Omagh Town, where a Real IRA car bomb killed 29 people, including a woman pregnant with twins, on August 15, 1998

This morning.

Via RTE:

A High Court judge in Belfast has found there was a “real prospect” the Real IRA attack in Omagh in 1998 could have been prevented.

Mr Justice Horner told Belfast High Court:

I am satisfied that certain grounds when considered separately or together give rise to plausible allegations that there was bombing.

“These grounds involve, inter alia, the consideration of terrorist activity on both sides of the border by prominent dissident terrorist republicans leading up to the Omagh bomb.

“I am therefore satisfied that the threshold under Article 2 ECHR (European Convention on Human Rights) to require the investigation of those allegations has been reached.”

‘Real prospect ‘ Omagh bomb could have been prevented (RTÉ)

RollingNews

Sponsored Link

15 thoughts on “Preventable

  1. Lisa

    Not surprizing. It’s been said for years that it was allowed to happen to further the peace process.

  2. RuilleBuille

    We know there were three informers involved in this attack. One has publicly stated he told the RUC.

    Not one RUC man was injured despite dozens being at the scene.

    1. Scundered

      Well of course he’s going to blame the cops, how’s about placing blame on the Neanderthals who think it’s ok to bomb a town centre regardless of who said what

  3. Diddy

    It was a botched job as I remember. The warming said the bomb was at the other end of the town so people were moved to the street the car bomb was actually on. Maximum F up on t part of the provos.

    1. Fearganainm

      Your post is a botched job, unless its purpose was to deliberately attribute blame to an organisation that wasn’t involved.

      In terms of historical accuracy you’ve achieved an ‘F’

      1. Diddy

        Don’t get salty friend, the IRA or formers members of in new offshoot bombed Omagh. A crew Gerry Adams approved of 10 years before I’m sure

        1. Fearganainm

          So you were clowning around.

          The historical record relating to Omagh records who bore responsibility for the massacre of innocents there and it was not, of course, the organisation that you alleged it was.

          That’s a simple fact. It’s on the record. Your wanting to establish a link where no link exists is your own issue, it has nothing to do with the facts of the event.

          It’s been so extensively covered that you’d have to have been living in a cave for the last twenty-odd years not to know precisely what happened. Or else to be one of those boring, obsessive characters who tries to convert any event into a stick to beat a particular party with. That’s not a good look.

          1. Scundered

            An easy slip to make, considering the organisation he included did EXACTLY the same things many times… Let’s not assume either one of them has any kind of integrity over the other, they are all sub-humans.

  4. Fearganainm

    Not a ‘slip’ considering the story of Omagh has been so thoroughly documented.

    And you know, of course, that members of the British army killed many innocent people, as did members of the ‘B’ Specials, the R.U.C., the U.D.R. and assorted Loyalist paramilitaries (the latter groupings sometimes containing individuals who were also members of the ‘B’ Specials, the R.U.C., the U.D.R. and the British army). And you’re equally well aware that some of the Loyalist murderers were aided and directed by elements of the R.U.C. and British security/intelligence services. If someone’s going to play whataboutery with the Omagh massacre then they may as well be fully inclusive, eh? Your list of ‘sub-humans’ ought to be enormous, to be fair.

    1. Scundered

      What is your point exactly, are you trying to defend terrorism? I don’t draw the line anywhere you see, or jump to the defence of any side, terrorism is terrorism. Is that clear enough for you? And if you are really of the belief that the provos and the Real IRA are totally unrelated then you’re very naive. Do you honestly think they’re not connected?

  5. Fearganainm

    As usual, you jump in and claim someone is stating something that they are not stating. You join ‘Diddy’ in trying to weave a connection between the Provisional I.R.A. and the Omagh bombing, that is precisely what you’re here doing. How many of the perpetrators were former altar boys? It is well known that the people responsible were opposed to the political direction being taken by Sinn Féin, refused to accept the Provisional I.R.A. ceasefire and had, in fact, broken away from that organisation. There is one question to be answered, who carried out and claimed responsibility for the Omagh atrocity? It was not, as you well know, the Provisional I.R.A. To try to claim otherwise is dishonest and yourself and ‘Diddy’ are here being dishonest if you wish to try to argue otherwise. Whatever semantics you wish to employ about ‘former members’ – and not all the alleged perpetrators had connections of any kind to the Provisional I.R.A. – it is dishonest to attribute the murders at Omagh to an organisation that did not carry them out. Have you some kind of problem dealing with facts?

    1. Scundered

      “you jump in and claim someone is stating something that they are not stating”

      What is it that I claimed you stated?

      It’s amazing and alarming that you think their history of membership has no relevance in this. My earliest memory is witnessing a car bomb as a child (and not knowing if my parents were still alive), and being close enough to have windows shatter beside me in another two instances, so maybe if you had lived close to the action you’d be less defensive about these groups and a little more outraged like most people who just wanted to live a normal life

  6. Fearganainm

    I wonder could you take a good look at yourself. Broadsheet posts an article about a High Court judge’s finding that there are grounds to believe that the horror of Omagh could have been prevented. Certain things should flow from such a finding, chief among them being investigations into terrorist activity on both sides of the border in the run up to and on the day of the attack in Omagh. Also highly relevant should be an investigation into what security forces/services on both sides of the border knew in advance and on the day of the attack.

    Twenty nine people, plus two unborn children, perished in the attack. Hundreds more people were injured, some of them sustaining amputations and other grievous life-changing wounds. The dead included British citizens, Spanish citizens and Irish citizens from both sides of the border. Surely the injured and the bereaved have some right to know the truth of the circumstances in which they were injured or in which their loved ones lost their lives?

    Those are the logical questions that flow from the announcement Broadsheet carried.

    But oh no, you have to row in behind ‘Diddy’ and blow smoke. Not for you any addressing of the possibilty of justice for the injured and bereaved. Instead you opt for muddying the waters and trying to float the claim that another organisation was responsible for the atrocity.

    Why are you doing that? Are you trying to divert attention from the actual perpetrators? By inserting a false attribution what do you hope to achieve? Nobody believes you. Not the Omagh injured and bereaved, not the PSNI, not the British or Irish governments, not the UK intelligence services or their Irish equivalents. No historian or journalist believes you. None of the hundreds of thousands of documents that have been produced in numerous investigations supports you.

    Members of British intelligence services were listening to the bombers’ chit-chat over the ‘phone as they made their way in bugged vehicles into Omagh. An Garda Síochána, via at least one of their own informants, knew that something was going down. Establishing who knew what, and who they did or did not share their information with, could possibly lead to better operational practices that served to prevent the likelihood of such horror occurring again.

    But you want to blow smoke. How curious it is that you want to employ obfuscation. How curious it is that you don’t seem to be capable of understanding that the grouping that did carry out the atrocity had its own command and control, its own organisation. Its decisions were taken by its own members, not those of any other organisation. And certainly not an organisation that some of those responsible for Omagh may have formerly belonged to.

    ‘Diddy’ seemed to want to name a particular Sinn Féin politician. You seem to just want to throw in a smear for smearing’s sake. It is a contemporary political tactic frequently employed, to resurrect Provisional I.R.A. violence as a means of attempting to ‘politically dirty’ Sinn Féin. However, it is more than stretching it to attempt the tactic when the issue is Omagh and possible state and policing intelligence failures.

    For all your ‘war anecdotes’ – and I suspect that I have a great many more than you do – you’re coming across as rather indifferent to either truth or justice.

    1. Scundered

      Wow, that’s rather a lot of paragraphs of a conversation that happened entirely in your head. Welcome to Tangentsville.

      It doesn’t seem to have sank in for you yet that the people who could have stopped the bomb for sure are the low-life bombers. Yet here you are more worried that other low-life bombers might get their good name smeared, people who must be nice moral citizens now that they stopped bombing folk. That’s quite a stoop and I wish you well in figuring out right from wrong.

      1. Fearganainm

        Once again, unsurprisingly, you omit to address the point of this Broadside article. That is, investigation of any possible failings that may have contributed to the carnage at Omagh.

        Nobody is in any doubt that the ultimate responsibility for the horror of that day rests with those who left a car laden with explosives in the town. They intended the device to explode and it did, with horrific consequences.

        But people are entitled to demand that those tasked with protecting society from such people do their utmost to safeguard that protection. Was that done with relation to the bombing at Omagh? Investigations are required to establish the true facts.

        Your insistence that the current response should be to talk about an organisation that wasn’t responsible is for what purpose, exactly? Are you trying to divert attention from the actual bombers? Or do you imagine that you’re ‘protecting’ the policing and intelligence services from both sides of the border? Are they beyond criticism? Are their methods and mistakes beyond accountability? Do you honestly believe that?

        Some members of the I.R.A. (the Provisional and ‘Official’ versions), were former members of the British army. Some were former members of the Irish army. Some former members of the Provisional I.R.A. were former members of the ‘Official I.R.A.’. Some members of the I.N.L.A. were former members of the ‘Official I.R.A.’ while others were former members of the Provisional I.R.A. Some members of the pre-Official/Provisional I.R.A.-split I.R.A. enjoyed later careers as political representatives at Stormont as well as in Dáil Éireann, as did some members of the post-Official/Provisional I.R.A.-split. These are facts of history, something that you seem determined to avoid.

        I think you’ll find that it’s yourself that has wandered off at a tangent and in doing so you’ve displayed a shocking ignorance of what actually occurred in Omagh and its ongoing implications.

Comments are closed.

Sponsored Link
Broadsheet.ie