Follow @PoliticsIE
 
 
 
Page 1 of 27 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 269

Thread: "Death on the Rock": 21 years later and still the official version lives on

  1. #1
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    173
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default "Death on the Rock": 21 years later and still the official version lives on

    David Elstein, 23 November 2009

    Many of us have recently been re-living a key event of 1989, with the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall. I remember it clearly, but an event in the previous year, 1988, is etched even more sharply in my mind: the shooting of three IRA members by an SAS squad on the streets of Gibraltar. As Director of Programmes at Thames Television at the time, I had approved the making of a documentary about the killings by the This Week team: “Death on the Rock”. It was a serious investigation that challenged the official version of events and quite an argument ensued.

    Last month, Christopher Andrew, Professor of History at Cambridge and a leading expert on intelligence services, published “The Defence of the Realm”, a massive official history of MI5. A number of his enthusiastic reviewers suggested he had shed new light on the Gibraltar affair. I decided to check.

  2. #2
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Waterford
    Posts
    1,096
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    I remember the event, the programme and an article in MaGill at the time. Serious questions were raised but never answered and the subsequent inquiry was all spooks, cloaks and daggers.

    The British tabloids at the time spouted anti-Irish jingoism promoting the 'bravery' and 'professionalism' of the under-cover SAS unit that shot and killed the IRA activists. They also vilified and branded as a 'whore' a Spanish lady, resident in Gibraltar, whose eye-witness account given both to the programme makers and to the inquiry was diametrically opposed to that of the anonymous SAS members involved in the shootings which they had claimed were all in self defence.

    There are still questions.

  3. #3
    Politics.ie Member Mitsui2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Between Time and Timbuktu
    Posts
    33,236
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    I actually remember hearing reports of the shootings on the radio news. Was it a Sunday when it happened, or is memory playing tricks? I'd recently returned to Ireland, had no tv and listened a lot to Radio4. Right from the first reports I remember thinking that the account given just didn't add up, and the more details that emerged, the more the holes in the official story became obvious.

    I'm no conspiracy theorist but there was clearly a cover up it always seemed to me. A definite instance of shooting to kill. The original cover story was botched but the British were stuck with it since they'd rushed it out, and from there on it became an increasingly ludicrous effort to paper over the cracks. A classic example of being in a hole and being more or less forced to keep on digging.

  4. #4
    Politics.ie Member Mitsui2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Between Time and Timbuktu
    Posts
    33,236
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Forgot to say that the first reports, as best I recall, definitely mentioned a "shootout" and a bomb, neither of which was true.

    Thanks for the link, which refreshed the memory uncomfortably about the incident itself and the murderous period it ushered in. I remember at the time thinking that I finally understood what the phrase 'febrile atmosphere' really meant. As best I can remember, everything in your account is documented fact (though much is of course officially denied). I used to have a copy of Private Eye's "Death On the Rock" special, which I wish I still had.
    Last edited by Mitsui2; 26th November 2009 at 12:15 PM. Reason: sp, omissions

  5. #5
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    46,555
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Of course the fact that the IRA, of which the Gibralter 3 were active members, had no problem with shooting without warning those whom they deemed to be combatants in their conflict, goes without comment from those here who are lionising them and claiming foul play by the SAS.

    Sauce for the goose, lads - if you're gonna give it, then be prepared to take it.
    "So how are things at the Campaign for the Freedom of Information, by the way?" "Sorry, I can't talk about that"

  6. #6
    Politics.ie Member Clanrickard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Last outpost of freedom
    Posts
    31,863
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hiding behind a poster View Post
    Of course the fact that the IRA, of which the Gibralter 3 were active members, had no problem with shooting without warning those whom they deemed to be combatants in their conflict, goes without comment from those here who are lionising them and claiming foul play by the SAS.

    Sauce for the goose, lads - if you're gonna give it, then be prepared to take it.
    While I agree with the sentiments it is worth bearing in mind one substantial difference. The SAS are part of the British army and therefore servants of the state (or the Queen in Britain). They should be upholding and seen to be upholding law and order. The IRA are criminals, outside the law in fact they are dedicated to breaking the law. You cannot say that just because the IRA do it it is ok for forces of law and order in Britain and Ireland to do it

  7. #7

    Default

    I really don't see the big deal, 3 leading members of PIRA on Active Service (Or maybe they were eco tourist's eh?) in Gibraltar get taken out by British Special Forces, PIRA had declared war on The British and you know what happens in wars? Call it Shoot to kill or whatever you like but it's mainly the supporters of PIRA thats crying foul even though PIRA themselves used the dirtiest of tricks to kill and maim, They never gave any warnings to their victims before gunning them down or blowing them to pieces, If you fight with fire you get burnt...simples.

  8. #8
    Politics.ie Member Mitsui2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Between Time and Timbuktu
    Posts
    33,236
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Clanrickard View Post
    While I agree with the sentiments it is worth bearing in mind one substantial difference. The SAS are part of the British army and therefore servants of the state (or the Queen in Britain). They should be upholding and seen to be upholding law and order. The IRA are criminals, outside the law in fact they are dedicated to breaking the law. You cannot say that just because the IRA do it it is ok for forces of law and order in Britain and Ireland to do it
    This would be pretty much my position too. The bombers went to Gibraltar to plant a bomb. If they saw themselves as soldiers then the possibility or even likelihood of death goes with the job. They went to plant a bomb & they were stopped - end of.

    It was the complete hypocrisy of the UK establishment that very much stuck in my craw at the time - that and the p1ss-poor nature of the story they cobbled together to cover up what I think I would otherwise have seen as a legitimate exercise in self defence.

    The important point far as I'm concerned is that in the course of this cover-up the entire panoply of UK justice and "fair play" was - for neither the first nor the last time - ultimately dragged into disrepute and made a mockery of (yet again).

    If that's what "investigations" are for, fine by me: but those who use investigations in this fashion cannot then turn around and expect their demonstrably notional "attachment" to such values to be respected or even believed in. Cover-ups on such a scale do enormous damage to the fabric of public trust, and public trust is ultimately far more important for a functioning democracy than any government's glorified spin - as we should be all too aware of in our own little kleptocracy.

  9. #9
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Waterford
    Posts
    1,096
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by conspiracy theorist View Post
    I really don't see the big deal, 3 leading members of PIRA on Active Service (Or maybe they were eco tourist's eh?) in Gibraltar get taken out by British Special Forces, PIRA had declared war on The British and you know what happens in wars? Call it Shoot to kill or whatever you like but it's mainly the supporters of PIRA thats crying foul even though PIRA themselves used the dirtiest of tricks to kill and maim, They never gave any warnings to their victims before gunning them down or blowing them to pieces, If you fight with fire you get burnt...simples.
    Actually, I haven't read anything in any of the posts on this thread that can be construed as pro-IRA (in any of its guises) sentiment. Certainly, I would neither support nor condone any of their activities including the Gibralter "mission".

    I would strongly, however, condemn and oppose Britain's history regarding anti-terrorist activities and subsequent cover-ups. Bloody Sunday? Birmingham 6? Guildford 4? Iraq?

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mitsui2 View Post
    It was the complete hypocrisy of the UK establishment that very much stuck in my craw at the time - that and the p1ss-poor nature of the story they cobbled together to cover up what I think I would otherwise have seen as a legitimate exercise in self defence.
    This is the core point here, does the end justifies the means. I think all right minded people will have no problem with the end result here, three less terrorists to worry about and the lives of the innocent have have preserved but the means were open open to debate. I believe that if the SAS members who successfully intercepted the terrorists thought that their lives were under threat or that they could no arrest the terrorists with the potential loss of innocent lives, then they were quite within their rights, however if an arrest was possible without loss of life then that should have been the preffered option.
    Thank you for the six thousand likes.

Page 1 of 27 1234511 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •