Adams says sorry

[bearhunter]

From RTE news:

Adams apologises to bomb victim's family
Wednesday, 31 October 2007 22:27
Gerry Adams has apologised to Colin and Wendy Parry for the death of their son, Tim, in the IRA Warrington bombing in 1993.

Speaking at a debate on reconciliation in London at which the Parry's were present, the Sinn Féin President said the IRA were responsible for what happened and he apologised for the hurt inflicted by Republicans.

Earlier, Mr Adams met Mr and Mrs Parry for the first time and held a private meeting with the couple who since the death of their son have run the Warrington project for Peace and Reconciliation.

AdvertisementBefore that meeting, Colin Parry had said that he was nervous about meeting the person seen by most British people for years as the emodiment of the IRA.

Mr Adams stressed at the debate the need for dialogue saying it was easy to talk to friends but that making peace with the enemy was a challenge. 'It was not easy for me to come here tonight', he said.

[Harry]

And rightly so. Teenage boys killed in the interest of Irish Unity

[Harry]

setanta said:

harry said:

And rightly so. Teenage boys killed in the interest of Irish Unity

It was an accident. It was right to apologise. They weren't killed in the interest of Irish Unity.
It was right to apologise.

Why where they killed. Why did the IRA plant the bomb?? What where the IRA goals?? Don't try and give us all this they weren't the targets, we don't target innocents lark cos its wet and pointless. Deal with facts and the only facts of this is that teenage boys were murdered.

[Harry]

Well to me they were killed in the interest of Irish Unity. Planting bombs runs the risks of killing innocent people.

[An Fear Dubh]

While nobody is denying that there were innocents killed in the pursuit of Irish Unity and it was right to apologize for that. But Harry you support the actions of the British troops in Iraq ans Afghanistan. Where mortar bombs are and have been fired, where rockets and bombs from planes have been fired by British troops. It is agreed that planting bombs does run the risk of killing innocent people, but also mortars, rockets and dropping bombs also run the risk of killing innocent people. Those of us who are not true pacifists can not pretend to be without sin, and there is no hierarchy of death.

[Harry]

Certainly Innocent people will of died at the hands of British troops in Iraq and Afghan. They will of died because of the troops doing what was in the interest of their aims. Like innocent people died in the interest of Irish unity and you accept that which makes a whole world of difference instead of offering silly excuses. Whats done is done and what was done was done because individuals or groups were only interested in their own aims. I don't accept that British troops and the IRA are or ever were on some sort of par but i agree with your approach to it.

[Jim]

But the difference here is while the IRA killed in the interests of Irish unity they have no stopped, the British army are still in Iraq and Afghanistan and they're still killing.

[Republic]

The difference is quite clearly in how people view certain conflicts as legitimate or not.
Not wanting to put words in Harrys mouth but it seems clear that he does not view Irish unity as a legitimate reason for conflict. Same goes for others views on Iraq and Afghanistan.

[Harry]

jim said:

But the difference here is while the IRA killed in the interests of Irish unity they have no stopped, the British army are still in Iraq and Afghanistan and they're still killing.

Jim is what the IRA done the same to you as operations carried out by British troops in Afghan or Iraq??

[Harry]

setanta said:

harry said:

Certainly Innocent people will of died at the hands of British troops in Iraq and Afghan. They will of died because of the troops doing what was in the interest of their aims. Like innocent people died in the interest of Irish unity and you accept that which makes a whole world of difference instead of offering silly excuses. Whats done is done and what was done was done because individuals or groups were only interested in their own aims. I don't accept that British troops and the IRA are or ever were on some sort of par but i agree with your approach to it.

Harry I think we're almost on the same page but using differnet words. I don't think that those boys were killed by a bomb in the interest of Irish Unity. I think the bomb was part of an economic targetting campaign in the interest of Irish Unity.

If you think

the only facts of this is that teenage boys were murdered

then do you also think that the teenage boys and children killed in Afghanistan and Iraq were also murdered?

Does it matter?

Of course teenage boys killed in Iraq or Afghanistan if innocent then they were murdered. Again you want to try and make comparisions and push me towards saying it was accidents so it gives you room to justify IRA actions. British troops and the IRA are worlds apart and what happens in Iraq or Afghan can't be compared to what the IRA did. The IRA are the same as the insurgents not British troops

[An Fear Dubh]

For my part I am not trying to maneuver you into any position but I do think we are not that far apart. I do think that the IRA are different from the British Army, and to compare them like for like is unfair to both. Comparing different conflicts and actions across the world is fraught with contradictions. But we must look at them in a general sense. As some have pointed out that they view some conflicts as 'legitimate'. For my part I view Irish Unity as an aspiration that was left with no alternative but armed conflict, and therefore it was legitimate to engage in armed conflict. But regardless of your view of the legitimacy of one conflict over another, some actions of war are bound to encroach on non combatants in other words innocent people do get killed in an armed conflict/war. Bombs of any type can kill innocent people.
If you can support one armed conflict then you can not look at another conflict and say that armed conflict is wrong. Either both are wrong or one is more 'legitimate' in your view, but you accept that others may not hold the same view, but be justified in holding such a view. Comparing one situation with another is open to political bias, and it is very difficult as one situation may make the other legitimate and therefore question your own foundation. I am not looking to undermine your foundation but for you to accept that you can not undermine my foundation without undermining your own.

[Jim]

harry said:

jim said:

But the difference here is while the IRA killed in the interests of Irish unity they have no stopped, the British army are still in Iraq and Afghanistan and they're still killing.

Jim is what the IRA done the same to you as operations carried out by British troops in Afghan or Iraq??

Both killed.

[Wasp]

harry said:

And rightly so. Teenage boys killed in the interest of Irish Unity

Harry only one was almost a teenager, the other was only three years old. Why didn't Adam's condemn this atrocity carried out by cowards??? Why did the same cowardly scum continue to make the same 'accidents' over and over again knowing fine well what the end result would be. No-one will ever full the Unionist community into believing that innocents were not the intended targets of any ira bomb. They are simply liars.

Johnathan Ball, three, died in the blasts when he was in town with his babysitter buying a Mother's Day Card.

Tim Parry, 12, was caught in the full force of the blast and died five days later in hospital.

The atrocity also left 56 people injured in the blasts which the IRA admitted carrying out.

Now let's look at some more facts in this planned revenge attack.

The troubles in Warrington started on Thursday 25 February 1993.

Three IRA terrorists broke into a Warrington gas storage depot.

After planting Semtex bombs, the trio tried to escape and shot a patrolling police officer.

Most of their bombs failed to detonate, but one did blow up. Thankfully, nobody was injured.

The three IRA men were arrested and Warrington believed its brush with terrorism had passed. They were wrong.

On Saturday 20 March 1993 another IRA unit took revenge on Warrington for the arrests three weeks earlier.

It was the day before Mothering Sunday and stores in Bridge Street were bustling with shoppers.

Two bombs, planted in waste bins, exploded within a minute of each other.

Now if innocents were not the intended target then why two bombs in a busy street on a Saturday of all days??

Despite the biggest ever double murder hunt that Cheshire had seen, the bombers have never been caught.

Now why are republicans not coming forward with their names in there search for truth?? Especailly when they are very vocal when they are the victims.

[Jim]

Wasp, what do you want him to do? Get down on his knees and kiss your arse? You know and I know that no matter what Adams says it'll not be good enough, there'll always be more.

[Wasp]

jim said:

Wasp, what do you want him to do? Get down on his knees and kiss your arse? You know and I know that no matter what Adams says it'll not be good enough, there'll always be more.

Bollocks Jim. That is not what I want nor what the Unionist community wants. I have made it crystal clear before that while I hate Adams and his fellow mouthpieces I would be the first to stand up and welcome his comments if they needed to be welcomed. His words are empty and IMO meaningless.

I do not expect republicans to condemn or view ira violence as I do, I wish they did but they don't. But that doesn't mean I won't say that I welcome steps taken by the republican movemnet because I will. A major step to trust building, confidence and reconcilliation would be condemnation of such incidents. Now that would be meaningfull and I would accept that as a major move from the republican side in which Unionists must take on board.

FFS a 3 year old toddler was killed out buying his mum a mothers day card and condemnation of such an outrage is apparently unthinkable. If such outrages cannot be condemned then you are right on one thing, no matter what Adams and co says or does it will never be good enough or acceptable to Unionists. If sinn fein had the best policys in the world they would never be acceptable to Unionists while they cannot condemn a 3 year old being killed in such a way.

As you well know republicans want answers from the British, enquiry after enquiry to find the 'truth'. Well what about the truth foir these two families and the scores of others injured in that cowardly bomb?? Are republicans going to let them know the truth which would save costly enquires?