33 1 min 7 yrs

We’ve heard a lot of hype in recent days about Ireland has discovered a news sense of morality as it embraces the redefinition of marriage. However it has other darker secrets lurking in the background…

“Victims campaigner Ann Travers has condemned the Irish Government for putting in place a scheme similar to the controversial on-the-runs (OTRs) letters which secretly gave assurances to IRA suspects they were safe from prosecution.

Some are understood to be the suspected killers of Lord Mountbatten in 1979 and British Ambassador Christopher Ewart-Biggs in 1976.

Official documents between the Irish and British Governments that have just come to light reveal Dublin was already running an informal scheme where suspects were promised they did not face arrest before the British scheme started.”

Quite the “rainbow” nation, providing comfort to on-the-run terrorists.

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]

33 thoughts on “THE BRAVE NEW IRELAND…

  1. The Gardai have long known who murdered Mountbatten, an elderly lady and two young boys. As with various UK authorities, they simply chose to do nothing about it.

  2. What the Gardai know and what they can produce evidence for are not always the same. I don’t think anyone is surprised that some arrangements were put in place.

    By the way seeing as nobody else is saying it can I wish the First Minister Peter Robinson a full and swift recovery from his heart problem.

  3. I wish the First Minister Peter Robinson a full and swift recovery from his heart problem.

    Seconded. I do hope he isn’t being treated by a *MUSLIM* doctor!

    Mountbatten got what was coming. It’s all over now. Let it go.

  4. Petr

    I don’t suppose you are willing to give a rational justification for your comment above about Mountbatten’s murder ?

  5. Victims campaigner Ann Travers

    Surely that should read selective victims campaigner?

    I think the Irish Government now have moral duty to the victims of the IRA to come clean about everything.

    Will she call now on other governments to excercise their moral duty and ‘come clean about everything’ to other victims?

  6. Petr

    Mountbatten was no enemy to any Irish, and he held no power and made no decisions. Why did he deserve to be blown up?

    If he deserved to be blown up then, who would you like to see blown up today?

  7. Mountbatten was no enemy to any Irish, and he held no power and made no decisions. Why did he deserve to be blown up?

    It’s interesting to see the class difference ingrained in the British psyche.

    From Charlie Windsor shook hands with Adams it’s been Mountbatten, Mountbatten, Mountbatten and seldom a word, if any, about the eighteen, presumably working class, British Paratroopers who were blown up the same day.

    Obviously the Monarchy’s blood relation’s lives are more important than that of their cannon fodder.

  8. Paul

    My comment was in direct reference to Petr mentioning Mountbatten’s killing which he thinks was justified. However much I disagreed with the IRA’s campaign, I can see a justification in attacking armed opponents on military duty as at Warrenpoint. I would just like Petr to expand on his view that the planting of the bomb on Mountbatten’s boat had a military justification. My question is nothing to do with valuing royal lives over others.

  9. Colm, I think the killing of a harmless old man and a few innocents was a detestable act. But a justification that is often put forward is that M was first and foremost a military man.
    During WW2, he had been in overall charge of Allied operations in the Pacific and obviously knew about and supported the mass firebombing and A-bombing of Japanese cities.
    Other people had the – even more spurious – excuse that he was playing the old Lord of the Manor in Ireland and exploiting the country’s resources, etc.

    Just so you know.

  10. Forgot to mention: bringing up M’s military past and possible wrongdoings is a dangerous game when you think of the current SF leadership now engaged in peaceful politics.

  11. My question is nothing to do with valuing royal lives over others

    I understand that Colm and don’t wish to imply that it did. I merely wanted to add my own observation of how one life eclipses eighteen because of supposed ‘blue blood’

  12. Paul

    That’s the way of the world, not just a British or’ Royal’ thing. The killing of famous or prominent individuals always garners more attention and reaction than the killings of numerous more ‘Joe Bloggs’ – and that is true for Ireland, America, the UK and everywhere on the planet.

  13. Noel

    Everyone know that stuff

    M still was guilty of no bad deed in NI or I for which he deserved to be punished ; he wielded zero power.

    This was an atrocity, period.

  14. //Everyone know that stuff//

    I don’t believe that. I’d say very few people do.

    //M still was guilty of no bad deed in NI or I for which he deserved to be punished//

    I hope you don’t think I said anything different.

  15. That’s the way of the world, not just a British or’ Royal’ thing

    I’m not sure. It’s telling how much the British media care about the lives of their soldiers when there seems to be not one mention of it over the last few days?

    Maybe Mountbatten was killed because he was a ‘famous or prominent individual’ of the British State?, who knows, (and before people jump in, that’s not a justification it’s a question).

    IMO, regardless for the reasons for killing Mountbatten I think it was an absolutely insane lapse in security for him to go holidaying where he did.

  16. Paul

    The media has focussed on Mountbatten over the last few days because Prince Charles – his nephew – has been visiting the site where he was killed. The Irish media has been focussing on it just as much as the British. Regarding your ‘I’m not sure’ comment, can you name anywhere else on earth where the murders of ordinary non-famous individuals are given as much prominence as the murders of famous or powerful people ?

  17. The Irish media has been focussing on it just as much as the British.

    I agree Colm although it wasn’t eighteen Irish soldiers killed.

    Can you name anywhere else on earth where the murders of ordinary non-famous individuals are given as much prominence as the murders of famous or powerful people ?

    I’m not sure as I can’t think of a comparitive where the uncle of one individual was killed on the same day as eighteen of the individual’s subordinates.

  18. //I think it was an absolutely insane lapse in security for him to go holidaying where he did//

    Paul, the property belonged to him, and he had been spending holidays there for years. His family had inherited the property from the British Palmerston, who definitely deserved to be assassinated. I often wondered why those properties were not simply confiscated by the State on independence.

    In any case, M was considered a very fair employer and was generous and popular with the locals.

    The security lapse was that nobody was keeping an eye on the boat or checking it for bombs before it sailed.

  19. Paul

    On the same days John Lennon was killed, or Aldo Mori’s body was dumped in public, or Marilyn Monroe committed suicide, there would have certainly been many more homicides/suicides that were unpublicised or given much less reporting by the world’s media. Why was that ? Is that also to do with Royal forelock tugging ?

  20. // Is that also to do with Royal forelock tugging ?//

    Paul has a point, Colm.

    I’d say that in small countries, like Ireland or Israel, 18 of their soldiers being killed would have been felt and reported more than, say, if some superannuated politician had been killed on the same day.

    In larger countries, especially ones used to their soldiers being killed abroad (like it?), the celeb would have got more coverage, simply because his death was more newsworthy than more soldier deaths in Northern Ireland.
    That he was a Royal gave it more more coverage still.

  21. Apples and oranges comparison I’m afraid Colm.

    Imagine eighteen American Marines had been killed in a single incident somewhere on the day John Lennon was killed in NYC, which would the Marines killing have got less coverage much less not have been mentioned?

    I still think that it was an insane security lapse Noel.

  22. Noel

    I don’t agree at all. There is a hierarchy of media reporting that is observed I believe everywhere. The killings of famous people will always be given greater coverage even when there is no political/power consequences to their deaths than ordinary people. On the day Princess Diana (a divorced ex wife of a British royal- of no significance to Ireland at all) was killed in a car crash, would the Irish media have relegated that story to the inside pages if a car crash had killed say, a family of 4 non-famous Irish people in a village in county Clare ?

  23. Paul

    The killings of the 18 soldiers have not been ‘not mentioned’. I was 15 when those 2 incidents occurred and remember both of them being reported on the news, and yes while the killing of Mountbatten was given greater coverage, the Warrenpoint massacre to my knowledge has always been mentioned when the media reports anniversaries of those occasions.

    PS – Yes I do believe the John Lennon murder would still have gained greater coverage and especially in the longer term than the killing of 18 US marines on the same day. The immediate news of the killings of the marines would have been widely reported but would have faded long after the Lennon killing was still being mentioned. That is the way the media and history operates. It is nothing to do with British attitudes to royalty.

  24. C’mon Colm.

    We’re talking about the single biggest loss of life to Charles Windsor’s own regiment here.

    The examples that you give just aren’t comparable.

  25. Sorry,

    We’re talking about the single biggest loss of life to Charles Windsor’s own regiment since WWII here

  26. Paul

    Yes, and if the killing of the soldiers had occurred on a separate day then it would have been given greater publicity. The news media makes judgements all the time and always distort things in favour of famous people and indeed between famous people. Maria Callas the world’s most famous Opera star died on the same day as Elvis Presley and consequently received far less media coverage than had she died a month earlier.

    If a bomb killed several Irish soldiers on peacekeeping duties somewhere in Africa tomorrow it would get major front page coverage in your media. If the same event had happened last week and on the same day Prince Charles had been shot dead while visiting Ireland , the soldiers killing would have been relegated down the news agenda by your own country’s media and you know it.

  27. * My mistake – Not Elvis Presley, Marc Bolan. The British press at least gave greater coverage to Bolan’s death than Callas.

  28. Colm, again,

    This was a (mid) monarch being blown up on the same day as eighteen of his nephew’s regiment suffered the biggest single loss of life since WWII and as far as I’m able to see not one single mention of it.

    Now, just let that sink in and find a comparitive.

  29. Colm, you aren’t comparing like with like.

    If a retired but famous British dignitary is killed on the same day as 18 soldiers, he gets the main media attention.

    But, as I said, if the same thing happened in a smaller country like Ireland or Israel, the main grief would definitely be for the dead soldiers, for the reasons I stated.

    I don’t want to sound callous, but British soldiers being killed in Northern Ireland just wasn’t as newsworthy in 1979.

    BTW, Colm, were yer ears burning yesterday evening? 🙂

  30. Noel

    Are you referring to the comments by mairin where my supposed misogyny was raised. Yes I read them but decided not to respond.

  31. Noel, you’re not a shite-stirrer either are you 😛
    These types of misogynist comments are uncalled for. I get that you guys don’t get it or don’t see a problem with it. And you’ll have to accept that from time to time I’ll call you out on it. Not always. Just when it gets asinine.

Comments are closed.