Mid east

[Paratrooper 0]

We all know that the situation is terrible, for Israelis and Palestinians, but the solution must include a free Palestine.

[IsthatyouJohnWayne 0]

Dando- Thank you for contributing here

Yes the reign of terror under which Israelis live is terrible indeed and everyone should join together in condemning terrorist bomb attacks aimed at civilians including the palestinian people.

However, many palestinians (wrongly) seem to think it's the only way to 'resist' or put more objectively to alter Israels policies. Maybe this is partly because theyve been brainwashed by the Palestinian media, i dont know-

But i assure you that Palestinians feel a similar fear to you when helicopter gunships hover near their home in counter attacks on 'Hamas' or whoever or when gun battles occur whilst their children are outside or tanks run over their neighbours car in case its booby-trapped (presumably?)

You may say that civilians are not the target but it sure wouldnt feel like that if you were a palestinian,

mistakes are made, missiles and bullets go astray, shrapnel hits school children-

there is very often colateral damage when stikes are made into Palestine.

Israel is waging a total war against Palestinian militants and potential suicide bombers. They transport weapons and fighters in ambulances (so Israeli spokespeople say)

And so Israel decides it can fire at ambulances. Thats never going to look pretty to a Palestinian is it? (or anyone really)

Many more Palestinians have died than Israelis, so you think theyre not living in fear also?

[IsthatyouJohnWayne 0]

However i do think that Arafat has been too inflexible and not at all serious enough about keeping down (militarily if necessary)Hamas and other groups

(though Israeli revenge strikes against Palestinian infrastructure dont exactly help this do they?)

,reform is indeed needed in the Palestinian leadership, but so is a great strengthening of the Palestinian state infrastructure

(and its proper establishment as a full state.)

Lazarus_Long-And i just thought of something else,

far more than Israel needs US military assistance or support, Palestinians need Israeli logistical assistance,

So if anything Arafat relies on Sharon( or more likely Shimon Peres), rather more than Sharon on Bush.

if that makes any sense.

[Lazarus_Long 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> You really don't know what you are talking about. Israel does not need American protection, the Arab nations simply are not a match for Israel, and what would America do if they were? Its time for the USA to stop considering Israel as an American outpost.<span id='postcolor'>

This would be a dangerousy arrogant assumption on the behalf of Israel if they really believed this was true.  

I completely agree that Israel has a very fine and capable military. One of the best! They should be, we trained them ourselves. They have since then become a thriving self-reliant fighting force. They could probably repel any single Arab nation who wanted to invade them with relative ease. BUT if the Arab Alliance ever realized that they could get away it (i.e. the U.S. promised not to intervene.), or if Saddam ever got any of his weapons of mass destruction working, there would be no more Israel as we know it.  Israel would put up a good fight, but in the long run, they would be overwhelmed and ultimately defeated.

If I was an Israeli, I would think twice before getting snooty with the only true friend that I had.  The USA!

And yes if Israels existence was truly threatened, the U.S. would intervene without hestiation with full military force before the EU or the UN would consider doing anything.  I think we have more than proven the fact that we stand up for our allies, even when the international community scorns us for it.

[Paratrooper 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">we trained them ourselves<span id='postcolor'> Err no. Not so.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Arab Alliance <span id='postcolor'> where do you get this from?

Israel has taken on all of it's Arab neighbours before and won.

I really don't know where you get all of this from!

[Lazarus_Long 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">where do you get this from?<span id='postcolor'>

Ok, I meant to say "Arab League" or "League of Arab States"...."Arab Alliance" - Same thing!  Sorry if I confused you.

It is no secret that Israel is one of the biggest buyers of U.S. weapons, and much of the trade is financed with the $2 billion a year it gets from Washington in military aid. Its arsenal includes dozens of US helicopters (AH 64As, AH 1Fs, AH 1Gs); hundreds of tanks (M-60s) and armoured personnel carriers; and the biggest fleet of American fighter aircraft outside the US (F-15s, F-16s, F-4s and A-4s).  Do you seriously believe that we sent Israel all these weapons with nothing but a users manual?

Well...Resistance is comming out tomorrow, so I won't have time to argue with you guys anymore.  It's been an interesting discussion.  To all you poor bastards living in Israel I offer you my most sincere hopes that I am wrong in believing in the impossibility of peace.  Good Luck!

Lazarus Long - (Arrogant American)    

[MDRZulu 0]

Really Isreal could fight and win probably all the middle eastern countries at once. The other countries are weak and have to use terrorism to attack because its the only way. Their air force is extremely powerful and they could probably put up a hell of a good fight against the USAF to prove how powerful that country is.

[Longinius 1]

If Israel can do so good without US funding, why dont they put their money where their mouth is and stop taking money from America? Stop buying American weapons, ammo, and stop cooperating with the US. Would be fun to see how long they would last without their mother.

[foxer 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Longinius @ June 30 2002,01:22)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">If Israel can do so good without US funding, why dont they put their money where their mouth is and stop taking money from America? Stop buying American weapons, ammo, and stop cooperating with the US. Would be fun to see how long they would last without their mother.<span id='postcolor'>

I don't think they have anything israel can sell to the world,that's why they need america money.If middle-east didn't have oil,What good would they be ? Not starting anything,but it's true.

[Longinius 1]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I don't think they have anything israel can sell to the world,that's why they need america money.If middle-east didn't have oil,What good would they be ? Not starting anything,but it's true. <span id='postcolor'>

So? Thats not what this is about. The fact is people said Israel doesnt need America nor its money. I responded to that. Not that the Middle East would be useless without its oil. So, respond to the topic at hand instead.

[RedStar 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Longinius @ June 30 2002,12:35)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I don't think they have anything israel can sell to the world,that's why they need america money.If middle-east didn't have oil,What good would they be ?  Not starting anything,but it's true. <span id='postcolor'>

So? Thats not what this is about. The fact is people said Israel doesnt need America nor its money. I responded to that. Not that the Middle East would be useless without its oil. So, respond to the topic at hand instead.<span id='postcolor'>

Just a little reminder here but Israeli was saying this when France was backing them in the 50's, saying that they didnt need france's help or money, just before France cut all financial and military help , after this the Israeli government cried out like a lost child for help.

The moral of this story.

Be careful what you wish for.

[scout 0]

errrrr.....excuse me?

just as an israeli....except maybe Netanyahu (yahoo! no israeli had ever said that israel can do without American military aid , although i might inform you that the deal is: we get money, but we can buy with it only american armaments.

so STOP PUTTING WORDS IN OUR MOUTHS!

secondly, and im not spokesman, on my last ToD i caught 2 wanted and some pistols traveling with the aid of a Red Cresent ambulance. and NO no one shoots on ambulances unless they try to run you down...

Longinius - as it seems no Palestinians or westerns shown any evidence of any massacre in Jenin so your apology is long overdue.

(if you already did then i here by APOLOGIZE RAISING THIS MATTER)

[Longinius 1]

"just as an israeli....except maybe Netanyahu (yahoo! no israeli had ever said that israel can do without American military aid , although i might inform you that the deal is: we get money, but we can buy with it only american armaments.

so STOP PUTTING WORDS IN OUR MOUTHS!"

Who said an Israeli said it? Quoting Paratrooper, earlier in this thread (dont know if he is Israeli or not, dont really care).

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You really don't know what you are talking about. Israel does not need American protection, the Arab nations simply are not a match for Israel, and what would America do if they were? Its time for the USA to stop considering Israel as an American outpost.<span id='postcolor'>

"Longinius - as it seems no Palestinians or westerns shown any evidence of any massacre in Jenin so your apology is long overdue.

(if you already did then i here by APOLOGIZE RAISING THIS MATTER)"

Why should I apologize for speaking up when I thought something bad was happening? So maybe I was wrong, maybe there was no massacre. That does not mean I should apologize for speaking up. As for wether there was a massacre or not, I have no clue. The fact still remains that civilians suffer for actions done by others. I still think thats wrong. So sue me.

Just get over with it. Either fence them in or throw them out, stop mucking about. Obviously Palestinians and Israelis are not civilized enough to get along, so one of the two have to go. If the Israelis are the once that stay, its fine by me. As I see it, Pals and Israelis have equal rights to the land. Just settle the matter and send the loser on their way. Or continue killing women and children on both sides...

[RedStar 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (scout @ July 01 2002,20:40)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">1. on my last ToD i caught 2 wanted and some pistols traveling with the aid of a Red Cresent ambulance. and NO no one shoots on ambulances unless they try to run you down...

2.Longinius - as it seems no Palestinians or westerns shown any evidence of any massacre in Jenin so your apology is long overdue.

(if you already did then i here by APOLOGIZE RAISING THIS MATTER)<span id='postcolor'>

Without hijacking this thread but to give examples.

1. No suprise there, In every conflict nations involved used or are using red cross/ cresent vehicles etc as weapons carriers and personel carriers. It is to make the other side look bad when they realise this fact and attack the emergency vehicles.

During operation motorman and continuing into the 70's and 80's the British army used their Scaracen medic APC's as troop carriers instead of the normal all green Scaracens, then lambasted the republicans on press releases for attacking them.

Photo shows medic scaracen on patrol with ferret scout car and Centurion tank in the Creggan housing estate on the morning of 'Operation Motorman'.

2. Just because the evidence hasnt been found yet doesnt mean that no massacre took place, afterall the Israeli army had quite a few days to clear up after themselves. If there was no massacre then why did the Israeli army not let reporters and officials in after the operation was over and not a few days later as the did to a very badly staged tour of the booby traps layed out in the area.

On example of this is during the massacre of bloody sunday a royal marine medic examined a body of a young man who had been shot in the chest, the bullet had passed through his jacket's breast pocket the medic stated that there was nothing unusual.

When the mans body was taken back to the army barracks in Derry the man was photographed and examined by a Para medic, The Para medic stated (and was shown in a photograph) that there was a blast bomb in the mans breast pocket yet the blast bomb was not damaged in any way, strange as it would have been in the path of the bullet.

[scout 0]

i will continue on this matter because i (and many men, mostly reservists like me) was greatly offended, and i'll remind you: you acused us massacring early on when facts were unknown yet. i challanged you on this matter saying you jumped into conclusions without waiting for facts. i challanged you weather you'll apologize if you were wrong and to this you answer favorably.

therefore I have no other choice but to conclude you are not a man of your word, nor are you man of honor. otherwise you wont dodge me that way.

i always respected you and your points although sometimes you accused us of things unjust and unbased, but this is a principal i cant lay aside!

the fact you stood and accused us of a massacre is no small thing, and it seems you dont understand the severity of this accusation! and you've done that without single proof. we both know there is a vast difference between "civilians are suffering and thats wrong" and slaughter.

im not going to sue you. im going to give you a chance admmiting you failed to wait for fact but rushed to conclusion as seen fit by you.

this is up to you!

edit: redstar:

do you know :"not guilty until proven otherwise"?

now, the israeli army was there for a week, yes.

but you've seent there was much rubble. and that the IDF hadnt moved it. much of it stayed there.

if there were mass graves they would've been found by the Pals. if there were people missing you can be sure that the pals would've shouted sky high that we hi-jacked people from Jenin.

fact is that despite best efforts by the Pals, they hadnt been able to show a single evidence of a massacre (i remind you we were talking about at least 500 ppl!

all this and more give the impresion that there wasnt any such thing, you really cant stand and accuse me of that do you?

(btw. wasnt there new foundings about 'bloody sunday?'

[RedStar 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (scout @ July 01 2002,22:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">(btw. wasnt there new foundings about 'bloody sunday?'<span id='postcolor'>

And what new findings would that be?

That some soilders fired more rounds than they were issued?

That the 29 rifles used on that day that were held by the MOD as evidence were destroyed 3 days after the inquiry asked for them?

please shed some light on your ramblings

[Longinius 1]

"therefore I have no other choice but to conclude you are not a man of your word, nor are you man of honor. otherwise you wont dodge me that way."

I havent dodged you. I am not sorry for speaking up when I think others are mistreated. My word has nothing to do with it though. As for my honor, I can't really understand how it is relevant in this case.

Like I stated, and others, there might have been a massacre and there might not have been. If the IDF had nothing to hide though, why were observers and journalists kept out? Talking about dodging questions, I dont think you ever answered that one.

"i always respected you and your points although sometimes you accused us of things unjust and unbased, but this is a principal i cant lay aside!"

I have never accused you of anything. I accused the IDF. As a soldier you must sure be able to differ between the actions of a person (such as yourself) and the actions of an entire army. You might very well be a good guy, you appear to be. But this does not mean the IDF would be free of blame nor would it mean IDF units were uncapable of massacres. Obviously the IDF have killed civilians, destroyed civilian property and made life hell for those Palestinians living in the occupied areas. Talking about honor, where is the honor in that?

"the fact you stood and accused us of a massacre is no small thing, and it seems you dont understand the severity of this accusation! and you've done that without single proof. we both know there is a vast difference between "civilians are suffering and thats wrong" and slaughter."

Yes, big difference. I havent taken it to court though, nor have I taken any official action. I have simply stated that I thought the actions taken in Jenin were wrong. If people were massacred or not is not the big point, the point is the IDF attacked civilians as well as terrorists. How do you expect people to look favorably upon Israel when you go in, guns blazing, and bulldoze their homes?

"im not going to sue you. im going to give you a chance admmiting you failed to wait for fact but rushed to conclusion as seen fit by you.

this is up to you!"

Of course I can admit to this, since its right. I admit I did not wait for proof. I don't admit jumping to conclusions though, because of what I stated above. I still think what happened in Jenin is wrong. I still think that making civilians suffer for the actions of some terrorists is wrong. And I still think several civilians died needlesly that day.

"do you know :"not guilty until proven otherwise"?

now, the israeli army was there for a week, yes.

but you've seent there was much rubble. and that the IDF hadnt moved it."

Why were not observers let in during that time? Or journalists? (I can kind of understand not letting in journalists, they are leeches. But it would atleast not make it look like the IDF were covering up.)

"if there were mass graves they would've been found by the Pals. if there were people missing you can be sure that the pals would've shouted sky high that we hi-jacked people from Jenin."

There would not need to be massgraves. Lets ignore massgraves since they are not a necessity for a massacre to take place. Do you deny that many civilians died that day? That civilian property was destroyed in scores? That medical attention was denied to non combatants for days? That they were not allowed to remove their dead until several days later?

"all this and more give the impresion that there wasnt any such thing, you really cant stand and accuse me of that do you?"

Like stated earlier, noone has accused YOU.

[scout 0]

i meant :"me" as " Israel" as i said, i was taking it personal, as i'm still serving in this army and i know the ppl serving there. and no i dont believe they are capable of massacring. i know most of the CO's too well.

now there were 56 casualties 13 of them were civies and the rest were known active members in terror organizations.

7 of the 13 were found on the site were 13 of our men had died when a suicide bomber (the pals say it was a 10 year old kid btw) expolded amognst them.

I dont like collateral damage. BUT when you wage war amongst civilians, which was the choice of these organization it means you are willing, and want to have it (for propoganda uses.

now. looking at this figure, i cant imagine an army which would achieve smaller civilian casualties. and never in history there were an army more careful about colateral damage.

you look at property damage. well i say. better property then people. and the use of bulldozers prevented huge amount of casualties. to us and to them. civilians WERE NOT ATTACKED! the army gave them ample time to leave the refugee camp. only 3000 decided to stay and they took their fate in their hands. still, there was no intentional attack that was directed against civilians.

now speeaking of medical attention. the 5th brigade doctor had been interview and it seems he spent most of his time taking care of sick and wounded pals that were in the area of israeli contorl. thats all you can demand. help was given, not always accepted , but given non the less.

all in all. fighting is an ugly thing. but as i can see it, andcomparing it to any military operation it was done as cleanly as can be.  now massacre is intentionally targeting civilians then the IDF had done very bad job hasnt he? only 13 civilians? bah. they could have done MUCH MUCH WORSE! like sending 2 squadrons of F-16 with FAE or cluster bombs.

and again. i dont mind your opinion, we both are entitled to do and think whatever we like. i object the accusations that are really groundless.

edit: redstar: sorry didnt see your post.

i read on the news something a week ago, saying there was new found evidence that showed the british troops were fired upon? could you relate to this?

[Longinius 1]

I hear what you are saying Scout, and I understand. Believe me, I respect the IDF for how they operate. Unlike certain other nations IDF soldiers put themselves in harms way to try and avoid civilian casualties. The proof of this, as you say, is that the settlements arent simply bombed to bits.

Still, I fear that there are things going on that are far from acceptable. Why else would journalists and observers not be allowed in to the area?

Another thing I want to point out is that even if some units in the IDF were responsible for massacres, its not certain you would know about it. For sure, you wouldnt think it was possible. Just like in Vietnam, American civilians and servicemen thought it unthinkable that the Vietnamese civilians were massacred. But they were, on occasion, both in organised manners and in more random events. Its sad but true. Things like that happen.

[scout 0]

if you dont mind my presistance.

i'd like to say that, yes there were things un-done in the first Intifada. this things cause great problems in the army and as a result in my era, since 1994 the army had gone to great length to prevent incidents such as you state here to happen.

our military is small enough, this may come as a surprise to you, for every officer, lowly as a Lt. to know and aquite ourselves with every first line unit. we do courses together, we train together we make friends.

i have many friends that they themselves have gone to every branch of the army and finally as a resrvist i meet more and more of other people.

in Jenin there were 2 regular units and one reserve unit my cousin and two classroom mates serve in. and i know it hard to accept it but. TRUST me, if things that are rotten would've happened things would've leaked out already. for the simple fact that 800 men, that already laid up uniform and arent complied ot secrecy would tell someone, a friend, a neighbor and from here to the news is really short.

maybe this would come as a shock to you but many many who are defined as firm "Left" had participated in this op.

as a result of that i again find it hard to believe that any thing undone happened there, althoug the civilian suffering u are more sensitive to, was there, although in my mind its less harsh and sharp.

in the end, i just wan to say, that if any things that is similar to any kind of pre-mediated targeting of civilian will occur, i assure you i would be against it and voice it as much as you , just because it hurts me as an Israeli and a Reservist of the IDF to be part of such system.

thank you very much for your time.

[Longinius 1]

Ok Scout, you make a good case. Had I known you in real life, I probably would have believed you. Since you are only a "net buddy" I dont know what to believe. Lets just say you got me thinking though.

But still, why were journalists and observers kept out?

[scout 0]

beats me. i know that until the shoot out ended the reason was that it was a battle ground. and the place was boobytraped. after that? well i dont know and it was a poor call. just like as our Govt. handled the UN commision later.

they really screwed up

my guess is good as you.

[RedStar 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (scout @ July 02 2002,17:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">edit: redstar: sorry didnt see your post.

i read on the news something a week ago, saying there was new found evidence that showed the british troops were fired upon? could you relate to this?<span id='postcolor'>

Actually this is old news from week 2 of the Bloody Sunday Tribunal that has been running for 60 weeks now but anyway

4.2 THE PRESENCE OF GUNMEN

Mr Clarke said that some gunmen were around and either used or brandished weapons on some occasions. The following is a summary of the accounts from both civilians and journalist evidence.

4.2.1 A shot in Columbcille Court

There is civilian evidence of a shot being fired from a flat in Columbcille Court in a northerly direction. Dennis Bradley was a curate in a Derry parish at the time. He was in Columbcille Court when someone told him there had been a gunman in the area. The gunman was described as a 'Stickie' (a member of the Official IRA) and the Provisionals had sent him away.

The Sunday Times archive includes notes of an interview with a man called Joe Carlin. Mr Carlin describes being with two people at the march when he saw a boy matching the description of Damien Donaghy shot.

'While we were standing there a small boy by our side was hit. He just gave this cry or scream and fell to the ground….He was about 14 years of age, very young looking, wearing jeans and the usual garb, I think. He seemed to have been wounded in the leg. It was bleeding pretty heavily.'

The interview records that three men picked the boy up and carried him to Kells Walk. Damien Donaghy was taken inside a house in the northern most block of Columbcille Court. Mr Carlin said that 'immediately afterwards' he heard a shot from an upstairs window.

Another Sunday Times interview records a similar witness statement. Tony Martin was in a friend's flat at the top floor of Kells Walk. He said that when he came out of the flat he heard two high velocity shots from the direction of the Richardsons Factory or the Presbyterian Church.

'A few seconds later I distinctly heard the thump of a .303. Right beside us on the corner of Columbcille Court was fired - one round.'

He said that he saw an argument between the gunman (who he later learned was an Official) and some Provisionals.

'The Provos were trying to get the gun from the Official and stop him firing because of the crowd.'

Mr Clarke returned to Reg Tester's evidence. Mr Tester claimed that two weapons, a pistol and a .303 rifle were missing from the Official's arsenal. He said that he later learned that a member of the Official IRA had fired one shot in return for the shot which wounded and later killed John Johnstone. He could not confirm whether this account was true.

4.2.2 A man seen with a rifle that was not fired

There is evidence that a man was seen with a rifle, which was not fired, at the north of the Kells Walk building. Eamonn Gallagher described how the man had been circled by a group of men who took the rifle off him and either broke it or dismantled it,

'I remember that one man said 'there will be no shooting here today.' There were no shots fired by the person holding the gun. There had been no shots at all up to that point.'

4.2.3 The taxi office in William Street

Anna O'Donnell said that a man with a rifle appeared after the British Army had shot a youth (presumably Damien Donaghy). She saw the man appear with an old rifle from behind the taxi office on William Street. He fired one shot, which did not hit anything, and he obeyed bystanders' instructions to put the gun away.

4.2.4 A man with a pistol firing from the crowd either near Columbcille Court or from opposite Tanners Row

David Capper of the BBC was asked by some people to look at the two people who had been injured. He was taken to Columbcille Court via William Street. At the entrance of the flats he heard a 'very large report' fired from close to him. He did not see who had fired it but he thought it had been fired from amongst the crowd. In his statement to the BSI Mr Capper said,

'I then saw a short man of about 30 to 40 years of age wearing, I think, a brown overcoat, fire one round from a pistol toward some soldiers who were in the derelict building near the Presbyterian church on the other side of William Street. After the pistol was fired the man placed the pistol into his coat pocket and ran off.'

Similar but not identical evidence has been taken from Ciaran Donnelly of the Irish Times. He saw a crowd stoning a house on the north side of William Street near Tanners Row. He heard one shot, which he believed to be fired from a revolver. He did not see anyone with a weapon. Mr Donnelly records seeing a man aged between 40 and 50 fire a shot at a derelict house. He recalls 15 to 20 people telling the man to go away. He said that this is the only shot he saw fired by a civilian that day.

4.2.5 City Cab's Office

Simon Winchester of the Guardian and Nigel Wade of the Daily Telegraph both gave evidence saying that they heard what sounded like high velocity fire, when they were standing outside the city cab's office. Mr Winchester noted the time of this shot at 45pm which would have been after Damien Donaghey and John Johnston had been shot. Mr Winchester believed it was a rifle shot and had come from the direction of the Little Diamond.

4.2.6 'Father Daly's Gunman'

After Jack Duddy was shot Father Daly saw a gunman at the western gable end at the south of Chamberlain Street, who fired two or three shots. Father Daly recounts that the man took out a small handgun and fired two or three shots at the soldiers. He screamed at the gunman to go away.

Photographer, Fulvio Grimaldi took a photograph of a gunman at the gable end of Chamberlain Street.

An Insight article claims that this gunman was a member of the Official IRA. Journalist, Eamonn McCann, spoke to this gunman later. The man said he had taken the gun on the march for his own personal protection, but lost his temper when the Paras started shooting. He had fired one shot in anger.

4.2.7 Sightings of Miscellaneous Gunmen

A number of witnesses speak of seeing or hearing individual members of the IRA on that day.

John Leo Clifford saw 40 people, against the southern gable wall of the eastern block of Glenfada Park North, being lined up and frisked by soldiers carrying rifles and batons. He then noticed a civilian carrying a .303 rifle running from the south-west corner of Glenfada Park South towards the north-east corner. Mr Clifford's nephew believed that the man was a member of the Official IRA.

James Donal Deeney recalls running across a road to St Columbs Wells and seeing a wounded man being helped by a woman and child. A car appeared and took the wounded man away. After half an hour passed he saw a few members of the Official IRA coming out of a house. Mr Deeney said that he saw one man hiding a rifle under his coat.

Father O'Gara said that after 30 seconds to a minute of soldiers opening fire he saw a young man fire three pistol shots from a walll at the cathedral side of Kells Walk. He said that the man was possibly aiming at the Saracen that was parked on Rossville Street.

Nell McCafferty of the Irish Times said that she saw two teenage boys appear out of a stairwell in the flats opposite the Bogside Inn. They were carrying two rifles. She told them to put the rifles away and the boys disappeared back into the stairwell.

4.2.8 Billy Gillespie's Account

The Insight team recorded that Billy Gillespie saw a gunman fire seven shots from the fifth floor of the Rossville Flats. Mr Gillespie has told the BSI that this is untrue, as he did not see any civilian gunmen that day.

4.2.9 Protestant Gunman

Nigel Wade said that he had heard three shots by Long Tower Catholic Church at a late stage in the afternoon. He saw a man with a rifle standing by the church wall. The families inside the church told him that the gunman was a Protestant from the Fountain Street area.

4.2.10 Gunmen coming down from the Creggan at the end of the day

Mr Clarke said there is little doubt that after the shooting by the soldiers in Rossville Street was either over or substantially over, a body of IRA men came down from the Creggan to Westland Street. The Officials and the Provisionals arrived seperately.

4.2.11 The Arrival of the Provisionals

Evidence refers to their arrival in Westland Street and deploying to the flats to the north of that street and firing in the direction of the north where the soldiers were.

Leslie Bedell said he saw some cars pull up in Westland Street and men with rifles or automatics piling out. He claims that the men dispersed into the flats to the north of the street and start firing. The men were then pulled back and ran to a community hall on the other side of the street.

Michael Havord recalls that he saw a car screech down Westland Street and four boys jumped out, carrying Enfield .303s. He said that this was 30 minutes after the first shots.

Ivan Cooper has rejected a Sunday Times document purporting to be a record of a discussion with him. The document suggests that someone told Mr Cooper that the Provisionals had been sent for and that Martin McGuinness and others were trapped in a house in William Street. Mr Cooper said that the document is factually inaccurate and 'smacks of British security intelligence operating.'

4.2.12 The Arrival of the Officials

Reg Tester who was driving the car carrying the Officials weapons around the Creggan claims that once he got word of events in the Bogside he drove to Westland Street. He claims that he took out a brand new M1 carbine and tried to fire it but it jammed.

So in short there was

1 OIRA .303 rifle that fired 1 round after John Johnstone was murdered

2 .303 rifles that were not fired

1 man with a revolver firing 2 shots after 2 people had been injured in williams st

1 M1 carbine that jammed before firing

1 Protestant gunman that fired a rifle at catholics and not the army.

The Paras have always said that they came under fire by a high velocity shot that hit a drainpipe before the march had taken place. What is interesting is that another regiment (Royal Anglian Regiment) was stationed on the city walls who also fired shots in derry and among the 29 rifles that were until recently held by the MoD was a sniper rifle. Make you think

The BSI sent the MOD the list of serial numbers of rifles from the DIFS examination. One of the rifles was a sniper rifle rather than a SLR. Five of the weapons were held at a depot in Donnington, 14 had been destroyed, two were sold and a company that is currently under a MOD police investigation is holding the remaining eight.

2.7.1 The Destruction of Weapons

Of the 14 weapons, which have been destroyed, eleven were destroyed after the BSI's first letter of 15 April 1998 and two were destroyed after the letter of 1 September 1999.

On 15 December 1999 the BSI wrote to the MOD asking for the preservation of the remaining rifles and asked why rifles had been destroyed as recently as September 1999 when the MOD had known about the BSI since April 1998.

The MOD claimed that they were unable to preserve the rifles until the BSI sent them the serial numbers of the weapons, which they had not done until September 1999. Even at that date the MOD said that the serial numbers which the BSI had sent was not sufficient for them to be able to check the 34,000 SLRs still in existence.

However when the MOD carried out further investigations they were able to account for all 29 rifles by the 29 September 1999. This was only five days after two of the rifles were destroyed. The eight rifles sent to the company under police investigation have been sold and the five rifles held at Donnington remain at that depot. The MOD said that they did not realise that the two rifles destroyed on 24 September were Bloody Sunday rifles.

By the middle of February 2000 it is clear that of the five weapons held at Donnington depot, two were subsequently destroyed. 14 weapons had been disposed of for destruction between 26 January 1998 and either 22 or 24 September 1999. Two rifles had been sold in1995 and eight had been sold more recently.

2.7.2 Police Investigation

The researches of the police team investigating the whereabouts of the rifles discovered that the BSI had been working on a mistaken assumption that the serial numbers they had for each rifle was unique. Mr Clarke said that he believed at least one officer in the Border Master General's Department and possibly more knew this. The police are currently investigating whether the MOD 's Donnington depot also knew this and whether this information reached the BSI's contacts at the MOD.

The BSI had mistakenly been working off partial serial numbers. This means that even if the BSI could identify which year the rifle was manufactured there could be a similar rifle with the same partial serial number. There were two factories at Birmingham and Enfield manufacturing these rifles. The maximum number of matching partial serial numbers for each rifle is four. The police investigation team has identified nine of what is thought to be Bloody Sunday rifles as having unique serial numbers. Of this nine, six have been destroyed, two have been sold abroad and one is being held by the police.

Mr Clarke said that the police investigation into the whereabouts of the rifles is continuing. He said it was a matter of 'considerable concern' that rifles had been destroyed when the BSI had twice sought assurances that they not be destroyed. Preliminary investigations suggest that a fault in the computer system meant that a warning not to destroy weapons only flagged up once the weapon had been destroyed. Mr Clarke said that reports that the MOD believed it was free to destroy weapons until the BSI formally requested them were incorrect.

There are 50 rifles that correspond with the partial serial numbers given to the MOD by the BSI. Of those 50, nine were unique numbers and so can definitely be said to have been used on Bloody Sunday. Mr Clarke said that it remains to be seen whether the remaining rifles can be shown to have been used on Bloody Sunday.

2.8 EVIDENCE DERIVED FROM THE RIFLES

Mr Clarke said the forensic significance of the rifles would depend on whether they have been rebarrelled since 1972. In 1972 it was possible to match the bullets lodged in Michael Kelly and Gerard Donaghey with the rifles of soldiers F and G. No other whole bullets were lodged in the other people who were killed or wounded on Bloody Sunday.

2.9 MODIFIED WEAPONS

Evidence exists which shows that Army weapons were modified to make them more lethal. Photographs of a baton (truncheon) with lead in the wood and a rubber bullet with a nail inserted in the middle were shown. A witness statement records the effect of a rubber bullet which had broken glass inserted in it. Mr Clarke will cover the evidence that Bernard McGuigan was shot by a modified bullet when he discusses events in sector 4.

2.4.2 Magilligan Internment Camp

A new internment camp had opened at Magilligan, ten miles outside Derry. It had taken its first group of internees on Monday 17 January. A demonstration took place outside the camp on Saturday 22 January where reporters saw Paras club demonstrators and fire rubber bullets at point blank range. Nigel Wade from the Sunday Telegraph said that he had seen soldiers drive the marchers into the sea and that the Regiments NCOs had used riot sticks to try to control their own soldiers.

2.4.9 The Paras

1 Para were normally stationed in Belfast and had been to Derry once before for an operation in July 1971, which had been aborted. Notes from the Sunday Times Insight team describe a discussion with Captain Jackson about this operation:

'He confirmed that the idea was to get the yobbos and gunmen into the streets by provocative searches, but that the IRA would not play and went on R&R (rest and recreation). Jackson said that the bloody thing never got off the ground and that since then the 1st Battalion had always wanted to sweep through the 'no-go' areas of Derry.'

In a statement for the BSI, General Jackson said that he could not recall saying this although he remembers the feeling of frustration that they had travelled all the way to Derry and returned 'for nothing.' He said that 1 Para had an

'…unequalled experience and record in Belfast…(they were) 'prepared to go in hard and ready. The idea was to inflict casualties, never to receive them, and this was possible due to the Battalion's aggressive posture in always seizing the initiative. He felt that the 1st Battalion had helped to ensure that there were no 'no-go' areas in Belfast, and that a certain contempt was felt for such areas existing elsewhere in the Province.'

1 Para had a reputation for brutality and other army units had complained about the damage they had on community relations. Colonel Wilford was asked about the reports of brutality at the Magilligan demonstration, the week before the Derry march. He admitted that one of his soldiers had kicked a man on the ground 'but the circumstances were such that he might easily and justifiably have lost his temper.'

A senior officer in the Ardoyne area of Belfast told a member of the Insight team that one visit by the Paras 'takes us six weeks to repair the damage to community relations.'

3.2 DISPLAYS OF TRIUPHALISM

Mr Clarke discussed evidence that possibly provides insight into the mindset of some of the Paras at the time of the march.

Photographs and witness statements show graffiti applauding the Paras for the deaths and injuries. Mr Porter took a photograph of a door in William Street on 31 January. It said 'Paras were here T.E., and they fucking hammered fuck out of you.' Six coffins and six crosses were drawn next to the writing. It is signed I Para and dated 30 January.

[scout 0]

REDSTAR: thanx.

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

The only thing I can say after days, weeks, months, years of this conflict that everything seems to be a lie and everyone appears to be a liar! There is not a single newsreport that has been confirmed by both parties. No UN people allowed to double-check.

My conclusion: STAY OUT OF MY NEWS! I wana see relevant things and not always those boring neirds with their guns and their bulldozers walking through dusty roads and ruins and crying women (the hell why do they always cry, they send their son into those suicide attacks). They could show me pictures from a year ago, I wouldnt notice. Nothing changed.

Problem solving is a question of intelligence, want me to draw a conclusion from that?

I want to see important stuff, e.g. more news from Africa! Or maybe they could have news only such as: "Today nobody got killed in the MidEast" which would cut broadcasted news from the MidEast by 95%.

I am really surprised that those two nations still have a stagnating population with this conflict going on for years.

I dont even want to see stupid represenative neirds of the jewish population living in Germany discussing the issue. They bore me, stop boring me, find a damm solution!

If those politicians you have would work for a German/swiss company, they would be kicked out and declared a s Ice-age managers (and without a golden parachute)  

I came to the conclusion when I was asked to go shopping with a girl, I hate shopping with girls; I hate it, but there was only MiddleEast discussion on TV so I actually decided to join that girl. How the hell is this possible. AM I GAY, damm do I really prefer shopping instead of TV? no way!! Just that middleEast stuff made me leave my appartment!