On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 19:16:13 +0100, "JAT"
 wrote:

>
>"Ex_OWM"  wrote in message
>news:3khcr4Fucqc3U1@individual.net...
>>
>> "JAT"  wrote in message
>> news:42e3714f$0$26079$ed2619ec@ptn-nntp-reader01.plus.net...
>> >
>>
>>
>> > Lets add 3) that the IRA were using their usual tactic of firing from
>> > behind
>> > civilians.
>>
>> Even if that were true, doe that mean it was ok for the soldiers to
>> calluosly shoot dead the unarmed civilians between them and the gunmen?
>>
>Of course not. But the unarmed civilians could have been hit when the army
>were shooting at the cowardly scum behind them!

Who was that then?

What is your evidence for believing that there was 'cowardly scum
behind them'?

Nik

"Republican"  wrote in message 
news:ibqcp3dgup4m2u493t4mmuovakclo1gm2b@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 25 Jul 2005 19:16:13 +0100, "JAT"
>  wrote:
[...]

>>Of course not. But the unarmed civilians could have been hit when the army
>>were shooting at the cowardly scum behind them!
>
> Who was that then?
>
> What is your evidence for believing that there was 'cowardly scum
> behind them'?
>
> Nik

Don't tell him Pike!

-- 
Falcon:
fide, sed cui vide. (L)