jmm@bonnie.UUCP (Joe Mcghee) (12/03/84)
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! On December 3, 1984 at 9:00 pm (EDST) NBC-TV will broadcast a fictional drama about Northern Ireland called "Children in the Crossfire". But already a storm of controversy has arisen concerning the factual misrepresentation and outright deceptions perpetrated in this story. Stories concerning the furor over this program have already appeared in the New York Times and the producer of the program, Frank Prendergast, has asked that a disclaimer be inserted stating that this fictional draama is not a true story. However, this request for a disclaimer by the producer has been declared inadequate and insufficient by those protesting the program, because such disclaimers usually have little impact on the viewing public and fictional stories are often taken for fact by a large segment of the viewing public, especially when the fictional story is based upon current events. Remember the radio broadcast of "War of the Worlds"? For instance, the story starts off with a group of Nationalist youths playing football while being watched over by a British soldier. When the ball rolls off the field, a British soldier runs out to retrieve it for the boys and is shot in the back by the IRA. In actual fact, no such incident has ever taken place in Northern Ireland, nor is it likely to ever happen given the the current attitude of the British Army which sees itself as having the god-given mission of harassing the Nationalist youth of Northern Ireland at every available opportunity. On the other hand, an actual incident which will probably never be reported by NBC-TV or any other major network is the following: a group of Nationalist youths were playing football while a British soldier was watching them. As they were kicking the ball around the field, the soldier shot the football with his rifle. In the British Army, this probably passes for a joke, especially when Nationalists are on the receiving end of the joke. However, if Nationalists were to play the same type of "joke" on the British Army, it would be regarded as an act of life-threatening terrorism, which is exactly how this incident was interpreted by the Nationalist community of Northern Ireland. Another event which you will probably never see portrayed by network television was the killing of Stephen Geddis, age 10, by the British Army shortly after returning from a trip to the U.S. to heal the scars of war on a small boy. Nor will you see the stories of any of the other children killed by the British Army portrayed on network television. Another story you will never see portrayed on network television is the story of David Seaman, a British soldier, who called a press conference in Dublin on October 23, 1971. He was a member of a British Army bomb squad whose job it was to plant bombs randomly and explode them in order to blame these bombings on the IRA and thus discredit them. He confessed that the Special Air Services (SAS) had exploded random bombs in Northern Ireland for which the IRA was subsequently blamed. David Seaman left the news conference with the announcement that he was returning to Northern Ireland to gather further evidence. He was later found dead in a ditch in Northern Ireland. David Blundy, a reporter for the London Sunday Times gave a general summary of "dirty tricks" operations carried out by British personnel in an article published on March 13, 1977: setting off "IRA" bombs, planting ammunition on suspects, using non-standard weaponry (like that used by the IRA) to shoot at civilians, carrying out "sectarian assassinations" and discrediting politicians deemed hostile to government policy. The SAS is a secret military organization. The British Army does not publish the identity of soldiers in the SAS. All military awards, medals and decorations for this unit are given out in private restricted ceremonies and those who are killed in the SAS are buried in a restricted graveyard on an army base in Wales. The motto of the SAS is "Who dares, wins". From the notebook of: Winston Smith Ministry of Truth Airstrip One (in real life J. M. McGhee clyde!bonnie!jmm) "In time of war Truth is so precious that it should always be surrounded by a bodyguard of lies." - Winston Churchill from a wartime lecture to Josef Stalin on the need for secrecy.
wetcw@pyuxa.UUCP (T C Wheeler) (12/04/84)
There goes the IRA apologist again. Once again I say there is no excuse for defending a bunch of yellow-bellied terrorists such as the IRA. Terrorism is just that, terrorism. No matter who does it, there is no excusing the action. I don't plan to watch the program mentioned because I already know it will be tearjerker and I don't care for tearjerkers. I know, and I am sure most people know, that this is not a true to life story. But, to use its showing as a platform to spread more hate is stupid. Get off it McGhee, your not fooling anyone. T. C. Wheeler
sofo@ihuxm.UUCP (Terry Bermes) (12/05/84)
T. C. Wheeler refers to the IRA as a bunch of yellow-bellied terrorists.
No, I disagree. While I do have problems with some of their tactics, I feel
that they certainly have a legitimate cause. No one considered the French
resistance underground to be a group of terrorists as they tried to expel
an unwanted occupancy. If England refused to leave Northern Ireland, then
the Irish have a right to take their war (and it is a war) to England's
home front. Agreed it is a minority of the Northern Irish who want to be
independent of England, but it was also a minority of American colonists
who also wanted their independence. Is the IRA spreading hatred? Or are
they attempting to get the self-determination that we Americans take for
granted. It is hatred that made a group like the IRA necessary. You can't
deny rights to a portion of the population and then expect them to go
along with it. Northern Irish Catholics must be granted the same rights as
Protestants. Only then will this war cease. That this situation has arisen
at all is indeed tragic.
Terry Bermesperelgut@utai.UUCP (Stephen Perelgut) (12/06/84)
> > > T. C. Wheeler refers to the IRA as a bunch of yellow-bellied terrorists. > No, I disagree. While I do have problems with some of their tactics, I feel > that they certainly have a legitimate cause. Which tactics do you disagree with? - killing horses and innocents to "make a point" - bombing hotels to create a stir - killing people who don't think like you do - firebombing schools - some of the above - all of the above - none of the above. Terrorism is terrorism regardless of the goals. The ends DO NOT justify these means. -- Stephen Perelgut Computer Systems Research Institute, Univ. of Toronto USENET: {decvax,ihnp4,allegra}!utcsrgv!utai!perelgut CSNET: perelgut@Toronto
dss00@amdahl.UUCP (Deepak S. Sabnis) (12/07/84)
> > > You can't > deny rights to a portion of the population and then expect them to go > along with it. Northern Irish Catholics must be granted the same rights as > Protestants. Only then will this war cease. That this situation has arisen > at all is indeed tragic. > > Terry Bermes How about elucidating as to what specific rights are being denied to the catholics in Northern Ireland that are enjoyed by the Protestants there. I was under the impression that the fight was only because the catholics in Northern Ireland do not want to be under British rule, where as the protestants (who I think are in majority) want to stay under the British. -- Deepak S. Sabnis ...!{ihnp4,hplabs,amd,nsc}!amdahl!dss00 (408) 746-6058 **Being IMMORAL is about as close as you can get to being IMMORTAL** (Opinions expressed above are strictly my own :-| )
rjc@ubu.UUCP (Richard Caley) (12/10/84)
> From: sofo@ihuxm.UUCP (Terry Bermes) > Subject: Re: Re: Propaganda/Disinformation Story to be Aired by NBC-TV > > No one considered the French resistance underground to be a group of > terrorists as they tried to expel an unwanted occupancy. Maybe that was because they didn't bomb/shoot at french civilians (as a rule) and because they were,in effect,the army of the government in exile rather than a group of amoral political activists with no scruples about how they further their cause. > If England refused to leave Northern Ireland, then the Irish have a > right to take their war (and it is a war) to England's > home front. ... and if the english say they will leave Ireland then would you support the unionist extemists as *they* blow up civilians in the republic of Ireland? > Agreed it is a minority of the Northern Irish who want to be independent of > England, but it was also a minority of American colonists who also wanted > their independence. There is a difference between a majority who don't actively want independence and a majority who actively find the idea of suddenly becomeing part of a foreign country disturbing (even abhorrent). > Is the IRA spreading hatred? Or are they attempting to get the > self-determination that we Americans take for granted. And what about the self determination of the majority - the republic is fine for catholics but some of it's laws (e.g on contraception) would be oppressive to people who don't see them as moral necessities. > It is hatred that made a group like the IRA necessary. The IRA is not necessary - many (most?) sane campagners for a united Ireland would prefer it not to exist since the violence only hardens the (possably biased) opinions of the protestants in the north that the republic is *not* somewhere they would like to find themselves liveing. > You can't deny rights to a portion of the population and then expect > them to go along with it. Northern Irish Catholics must be granted the > same rights as Protestants. Only then will this war cease. That this > situation has arisen at all is indeed tragic. > > Terry Bermes a) they have exactly the same rights as any other citizen of the united kingdom . b) Tragic yes,but uniteing Ireland would not change the IRA - they would just find annother "cause" and carry on.The situation would be much less tragic if those in other countries (esp. America) who wish to advance the cause of a united Ireland gave their money to campagners who would try to convince those on the other side of the argument rather than shoot them. Now my opinion......... I have none! I lack the information to say if a united Ireland would be a good thing for all concerned (rather than just aesthetically pleasing),but I would say that the solution to the problem lies with bringing the protestants and catholics closer together so they see that the other side are just people and not some form of monster.When this is done any solution would just be an administerative nicety - either the protestants could see the republic as just a different set of beurocrats to collect the income tax,or the catholics could see rule from westminster a no different from Dublin. NOTICE: I take no responcibility for any mangleings of the English language found in the above - can someone write a program for translation from 'Richard-ish' into English? :-) . -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- "In the beginning was a flame ...... " Paul Kantner. .......... mcvax!ukc!flame!ubu!rjc [ Any opinions in the above crawled in while I wasn't looking ]