Troubles legacy..

[tibilicus]

Well as if the UK tax payers didn't have to pay enough money here is the scheme put forward to the government..

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/n...nd/7855035.stm

You can't seriously be telling me that government money is to be spent giving pay outs to convicted terrorists? I completely understand giving money to the innocent victims and their families but to the IRA and UDA scum who slaughtered and killed innocence? To men who would drive up the falls road at night abducting Catholics at will and then take them away to be butchered and cut into pieces? What about Omagh? Where on earth is the justice?

I find it astonishing that all this is to supposedly help put the troubles in the past, why on earth do those paramilitaries which were killed and their families deserve a single penny? Do they really deserve that money to put their mind at ease and help convince themselves that their loved one was nothing more than a low life murderer?

I'm actually bemused, and all that time Gerry Adams, a former IRA war council leader sat there in the Northern Ireland assembly smirking at the protesters.

Maybe the people who put forward this scheme should think about the insult they are causing to those families who lost loved ones to this disgusting a pointless conflict, as well as seeing that this is a deal which is on far greater terms with the Nationalist communities than it is with the unionist ones.

One word, disgusted.

[Furunculus]

agreed. the compensation money is an admission of partial responsibility by the gov't for not protecting its citizens, people who die in the act of commiting terror acts are not due compensation from anybody.

[naut]

Agreed. But Britain's a mess currently.

[Tribesman]

Since a lot of the terrorists on both sides were working for the British government then its only right that the British government should pay .

What about Omagh?

Indeed , what about Omagh ?
It isn't included , its past the cut off date and it was offerd to be included anyway but the families of the victims didn't want to accept the offer to be involved .
One thing that does piss me off is the blocking of still unstarted public inquiruies , they will continue with the two already in place but not start any of the outstanding ones .

[tibilicus]

Since a lot of the terrorists on both sides were working for the British government then its only right that the British government should pay .

pay for the victims, not the perpetrators though.

I can't think of any thing more disgusting than the shankill butchers getting a nice cash pay out or those IRA members who would abduct innocent RUC members for doing their job.

Also which terrorists do you mean were working for the British government? I know the UDA and other loyalist groups were supplied weapons from some members of the armed forces and RUC who had sympathy's with their cause but I never heard of any senior figures endorsing or supporting the two groups.

[Tribesman]

pay for the victims, not the perpetrators though.

Thats the problem with an amnesty , everyone gets a clean sheet so they are all victims now .

Also which terrorists do you mean were working for the British government?

Well if Britain says it had a couple of thousand people working inside the IRA and the IRA is a small group how many of them were not working for the British ?

I know the UDA and other loyalist groups were supplied weapons from some members of the armed forces and RUC who had sympathy's with their cause but I never heard of any senior figures endorsing or supporting the two groups.

Do you remember the little bit of trouble thatcher had with the people at GCHQ in Cheltenham ?
She changed the official secrets act to remove the public interest clause so that people working there couldn't go public again about arms shipments to the IRA .

[Fisherking]

Thats the problem with an amnesty , everyone gets a clean sheet so they are all victims now .


Well if Britain says it had a couple of thousand people working inside the IRA and the IRA is a small group how many of them were not working for the British ?

Do you remember the little bit of trouble thatcher had with the people at GCHQ in Cheltenham ?
She changed the official secrets act to remove the public interest clause so that people working there couldn't go public again about arms shipments to the IRA .

I am sure you have some source for those assertions.

Can you share it?

[Tribesman]

I am sure you have some source for those assertions.

Yes .
Don't you ever follow the news as they were all big stories ?
Ever heard of the Stephens reports ? What about that earlier Mancheste policeman who got so screwed over his investigations that he ended up selling windows in TV ads .
Roger Cook and Panorama both did programs on the Britsih agents in the IRA , and the French sparked a small controversy when they boarded the stranded arms boat .
So one thing this consultative paper that has been produced does is block all further public inquiries into the shit that was really going on , now it will have to be seen if it is adopted and if it is adopted does it also block all parliamentary inquiries too .
I mean seriously Fisher ,surely you can remember as recently as the suspension of the assembly because of the "republican spy ring" operating there ....that actyually turned out to be working for the British .

[Fisherking]

Not those Tribesman!

I was in the field a great deal at the time and didn’t get any newspapers or TV.

The current things I am not too much up on because it is all in German and I don’t get the full picture….

So help me see where you are coming from. It isn’t that I doubt you, I only want to be better informed.

[KukriKhan]

So, this Truth and Reconciliation method of settling conflicts has spread to Britain. No more Nuremberg's, eh?

Will those seeking amnesty have to testify, detailing their sins - and will it be on TV?

[Tribesman]

Will those seeking amnesty have to testify, detailing their sins - and will it be on TV?

The issue of crimes committed was in the main already dealt with in the peace agreement .
As for publicity

During the consultation many expressed the wish that the legacy of the past should
be kept out of the courts and that society should be allowed a breathing space from
the constant disclosures that result from court and inquiry proceedings.

And of course on the pursuit of justice angle .....

A long and determined pursuit of penal justice could be viewed as a means of continuing the conflict rather than enabling healing.

Because of course some people want justice , but only for their side as it was only the other side that was wrong .

[Vladimir]

Well if Britain says it had a couple of thousand people working inside the IRA and the IRA is a small group how many of them were not working for the British ?

Here, again you're not trying to add anything to the discussion, but take away from it.

Roger Cook and Panorama both did programs on the Britsih agents in the IRA , and the French sparked a small controversy when they boarded the stranded arms boat .

I hope you're not saying that paid informants and agents were "working for" MI-5 et. al. and therefore the UK government bears some responsibility for the terrorism. Because you are so intentionally vague one can only infer your true meaning.

[Fisherking]

The roots of the problem stretch back near 500 years and it was started by Government.

Attempts at finger pointing and more us vs. them in any regard is not going to help alleviate strife.

At this point all that can be done is address what happened in the past and attempt to move on.

Neither side is ever going to admit that they did anything wrong and will always feel that they were justified in their actions while condemning the others and any discussion is only going to bring about more of the same.

It would seem that this is doing the best they can with the least amount of blame being focused.

It is a mess. What more can be said.

[LittleGrizzly]

Thinking on it im probably in agreement with the goverment here... its not nice certainly but better to have some hurt feelings and terrorism finally put to bad than allow hatred to take over once again...

I was thinking maybe some clause could be put in specifying murder'ers familys not be compensated... but then you get into technical deatils like a police officer wrongly killing a suspect and thus murdering them or appropriate force in the line of duty.... the problem i see is that any clauses to deny some people compensation would more likely affect IRA people than the Unionists... and the last thing we need is for one side to feel hard done by... better people on both left a bit angry...

[InsaneApache]

Why pay them at all?

I have a better idea. Bill the bombers families for the reconstruction costs.

What's the next government wheeze? Free rucksacks for failed suicide bombers! I despair, I really do.

[Tribesman]

Here, again you're not trying to add anything to the discussion, but take away from it.

Actually Vlad it adds a hell of a lot to the discussion as it gets to the core of it .

I hope you're not saying that paid informants and agents were "working for" MI-5 et. al. and therefore the UK government bears some responsibility for the terrorism. Because you are so intentionally vague one can only infer your true meaning.

Vague ?
If someone is paying someone to do a job and in the course of that job the employee has to kill someone then the employer is responsible as well as the employee , if the employee also does his job by killing someone when the guns or explosives have been shipped from Czechoslovaki via libya to Ireland by the employer then the employer and employee are both responsible .
So Vlad would you like to try and argue that the employer was not responsible ?

So back to the core of the issue , the compensation , do you want public enquiries and lots of muck raking to determine case by case all the details of all the killings and who played what role in each of them ?

Or to put it in terms for the fiscally conservative , given the vast amount that a few inquiries have so far cost the taxpayer isn't it prudent to brush it under the carpet and go for the cheap option which is a snip at only £300 million .

[Furunculus]

why hold an inquiry? if we can brush an inquiry under the carpet by agreeing to pay every victim and their murderer a compensation payment then HMG can brush aside the question of whether an ira terrorist tangentially involved in a terror atrocity was in fact a SB/MI5 agent.

I can accept that agents of HMG had to do dirty things to infiltrate the loyalist and republican gangs, and i am perfectly happy with HMG unoffically sanctioning assassinations of republican terrorists, what i cannot accept is republican terrorists or their families receiving compensation because the idiot died as a terrorist.

compensation is recognition of the failure of a Gov't to protect its citizens from terrorist attacks, not recognition that it did its job competantly by knocking off terrorists.

[Vladimir]

and etc

You're also then saying that every intelligence and law enforcement agency around the world is a criminal organization.

[Furunculus]

he is saying that every british intelligence agency involved in NI got up to stuff that was technically illegal, i am saying; so what?

[Incongruous]

You're also then saying that every intelligence and law enforcement agency around the world is a criminal organization.

Not hard to imagine is it?

Lets say that, while they were performing these acts it was not criminal, but after the far reaching consequences have been felt, it is criminal. This is standard in the world of idiotic and short sighted government.

[Tribesman]

You're also then saying that every intelligence and law enforcement agency around the world is a criminal organization.

Errrr...No , not if they operate within the law .

he is saying that every british intelligence agency involved in NI got up to stuff that was technically illegal

There are no real legal technicalities when it comes to outright plain and simple murder .

if we can brush an inquiry under the carpet by agreeing to pay every victim and their murderer a compensation payment then HMG can brush aside the question of whether an ira terrorist tangentially involved in a terror atrocity was in fact a SB/MI5 agent.

The proposal makes no provision for payment to people for being murderers .
Didn't you read it before you went off on one about it ?

[Furunculus]

agreed. the compensation money is an admission of partial responsibility by the gov't for not protecting its citizens, people who die in the act of commiting terror acts (i.e their living relatives)are not due compensation from anybody.

I can accept that agents of HMG had to do dirty things to infiltrate the loyalist and republican gangs, and i am perfectly happy with HMG unoffically sanctioning assassinations of republican terrorists, what i cannot accept is republican terrorists or their families receiving compensation because the idiot died as a terrorist.

already clarified.

[Furunculus]

There are no real legal technicalities when it comes to outright plain and simple murder .

i can cope with what HMG did, i respect the necessity of what was necessary in a dirty war.

[Tribesman]

i can cope with what HMG did

Then you can cope with the after affects ...like paying for it , after all if you can cope with killing people why worry about a little bit of money .

[Furunculus]

wrong. i don't accept that giving the families of terrorists compensation money for being the family of terrorists is just.

the compensation is recognition of partial responsibility by HMG for not protecting her citizens from things such as terrorist attacks.

[Tribesman]

wrong. i don't accept that giving the families of terrorists compensation money for being the family of terrorists is just.

Well in that case the other option is for the expensive case by case hearings , and since you know that HMG were often operating outside the law that means lots of court verdicts of unlawful killing and bigger payouts to terrorists families.

So you are faced with two options really .
Go for the cheap keep it quiet option or go for the very very expensive publicly drag your country through the mud before paying more option .
Such is the price of the peace process .

[KukriKhan]

Isn't the truth and reconciliation process about trying to stop the cycle of retribution and blood-feud, by recognizing the hurt suffered by those who've survived the conflict?

Maybe I'm wrong there.

But, if I'm right, the empasis has to be on paying the survivors of the conflict for the loss of their loved-one/kinsman a symbolic amount, NOT linked to his/her affiliations or atrocities, but to the premature loss of that member's services to the family.

In that sense, t&r resembles an insurance company. With the (hopeful) side-effect that the dead guys' kin are tired of the conflict, and mererly seek validation of THEIR sacrifice, promising to forget or forgive or both, the issues both sides fought for.

The only question remaining: who pays?

[InsaneApache]

The only question remaining: who pays?

The UK taxpayer.

I watched This Week last night and there is a very good analysis about the problems in Ulster from Denis Murray who is from there and still lives there. The analogy with Sud Afrika is misplaced. Although the political leaders have achieved impressive things, unheard of just ten years ago, the 'people' still have a lot of bitterness and resentment.

The money thing is just one of a whole raft of measures floated to help heal over old wounds. (I like me mixed metaphors me )

[Tribesman]

Maybe I'm wrong there.

No you are spot on .

But, if I'm right, the empasis has to be on paying the survivors of the conflict for the loss of their loved-one/kinsman a symbolic amount, NOT linked to his/her affiliations or atrocities, but to the premature loss of that member's services to the family.

Exactly .

So while for example you have Furunculus saying I don't care if what was done was wrong or illegal because my side was right so it doesn't matter if they did bad stuff becuse the other side was really wrong .
You will have people on the other sides saying exactly the same from the opposite perspectives .

Which means the easiet way out is to say all sides were wrong but it must be put in the past .
Yes it isn't pleasant , but life often isn't .

[Fisherking]

Siding with Tribesman at this point,


Is seems like the Government is trying to lance the Boil.

Screaming that one side or the other was right is just being part of the Infection.

Making one side more Right than the other is just going to make a new Abscess.

Both sides lost people and have deep hurt. Both sides are people who have hopes and dreams of a better future.

Address the pain as best you can and move on.

Baring that your patient is going to die from this Ulster disease…