Anything Political

[DJ360 6,733]

13 hours ago, Brew said:

On 1/23/2022 at 1:56 AM, DJ360 said:

t would be helpful if you stopped describing my considered and closely argued posts as 'diatribes'.

 

Helpful to whom?

Col, I have always considered your posts to be well written and well thought out, though obviously faithful to the anti-Tory mantra and highly biased.

 

Other than exaggeration there is, invective, tirade, disputation, abuse, castigation and more words I could use. However, the word diatribe along with another you don't like 'hyperbole', seem to be a good fit for the sometimes vitriolic post you make in the political thread.

 

Well that's me told! , though I thought it accurate to replace my 'Rolleyes' emoji which went missing in your quote.

 

I'll spell out my position again.  I am a Democratic Socialist, with the emphasis on Democratic.  I fully recognise the rights of the electorate to hold conservative views on the economy, society etc..which is the democratic way.  Also, as I've long argued, the most important body in this country is not any one political party, or Govt., but Parliament, closely followed in second place by our Independent Judiciary.  Between them, those two protect our Democracy, and our freedom from dictatorship.

 

So..basics out of the way. I thoroughly detest the present Tory Government, as well as the Cameron Govt. before.  I also hated Thatcher with a passion.  I don't hate all those who vote  Tory, but I do find it difficult to grasp how anyone  below the rank of multi-millionaire can see their interests as represented by the Tories in their present form as a borderline criminal enterprise. I sincerely believe that the present Govt. has no real interest in the general population, except insofar as they need to convince them to keep voting Tory. I could go on...at great length,  but it might turn into a hyperbolous diatribe.  

 

So, Jim.  I am genuinely, passionately and implacably opposed to the present Tory Govt., which I see as very obviously  crooked. I also see what they are up to in trying to erode Democracy.  I'm also not entirely surprised that some people (not quite me..yet.. but there is time..) regard the Metropolitan Police and only half jokingly,  as the 'Military Wing' of the Tory Party.

 

Which finally brings me to my point...   Which is Jim, that I take your point..

I'm afraid that I'm not going to remove the passion from my political posts, it's far too important for me to do that.. , but I will try to avoid the vitriol and abuse aimed at the likes of Johnson, and stick to the facts...which are not much different.

 

I'm not aware that I'm vitriolic or abusive to fellow 'Stalgians and I certainly don't intend to be, but if that perception exists I apologise.

[DJ360 6,733]

Meanwhile the Dear Leader, the RH Boris Johnson, our esteemed Prime Minister, has yet another problem..

So apart from Partygate, and Blackmail/Bullying Gate, he now has 'Islamophobia Gate'

 

So many gates, you'd think he'd have found his way out by now.....

[PeverilPeril 3,288]

I gave DJ a like, not because I agree to what he is saying but simply because he explains his political beliefs and makes his cases quite clearly. No one liners or 'worrabahts'.

I've said this before - the Brew and DJ debates are interesting, educational and enjoyable to read.... and a good example of how arguments can be conducted respectfully. Wish I had their level of acumen to join in 

[radfordred 6,284]

14 hours ago, DJ360 said:

I thought it accurate to replace my 'Rolleyes' emoji which went missing in your quote

 

Quite right DJ, some underhanded jiggery pokery going on with these quoted posts, must be a Tory thing 

[DJ360 6,733]

They'll have flogged it to a mate... It's what they do....

[DJ360 6,733]

Interesting developments yesterday in the ongoing pantomime of 'Partygate' etc.

 

1. Johnson 'welcoming' the decision by Cressida Dick  to set her Metropolitian Police  the task of investigating it all.  Of course he welcomes it because it immediately shuts down much of what Sue Gray will be able to say in her report expected today.  I predict a lengthy investigation and possibly the quiet issuing and swift payment of a few fines.  All of which of course will massively miss the point....

 

2. Rees Mogg on TV last night being typically evasive. His general  thrust was "nothing to see here....arguing about a piece of cake... more important things"  etc.  He went on to quote tensions with Russia and the 'cost of living crisis', yet oddly, he seems less concerned by his own party's attacks on  Parliament, the Judiciary, Citizen's Rights and Democracy.

 

Rees-Mogg's final threat to his own party was that if Johnson fell..an election, by which he clearly meant a General Election, would be required.   Clever, but exceptionally devious thinking on his part, as many in the electorate would not welcome an election at this point, but more importantly, it's more of a threat to his own back benchers, and especially 'Red Wall' MPs, who might be wavering in their support for Johnson.  What an exceptional blend of the incompetent and the devious this Govt. represents.

[DJ360 6,733]

On 1/24/2022 at 8:37 AM, PeverilPeril said:

I gave DJ a like, not because I agree to what he is saying but simply because he explains his political beliefs and makes his cases quite clearly. No one liners or 'worrabahts'.

I've said this before - the Brew and DJ debates are interesting, educational and enjoyable to read.... and a good example of how arguments can be conducted respectfully. Wish I had their level of acumen to join in 

 

PP, I thank you for those comments.

At some point I will lay out  in more detail why I see a qualitative difference between 'traditional' Conservatism, and what I regard as the aberration started by Thatcher and enthusiastically taken to further extremes by Cameron, Johnson et.al.

I disagreed with 'traditional' or 'consensus'  Conservativism, even though I do believe that many thought their approach was better for everyone...and I could respect that.  I absolutely cannot respect  Thatcher, Johnson et.al..and because both their politics and their  behaviour are so obviously at odds with the traditions of the UK Parliament and accepted standards of ministerial behaviour..I'm also forced to question either the motives, the  fundamental principles of those Tory members who have allowed Johnson to become their leader, and then to drag their party into such disrepute..  As so often said.. 'for bad men to succeed, it is only necessary for good men to do nothing..' 

 

Ohhh.. by the way.. I'm quite sure you have more than sufficient 'acumen' to join in.

[DJ360 6,733]

Re: My post..posted at: Posted Wednesday at 12:21 PM

 

I hate to  say 'I told you so...'  But.. err.. I told you so.

 

My reading.., a  PM under intense pressure because everybody knows he is as bent as a 'Nine Bob Note', and a Met Police Commissioner also under intense pressure because her force repeatedly gets revealed as populated with rapists, murderers and the like.

 

They get together to deflect attention from their wrongdoing/incompetence/serial failure.

 

No back scratching here folks. nothing to see.. move on...

 

If you are not concerned by these antics, you do not deserve to live in a democracy.

[Brew 5,423]

There are clever and possible underhand manoeuvres taking place here that appear to use the system against itself. The report is, quite legally, delaying publication whilst a police investigation is ongoing. It is, in these circumstances, normal practice in order to avoid a later claim of prejudice and an unfair trial.

 

There is also the scenario whereby the report is released, and the investigation cancelled for the same prejudicial reasons.

 

It is, as far as I know, the police asking for minimal information to be released.

------------------

2 hours ago, DJ360 said:

a Met Police Commissioner also under intense pressure because her force repeatedly gets revealed as populated with rapists, murderers and the like.

 

 

A bit of an exaggeration there Col? There were 109 convictions in the Met among 43,000 officers -  in eight years! (2010 - 2018).

There were a further 400+ offences committed by officers off-duty.

It may sound a lot, but the number includes minor charges like speeding and driving offences  most have kept their job after facing disciplinary procedures.

Not perfect by any means but not quite as bad as some headlines would have us believe.

[letsavagoo 964]

I am not suggesting for a second that the infamous Boris party was acceptable and am sure that it will lead to his demise very soon but why is Starmer not getting the same level of flak over the office work take away and drinks that he was involved in. Arguable at least Boris was outside where Starmer was in what looked to be a crowded room. I found Starmer’s defence of his ‘do’ in a tv interview quite pathetic. I’m surprised that he hasn’t had the same scrutiny as Boris. I accept that it was Boris made the rules he immediately broke but pot and kettle spring to mind. 

[radfordred 6,284]

As a lifelong Labour voter except the once I voted for whatever party Farage was running, I'm keeping my fingers crossed for Owd Boris & hoping he's not forced out he's done a good job in difficult circumstances.

[Brew 5,423]

Jo Moore was right and while everyone is fussing and fighting over what is, at the end of the day, a quite trivial thing, Draconian laws are creeping though the system.

 

Are they deliberately stirring the pot to make us look the other way? Is it a classic piece of misdirection by the government? Will Boris pull a rabbit out of the hat? Am I paranoid?

 

Yes, I accept lying is hardly trivial, but in the grand scheme of things it's not a hanging offence and Boris is hardly the first to do so.

Blair and WMD still rankles here.

[Jill Sparrow 10,316]

What's the worry? When Vladimir invades Ukraine, as he is almost being goaded into doing by some parties, all this trivia will be small print on page inconsequential.

[LizzieM 9,514]

On our way back from Dorset on Thursday we saw lots of tanks being transported southwards (possibly) to the Docks, seems ominous.  
Also our sons’ company’s airport division have had an URGENT enquiry to upgrade an airport runway in Ukraine.  I hope that talking will calm the situation but not convinced that Boris has ‘Statesman qualities’.  Where are Churchill or Thatcher when we need them.  

[DJ360 6,733]

20 hours ago, Brew said:

There are clever and possible underhand manoeuvres taking place here that appear to use the system against itself. The report is, quite legally, delaying publication whilst a police investigation is ongoing. It is, in these circumstances, normal practice in order to avoid a later claim of prejudice and an unfair trial.

 

There is also the scenario whereby the report is released, and the investigation cancelled for the same prejudicial reasons.

 

It is, as far as I know, the police asking for minimal information to be released.

------------------

 

A bit of an exaggeration there Col? There were 109 convictions in the Met among 43,000 officers -  in eight years! (2010 - 2018).

There were a further 400+ offences committed by officers off-duty.

It may sound a lot, but the number includes minor charges like speeding and driving offences  most have kept their job after facing disciplinary procedures.

Not perfect by any means but not quite as bad as some headlines would have us believe.

 

Jim.. on the first part, yes, there is some clever manouvreing going on in my opinion .  I did predict it and I am very far from being alone in my suspicions...with even some senior Tories coming out with their views.

The issue here is timing.  The 'Met' has been criticised for not investigating sooner, and yet the timing of their 're-think' and decision to act, seems remarkably convenient for Johnson.

 

On the second part, regarding exaggeration of the 'Met Problem'.  yes.. I exaggerated for effect.

It is part of debating.

 

And now.. Johnson is running off next week into the Eastern European equivalent of a Fridge, to use his legendary Diplomatic skills to sort out Putin. Those same skills he has used to such stunning effect in easing the way for Ms.Zaghari-Ratcliffe, and in 'Getting Brexit Dun'.

 

If we get to next Friday without Johnson starting WW3, I'll be mightily relieved.

 

Of course Johnson might just be going to see Putin to ask for another donation.  Given the level of Russian dirty money in the UK, which many think has bought Putin the 'Best Tory Party Money Can Buy..'......

 

 

 

[DJ360 6,733]

3 hours ago, LizzieM said:

 I hope that talking will calm the situation but not convinced that Boris has ‘Statesman qualities’.  Where are Churchill or Thatcher when we need them.  

 

Lizzie, I share your hopes for a peaceful resolution of this.

 

I'd say it is a 'given' that Johnson not only is a 'Statesmanship Vacuum', but is also currently a laughing stock on the Geopolitical stage. The fact that his monumentally misplaced ego will not let him see this..tells us all we need to know about him.

 

Thing is Lizzie..all three were/are hugely flawed human beings.  Churchill was the right, obstinate and belligerent character for WW2, despite many other faults. Arguably, he delivered the goods and inspired a nation.. but he was quickly dumped when it came to delivering the peace.

 

I'm afraid no evidence or argument will ever convince me that Thatcher was anything less than a psychopathic bully and egomaniac. To me, her psychology was as transparent as that of Trump..and just as worrying.  Both were/are certifiable IMHO.

 

Johnson is equally transparent.  He's a self serving, lying opportunist, and has been proven to be so many times before he even got near being PM.  He wasn't even a Brexiteer until it became politically expedient for him to become one. He is not as obviously 'unbalanced' as Trump and Thatcher.  He is quite sane.. but he is a totally principle free zone, whose only concern is his own power and political survival.

[letsavagoo 964]

8 hours ago, DJ360 said:

Of course Johnson might just be going to see Putin to ask for another donation.  Given the level of Russian dirty money in the UK, which many think has bought Putin the 'Best Tory Party Money Can Buy..'......

 

 

 

Perhaps Boris could ask Starmer for Labours Chinese contacts and drum up some dosh there. 
 

[Brew 5,423]

11 hours ago, DJ360 said:

On the second part, regarding exaggeration of the 'Met Problem'.  yes.. I exaggerated for effect.

It is part of debating.

 

Do we not see that as shooting ourselves in the foot?

You say making an inaccurate or misleading statement for dramatic effect is only an exaggeration, an acceptable debating strategy – yet when Boris does the same it's a bare faced…

 

Perhaps Blair and Bush were merely exaggerating about Iraq for dramatic effect.

[DJ360 6,733]

OK, I surrender.

 

I do like this summation of the current situation, but I must warn that it is written by a former Labour Minister.

 

 

Quote

 

‘Greased piglet’ Boris Johnson could evade justice due to the Met’s disastrous move

Charles Falconer

 

 

The needless decision to limit Sue Gray’s report on partygate may make its findings irrelevant and paralyses the country

Boris Johnson during a visit to RAF Valley in Anglesey, North Wales, on 27 January. Photograph: Carl Recine/PA

Sat 29 Jan 2022 21.00 GMT

Last modified on Sat 29 Jan 2022 21.02 GMT

 

 

The real villain in the story is Boris Johnson. He presided over a home and a workplace where the rules were ignored. The whole country has heard the stories.

Of course everyone knew the the prime minister told lies and was unreliable. But this – a character who appeared sometimes engagingly anarchic turns out to be contemptuous and disdainful, lacking the most basic decency and honour. He shames our country, the office of PM and disables the leadership of the UK. He is on his belly to Conservative MPs: decisions about the nation’s future now depend on whether his backstairs deals with wavering MPs stem the haemorrhage brought on by the sight of his suppurating character.

 

 

An authoritative account of what he did and the extent to which he lied about it is vital to allow the country to regain some self-respect, reach a decision about whether his premiership continues and move on to make decisions about the policies that matter for the people of the UK and the wider world.

Sue Gray, throughout all of last week, appeared to be a short time away from producing that account – until the blundering intervention of the Met. Its request to Gray not to make public in any detail her findings on the eight parties it suspects broke the law derails the prospect of a worthwhile report in the near future.

Johnson will now be handed a new “heavily redacted” version of Gray’s report in the coming hours or days, which will be compliant with the Met request that nothing “jeopardises” its inquiry.

The facts leading to the holding of these eight events and what happened at them is a vital part of the story, important to making judgments about the culpability of the prime minister. Not to give any detailed account of them would be disastrous. Perhaps even a heavily redacted account would be enough to reveal a level of wrongdoing that sinks the PM. I don’t know. What I do know is that the right course is a full account of what he did, made public as soon as possible. Redactions allow the PM to get away with it.

There is no law that requires the Met to make this ill-judged request or that requires Gray to comply with it. The Contempt of Court Act 1981 prohibits any action that could interfere with an investigation or a trial but only once a summons has been issued or an arrest made. Arrests or summonses are extremely unlikely for these breaches of the coronavirus regulations and a fixed penalty notice, the most likely response, does not trigger contempt protection. It is very unlikely that contempt law will ever kick in.

There are other laws that stop people intentionally interfering with an investigation but the idea that Gray’s motivation is to undermine the Met’s investigation is patently for the birds. So there is no legal reason for the Met to delay the Gray investigation and report.

It must be obvious even to a Metropolitan police commissioner under the most immense pressure that as much transparency as possible about what happened as quickly as reasonably possible trumps the remote possibility that once attenders at the No 10 parties read the Gray report they might amend their statements to the police about their involvement. That, according to off-the-record briefings from the Met, is the reason it has adopted this country-paralysing course.

The right course is a full account of what Johnson did, made public as soon as possible

 

The Met’s request to Gray not to publish details of the eight parties it suspects broke the law makes the Met look complicit with the prime minister in trying to delay for as long as possible the truth about what happened. Through incompetence rather than malice, the Met gives the impression that when it comes to investigating the prime minister it does what it is told.

The idea that the police are going to conduct interviews beyond asking was the suspect present is far-fetched. If the justification in the police’s own mind is that if Gray publishes the whole story, the police will not be able to trap the suspects into lies suggests it has lost all touch with proportion. That was the justification advanced by the secret barrister yesterday.

Why has the Met made this obviously disastrous judgment? Probably because its approach in all other investigations is to shut down all non-police inquiries until it has completed its own. So it has mindlessly applied the same rule here, either unaware or indifferent to the fact that fixed penalty notice cases do not attract the same protection.

The greased piglet might slip through the hands of those trying to hold him to account. If he does, it will be because he delayed a judgment on his conduct until the heat had gone out of the issue. Gray was a means forced on the PM, ensuring there would be a speedy conclusion.

The Met is in danger of stringing the process out for so long that the report loses all utility. Its purpose is to ensure that there is true accountability for the PM. That accountability comes from there being full transparency about his attitude and conduct towards the laws of the lockdown. In many cases, true accountability means facing justice in a criminal court. But not in this case – a fixed penalty notice does not bring any sense of justice done to those who paid what was very often a high price for obeying the rules.

That comes from the facts being exposed and the PM paying the price. Why can’t the Met let justice take its course and let Sue Gray deliver?

Lord Falconer was lord chancellor in Tony Blair’s government

 

 

 

 

[letsavagoo 964]

Col.
I believe that the mets request to delay publishing certain details has nothing  to do with them being in Johnson’s pocket.

If the report is published it could prejudice the investigation by the met and make any potential prosecution invalid. It would be sub judice. It is a mess as the met initially said they would not investigate and then renaged but I don’t believe there is some sinister plot involved.

[Brew 5,423]

Much of it is highly biased, overblown and somewhat repetitive, although true it's not entirely unexpected. Nor is it a surprise they chose someone who's retired and safely out of the firing line to write it.

 

There is no law compelling Grey to withhold publication, which is why it is a request, not an order. There is not to my knowledge any threat of legal action should it be made public, even if in full. Only a D notice can do that, but the internet and foreign media make such things redundant.

 

There have been meetings behind closed doors we will never know of and both sides will see plotting in dark corners, of this I'm sure. I'm also sure the opposition step carefully to avoid exposing  their own transgressions and leave themselves open to counter-accusations.

 

I've no doubt pressure was brought to bear with all the prejudicial implications firmly in mind. It might be difficult for him to lose now.

Publish and it scuppers criminal charges, withhold or redact it and the MET can issue a fixed penalty or the CPS could say it's not in the public interest to pursue. The third possibility is that neither the MET nor Grey find evidence of any wrongdoing or only minor misdemeanours.  Any of those will see it blow over quite quickly.

I'm at a loss why he didn't just say sorry, here's the 10k fine, now let's move on… arrogance? Ignorance? Who knows?

 

Johnson, I've said before, is a master manipulator and whether by threats or promises is still PM and may yet survive.

 

It's starting to smack of Labour's desperation to harangue Boris if this all they can come up with. They might do

a better job of opposition if they look at what is actually happening in parliament rather than using a populist meme and playing to the gallery.

 

Hopefully not, but the Ukraine could knock it all off the front pages and reprieve him.

[DJ360 6,733]

Jim, I don't accept that your criticism of the writing style, repetition etc. is valid. What is being said is substantially true and that to me is what matters.  If that is what it takes to get through to some sectors of the public then so be it. 

Lat's be honest here.. it is a million miles away from Daily Mail type filth such as when they portrayed judges who quite rightly and legally ruled against Johnson as 'Enemies of the People'. There will still be many, ill educated and unthinking people who genuinely believe that the Sun shines out of Johnson and that he is 'just doing his job'. You and I both know better.

 

5 hours ago, Brew said:

It's starting to smack of Labour's desperation to harangue Boris if this all they can come up with. They might do

a better job of opposition if they look at what is actually happening in parliament rather than using a populist meme and playing to the gallery.

 

Now there.. I agree with you.  They should  certainly continue the attack on Johnson's serial rule breaking and contempt for the electorate, but they really need to make more noise about Johnson and Co's efforts to legislate an even more favourable position for themselves, by attacking Citizen's Rights, Voting Rights, and the Independence of the Judiciary.  It is all sliping under the Radar. The problem with that is that it is beyond many people's 'tabloid' understanding of how UK Politics works.. so they are clueless about it.

 

I'm increasingly of the opinion that until we get a system of Proportional Representation, we will be stuck with essentially Tory Govts, who get there by virtue of what amounts to a 'rigged' First Past The Post' system. Even Labour only get elected when it suits the Media.

[DJ360 6,733]

7 hours ago, letsavagoo said:

Col.
I believe that the mets request to delay publishing certain details has nothing  to do with them being in Johnson’s pocket.

If the report is published it could prejudice the investigation by the met and make any potential prosecution invalid. It would be sub judice. It is a mess as the met initially said they would not investigate and then renaged but I don’t believe there is some sinister plot involved.

 

Letsav.. As Jim has already pointed out, the Met can only 'request' redaction of the Grey Report, for the reasons he gives.  On that basis, the actions of both Johnson and the Met.. alkong with the timing of events..looks very much like a 'fit up', and that view is held by some Tories too.

[DJ360 6,733]

15 hours ago, letsavagoo said:

Perhaps Boris could ask Starmer for Labours Chinese contacts and drum up some dosh there. 
 

 

I know nothing of 'Labour's links with China',so you will have to enlighten me.

 

On the other hand, it is more than ten years of Tory Government which has allowed  Chinese and other foreign money to distort our housing market, as the Tories continually seek and promote 'Chinese Investment' 

 

Also, if I'm not mistaken.. after forcing the privatisation of our utilities and transport, so that they are now mostly owned by foreign companies owned by foreign Govts, the Tories have also gone cap in hand to the French and the Chinese for the expertise and investment to create the Nuclear Power Stations which we will need as we go 'zero carbon'.  This is the country which had the first viable nuclear power station.  How did we come to this?  

 

Capitalism and greed taking precedence over the National Interest. That's how.

[letsavagoo 964]

Bloody Sunday.

I’m not entirely sure this is the appropriate thread or even forum to post this. However as comrade Corbean was involved in the anniversary I thought it deserves a mention here. The events of the Sunday 30th January 1972 were certainly not one of the Parachute Regiments finest days when 14 civilians shot and killed. I don’t seek to defend the terrible actions of that day. However although the Main Street media covered the anniversary widely they failed to give any sort of context of the situation.
For instance, that between March 1971 and 30th January 1972, republicans terrorists had murdered 52 British soldiers.
Here is a list of those soldiers that you won’t see in the mainstream media this weekend:
1971
1. Robert Curtis - Feb 6th, 1971
2. John Lawrie, Feb 15th, 1971.
3. William Jolliffe, March 1st, 1971
4. John McCaig, March 10th, 1971
5. Joseph McCaig, March 10th, 1971
6. Dougald McCaughey, March 10th, 1971
7. Kenneth Easthaugh, March 23rd, 1971
8. Robert Bankier, May 22nd, 1971
9. Michael Willetts, May 25th, 1971
10. David Walker, July 12th 1971.
11. Richard Barton, July 14th 1971.
12. Malcolm Hatton, August 9th 1971.
13. Winston Donnell, August 9th, 1971
14. Paul Challenor, August 10 1971.
15. John Robinson, August 23 1971.
16. George Crozier, August 23 1971
17. Ian Armstrong, August 29 1971.
18. Clifford Loring, August 31 1971.
19. Francis Veitch, September 3 1971
20. John Warnock, September 6th 1971
21. Daniel Stewardson, September 9th 1971.
22. Martin Leonard Carroll, September 14th 1971.
23. Paul Carter, September 14th 1971
24. John Rudman, September 14th 1971
25. Peter Harrington, September 16th 1971
26. Peter Sharp, October 1st 1971.
27. Brian Hall, October 4th 1971.
28. Roger Wilkins, October 11th 1971
29. Joseph Hill, October 16th 1971
30. Graham Cox, October 17th 1971
31. George Hamilton, October 17th 1971
32. Angus Stephens, October 27th 1971
33. David Tilbury, October 27th 1971
34. David Powell, October 28th 1971
35. Norman Booth, October 28th, 1971
36. Ian Docherty, October 31st 1971
37. Stephen McGuire, November 4th 1971
38. Paul Genge, November 7th 1971
39. Ian Curtis, November 9th 1971
40. Edwin Charnley, November 18th 1971
41. Colin Davies, November 24th 1971
42. Paul Nicholls, November 27th 1971
43. Robert Benner, November 28th 1971
44. Denis Wilson, December 1st 1971
45. Jeremy Snow, December 8th 1971
46. Sean Russell, December 8th 1971
47. Kenneth Smyth, December 10th 1971
48. Anthony Aspinwall, December 17th 1971
49. Richard Ham, December 29th, 1971
1972
50. Keith Bryan, January 5th 1972
51. Maynard Crawford, January 13th 1972
52. Charles Stentiford, January 21st 1972

In addition over 300 members of the Royal Ulster Constabulary were murdered by various paramilitary terrorist organisation including the IRA. 

Remember them all, not only those who fit the republican narrative.