It’s the same old Unionist story…

The Unionist/Loyalist response to the findings of the Saville Report have so far been characteristic. “It’s one-eyed”, one claimed. Another demanded, “What about the rest of the Troubles”? Jeffrey Donaldson was typical,

“The difficulty is that we have the truth on one side, but not the truth on the other.

“We don’t know the truth about what Martin McGuinness and the IRA were doing on that day.

“While we regret every death… we must not lose sight of the need for balance.”

Balance? What of it?

Has-been Reg Empey of the tired UUP had this to say

“In the days before Bloody Sunday, two RUC officers – Peter Gilgunn and David Montgomery – were shot dead in the Creggan area of the city. Their families have not received justice.”

Yes but these people were killed by agents of the State, not by armed guerillas. There’s a big, big difference.

Trimble twists,

It would be perverse if the events of Bloody Sunday were used to justify those unjustifiable events that PIRA launched in the 1970s.

Again, these were state-sponsored killings. By the way, what about all the names of supposed Republicans that were passed to Loyalist paramilitaries by the RUC?

Unionist splitter McAllister, on the other hand, paints a selectivised picture of history,

Thus today’s jamboree over the Saville report throws into very sharp relief the unacceptable and perverse hierarchy of victims which the preferential treatment of ‘Bloody Sunday’ has created.

Yes but what about civil rights? Weren’t the Catholic community entitled to these? What about the rampant gerrymandering that was typical of Unionist controlled municipal councils?

My question to all of these people would be “How many Unionists and Loyalists were shot to death by the British Army for simply protesting”? I’m willing to bet that I get no reply. Furthermore, why did the Army send in the Parachute Regiment, wasn’t that a little heavy-handed?

One-sided? It seems the Unionists don’t know the meaning of the word.



Filed under Ireland

2 responses to “It’s the same old Unionist story…

  1. General Sir Mike Jackson, the erstwhile head of the British army, was the ground commander on that faithful day we remember as Bloody Sunday.
    How did this man get to the top of the army, why is there no information in the press about his involvement. Did his silence, convienent loss of memory or involement in a cover up get him to the top. WE MUST KNOW. The Saville report CANnot be the end. It should be the end of the beginning!!!!!!!!!

    • Well, his rise through the ranks was pretty rapid; I’d say he kept schtum on the whole affair. I also reckon this went right to the highest levels of government too. Did Whitelaw know about this? You bet he did!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s