Petition to HM Gov to stop the Prosecutions Of Soldiers who served on OP BANNER

Not to me. I never commited unlawful acts whilst on tour.

If these people are the same then they've nothing to fear.
 
Not to me. I never commited unlawful acts whilst on tour.

If these people are the same then they've nothing to fear.
I think you are missing the point. If there is an amnesty for the terrorists, there should also be one for the military. It is not a case of 'nothing to fear' but 'the truth may have been distorted over the years'. See that latest attempt to possibly do thirteen SF for carrying out an ambush on two members of PIRA going equipped for assassination.
 
I think you are missing the point. If there is an amnesty for the terrorists, there should also be one for the military. It is not a case of 'nothing to fear' but 'the truth may have been distorted over the years'. See that latest attempt to possibly do thirteen SF for carrying out an ambush on two members of PIRA going equipped for assassination.

What amnesty? All I'm aware of is the release of prisoners under the GFA and the fück up with letters giving assurances certain terrorists would not be prosecuted. Outside of this it still stands that any crime that has not resulted in a conviction can still do so - there is no amnesty on these crimes.

If a member of the armed forces has acted unlawfully at any time then they should be treated accordingly. If the powers that be don't wish it to happen then hide it, burn every piece of information if you want to protect people from the law.
 
D

Deleted 60082

Guest
I think you are missing the point. If there is an amnesty for the terrorists, there should also be one for the military. It is not a case of 'nothing to fear' but 'the truth may have been distorted over the years'. See that latest attempt to possibly do thirteen SF for carrying out an ambush on two members of PIRA going equipped for assassination.

Actually, the 'forgiven' letters have been overturned.
 
Actually, the 'forgiven' letters have been overturned.
Really? When? Whilst Theresa Villiers said that the gov't would no longer stand by the letters, she also said that there was no guarantee' that the government could prevent a future "abuse of process" or the collapse of a trial'.
 
Last edited:
What amnesty? All I'm aware of is the release of prisoners under the GFA and the fück up with letters giving assurances certain terrorists would not be prosecuted. Outside of this it still stands that any crime that has not resulted in a conviction can still do so - there is no amnesty on these crimes.

If a member of the armed forces has acted unlawfully at any time then they should be treated accordingly. If the powers that be don't wish it to happen then hide it, burn every piece of information if you want to protect people from the law.
I see what you are saying the difference is that there will be no-one actively looking for evidence against those that were released under the GFA or given the OTR letters, whilst others are looking for leads (albeit spurious and vexatious) against the military. Yes, if the cases are genuine, they deserve to go down, you may look back at my posts ref Marine A and the SAS Fuckwit. If they were legitimately carrying out legal orders they should not be hounded by trouble makers from over the water.
 
The same does happen to Op HERRICK law breakers, if detected. There were no helmet cams or mobile phones on Op BANNER in my day.
Correct in reference to comparing Op Banner to more recent deployments.

However, I'm in agreement that thanks to Mr Blair and his previous letter activity the spineless political establishment would be prepared to give in to terrorists than support HMF.*




*Besides, making soldiers redundant makes for a cheaper litgation outcome.
 

jboldie

Old-Salt
Correct in reference to comparing Op Banner to more recent deployments.

However, I'm in agreement that thanks to Mr Blair and his previous letter activity the spineless political establishment would be prepared to give in to terrorists than support HMF.*




*Besides, making soldiers redundant makes for a cheaper litgation outcome.
Rarely have I seen a post with which I so thoroughly agree.
 
Not to me. I never commited unlawful acts whilst on tour.

If these people are the same then they've nothing to fear.

Depends on the situation. If someone has clearly committed a serious offence, they should be held to account. If no-win no-fee lawyers are dragging up the intricate details of every incident until they get a ping, soldiers should be spared that.

The definition of 'lawful' can also be tricky, particularly when it comes to killing folk.
 
May I ask all ARRSE users to sign this Petition. Remember that in a few years time the same might happen to those who served on Herrick or other recent Ops.

Many Thanks
SB


https://www.change.org/p/rt-hon-dav...r-ni?after_sign_exp=member_sponsored_donation
That's not going to happen. If it did, it would mean the Government having to 'donate' all of our Rifle 5.56 to Sierra Leone like they did with the S*R as a 'gift' (destroy evidence)(allegedly)
After the amount of money spent on refurbs and HK improvements, I think we're safe for a few years yet
 
M

MotorBoat

Guest
What amnesty? All I'm aware of is the release of prisoners under the GFA and the fück up with letters giving assurances certain terrorists would not be prosecuted. Outside of this it still stands that any crime that has not resulted in a conviction can still do so - there is no amnesty on these crimes.

If a member of the armed forces has acted unlawfully at any time then they should be treated accordingly. If the powers that be don't wish it to happen then hide it, burn every piece of information if you want to protect people from the law.

Surely the senior officers that ordered the 13 to carry out the pre-emptive killings should be the ones hauled over the coals?

Edited to add

My bold this is a truly poor selection of words
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Latest Threads

Top