition and armed insurgency. The SDLP had quit Stormont the previous June – even before the fiasco of internment – in the wake of the army’s shootings of two young men, Cusack and Beattie.
But today, the transformation was complete. Call it euphoria or release if you like, but to me it looked and felt longer lasting . The crowds in front of the Guildhall seemed to be bringing a very old isolation to a final conclusion and marking a further stage of reconciliation with a new State in which they now play a full part.
Unionists need not have feared that this was going to be Sinn Fein’s day, the greatest in a long line of republican propaganda coups. The televised display of people power did not reinforce the republican narrative of the Troubles. The shout of “innocent” coming after the names of each of the 14 dead gave the lie to that and put the emphasis in the right place. Revolutionaries are indifferent to matters of guilt or innocence. And it was obvious to all that the affirmation of innocence was what mattered today.
Not all the deep emotion was reserved to Guildhall Square. Beneath the bigger but similar clock, deep feelings were expressed in the Commons. It was fitting that Mark Durkan brought the spirit of the Guildhall crowd to Westminster. Almost uniquely, the two very different forums, so often bitterly divided or locked in mutual incomprehension, were linked and united. London’s Derry or Derry’s Westminster indeed. Mark’s speech is worth quoting at length. In deliberate imitation of the custom at PMQs when the names of soldiers killed in Afghanistan are read out, he spoke the names of each of the 14 dead, his voice cracking.
Mark Durkan
May I thank the Prime Minister for his clear statement? From talking to representatives of the families a short while ago, I know that they would want to be associated with those thanks.
This is a day of huge moment and deep emotion in Derry. The people of my city did not just live through Bloody Sunday; they have lived with it since. Does the Prime Minister agree that this is a day to receive and reflect on the clear verdicts of Saville, and not to pass party verdicts on Saville?
The key verdicts are:
“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. No one threw or threatened to throw a nail or petrol bomb at the soldiers on Bloody Sunday”.
A further verdict is:
“none of the casualties…was posing any threat of causing death or serious injury.”
Of course, there is also the verdict that
“the British Army fired the first shots, these were not justified and none of the subsequent shots that killed or wounded”
anyone on Bloody Sunday “was justified.” In rejecting so much of the soldiers’ submissions and false accounts, the report highlights where victims were shot in the back or while crawling on the ground, or shot again when already wounded on the ground.
Will the Prime Minister confirm that each and every one of the victims—Bernard McGuigan, 41; Gerald Donaghey, 17; Hugh Gilmour, 17; John Duddy, 17; Gerard McKinney, 34; James Wray, 22; John Young, 17; Kevin McElhinney, 17; Michael Kelly, 17; Michael McDaid, 20; Patrick Doherty, 31; William McKinney, 27; William Nash, 19; and John Johnston, 59
—are all absolutely and totally exonerated by today’s report, as are all the wounded? These men were cut down when they marched for justice on their own streets. On that civil rights march, they were protesting against internment without trial, but not only were their lives taken, but their innocent memory was then interned without truth by the travesty of the Widgery tribunal. Will the Prime Minister confirm clearly that the Widgery findings are now repudiated and binned, and that they should not be relied on by anyone as giving any verdict on that day?
Sadly, only one parent of the victims has survived to see this day and hear the Prime Minister’s open and full apology on the back of this important report. Lawrence McElhinney epitomises the dignity and determination of all the families who have struggled and strived to exonerate their loved ones and have the truth proclaimed.
Seamus Heaney reflected the numbing shock of Bloody Sunday and its spur to the quest for justice for not only families but a city when he wrote:
“My heart besieged by anger, my mind a gap of danger,
I walked among their old haunts, the home ground where they bled;
And in the dirt lay justice, like an acorn in the winter
Till its oak would sprout in Derry where the thirteen men lay dead.”
The Bloody Sunday monument on Rossville street proclaims:
“Their epitaph is in the continuing struggle for democracy”.
If today, as I sincerely hope it does, offers a healing of history in Derry and Ireland, may we pray that it also speaks hope to those in other parts of the world who are burdened by injustice, conflict and the transgressions of unaccountable power?
The Prime Minister’s welcome statement and the statement that will be made by the families on the steps of the Guildhall will be the most significant records of this day on the back of the report that has been published. However, perhaps the most important and poignant words from today will not be heard here or on the airwaves. Relatives will stand at the graves of victims and their parents to tell of a travesty finally arrested, of innocence vindicated and of promises kept, and as they do so, they can invoke the civil rights anthem when they say, “We have overcome. We have overcome this day.”
The cause of wider redress was fairly put by Willie McCrea and by Gregory Campbell, though rather marred in his case by a lack of magnanimity.
Gregory Campbell
“We did not need a £200 million inquiry to establish that there was no premeditated plan to shoot civilians on that day. We did not need a report of such length to tell us that as a result of IRA actions before Bloody Sunday, parts of the city “lay in ruins”. Many have said that the difference between Bloody Sunday and the other atrocities that I have alluded to was that Bloody Sunday was carried out by state forces, whereas other murders were carried out by terrorists.
There has been no similar inquiry into the financing of the Provisional IRA at the inception of that organisation by another state—the Irish Republic. That Irish state acted as a midwife at the birth of an organisation responsible for murdering many thousands of UK citizens.
Soldiers answered questions in the course of the Saville inquiry. The 2IC of the Provisional IRA, Martin McGuinness, appears not to have answered questions. The public will want to know from today what he was doing with a Thompson sub-machine-gun on the day of Bloody Sunday. Does the Prime Minister agree that the sorry saga of the report is finally over and done with, and that we should look forward, rather than looking back?
Dr William McCrea
“I am sure the Prime Minister would not like to support a hierarchy of victimhood. On 17 January 1992, eight innocent civilian construction workers at Teebane were murdered by the Provisional IRA, and six others were seriously injured. On 9 April 1991, my cousin Derek was gunned down and his child was left to put his fingers into the holes where the blood was coming out to try to stop his father dying. On 7 February 1976, my two cousins were brutally murdered—one boy, 16, and his sister, 21, on the day she was engaged to be married. Therefore I say this to the Prime Minister: no one has ever been charged for any of those murders, and there have been no inquiries. Countless others, including 211 Royal Ulster Constabulary members, were also murdered. Saville says
“Noneof the casualties was posing any threat of causing death or serious injury”,
but that could be said of Teebane, of Derek, of Robert and of Rachel. How do we get closure, how do we get justice, and how do we get the truth?”
Despite its monumental length and cost, Saville may yet boost calls for more inquiries. Margaret Ritchie is not alone in calling for a review of the “Ballymurphy massacre” and it was significant that while David Cameron wished to hold the line at the Historic Inquiries team, this was not the day to rule out some form of wider examination. The failure of Eames Bradley has left a vaccuum. It will have to be filled somehow.
Ms Margaret Ritchie
Will he also give consideration to possible measures of redress for the families in Derry following the exoneration of the victims by the Saville report? In that debate, could wider consideration be given to the Ballymurphy families, who also experienced a lot of distress and pain because the Parachute Regiment, some five months earlier, was involved in those incidents, which resulted in the wounding, but above all the killing, of 10 people?
The Prime Minister
My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has meetings with the Ballymurphy families. The first port of call should be the historical inquiries team. It is doing good work, going through all the issues of the past and trying to settle them as best it can. We want to avoid other such open-ended, highly costly inquiries. We cannot rule out for ever that there will be no other form of inquiry, but let us allow the historical inquiries team to do its very good work.
I didn’t catch him on anything other than his speech in the House where I thought his points were fair enough. In fact I thought the DUP were right to point out the importance of balance, just as I was impressed by the Durkan speech. Everyone has to have their say and express how they feel.
Personally, though, as a unionist, I am very happy that the truth on Bloory Sunday has been established to the satisfaction of the families. I hope that this is part of a healing process for us all.
“All murder is unjustifiable no matter the reason no matter who carried it out republicans ”
So was the killing of Nazi soldiers by the French resistance unjustifiable? While not trying to defend the acts of republican terrorists over the years I do think that violence can be justified for political purposes in some circumstances and I do think that there is a huge difference between a government using violence on it’s own citizens and a political organisation using violence as a means to furthering it’s aims.
The attrocites of the IRA are terrible and the loss felt by the victims of the IRA can be no less than the loss felt by the victims of Bloody Sunday, the reason why an inquiry into Bloody Sunday is more appropriate than an inquiry into Teebane is because the inquiry was carried out by the British state who are the very people who carried out the acts of Bloody Sunday and as such is a symbol that not only are they admitting their own mistakes and failings and also because it is a symbol that they do not intend to make the same mistakes again.
The hypocrisy lies with those who would condemn a terrorist organisation for murdering innocent civilians, but try to defend a government for doing so.
Lets look at the so called widgery whitewash…
” There would have been no deaths in Londonderry on 30 January if those who organised the illegal march had not thereby created a highly dangerous situation in which a clash between demonstrators and the security forces was almost inevitable.” — Well is this not true?
Yeah, and if nationalists had just accepted the injustices of the British State in the 60′s instead of campaigning for civil rights then there would have been no loyalist murder squads and no need for the British army to come here in the first place, right?
” If the Army had persisted in its “low key” attitude and had not launched a large scale operation to arrest hooligans the day might have passed off without serious incident.” — Yeah once again it seems this was true
It is only true if you accept that people campaigning against injustice are mere hooligans, the Widgery report did so because they started with a conclusion and twisted the facts to suit that conclusion.
“The intention of the senior Army officers to use 1 Para as an arrest force and not for other offensive purposes was sincere.” — Saville makes it clear what happened wasn’t planned by the officers who have been fully exonerated of wrongdoing so I guess this is true also
So the fact that a massacre of innocent people occured is OK because it wasn’t pre-meditated?
“None of the deceased or wounded is proved to have been shot whilst handling a firearm or bomb. Some are wholly acquitted of complicity in such action; but there is a strong suspicion that some others had been firing weapons or handling bombs in the course of the afternoon and that yet others had been closely supporting them.” — Saville says as much when he says some were probably carrying nail bombs and stones etc. so I guess once again widgery wasn’t actully that far away from the truth
One person was probably in possession of nail bombs but not doing anything at the time to justify his shooting, that does not justify killing 14 people as Widgery seems to infer that it does.
but wait a sec if he wasn’t that far from the real truth then whats the problem?? Oh wait it wasn’t the answer that you wanted so guess what… lets hold another inquiry until you get the answer you do want. Lets face it if this inquiry had found the same as widgery (which it wasn’t set up to do anyway) would the republicans in Londonderry have accepted it? or would they have kept complaining until they got another inquiry set up?
It was far from the real truth because it claimed that the killings were justifiable, the only way that the Saville report could have come to the same conclusions as Widgery was if it had been a whitewash just as Widgery was and in that case, no, the people of Derry would not have accepted it
Just think £191 million pounds was wasted on this exercise in rewriting history… money that could have saved the West’s A&E… that could have saved countless jobs, that could have saved us from the recession, that could have been used to help and build up the West….wasted
Much less than was wasted in years of the British occupation of Ireland.
when will unionists see justice for our dead?
Still not seeing the fact that many have had justice through the courts already? That the big deal here is that for once, just one time, the army is being scrutinised? Bearing in mind that the IRA as a whole have collected thousands of years in jail already.
This is pure duplicitousness. You don’t want to see innocent Catholics receiving justice and here’s why: because when Catholics receive justice it strips away the comforting blanket of lies that the British and state forces did no wrong. It shows the Unionist side of the fence in a bad light. But I’m assuming you don’t worry too much about that, as you begrudge one set of victims any closure or truth while demanding further, more justice for the victims on your side of the fence. So showing Unionism in a bad light is your form, and doesn’t bother you at all.
Bitterness, hypocrisy, it’s all there to see. Innocent civilians are exonerated and all you can whinge is ‘where’s my enquiry, why don’t you lock up some IRA men’ when in fact IRA men have been being locked away for more than 30 years, while soldiers and state forces have been protected from any consequence for their role in murder. But shhhh we don’t want to talk about that, those murders suited you quite well and any talk of justice for those innocents will be met with your shrill matra of ‘themmuns, themmuns themmuns’ and lies about concern for innocent victims without the qualifying word Protestant.
Actually most of the hypocrisy here lies with those who would condemn a Government for murdering innocent civilians, but try to defend a terrorist organisation for doing so.
Pray make it so to let it be so.
Let it be so,
In passing to move on in that direction of travel, here clarification of what might otherwise be the mistaken identity of namesakes – but who are in not in any way related by blood as far as i know yet. This too said in selfish hope of engaging one of their removal trucks one day lasting two. Not yellow to take me away mind, but chattels home over the border and Borders some long gone kings shipped troublesome Reivers (incl Scots Burns back again?) from both sides to Ulster, as later kings having by then found Australia did too.
Ach, if only the Romans had not gone home and left Hadrians wall unattended
]
Nail. Head. Hit. Good job.
Come on unionists! Play up! Play up! And play the game! The sectarian republican f***wits demand that you settle for some small little instances of justice. Heaven forfend you ask for all the dead to be counted.
They would, no doubt, have been equally content with, say, only seven of the Bloody Sunday families having been included in Saville.
At the same time the old chestnuts of “shoot-to-kill” and “collusion” are drawn from the fire to ‘scare’ you. How laughable. They chose to ignore the fact that the vast majority of unionists have no time for those who break the law, unlike republicans who vote them into office. Stand up to be counted and embraced Tommy G. McGuinness!
Let them and their ilk witter on. Their poisonous verbiage will, like the poor, always be with us. We should at least be thankful that they are only using hammers; for now the AK47s are on hold.
Optimum est patí quod émendáre nón possís.
As has been said, Ireland did not fund nor support the IRA. For christs sake, we fought and won the civil war against them. The IRA have been our enemy because they wanted to destroy our country and replace it with one of their own imposition.
Did individual citizens of the irish state support the IRA?
Yes.
Did the Irish state?
No.
We have not taken your blows under republican cudgels, but we have had ours. Why else do you think SF preform so badly down here? Why else do think there is so little support among us for a united Ireland?
By the way, I just want to say, in light of the departure of our dear Horseman –
I love you guys.
I have heard a lot about context today, mostly from the likes of Gregory Campbell etc. As an Englishman living here it seems that an historic wrong has been made right. Obviously that is in the midst of other wrongs from both sides. However going back to 1972, the Unionist Parliament had interned people and made marching illegal. Two of the cornerstones of any free society is the right to free assembly and the freedom from detention without trial. Therefore the issue of context is not a strong hand that the Unionist community at large should seek to play.
I listened last night to a lot of concillitory talk from the nationalist community last night and the response has been at best defensive. If a leader of Unionism could step forward?
republicans accusing unionists of whinging? Has the world gone mad… or is the hypocrisy of republicans just astounding
Dammit, Saville hath spoke and Horseman dead – can ye not wisht?
No the hypocrisy of some Unionists is astounding, especially Gregory Campbell, has he forgot his party created a terrorist army who together with the UDA and UVF imported hundreds of weapons into the country that were then used to murder innocent people. Has he forgotten the DUP advised the UVF not to call a ceasefire when they were murdering innocent catholics. Yes Im all for inquiries into all the deaths of the past conflict but it is Unionists and the British government who have most to fear from the truth being outed.
vanhelsing,
I can only imagine how difficult it was yesterday for those in the unionist community who have lost loved ones to terrorists and who have yet to have their voices heard and receive justice. I fully understand their anger and disquiet. I want them to receive justice. It was only the timing of their political representatives’ opinions that I had misgivings about. Nothing else.
“Bottom line now for the vast majority of the Unionist family is now (ready) to move on and take NI forward.”
And that’s great to know. The best of luck.
Gregory Campbell’s comments were at best mean spirited. He’d do well to catch himself on before he’s consumed by his own very obvious sectarian agenda.
[...] 16 June 2010, 11:09pm0That unionist response has tended to be in one of two fashions. Cushy Glenn made a very valid point on another thread when he suggested that the majority of unionists agreed with Gregory Campbell. [...]
Where is the evidence that what Campbell says is what most unionists think ?
How is it valid when he has produced no evidence to support his assertion that what Campbell says is agreed with by the majority of unionists ?
It’s the price of truth and yes a different standard does apply to the state than to illegal secret paramilitaries who have no pretence to any adherence to the law, still less to public accountability . Why not welcome this as a perhaps too rare good day for UK democracy, for citzenship, for truth, for humanity. There must be good days ahead for other victims but this is a landmark nonetheless given the subsequent history of the conflict following the unlawful killing and lies of Bloody Sunday.
Irish state linked forces ? Please explain.
Slug, I agree with your comment 100%, I follow slugger’s blog regularly and the theme of “bitter isolated” seems to come through on a lot of the posts ( on whatever subject ) which by their content is of a nationalist/republican viewpoint. Bitterness is not onesided..I get the feeling that the phrase moving on is just held by a few bloggers. Furthermore, the views of the unionist tradition are dismissed to readily, the majoriity of which don’t have the same opinon as Gregory Campell,
You can take it from me most unionists don’t agree with G Campbell’s views, when the DUP agreed to go into the assembly,after years of condemning the U U for betrayal. The party forgot to change the mindset of their politicians.
“And when innocent nationalist or unionist people do get justice, like yesterday, everyone should be glad for them.” – Republic of Connaught
Got justice? I think folks are confusing Saville with the 1991 Birmingham Six appeal. Saville wasn’t a trial, so it cannot declare anyone guilty or not guilty, just as Widgery couldn’t and didn’t declare the victims of BS guilty. The BS victims weren’t exhonerated of any crime because they were never convicted of any crime.
This is the British state cleverly using the catholics’ own myth against them. In reality, the British state has told the families of the BS victims to go fuck themselves if they think the State has any intention of delivering justice for their loved ones. It has brainwashed them so successfully that they now think that denial of justice is actually delivery of it.
To add to that: this issue isn’t whether or not the BS victims were guilty of any crime but whether or not those who shot them are guilty of a crime. That has not been put to a Court because the British state has persistently refused to do so, and it is still refusing to do so. It simply put the focus on the ‘guilt’ of the victims to take it off the victimizers. It is now time to stop being fucked about by the British state and to put that fucus back on the victimizers, demanding that the state holds its actors to account for the murder of its own citizens.
But Alias republicans got an apology… so what if there are no prosecutions and no trials? So what if there is no real justice? Isn’t it better to believe you got justice when in fact you got a carefully crafted statement which only served to actually increase the British Government’s standing within republican communities?
Look at the posts from unionists in the last couple of days even just here on slugger… about three support saville whilst the rest are aginst it, look at the facebook campaigns, look at the loyalist magazines even look at what the unionist politicians are saying and it is obvious the majority are against this biased report…
by the way did anyone read the statement by one of the PIRA members who later joined the INLA when he said that Martin McG had dyed his hair aurburn at one point?
“Yeah, and if nationalists had just accepted the injustices of the British State in the 60’s instead of campaigning for civil rights then there would have been no loyalist murder squads and no need for the British army to come here in the first place, right?”
Not at all, they should have protested but they should have doen so legally, maybe if they hadn’t went into direct conflict with the police and army they might have had cross community support… they should have been peacefully protesting in a legal manner,
“It is only true if you accept that people campaigning against injustice are mere hooligans, the Widgery report did so because they started with a conclusion and twisted the facts to suit that conclusion.”
No I view people who were involved in an illegal parade and attacking police and carrying nailbombs and firing on the army with machine guns as hooligans, the saville started with conclusion and worked backwards even ignoring sizeable amounts of eyewittness testimony
“So the fact that a massacre of innocent people occured is OK because it wasn’t pre-meditated?”
No one said that but it does show that republicans have been lying when going on about how Bloody Sundya was planned by Heath etc.
“One person was probably in possession of nail bombs but not doing anything at the time to justify his shooting, that does not justify killing 14 people as Widgery seems to infer that it does.”
he was a member of Fianna the IRA youth wing and was carrying an explosive device with intent to kill or main… he died in the process of his bomb run… he is no innocent victim, Widgery makes it clear others were innocent… it doesn’t infer that it was ok for 14 to die but it does make it clear that one was a terrorist.
“It was far from the real truth because it claimed that the killings were justifiable, the only way that the Saville report could have come to the same conclusions as Widgery was if it had been a whitewash just as Widgery was and in that case, no, the people of Derry would not have accepted it”
It was a blackwash… it was set up to blacken the army, BS was justifiable and it has been justified for 38 years… republicans were never going to be content until they got the answer they wanted
“Much less than was wasted in years of the British occupation of Ireland.”
How is the old free state doing down there? The western equivalent of Saudi Arabia? or maybe a paradies for the rich? or is it something akin to Greece and nearly bankrupt… Big Bad Britain is keeping us afloat.. the south cant even look after themselves never mind us
[...] O’Toole believes that the publication of the Saville report heralded a good day for reconciliation, others would [...]