« Previous | Main | Next »

Bloody Sunday.

Eddie Mair | 10:40 UK time, Tuesday, 15 June 2010

Read the report in full here.

Read more BBC News coverage here.

You can see and hear more here.

Comments

  • 1. At 12:11pm on 15 Jun 2010, Mack O Damia wrote:

    • "There have been no comments made here yet."

    Whooooooopppppeeeeeee!

    Complain about this comment

  • 2. At 2:03pm on 15 Jun 2010, Mack O Damia wrote:

    By hook or by crook
    you must read the whole book!

    Complain about this comment

  • 3. At 2:30pm on 15 Jun 2010, The Intermittent Horse wrote:

    Mack O Damia - Hardly the 'whole book'!
    Journalists from various media organisations are currently locked in an hotel in Derry, having handed over all their electronic equipment. They have between 2.30pm and 3.30pm to read a 60-page summary of the report. At 3.30 pm they can then tell us what it contains. The 'whole book' is 5,000 pages!

    Complain about this comment

  • 4. At 2:46pm on 15 Jun 2010, Mack O Damia wrote:

    3. The Intermittent Horse

    • "Journalists from various media organisations are currently locked in an hotel in Derry, having handed over all their electronic equipment."

    Any hope the key might get lost?

    Complain about this comment

  • 5. At 2:50pm on 15 Jun 2010, newlach wrote:

    Murderers should be put behind bars. If soldier "F" (the perjurer) has been found to have acted unlawfully he should face prosecution. Prosecution in such circumstances would be in the public interest.

    Complain about this comment

  • 6. At 2:50pm on 15 Jun 2010, Big Sister wrote:

    It's extraordinary that this has taken so long (let alone the money it has cost). And no amount of enquiry or lawyers' fees can remove the stain of the day.

    I hope the families and others involved in this dreadful event do find some closure from the Report.

    Complain about this comment

  • 7. At 2:53pm on 15 Jun 2010, Ellis P Otter wrote:

    Look we've waited decades for this!

    Does another day or two for careful consideration really mean the the BBC are going to slow off the mark?

    What the heck has happened to serious journalism in this country?

    So called serious journalists will, later today, expose themselves, again for the vain and egotistical arrogant fools they are for spouting ill-considered comment on events that changed the course of politics in the British Isles for ever!

    It makes me very upset that said journalists treat their listeners and viewers as badly brought up and rather spoilt children who must be satisfied immediately lest we lose concentration.

    The programme hasn't even been on yet, so I could be proved wrong! I will, of course apologise, if I am.

    Complain about this comment

  • 8. At 2:55pm on 15 Jun 2010, Mack O Damia wrote:

    6. Big Sister

    • "I hope the families and others involved in this dreadful event do find some closure from the Report."

    I too, but it's doubtful.
    ;-(

    Complain about this comment

  • 9. At 2:56pm on 15 Jun 2010, Big Sister wrote:

    Ellis (7): That's a first for the programme - Criticism in advance! ;o)

    Complain about this comment

  • 10. At 2:57pm on 15 Jun 2010, Ellis P Otter wrote:

    Re My 7 - the the BBC are going to slow off the mark - please read this as:
    "the BBC are going to be seen as being slow off the mark"

    Thank you

    Complain about this comment

  • 11. At 3:03pm on 15 Jun 2010, Ellis P Otter wrote:

    9 - Big Sis, Yes I am apoplectic in anticipation ;-[

    I do think such a serious report deserves greater consideration that it will get in the broadcast media though. Not least, in memory and respect for those who suffered then and the many who suffer still.

    Complain about this comment

  • 12. At 3:23pm on 15 Jun 2010, The Intermittent Horse wrote:

    newlatch (5) - "Prosecution in such circumstances would be in the public interest"

    I couldn't disagree more. I remember Bloody Sunday, like it was yesterday. I also remember the disgraceful Widgery Tribunal and all the lies, deceit and fabrication surrounding it. The Saville Inquiry will hopefully finally address that great wrong.

    But the Saville Inquiry is part and parcel of the peace process, a process that has seen weapons put beyond use, the demilitarisation of Northern Ireland, the establishment of a fledgling power-sharing government and perhaps most significantly, the early release of prisoners. In my opinion, it is certainly not in the public interest to bring prosecutions, even if sufficient evidence could be garnered.

    Complain about this comment

  • 13. At 3:27pm on 15 Jun 2010, Mack O Damia wrote:

    I'm with the Horse on this. Well said.

    Complain about this comment

  • 14. At 3:33pm on 15 Jun 2010, Ellis P Otter wrote:

    12 & 13 - If it's okay with you, I'd like time to consider how to respond once I know what is in the report.

    Complain about this comment

  • 15. At 3:40pm on 15 Jun 2010, Mack O Damia wrote:

    14. Ellis P Otter

    • "If it's okay with you,..."

    Cool with me, but you don't need our approval.

    Happy reading

    Complain about this comment

  • 16. At 3:58pm on 15 Jun 2010, Lady_Sue wrote:

    Horse, why no prosecutions?

    Complain about this comment

  • 17. At 4:11pm on 15 Jun 2010, mittfh wrote:

    Courtesy of BBC News Online's reporting of David Cameron's verbal summary of the written summary of the report:

    • No warning had been given to any civilians before the soldiers opened fire
    • None of the soldiers fired in response to attacks by petrol bombers or stone throwers
    • Some of those killed or injured were clearly fleeing or going to help those injured or dying
    • None of the casualties was posing a threat or doing anything that would justify their shooting
    • There was no point in trying to soften or equivocate - the events of Bloody Sunday were not justified
    • Many of the soldiers lied about their actions
    • What happened should never, ever have happened
    • Some members of the British armed forces acted wrongly
    • On behalf of the government and the country, he said he was "deeply sorry"
    • The events of Bloody Sunday were not premeditated

    Complain about this comment

  • 18. At 4:19pm on 15 Jun 2010, IMOORE wrote:

    " why no prosecutions? "

    Wait, I fully expect the British establishment will put British troops on trial. It won't bother them that they have given up going after the Irish terorists.

    Complain about this comment

  • 19. At 4:30pm on 15 Jun 2010, Mack O Damia wrote:

    Is it coincidental that we have just been hearing a discussion on the principles of sentencing?

    The suggested proper priorities (I paraphrase)
    1. consider the likelihood or recurrence of the crime
    2. Is there remorse or apology?
    3. Can there be recompense?
    4. Punishment.

    The contributor suggested that the present system seems to use the reverse order, and I agree.

    It seems appropriate to guide our thinking by the suggested priorities. Truth and Reconciliation is very much in order.

    Peace

    Complain about this comment

  • 20. At 4:43pm on 15 Jun 2010, The Intermittent Horse wrote:

    Lady Sue (16) - "Horse, why no prosecutions?"

    I just don't see it happening, Sue. The Prosection Service will ask itself: "Is prosection in the public interest?" Given the ongoing peace process, the early release of prisoners etc., I can't see them coming up with any answer other than: "No".

    The events of Bloody Sunday were appalling and the Widgery Tribunal was a disgraceful episode. The vast majority of people in Northern Ireland have known for decades the truth of what happened in Derry that day. Saville has now confirmed that truth and given some peace to the relatives of those killed. I can't see anything to be gained with prosecutions but a great deal to be put in jeopardy.

    Complain about this comment

  • 21. At 5:15pm on 15 Jun 2010, Lady_Sue wrote:

    Horse, thanks for your response. However, I do wonder how the families of those who were killed would view a decision of "no prosecution".

    Complain about this comment

  • 22. At 5:22pm on 15 Jun 2010, Lady_Sue wrote:

    Will the families of those who were killed be compensated?

    Complain about this comment

  • 23. At 5:35pm on 15 Jun 2010, Geezer wrote:

    It has been mental torture for the victims and the nationalist community formerly known as 'liars' by the Unionist and British communities. They wanted civil dignity. They marched. They died. They were murdered by state forces. They were ordinary people with an extraordinary and justifiable anger. It is maddening how recklessness can so easily fuel and ignite a subjected people into war. Actions of stupidity so often bring about death and deaths in there 1000s. Soldiery. Fools, fools, and there is no honour for the British Army this evening despite the PM's silky smooth words. Your commentator also suggested that this was merely human error as a result of difficult conditions. Collateral damage per chance? My rrrs. It was pure blue collective punishment to teach the 'rebel' community to better crawl back into their second class "citizen" hole and not to raise their heads above the parapet and just stay in the bog where those "lazy" nationalists deserved to stay so that the Unionist community could maintain their "dominion" and economic superiority. Very sad. A generation at war. And many still at war in their hearts. What an inheritance. Best regards, a Peace Studies, Post Graduate (MA).

    Complain about this comment

  • 24. At 5:38pm on 15 Jun 2010, Lady_Sue wrote:

    The report keeps quoting how many men were killed (13) but seven of them were teenagers. Six of them were 17 years old.

    Complain about this comment

  • 25. At 5:43pm on 15 Jun 2010, davmcn wrote:

    "Hopefully we can now move on together." We'll be lucky...

    Complain about this comment

  • 26. At 5:48pm on 15 Jun 2010, Geezer wrote:

    Those soldiers fueled a war because collective punishment was the order of the day.

    Complain about this comment

  • 27. At 5:50pm on 15 Jun 2010, Mack O Damia wrote:

    6. Big Sister

    • "I hope the families and others involved in this dreadful event do find some closure from the Report."

    Earlier I expressed more doubt on the likelihood of this than I now feel. Truth is a jewel beyond price, and has great powers for healing.

    Let us remain hopeful.

    Complain about this comment

  • 28. At 5:51pm on 15 Jun 2010, DoctorDolots wrote:

    Jackson 'It was grim in Northern Ireland...' yes, for the Irish it was.
    It was a bloodbath by heroic paras we are supposed to think of as 'our lads', they are not my lads. This isn't a 'stain on the British Army' it's part of a litany of abuse by the British Army - how far shall we go back? Let's not pretend it's record is blameless apart from this.

    Complain about this comment

  • 29. At 6:02pm on 15 Jun 2010, Ellis P Otter wrote:

    I was much cheered by the first reaction from the Guildhall.

    A joyous celebration of the innocence of the victims ... so much better than the possible alternatives.

    Complain about this comment

  • 30. At 6:22pm on 15 Jun 2010, funnyJoedunn wrote:

    Was I shocked by this report? Course not.
    I was 17 too when this occurrence took place. I almost signed the a year before at 16. In later years I was so grateful one of my brothers persueded me against it. Since that time I have seen the place that I am supposed to call my country slip down the low road of state oppression, state repression about it's oppression to a point where its virtually impossible to hold state security and army to account for deliberate wrong doing. I find it sad that relatives even seem to have started from a position of guilt concerning their loved ones. There was no need to declare their innocence in my opinion - none were ever charged or convicted of any wrong doing were they.Its the state forces that has found to be wrong and liars.

    Complain about this comment

  • 31. At 7:14pm on 15 Jun 2010, Lady_Sue wrote:

    fJd: overall your comment is both sympathetic and most interesting. When you say "relatives even seem to have started from a position of guilt concerning their loved ones" I beg to differ. The relatives knew their loved ones were innocent (it seems everyone in the 32 counties knew the same). It is a joyous day for them to have their loved ones cleared after 38 years.

    I do feel that, at the very least, Soldier F should be queried about his actions and subsequent fabrications. It must have been an exhausting 38 years for him too. It's a long time to hold onto a series of lies.

    Complain about this comment

  • 32. At 11:13pm on 15 Jun 2010, The Intermittent Horse wrote:

    Sue (21&22) - I have no doubt that some will pursue the case for compensation, and why on earth should they not? I suspect that a few may seek the prosecution of the military responsible but without the prospect of any action. I think that today's exonoration of the men/boys killed on Bloody Sunday may be enough for most of the relatives. I hope so.

    Complain about this comment

  • 33. At 10:17am on 16 Jun 2010, Lady_Sue wrote:

    Horse, wise words. It seems it is too late for forensic evidence (except for Soldier F's bullet which was found in one of those killed) to be of much use and listening to the relatives, many of them are content to leave a decision on prosecution up to the CPS.

    It was heartwarming to hear the cheers after Mr. Cameron's apology.

    Complain about this comment

  • 34. At 11:03am on 16 Jun 2010, Mack O Damia wrote:

    33. Lady Sue

    • "It was heartwarming to hear the cheers after Mr. Cameron's apology."

    It was indeed. A good day for truth and reconciliation and all bar the general carried their parts well.

    Complain about this comment

  • 35. At 11:45am on 16 Jun 2010, Looternite wrote:

    Although this report took a very long time and was a lawyerfest costing 200 million.
    It was right that at the time Lord Saville was allowed free reign to take the inquiry as far as necessary to uncover the facts.
    If Tony Blair had placed boundaries on Lord Saville, the report would have had a credibility problem amongst some of the community.

    Complain about this comment

  • 36. At 2:02pm on 16 Jun 2010, Lady_Sue wrote:

    Looter, pity Mr. Blair didn't appoint Lord Saville to look into the 'weapons of mass destruction' fabrication before the war.

    Complain about this comment

  • 37. At 3:06pm on 16 Jun 2010, Looternite wrote:

    36. Lady Sue
    I would have thought that Lord Saville had enough to do over the past 12 years. Are you saying that he could have skivved off and done another enquiry on the side?

    Complain about this comment

  • 38. At 4:07pm on 16 Jun 2010, Mack O Damia wrote:

    36. Lady Sue
    Indeed. Look out for the film, The Ghost Writer.

    Complain about this comment

  • 39. At 3:06pm on 17 Jun 2010, Lady_Sue wrote:

    Looter@37: agree he would have been a tad busy. My implication was that, had Saville been in charge of the WMD investigation, undoubtedly he would have given an honest response and, therefore, we may never have gone to war. However, the report of "no WMD" wasn't what the government wanted.

    Complain about this comment

View these comments in RSS

BBC iD

Sign in

BBC navigation

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.