-Caveat Lector-
>From The Irish Times
> Friday, September 17, 1999
>
> Central plank of
> Widgery knocked away
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> The forensic evidence in the Widgery inquiry was "worthless", according to new
> independent forensic information. There is also a suspicion that British
> soldiers deliberately used dumdum bullets on Bloody Sunday. Gerry Moriarty
> reports
>
>
> Last year, on the anniversary of Bloody Sunday, the Government published an
> analysis of the Widgery Report in which it stated that one of its key findings
> was "grotesque and unjust and contrary to the "credible evidence" available at
> the time.
>
> Yesterday, new forensic material assembled at the behest of Lord Saville, the
> successor to Lord Widgery, attested to the strength of the Government's
> assertion.
>
> Lord Widgery's suggestion that some of the 14 people killed and the 13 wounded
> in Derry 27 years ago might have handled or been in the vicinity of guns or
> bombs was effectively repudiated by forensic experts appointed by Lord Saville's
> team.
>
> Conclusion 10 of the Widgery Report of 1972 states: "None of the deceased or
> wounded is proved to have been shot whilst handling a firearm or bomb. Some are
> wholly acquitted of complicity in such action; but there is a strong suspicion
> that some others had been firing weapons or handling bombs in the course of the
> afternoon and that yet others had been closely supporting them."
>
> It was this paragraph that allowed elements of the British establishment to
> persist with its claim, expressed directly or through a telling nod and wink,
> that what happened on Bloody Sunday was justified. It was also the paragraph
> that caused most offence to the wounded and the families of the dead.
>
> The element of suspicion against the victims is pervasive throughout the Widgery
> report. In his carefully crafted document, he created an impression of guilt
> while speaking of the absence of proof of guilt.
>
> Lord Widgery chose to believe the evidence of the soldiers responsible for the
> killings. This may be understandable. Before beginning his inquiry he was
> reminded by the then Tory prime minister, Ted Heath, that the British army was
> "in Northern Ireland fighting not only a military war but a propaganda war".
>
> But what was an exercise in damage limitation has for the past 27 years been
> gradually and incrementally discredited. There was a radical acceleration of
> that process yesterday when solicitors for the families released the new
> material given to them by the Saville inquiry.
>
> Crucial to the Widgery Report, effectively exonerating the British army, was
> evidence given by former Northern Ireland Office forensic expert Dr John Martin
> of lead traces on the bodies.
>
> But three British scientists who re-examined Dr Martin's evidence - Dr John
> Lloyd, Dr R.T. Shepherd and Mr Kevin O'Callaghan - judged his findings to be
> suspect. Dr Martin had found that many of the victims were exposed to lead
> particles discharged by firearms.
>
> Dr Lloyd, in his report, found that Dr Martin's evidence was "worthless". Dr
> Martin himself, in a statement to the Saville inquiry, questioned some of his
> own findings of 27 years ago.
>
> Dr Lloyd was critical of the forensic methodology of 1972, and suggested that
> what he and his two scientific colleagues had discovered should have been found
> at the time of the Widgery inquiry.
>
> Dr Lloyd said it was "profoundly disturbing" that a single particle of lead on a
> hand swab should have been considered as significant evidence that a person had
> been handling a firearm or been in the vicinity of a discharging firearm.
>
> The scientists complained that the possibility of cross-contamination was not
> taken into account. For example, some of the victims were taken away in an army
> personnel carrier which was almost certain to contain lead traces that could
> have been transferred to them.
>
> Moreover, the lead traces found on the victims could have come, according to the
> experts, from a multitude of sources such as the victims' workplaces, from
> petrol emissions, lead in plumbing, metal sheeting, paintwork, bottle tops,
> fishing tackle, etc.
>
> Eyewitness accounts of Bloody Sunday spoke of some of the victims being shot
> while they lay on the ground, while pleading for mercy, or while running away.
> They told of James Wray being shot dead almost casually as he lay wounded in the
> Glenfada Park area.
>
> Lord Widgery came to no such conclusion, although he went as far as to say that
> the firing of the soldiers in Glenfada, where four people were killed, "bordered
> on the reckless".
>
> The new forensic evidence points to something worse than reckless. It states
> that it was "most likely" that Mr Wray was shot as he lay on the ground. There
> is also evidence to suggest that some soldiers may have doctored their bullets
> so that they would fragment on impact, causing maximum injury. Lawyers for the
> victims said this was evidence of the soldiers using dumdum bullets, which are
> contrary to the Geneva Convention.
>
> The Government, in January last year, apparently based on its own forensic
> evidence, said Conclusion 10 was "wholly unwarranted, unsustained by the
> evidence then or now and an unjustified calumny against the victims".
>
> It added: "The victims suffered the double injustice of being unlawfully killed
> and having their reputations sullied for the purpose of exculpating the actions
> of those responsible for the deaths."
>
> What emerged yesterday has gone a considerable distance to correcting that
> wrong. What still has to be established is - as at least one member of the
> Parachute Regiment in Derry on Bloody Sunday has alleged - whether the soldiers
> were acting under specific military and/or political orders on January 30th,
> 1972.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>From TheBelfastTelegraph
www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/today/sep16/Opinion/garry.ncml
> Why the Agreement may fail
> <Picture>
> By Philip McGarry
> <Picture>
> As the review of the Agreement commences there is much pessimism about the
> prospects of success. Perhaps Senator George Mitchell can rescue a
> disintegrating political process. But if the Agreement does fail it will be due
> to two related issues. <Picture: test> There is firstly the fundamental flaw at
> the heart of the Agreement in which division is reinforced rather than
> minimised, and secondly the failure of those parties which signed the Agreement
> to deliver on their promises. <Picture: test> The Good Friday Agreement is
> primarily about conflict management rather than conflict resolution. The two
> Governments and the main protagonists in essence saw it as a deal between two
> distinct groups of people. <Picture: test> The whole process is based upon the
> underlying premise that people must place themselves (or if they don't they will
> be placed!) in one of two mutually opposing political identities, either
> Catholic/nationalist or Protestant/unionist. <Picture: test> In Ireland today
> religion, rather than being a matter of private faith, has become an issue of
> political identity. <Picture: test> The structure of the Assembly in which
> voting requires the support of 50% of nationalists and 50% of unionists requires
> politicians first of all to decide if they are "one side or the other".
> <Picture: test> There is no room for "dissenters" in this Agreement!The language
> throughout the Agreement emphasises the concept of "the two communities" and
> "the two traditions". There is a clear lack of recognition for non-sectarian
> Catholics and Protestants who, like Catholics and Protestants throughout the
> rest of the world, share common values and principles. <Picture: test> Our
> society is becoming ever more polarised. Most residential areas are becoming
> more segregated. This summer has witnessed more and more kerbstones painted in
> partisan colours, graffiti on walls and flags on public property. The aim is to
> mark out territory as the exclusive preserve of unionists or nationalists.
> Bodies such as the DOE have done shamefully little to tackle this growing
> problem. <Picture: test> While there has been a major reduction in the level of
> violence since 1994 one doesn't have to go far beneath the surface to recognise
> the increasing divisions (go and feel the tension in Portadown). We are moving
> rapidly towards a society based upon separation rather than sharing. <Picture:
> test> The only way the Agreement can work in the long term is if it is built on
> the solid foundations of an integrated society at peace with itself. <Picture:
> test> Notwithstanding the above criticism the Agreement was based upon an
> apparent willingness to move towards an era of political co-operation. Today we
> find the Agreement under threat, not primarily from the anti Agreement parties,
> but because the parties which signed the Agreement have failed to live up to
> their promises. <Picture: test> The UUP accepted the principle of an Executive
> in which Sinn Fein would be included. There is no specific linkage in the
> Agreement between setting up an Executive and decommissioning. Alliance believes
> that if the Unionists had, had the courage to set up an Executive in the autumn
> of 1998 many of the current difficulties could have been avoided. <Picture:
> test> Sinn Fein committed itself to "non-violence and exclusively peaceful and
> democratic means" and "a complete unequivocal ceasefire". Their failure either
> to prevent or to condemn the five murders carried out by the IRA since the
> Agreement, and the ever spiralling number of beatings, shootings, threats and
> exclusions illustrate Sinn Fein's ambivalent commitment to the Agreement.
> <Picture: test> From the very start of the Talks Process in 1996, which took
> place under the Mitchell principles of democracy and non violence, both
> Governments have largely ignored the systematic violence and intimidation of the
> IRA/UVF/UFF. <Picture: test> This has continued to be the case since Good Friday
> and the paramilitaries, knowing that the Governments will not sanction them for
> their activities, have continued to beat, to shoot and to murder. <Picture:
> test> The recent decision that the abduction and murder of Charles Bennett does
> not constitute a breach of the IRA ceasefire highlights the consequences of
> compromising the basic principles of moral and political integrity. <Picture:
> test> Is it really the position of the Governments that the IRA can shoot
> Catholics but not Protestants, and that the UVF/UDA cn shoot Protestants but not
> Catholics?If the Agreement is to survive it is essential that the two
> Governments jointly reaffirm their commitment to the Mitchell principles of
> non-violence and democracy and stage explicity that intimidation, maiming,
> shooting and killing actually constitute a breach of a ceasefire. <Picture:
> test> All parties to the Agreement must now genuinely commit themselves to
> implement in full the pledges they gave on Good Friday last year. <Picture:
> test> If action is taken in these areas then we can make progress. However we
> must leave ourselves in no doubt whatsoever that if we are to achieve a genuine
> and lasting peace and a healthy integrated society then we need a much more
> radical shift in thinking than we have yet seen. <Picture: test> *Philip McGarry
> is President of the Alliance Party. <Picture: test>
>
> © Copyright Belfast Telegraph Newspapers Ltd.
A<>E<>R
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The only real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking
new landscapes but in having new eyes. -Marcel Proust
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said
it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your
own reason and your common sense." --Buddha
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
A merely fallen enemy may rise again, but the reconciled
one is truly vanquished. -Johann Christoph Schiller,
German Writer (1759-1805)
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
It is preoccupation with possessions, more than anything else, that
prevents us from living freely and nobly. -Bertrand Russell
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Everyone has the right...to seek, receive and impart
information and ideas through any media and regardless
of frontiers."
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
"Always do sober what you said you'd do drunk. That will
teach you to keep your mouth shut."
--- Ernest Hemingway
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Forwarded as information only; no endorsement to be presumed
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material
is distributed without charge or profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information
for non-profit research and educational purposes only.
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
