who turned down the visit to meet the queen at croke park?

[Nally Stand]

Nally, the British State has apologised where appropriate to innocent victims. You need to realise that the war was fought through propaganda as well as pyysical means. I am not saying the the British are justified in the position they are taking. However we need to recognise that as a sovereign state it will not give an unconditional apology to combatants such as Loughgall and Gibralter. And yes in these incidents I take issue with the "it's not a war" line from the British who then shoot unarmed IRA people but the IRA were equally hypocritical in declaring it a war yet complaining that they weren't arrested. Both were and are playing the propaganda game. I am a nationalist who suports the aim of a UI. All I am saying is that we need to take a balanced and realistic view of what is achievable.

I sill don't know where you are getting this idea from that Britain has apologised where appropriate. I mentioned a local family earlier who fell victim to collusion and they would beg to differ that Britain has apologised where appropriate. As, I'm sure, would several hundred other families for that matter.

Be realistic Nally, they are never going to acknowledge collusion.

Thanks to the good work of groups like An Fhirinne, Relatives for Justice and The Pat Finucane Centre, there will come a day when they will have no choice. Of that I'm confident.

[Nally Stand]

Nally, the British State has apologised where appropriate to innocent victims. You need to realise that the war was fought through propaganda as well as pyysical means. I am not saying the the British are justified in the position they are taking. However we need to recognise that as a sovereign state it will not give an unconditional apology to combatants such as Loughgall and Gibralter. And yes in these incidents I take issue with the "it's not a war" line from the British who then shoot unarmed IRA people but the IRA were equally hypocritical in declaring it a war yet complaining that they weren't arrested. Both were and are playing the propaganda game. I am a nationalist who suports the aim of a UI. All I am saying is that we need to take a balanced and realistic view of what is achievable.

I sill don't know where you are getting this idea from that Britain has apologised where appropriate. I mentioned a local family earlier who fell victim to collusion and they would beg to differ that Britain has apologised where appropriate. As, I'm sure, would several hundred other families for that matter.

Nally stand, been reading your posts recently,  i am curious about what form this apology would/ should take, would a Bloody Sunday type one from Cameron do, covering all nationalist victims of the crown forces dating back to cromwell, or would a truth and reconcelliation type forum need to be set up i.e South Africa, i am not been smart here or anything but i am curious on the format.

Personally speaking, wouldn't it be a great start if we had a British Head of State or Head of Government making some form of a spoken statement? Though I'm sure many recent victims families would like to see a truth and reconciliation forum so that full transparency could be achieved into how they lost their loved ones. And that means from every side. I don't pretend to be an expert on how such a forum would work so I wouldn't want to say a whole lot about it. My general point is simply that the families of the states victims should be absolutely entitled to the same acknowledgement and apology from the state as the IRA offered to it's victims back in 2002. It would at least be a starting point for truth and reconciliation to be taken seriously from.

Think I posted a few days ago here that would be the way to go. But there is a flip side to that coin. Apart from providing info on graves of disappeared etc the IRA would have to reveal Adam & McGuinness's full role as paramilitary leaders not to mention the atrocities committed during their "term". The same for loyalist politicians. British collusion of course amongst other things would be opened up. But for SF it could open a can of worms. Not sure they'd want it. I do agree with you however that the Queen's apology didnt go far enough and that there is far too much significance being made of her visit and statement. But you also have to bear in mind the provos apology in the poblacht or wherever probably gives little comfort to the relatives of the men, women and children killed in Warrington, Birmingham, Guilford, Enniskillen not to mention Marie McConville's kids. The victims you're talking about dont have a monoply on grief.

My point all along has been about victims. And im my post about a truth and reconciliation forum, as I mentioned, all sides would have to commit to it. That includes republicans. As for your statement that the IRA apology to it's victims might be of little comfort; well, that may be the case for some, though I would imagine there were some families who on some level, took it as a positive development. As I keep saying, to ensure no hierarchy of victims, the families of state murder should not be denied a similar gesture.

[Banana Man]

Nally, the British State has apologised where appropriate to innocent victims. You need to realise that the war was fought through propaganda as well as pyysical means. I am not saying the the British are justified in the position they are taking. However we need to recognise that as a sovereign state it will not give an unconditional apology to combatants such as Loughgall and Gibralter. And yes in these incidents I take issue with the "it's not a war" line from the British who then shoot unarmed IRA people but the IRA were equally hypocritical in declaring it a war yet complaining that they weren't arrested. Both were and are playing the propaganda game. I am a nationalist who suports the aim of a UI. All I am saying is that we need to take a balanced and realistic view of what is achievable.

I sill don't know where you are getting this idea from that Britain has apologised where appropriate. I mentioned a local family earlier who fell victim to collusion and they would beg to differ that Britain has apologised where appropriate. As, I'm sure, would several hundred other families for that matter.

Nally stand, been reading your posts recently,  i am curious about what form this apology would/ should take, would a Bloody Sunday type one from Cameron do, covering all nationalist victims of the crown forces dating back to cromwell, or would a truth and reconcelliation type forum need to be set up i.e South Africa, i am not been smart here or anything but i am curious on the format.

Personally speaking, wouldn't it be a great start if we had a British Head of State or Head of Government making some form of a spoken statement? Though I'm sure many recent victims families would like to see a truth and reconciliation forum so that full transparency could be achieved into how they lost their loved ones. And that means from every side. I don't pretend to be an expert on how such a forum would work so I wouldn't want to say a whole lot about it. My general point is simply that the families of the states victims should be absolutely entitled to the same acknowledgement and apology from the state as the IRA offered to it's victims back in 2002. It would at least be a starting point for truth and reconciliation to be taken seriously from.

Think I posted a few days ago here that would be the way to go. But there is a flip side to that coin. Apart from providing info on graves of disappeared etc the IRA would have to reveal Adam & McGuinness's full role as paramilitary leaders not to mention the atrocities committed during their "term". The same for loyalist politicians. British collusion of course amongst other things would be opened up. But for SF it could open a can of worms. Not sure they'd want it. I do agree with you however that the Queen's apology didnt go far enough and that there is far too much significance being made of her visit and statement. But you also have to bear in mind the provos apology in the poblacht or wherever probably gives little comfort to the relatives of the men, women and children killed in Warrington, Birmingham, Guilford, Enniskillen not to mention Marie McConville's kids. The victims you're talking about dont have a monoply on grief.

My point all along has been about victims. And im my post about a truth and reconciliation forum, as I mentioned, all sides would have to commit to it. That includes republicans. As for your statement that the IRA apology to it's victims might be of little comfort; well, that may be the case for some, though I would imagine there were some families who on some level, took it as a positive development. As I keep saying, to ensure no hierarchy of victims, the families of state murder should not be denied a similar gesture.

Nally's point is correct - an a pology by definition has the words apology or i am sorry - the IRA did this, whether people want to admit it or not they have apologised for their part in the conflict. The British Government has not. This isn't a grey area where people feel the queen did enough to nearly apologise. To me that's a whitewash, Nicholas Witchell the BBC royal correspondent said ''the queen doesn't apologise and that's as close as it comes''.

My question is why? why can she not? do the Brits think they are that a superior race that they have never done any wrong.

Reminds me of the old adge, the man who has never made a mistake....

[Applesisapples]

Lads there is a huge difference between a sovereign Government and the IRA. They can not apologise for shooting insurgents. Not only from their own point of view but can you imagine the effect on Evil Genius and his community. Lets be realistic...it only words anyway.

[Nally Stand]

Lads there is a huge difference between a sovereign Government and the IRA. They can not apologise for shooting insurgents. Not only from their own point of view but can you imagine the effect on Evil Genius and his community. Lets be realistic...it only words anyway.

Since when could all collusion victims be labeled insurgents?

[pintsofguinness]

The 'moving on' is a very difficult issue and will be very sensitive for a lot of people.

But if victims of republican violence have had to move and deal with Sinn Fein governing them (or alteratively, be called a dinosaur), then is a visit by the Queen not just something that victims of loyalist and/or state violence will have to stomach, however hard, as part of the bigger picture?

Nally made the following point earlier in the thread:

well I could put it like this, I know a local family who had a member murdered by loyalists. The dogs in the street know these loyalists were acting with security force collusion. That family has never been told the truth. How could I buy into the nonsense line that this visit moves people forward and still look into the eyes of anyone in that family?

By the same score, should Unionist politicians not be able to look straight into the eyes of victims in their communicty after going into government with SF?

By the way, this post isn't meant as 'whataboutery' - just making the point that 'we' all expect people to 'move on' to facilitate the bigger process. And it's going to be very difficult for a lot of people.

I'm sure they are just the same maguire. I'm sure some can deal with it while others find it extremely difficult.  I suppose it helps them when no one questions their victim status or screams in their face to "move on".

Who's victim status is being questioned? I assume you don't mean paramilitaries?

Those killed or maimed by British state forces where they have refused to admit any wrong doing and those killed due to collusion.  The same ones who never received any meaningful investigation in to their deaths never mind any justice.

Well actually if you look at the enquiries and their results then victims of the state have faired better than victims of the IRA. As a Nationalist/Republican I do have difficulties with some of the circumstances surrounding the deaths of some such as Loughgall, Rosemary Nelson. Unpalatable as it is though I wouldn't expect to the British to own up to collusion any more than I would expect Sinn Fein to denounce the actions of the IRA.

Sweet Jesus, how do you work that out? How many members of British Security forces have served time in jail?

[Banana Man]

i breathed a sigh of relief last night reading the local paper - the down representative meeting the queen was a DERRY MAN. Paddy McFlynn, former GAA president currently living in Tullylish and i stand open to correction but from the article it appeared he was asked on a persoanl basis and not via the county board - i knew Down weren't as spineless as people would have us believe!!!

[Applesisapples]

The 'moving on' is a very difficult issue and will be very sensitive for a lot of people.

But if victims of republican violence have had to move and deal with Sinn Fein governing them (or alteratively, be called a dinosaur), then is a visit by the Queen not just something that victims of loyalist and/or state violence will have to stomach, however hard, as part of the bigger picture?

Nally made the following point earlier in the thread:

well I could put it like this, I know a local family who had a member murdered by loyalists. The dogs in the street know these loyalists were acting with security force collusion. That family has never been told the truth. How could I buy into the nonsense line that this visit moves people forward and still look into the eyes of anyone in that family?

By the same score, should Unionist politicians not be able to look straight into the eyes of victims in their communicty after going into government with SF?

By the way, this post isn't meant as 'whataboutery' - just making the point that 'we' all expect people to 'move on' to facilitate the bigger process. And it's going to be very difficult for a lot of people.

I'm sure they are just the same maguire. I'm sure some can deal with it while others find it extremely difficult.  I suppose it helps them when no one questions their victim status or screams in their face to "move on".

Who's victim status is being questioned? I assume you don't mean paramilitaries?

Those killed or maimed by British state forces where they have refused to admit any wrong doing and those killed due to collusion.  The same ones who never received any meaningful investigation in to their deaths never mind any justice.

Well actually if you look at the enquiries and their results then victims of the state have faired better than victims of the IRA. As a Nationalist/Republican I do have difficulties with some of the circumstances surrounding the deaths of some such as Loughgall, Rosemary Nelson. Unpalatable as it is though I wouldn't expect to the British to own up to collusion any more than I would expect Sinn Fein to denounce the actions of the IRA.

Sweet Jesus, how do you work that out? How many members of British Security forces have served time in jail?

You can't have it both ways was it a war or violent activity of a criminal gang? Both sides are hypocritical in their approach to this for propaganda reasons.

[pintsofguinness]

I'm not talking about IRA members who were killed - that's a whole other debate.
I'm talking about civilians who were killed.

[Applesisapples]

I'm not talking about IRA members who were killed - that's a whole other debate.
I'm talking about civilians who were killed.

I think you will find that in most cases the Brits have apologised...Do not get me wrong I am a Nationalist but some realism must be applied.

[Nally Stand]

I'm not talking about IRA members who were killed - that's a whole other debate.
I'm talking about civilians who were killed.

I think you will find that in most cases the Brits have apologised...Do not get me wrong I am a Nationalist but some realism must be applied.

In most cases the British have continued to deny involvement. There are HUNDREDS of families out there who have good reason to believe that their relatives were murdered through collusion. How can you keep saying that in most cases, Britain has apologised?! It boggles the mind! Is releasing 20 (heavily edited) pages of a 3,000 page collusion report your idea of Britain being remorseful for it's actions? That's a funny apology. And when was "the British apology" you talked about earlier?

[Applesisapples]

I'm not talking about IRA members who were killed - that's a whole other debate.
I'm talking about civilians who were killed.

I think you will find that in most cases the Brits have apologised...Do not get me wrong I am a Nationalist but some realism must be applied.

In most cases the British have continued to deny involvement. There are HUNDREDS of families out there who have good reason to believe that their relatives were murdered through collusion. How can you keep saying that in most cases, Britain has apologised?! It boggles the mind! Is releasing 20 (heavily edited) pages of a 3,000 page collusion report your idea of Britain being remorseful for it's actions? That's a funny apology. And when was "the British apology" you talked about earlier?

What part of my posts stating that a Sovereign Government is not going to admit to collusion do you not understand. We need to get real here. There are aspects of the conflict which we are all going to be uncomfortable with. The British Government have apologised for the failings of the state in innocent deaths. I do understand where you are coming from but it's a bit like the unionists constantly bringing up Gerry's past. we are where we are and as Nationalists and Republicans we need to move confidently onwards.

[Nally Stand]

I'm not talking about IRA members who were killed - that's a whole other debate.
I'm talking about civilians who were killed.

I think you will find that in most cases the Brits have apologised...Do not get me wrong I am a Nationalist but some realism must be applied.

In most cases the British have continued to deny involvement. There are HUNDREDS of families out there who have good reason to believe that their relatives were murdered through collusion. How can you keep saying that in most cases, Britain has apologised?! It boggles the mind! Is releasing 20 (heavily edited) pages of a 3,000 page collusion report your idea of Britain being remorseful for it's actions? That's a funny apology. And when was "the British apology" you talked about earlier?

What part of my posts stating that a Sovereign Government is not going to admit to collusion do you not understand. We need to get real here. There are aspects of the conflict which we are all going to be uncomfortable with. The British Government have apologised for the failings of the state in innocent deaths. I do understand where you are coming from but it's a bit like the unionists constantly bringing up Gerry's past. we are where we are and as Nationalists and Republicans we need to move confidently onwards.

As I say, why should we accept that Britain will never admit to collusion? It isn't something that they can deny! The proof exists. I'm confident that the day will come when they will not have a choice but to apologise. We're not talking about a small fraction of victims here. Anything short of an apology is tantamount to the sustaining of a hierarchy of victims. I fail to see how you can, in the same post, admit that Britain is covering up mass state murder/collusion, and also state that "The British Government have apologised for the failings of the state in innocent deaths". Have they f**k.

[pintsofguinness]

I'm not talking about IRA members who were killed - that's a whole other debate.
I'm talking about civilians who were killed.

I think you will find that in most cases the Brits have apologised...Do not get me wrong I am a Nationalist but some realism must be applied.

What the f**k are you talking about - On one post you say the brits have apologised in "most cases" when in the next you say we can't expect them to admit to collusion - so they haven't apologised in most cases then? In most cases they won't admit any wrong doing never mind issue an apology.
Lets leave out the victims of collusion for a minute then and concentrate on the unarmed civilians state forces directly murdered and maimed.  Where are all these apologies? I can only think of two - Bloody Sunday and Majella O'Hare - when did they apologise for the rest, I must have missed it? 

[Applesisapples]

I'm not talking about IRA members who were killed - that's a whole other debate.
I'm talking about civilians who were killed.

I think you will find that in most cases the Brits have apologised...Do not get me wrong I am a Nationalist but some realism must be applied.

What the f**k are you talking about - On one post you say the brits have apologised in "most cases" when in the next you say we can't expect them to admit to collusion - so they haven't apologised in most cases then? In most cases they won't admit any wrong doing never mind issue an apology.
Lets leave out the victims of collusion for a minute then and concentrate on the unarmed civilians state forces directly murdered and maimed.  Where are all these apologies? I can only think of two - Bloody Sunday and Majella O'Hare - when did they apologise for the rest, I must have missed it?

Take Rosemary Nelson, whilst they did not admit collusion, and I don't accept this denial they did however apologize for the states failures. I am no apologist for the British and don't accept that there was no collusion. But they won't admit it. I just think it is time to try and move on and I am uncomfortable with some of the IRA's actions as well but again would like to see progress towards a peaceful reunification. To this end drawing a line under many acts of violence on all sides is necessary. I have seen the work of loyalists at first hand and have experienced discrimination in my time. I want a better future not forgetting the past but not trapped in it either. You may disagree but I have aright to my opinion.